Issues in computerized art therapy assessment

The purpose of this investigation was to explore some of the main issues springing from the computerized assessment of art-based instruments (CAABI). The results indicated that there were opposing viewpoints, limitations, and solutions regarding the limitations. Many art therapists believe that this technology will supplant their own expertise in assessment (Hartwich and Brandecker, 1997 and Kim et al., 2006a). However, due to the prototypical and delineating nature of these programs, CAABI are incapable of replacing human assessment, particularly clinical intakes (Lichtenberger, 2006). Despite opposition and limitation, the author concluded that there is a need for increased research in CAABI based on the advantages it offers, such as ease-of-use, early detection, less scoring time, reduction of subjective human error, improved statistical measures, and resiliency in the face of healthcare reform (Kim et al., 2006a, Kim et al., 2006b, Kim et al., 2008b and Kim et al., 2009a). Overall, a hybridization of both subjective and objective methodologies will likely further art therapy assessment, but collaboration between clinicians and program developers is necessary for this to occur (Kapitan, 2007, Kim et al., 2008a and Mattson, 2009).