Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T10:00:44.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Spatial structures in children's drawings: how do they develop?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

By
Sergio Morra
Edited by
Chris Lange-Küttner  and
Annie Vinter
Sergio Morra
Affiliation:
Università di Genova
Chris Lange-Küttner
Affiliation:
London Metropolitan University
Annie Vinter
Affiliation:
Université de Bourgogne, France
Get access

Summary

Morra uses a neo-Piagetian approach to conceptualize the development of spatial organization in children's drawings, which also includes some aspects of transition from intellectual to visual realism. He assumes the existence of graphic figurative schemes, i.e. the child's mental representations of satisfactory graphic denotations of objects, and operative schemes, i.e. procedures to modify or organize the figurative schemes. Furthermore, more general information-processing mechanisms silently affect and control the processing of these basic schemes. In particular, the F-operator (field factor) would aim for the most simple solution with the largest set of activated schemes, i.e. the F-operator is responsible for an economical solution. However, there is no accuracy implied; the F-operator can organize according to a distorting bias as much as according to a Good Gestalt or a composition law. The M-operator (mental energy factor) conceptualizes the more general information-processing capacity, with increases with age by one unit with every second year, while other factors such as the I-operator (inhibit or interrupt factor) and other learning, planning and executive factors contribute to weigh the information. Morra illustrates the neo-Piagetian approach with an analysis of the transparency phenomenon and the task of drawing a partly occluded object. Then, he uses that approach to conceptualize other developmental phenomena, such as drawing flexibility and the acquisition of a spatial axes system, in terms of informational units as well as processes, and explains how the limitation, especially in M-capacity, limits possible solutions.

objects exist in space and have a spatial structure.

Type
Chapter
Information
Drawing and the Non-Verbal Mind
A Life-Span Perspective
 , pp. 159 - 194
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Case, R. (1995). Capacity-based explanations of working memory growth: a brief history and re-evaluation. In Weinert, F. E. and Schneider, W. (eds.), Memory performance and competencies: issues in growth and development (pp. 23–44). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Case, R., Stephenson, K. M., Bleiker, C. and Okamoto, Y. (1996). Central spatial structures and their development. In Case, R. and Okamoto, Y. (eds.), The role of central conceptual structures in the development of children's thought (pp. 103–30). Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 246. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cowan, N., Saults, J. S. and Elliott, E. M. (2002). The search for what is fundamental in the development of working memory. In Kail, R. V. and Reese, H. W. (eds.), Advances in child development and behaviour (Vol. 29, pp. 1–49). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Cox, M. V. (1985). One object behind another: young children's use of array-specific or view-specific representations. In Freeman, N. H. and Cox, M. V. (eds.), Visual order: the nature and development of pictorial representation (pp. 188–201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, M. V. (1991). The child's point of view: the development of cognition and language. Second edition. London: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Cox, M. V. (2005). The pictorial world of the child. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bruyn, B. and Davis, A. (2005). Breakdown of parallel spatial coding in children's drawing. Developmental Science, 8, 226–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ribaupierre, A. and Bailleux, C. (1994). Developmental change in a spatial task of attentional capacity: an essay toward an integration of two working memory models. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 17, 5–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, S. (1987). The development of childen's drawing: a neo-structuralist approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.
Dennis, S. (1992). Stage and structure in the development of children's spatial representations. In Case, R. (ed.), The mind's staircase (pp. 229–45). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Foley, E. J. and Berch, D. B. (1997). Capacity limitations of a classic M-power measure: a modified dual-task approach. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66, 129–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, N. H. (1972). Process and product in children's drawing. Perception, 1, 123–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, N. H. (1980). Strategies of representation in young children. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, N. H. (1995). The emergence of a framework theory of pictorial reasoning. In Lange-Küttner, C. and Thomas, G. V. (eds.), Drawing and looking: theoretical approaches to pictorial representation in children (pp. 135–46). London: Pearson/Prentice Hall (distributed by www.amazon.co.uk).Google Scholar
Freeman, N. H., Eiser, C. and Sayers, J. (1977). Children's strategies in producing three-dimensional relationships on a two-dimensional surface. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 23, 305–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallo, F., Golomb, C. and Barroso, A. (2003). Compositional strategies in drawing: the effects of two- and three-dimensional media. Visual Arts Research, 29, 2–23.Google Scholar
Golomb, C. (1987). The development of compositional strategies in children's drawings. Visual Arts Research, 13, 42–52.Google Scholar
Golomb, C. (1992). The child's creation of a pictorial world. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Goodnow, J. (1977). Children drawing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodnow, J. (1978). Visible thinking: cognitive aspects of change in drawings. Child Development, 49, 637–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargreaves, D. J., Jones, P. M. and Martin, D. (1981). The air gap phenomenon in children's landscape drawings. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 32, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hildebrand, D. K., Laing, J. D. and Rosenthal, H. (1977). Prediction analysis of cross classifications. New York:Wiley.Google Scholar
Ibbotson, A. and Bryant, P. E. (1978). The perpendicular error and the vertical effect. Perception, 5, 319–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanizsa, G. (1979). Organization in vision: essays on Gestalt perception. New York:Praeger.Google Scholar
Lange-Küttner, C. (1997). Development of size modification of human figure drawings in spatial axes systems of varying complexity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66, 264–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lange-Küttner, C. (2004). More evidence on size modification in spatial axes systems of varying complexity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 171–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lange-Küttner, C. (2005). The logic of spatial axes systems. Paper presented at the 12th European Conference on Developmental Psychology. Tenerife, 24–28 August.
Lee, M. and Bremner, J. G. (1987). The representation of depth in children's drawings of a table. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 479–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luquet, G. H. (1927). Le dessin enfantin [Children's drawing]. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar
Milbrath, C. (1998). Patterns of artistic development in children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morra, S. (1994). Issues in working memory measurement: testing for M capacity. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 17, 143–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morra, S. (1995). A neo-Piagetian approach to children's drawings. In Lange-Küttner, C. and Thomas, G. V. (eds.), Drawing and looking: theoretical approaches to pictorial representation in children (pp. 93–106). London: Pearson/Prentice Hall (distributed by www.amazon.co.uk).Google Scholar
Morra, S. (2000). A new model of verbal short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 75, 191–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morra, S. (2002). On the relationship between partial occlusion drawing, M capacity, and field independence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 421–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morra, S. (2005). Cognitive aspects of change in drawings: a neo-Piagetian theoretical account. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23, 317–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morra, S. (2008). Memory components and control processes in children's drawing. In Milbrath, C. and Trautner, H. M. (eds.), Children's understanding and production of pictures, drawing, and art: theoretical and empirical approaches (pp. 53–85). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Morra, S. (in press). A test of a neo-Piagetian model of the Water Level Task. European Journal of Developmental Psychology.Google Scholar
Morra, S., Angi, A. and Tomat, L. (1996). Planning, encoding, and overcoming conflict in partial occlusion drawing: a neo-Piagetian model and an experimental analysis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 61, 276–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morra, S., Caloni, B. and d'Amico, M. R. (1994). Working memory and the intentional depiction of emotions. Archives de Psychologie, 62, 71–87.Google Scholar
Morra, S., Gobbo, C., Marini, Z. and Sheese, R. (2008). Cognitive development: a neo-Piagetian perspective. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Morra, S., Moizo, C. and Scopesi, A. (1988). Working memory (or the M operator) and the planning of children's drawings. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 46, 41–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parisi, M. and Marini, F. (1974). Il fenomeno della trasparenza nello sviluppo del grafismo infantile [The transparency phenomenon in the development of graphic skills]. Research report, Contributi dell’ Istituto di Psicologia. Cagliari (Italy): Università di Cagliari.
Pascual-Leone, J. (1970). A mathematical model for the transition rule in Piaget's developmental stages. Acta Psychologica, 63, 301–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. (1989). An organismic process model of Witkin's field dependence–independence. In Globerson, T. and Zelniker, T. (eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (pp. 36–70). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. (2000). Reflections on working memory: are the two models complementary?Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77, 138–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pascual-Leone, J. and Baillargeon, R. (1994). Developmental measurement of mental attention. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 17, 161–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. and Goodman, D. (1979). Intelligence and experience: a neo-Piagetian approach. Instructional Science, 8, 301–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. and Johnson, J. (2004). Affect, self/motivation, and cognitive development: a dialectical constructivist view. In Dai, D. Y. and Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 197–235). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. and Johnson, J. (2005). A dialectical constructivist view of developmental intelligence. In Wilhelm, O. and Engle, R. (eds.), Handbook of understanding and measuring intelligence (pp. 177–201). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J., Johnson, J., Baskind, S., Dworsky, S. and Severtson, E. (2000). Culture-fair assessment and the processes of mental attention. In Kozulin, A. and Rand, Y. (eds.), Experience of mediated learning (pp. 191–214). New York:Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. and Morra, S. (1991). Horizontality of water level: a neo-Piagetian developmental review. In Reese, H. W. (ed.), Advances in child development and behaviour (Vol. 23, pp. 231–76). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, W. A., Inall, M. and Lauder, E. (1985). On the discovery, storage, and use of graphic descriptions. In Freeman, N. H. and Cox, M. V. (eds.), Visual order: the nature of development and representation (pp. 122–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Piaget, , , J. and Inhelder, , , B. (1947/1967). La représentation de l'espace chez l'enfant. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France (trans. as The child's conception of space. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).Google Scholar
Picard, D. and Vinter, A. (1999). Representational flexibility in children's drawings: effects of age and verbal instructions. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 605–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porath, M. and Arlin, P. K. (1997). Developmental approaches to artistic giftedness. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 241–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pizzo, Russo L. (1974). La trasparenza nel disegno infantile [Transparency in children's drawing]. Il Pisani: Giornale di Patologia Nervosa e Mentale, 98, 179–226.Google Scholar
Spensley, F. and Taylor, J. (1999). The development of cognitive flexibility: evidence from children's drawings. Human Development, 42, 300–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommers, P. (1984). Drawing and cognition: descriptive and experimental studies of graphic production processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasta, R. and Liben, L. S. (1996). The water-level task: an intriguing puzzle. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 171–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willats, J. (1977). How children learn to draw realistic pictures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 367–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willats, J. (1985). Drawing systems revisited: the role of denotation systems in children's figure drawing. In Freeman, N. H. and Cox, M. V. (eds.), Visual order: the nature of development and representation (pp. 78–100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Willats, J. (1987). Marr and pictures: an information-processing account of children's drawings. Archives de Psychologie, 55, 105–25.Google Scholar
Willats, J. (1995). An information-processing approach to drawing development. In Lange-Küttner, C. and Thomas, G. V. (eds.), Drawing and looking: theoretical approaches to pictorial representation in children (pp. 27–43). London: Pearson/Prentice Hall (distributed by www.amazon.co.uk).Google Scholar
Zhi, Z., Thomas, G. V. and Robinson, E. J. (1997). Constraints on representational change: drawing a man with two heads. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 15, 275–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×