Formal elements are often used in art therapy assessment. The assumption is that formal elements are observable aspects of the art product that allow reliable and valid assessment of clients’ mental health. Most of the existing art therapy assessment instruments are based on clinical expertise. Therefore, it is not clear to what degree these instruments are restricted to formal elements. Other aspects might also be included, such as clinical expertise of the therapist. This raises the question of whether and how formal elements as observable aspects of the art product are related to clients’ mental health. To answer this question, four studies are presented that look at: (1) a meta-theoretical description of formal elements; (2) operationalization of these formal elements so they can be analyzed reliably in clients’ art products; (3) establishment of reliable and clinically relevant formal elements; (4) the relationship between formal elements and adult clients’ mental health. Results show that the combination of the formal elements “movement,” “dynamic,” and “contour” are significantly interrelated and related to clients’ mental health, i.e., psychopathology, psychological flexibility, experiential avoidance, and adaptability. These findings give insight in the diagnostic value of art products and how they may add to clients’ verbal expression and indicate their potential to benefit from therapy.
Background The Self-Expression Emotion Regulation in Art Therapy Scale (SERATS) was developed as art therapy lacked outcome measures that could be used to monitor the specific effects of art therapy. Although the SERATS showed good psychometric properties in earlier studies, it lacked convergent validity and thus construct validity. Method To test the convergent validity of the SERATS correlation was examined with the EES (Emotional Expressivity Scale), Emotion Regulation Strategies for Artistic Creative Activities Scale (ERS-ACA) and Healthy-Unhealthy Music Scale (HUMS). Patients diagnosed with a Personality Disorder, and thus having self-regulation and emotion regulation problems (n = 179) and a healthy student population (n = 53) completed the questionnaires (N = 232). Results The SERATS showed a high reliability and convergent validity in relation to the ERS-ACA approach strategies and self-development strategies in both patients and students and the HUMS healthy scale, in patients. Hence, what the SERATS measures is highly associated with emotion regulation strategies like acceptance, reappraisal, discharge and problem solving and with improving a sense of self including self-identity, increased self-esteem and improved agency as well as the healthy side of art making. Respondents rated the SERATS as relatively easy to complete compared to the other questionnaires. Conclusion The SERATS is a valid, useful and user-friendly tool for monitoring the effect of art therapy that is indicative of making art in a healthy way that serves positive emotion regulation and self-development.
In clinical practice, formal elements of art products are regularly used in art therapy observation to obtain insight into clients’ mental health and provide directions for further treatment. Due to the diversity of formal elements used in existing studies and the inconsistency in the interpretation, it is unclear which formal elements contribute to insight into clients’ mental health. In this qualitative study using Constructivist Grounded Theory, eight art therapists were interviewed in-depth to identify which formal elements they observe, how they describe mental health and how they associate formal elements with mental health. Findings of this study show that art therapists in this study observe the combination of movement, dynamic, contour and repetition (i.e., primary formal elements) with mixture of color, figuration and color saturation (i.e., secondary formal elements). Primary and secondary elements interacting together construct the structure and variation of the art product. Art therapists rarely interpret these formal elements in terms of symptoms or diagnosis. Instead, they use concepts such as balance and adaptability (i.e., self-management, openness, flexibility, and creativity). They associate balance, specifically being out of balance, with the severity of the clients’ problem and adaptability with clients’ strengths and resources. In the conclusion of the article we discuss the findings’ implications for practice and further research.
