|
The Lowenfeld Mosaic Test in Child
Psychotherapy
This paper by Thérèse Woodcock,
Consultant Child and Adolescent Psychotherapist
and Trainer in Lowenfeld Projective Play Therapy,
delivered at a Cambridge conference and published
originally in the British Journal of Projective
Psychology describes briefly how to use Mosaics
in psychotherapy and gives several illustrated
case histories. Download
paper as PDF file (192kb)
THE USE OF THE LOWENFELD MOSAIC
TEST IN CHILD PSYCHOTHERAPY
The Lowenfeld Mosaic Test was first introduced
over fifty years ago; since then a great deal of
research has been conducted into its possible uses.
Besides its continued use at Dr. Lowenfeld's Institute
of Child Psychology before its closure, workers
from all over the world have employed this Test;
anthropologists in cultural and cross-cultural
studies; psychologists in the study of normal children
and adults as well as mental defect; psychiatrists
for differential diagnosis and the study of mental
disorder. This paper is confined to one use of
the Lowenfeld Mosaic Test, namely as a communication
tool in the diagnosis and psychotherapeutic treatment
of children.
Administrative Procedure; The mosaic pieces are
laid out ready for use in a box, grouped by shape
and displaying all the colours in each shape. There
are five shapes, all bearing a mathematical relation
to each other (Figure I). The basic shape is a
square from which the isosceles, equilateral and
scalene triangles are derived: the sides of the
diamond are the same length as the square (30mm).
Each shape is available in red, blue, yellow, black,
green and white and arranged in the box in this
order. This box is presented to the child alongside
a Tray (filled with plain white paper) whose dimensions
were chosen so that complete edged patterns could
be made with certain shapes and the Tray could
be entirely covered, though this is very difficult
to achieve satisfactorily.

Figure
I
To administer the mosaic, the child is shown
the box and the variety of pieces available and
then asked to 'do something with these pieces,
using as few or as many as you choose, on this
tray. You can make anything you like.' In treatment,
I usually allow a maximum of one hour for the child
to complete a design or designs, the time being
dictated by the conventional length of a consultation
rather than any intrinsic factor arising from the
mosaic material. In practice, most children finish
in much less than the hour allowed.
When the child has finished, I usually discuss
with him what he has made, ascertaining whether
the design is meant to depict something (i.e. representation)
or just a pattern (i.e. abstract) and whether the
idea was in his mind before he started or came
to him as he manipulated the pieces. Care has to
be taken not to allow one's own preconceptions
to be reflected in the questions. The main skill
required at this point is in asking questions which
elucidate the mosaic without circumscribing the
possible answers. For instance. most people would
say Figure II is a picture of the sky, a house
and garden with a tree in it. Indeed it is the
sky but, on questioning the child who made it,
the house turns out to be a railway station and
the garden, a train puffing away.

Figure
II
The Lowenfeld Mosaic Test as used in psychotherapeutic
treatment is not, however, a test but a tool: it
is firstly a tool to enable the child (or adult
for that matter) to explore and express non-verbalizable
ideas, using the pieces as a personal vocabulary.
For the therapist, it is a tool to assist in the
diagnosis of the problem and for estimating the
progress, if any, made in treatment. In terms of
psychotherapy, it is not used as a test because
its value lies not in a score but in the INDIVIDUALITY
of the response. There can be no right or wrong
about the mosaic because the question is not about
right or wrong; it is a much more global question,
one simply of 'what is the response?'. It is what
is made, how it is assembled, which is going to
give insight into the child's view and approach
to the world.
It is how the child approaches the material (e.g.
does he sit and stare at the tray or does he take
out pieces and experiment with them freely); it
is how the selection is made as well as which piece
is chosen (e.g. does he pick and distribute pieces
at random whilst looking at me all the while or
does he take out handfuls at a time and then consider
how to use each of the pieces in his hand); it
is therefore also the manner in which the pieces
are disposed as well as their place in the tray:
all these must be taken into account as it forms
a global picture of the response. It is what Dr.
Lowenfeld called the Total Response, which is of
paramount importance. It is attention given to
this Total Response which will yield the maximum
assistance to the therapist.
Unlike a verbal response, it does not rely on
the size of one's vocabulary or one's ability to
use language. The actual pieces are given: both
their differences and relationships are clear.
One is then free to pay full attention to how the
subject exploits these differences and relationships.
One can even observe how and what problems arise
and see whether and how they are resolved. On the
other hand, it is not just any response that is
of interest, as might be elicited when one asks
a child to draw or paint. What is important is
to see the natural response to an external stimulus.
Whilst, like drawing or painting, the response
is infinitely variable, the Lowenfeld Mosaic Test
has other advantages which allow the response to
be more clearly defined: the manipulable material
is limited, standardised, provides a neutral focus
to work from and requires the minimum of skill.
Thus the Total Response demands in return total
acceptance; it is a statement of his situation
as perceived by the maker. It is beyond question
that there can be no universal meaning attached
to either particular colours, shapes, patterns
or pictures made. The meaning may have general,
perhaps cultural, characteristics, but it is used
idiosyncratically by the individual. So that it
is not what red may mean generally but what it
means to the Mosaic maker that is of importance
in therapy. It is not even necessary for the therapist
to know what red means, merely to note whether
or not it has been used, in what shapes and in
what relationship with other colours and shapes.
So it is not necessary to have preconceptions about
human responses to be able to use the mosaic material
as a projective technique. It does, however, require
the utmost attention to the global nature of the
response.
Illustrative Cases: I would now like to present
three cases: one rather briefly and two in more
detail. It must be admitted that there is great
difficulty in knowing how to present them, principally
because of the problem of reducing a multidimensional
event ~ the Total Response ~ into a linear form.
The first case is a child who came to the notice
of the School Medical Officer because he had outbursts
of anger and temper tantrums when he was ten years
old. These started around the time when it was
first noticed that his left breast had begun to
grow. When he was twelve years old, he was admitted
to hospital for the removal of the breast, which
the boy was keen to have done; but at the last
minute, the operation was cancelled. The surgeon
explained that he had decided it would leave an
unacceptable scar. This produced a dramatic effect
on the boy: not only did his violence increase
in degree and frequency, he became weepy and withdrawn,
he began truanting from school where he was making
no progress and started stealing. He continued
to have periodic check-ups when he would be told
that the swelling would disappear in time. Because
of his worsening behaviour and emotional state,
he was referred to the Child Guidance Service and
eventually came for psychotherapy.
 |
|
| Figure IIIa |
Figure IIIb |
It took three sessions and three Mosaics before
the boy, in total silence, made a Mosaic design
which was to be a decisive point in his treatment.
As soon as it was completed to his satisfaction,
he brushed the pieces aside and began reassembling
what looked like the same design. He took an extra
piece out of the box and muttered 'It's a bigger
one' as he placed it on the tray. He then told
me that it was a flower, that they were both flowers.
He then disarranged the design and made a house,
using the petal pieces (red equilaterals) to make
the roof and discarding the other pieces, the house
had no base. As the first two were destroyed before
I could make a copy (by then he was familiar with
the fact that I record his mosaic responses) I
asked him to remake them both on the same piece
of paper. He said he couldn't remember exactly
but he would try. Figure IIIa was the result. Note
that the larger flower is on the left, and it was
his left breast which had become enlarged. This
led me to judge that he was ready to explore his
worry about his breasts and indeed the next Mosaic
~ Figure IIIb ~ showed there was conflict involved.
It is also a flower in the shape of a cruciform
with a white centre. The cruciform is a classic
pattern of conflict, but he was not just a person
torn by conflict: the white centre on white paper,
indicated that, at his core, he felt himself a
non-person. It also expressed the relationship
between the white square and the four red equilaterals:
that the relationship is only minimal, that the
triangles are being used to suppress the impact
of the white centre, and thus, even if the conflict
is resolved, work will have to be done on the white
centre. At this juncture the remarkable consistency
of expression in Mosaic terms could also be noted:
the white stem, the lack of a base to the house,
the white centre and the minimal relationship between
the shapes.
The next two Mosaics are those of an adolescent
in treatment: the first one he did, and another
done a year later, both of them at my request.
The first one was done as part of the usual procedure
at his first visit. It was the three dimensional
effect that he particularly wished to achieve and
he was quite satisfied. In the next year the treatment
consisted mainly of talking – he was not
at all keen to use any of the non-verbal material
available in the room. After a year of regular
attendance, he said he felt that he had learnt
a great deal about himself and that he was ready
to terminate treatment. As it had been agreed that
he could stop whenever he wished, I concurred and,
as part of the termination procedure, asked him
to do a Mosaic. He completed (Figure
IVa) and I
was so struck by it that I produced his first Mosaic
(Figure IVb) for him to see for himself. The two
Mosaics were placed side by side as well as one
over the other for comparison. He agreed that,
apart from including all the colours instead of
only some, his present Mosaic was really an elaborated
version of the first Mosaic – the basic structure
had not altered. Upon the evidence of this, he
said of his own accord, '1 think I had better continue'.
 |
|
| Figure IVa |
Figure IVb |
That was a case where the Mosaic showed the maker
the absence of any real change despite his saying
that progress had been made. The next and last
case is one where the Mosaic strikingly confirmed
that the outward improvement in a patient was accompanied
by profound interior change.
This third set of Mosaics was made by a teenage
boy during nineteen months of treatment. He came
regularly once a week. This boy was first referred,
when he was nine years old, for obsessional and
ritualistic behaviour and enuresis. He insisted
on being washed and dressed by his mother and had
a lengthy and complicated dressing and undressing
ritual which followed a definite pattern. If a
step was missed, then the whole ritual had to begin
again. This first referral was not taken up by
the family. However, improvement was reported after
a short stay in hospital instead. He was referred
again to the Child Guidance Service three years
later, this time for signs of school phobia as
well as the return of his previous obsessional
behaviour, now further complicated by eating rituals.
These included only eating food which was prepared
by his mother, to the extent that he would not
eat his boiled egg unless his mother took the top
off. The school phobia turned out to be more a
difficulty in getting out of the house and he required
an escort.
 |
|
| Figure Va |
Figure Vb |
His series of mosaics (Figures Va-Vg) was made
always at my request. He always complied with grace
and usually told me what it was he had done without
being asked. They were made at fairly regular intervals,
usually either around the beginning or end of the
school term. Of eourse, one could pursue the motifs
of the Mosaic response in terms of colours and
shapes used and find an internal consistency in
them. I shall confine myself to describing what
was happening in the boy's life at the time a Mosaic
was done.
The first Mosaic in the series (Figure
Va) was
done at the initial interview and took him the
entire session to do. At the end, he was still
trying to fit pieces into the remaining spaces.
This is a typical obsessional pattern. It must
be emphasised, however, that, while this pattern
is typically obsessional in general, the content
and how it is made, are particular to the maker.
Figure Vb was taken after a term in treatment.
He described the Mosaic as the sun, a row of houses
with a block of flats at the end and a tree, all
this enclosed inside a frame of Mosaics, i.e. the
picture is double-framed. In his daily life, he
had now started to come to the clinic on his own
and his mother reported, with some relief, that
he had begun to cut up his own food.
 |
|
| Figure Vc |
Figure Vd |
Two terms later he made two Mosaics (Figures
Ve and Vd) in one session. For the first time, I noticed
that he was more animated in his response, less
serious, almost mischievous. Vc was a cat. After
making this, he asked immediately to do another.
He accepted that he would have to do the next Mosaic
on the paper without the tray, that is without
a frame. Vd depicted a sun, a flower growing out
of the grass, falling rain and a rainbow.
By now his mother was reporting that he was going
to bed on his own and no longer insisted that she
should stay upstairs whilst he undressed. He was
eating a greater variety of food and not just boiled
egg for tea. There was no further mention of his
lengthy occupation of the toilet. Six months later,
I again asked him to do a Mosaic and, again, he
made two at one sitting, but this time with a difference.
For the first time he made separate abstract designs
on the tray (Figure Ve). He began with the hexagon
in all the available colours. For only the third
time had he started with an equilateral, and on
both previous occasions he had used this shape
as an edge piece. Not since his first Mosaic had
he made anything abstract. The next design was
the star-shaped pattern using only diamonds and
the third was a large square made up of isosceles,
that is, still following the order of his first
Mosaic. The fourth item on the tray was a cross
made only with squares. He had wanted to make the
fifth design using the only remaining shape, the
scalene, but nothing satisfactory emerged until
he added the two squares. With this design he became
very excited, as though he had made a fresh discovery
and wanted to make something else, but there was
no more space on the tray. When I offered him another
piece of paper, he almost snatched it from me.
Vf was the result, it was a wasp. He was concerned
that he could not make the wasp's eye, and insisted
that I write it in. He had great fun making the
sting.
 |
|
| Figure Ve |
Figure Vf |
At home, comportment more appropriate to
his age had begun to emerge. He had begun to take
on more responsibility for his share of the domestic
chores ~ for example, walking the family dog, cleaning
out the fish tank and budgerigar cage ~ and these
became his regular contribution to the work at
home. He had also gone shopping for himself by
himself, outside his local area. Obsessional symptoms
seemed to have disappeared, at least they no longer
figured in the Social Worker's report.
At this point, I would like to give you a brief
summary of the background to this case. This boy's
life began as the result of an unexpected and unwanted
pregnancy, born ten years after the previous child.
The family already had three sons and the mother
only became reconciled to the pregnancy by thinking
she might have a girl this time.
The mother suffered from agoraphobia, which had
started a few years before his conception, and
many other complaints which required the family's
attention, particularly the husband's. She had
frequent attacks of migraine and also suffered
from allergies, so that, from the beginning of
his life, this boy had had to compete with his
mother for his needs to be met. On the other hand,
he al so became a very good excuse for his mother
to stay at home.
The next mosaic was his last, made as part of the
termination procedure. He had begun spontaneously
to talk to me about his future, about job prospects
related to his current interests. He was eager
to grow up but admitted that he was not ready to
leave home. He talked more openly about friends
and, although still timid, no longer complained
about being bullied. He was by now fifteen years
old.
 |
|
| Figure Vg |
|
This last mosaic (Figure
Vg) was a picture of
a hungry duckling upon a pond, the flower was its
food, and the two birds in the distance were the
duckling's parents. As he did for his first mosaic,
he spent the whole session doing this mosaic. He
took great care to produce the bent stem of the
flower and the ruffled surface of the pond, to
show that there was a strong breeze, and he spent
half the time making the duckling look as realistic
and as alive as possible. The open beak is meant
to convey the duckling's hunger and the flower,
its food was at the opposite edge to give the impression
that it was out of the duckling's reach. The duckling's
parents were far away and unaware of its plight.
This mosaic is remarkable for the fluidity of outline
that has been achieved with angular pieces, and,
compared with his first mosaic, the achievement
becomes wholly astonishing.
Moreover, this mosaic describes in a nutshell
the origin of his obsessional behaviour. Throughout
the series, his mosaics showed a gradual loosening
of the compulsive structure. He came to see that
his obsessive manipulations were al the level of
an infant and, eventually, to recognise not only
that this life-style was hindering his personal
development but, and this is the crucial point,
that it was established very early on in his life,
by him, for a legitimate purpose, but which was
no longer relevant.
Of course, a collection of mosaics does not always
show such clarity of expression. This could have
two possible explanations: one, that the maker
is groping towards expression; two, that the observer
has not yet found a way into making sense of the
mosaic. However, it is one of the more remarkable
features of the mosaic, used by the therapist with
respect for the Total Response, that it eliminates
the necessity of resistance and denial on the maker's
part and the therapist's response is always anchored
by the mosaic ~ starting where the child starts,
and following where the child leads. As an aid
to diagnosis and assessment in psychotherapy, the
Lowenfeld Mosaic Test can be an indispensable tool.
REFERENCE
LOWENFELD, M. (1954) The Lowenfeld Mosaíc
Test, Newman Neame, London.
.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: We are indebted to the Margaret
Lowenfeld Trust for meeting the cost of the colour
illustrations.
|