9: Conclusions

Both the method of morphological description and interpretation of early graphic expressions using a corresponding catalogue of attributes (cf. Maurer und Riboni, 2007a/2010a, part 2), as well as the inter-individual structure of the graphic development derived from longitudinal and cross-section studies (cf. Maurer und Riboni, 2007a/2010a, part 3), prove to be basically robust in light of the picture processes at hand. Individual aspects of the catalogue, as well as individual aspects of the presented development structure must, however, be relativised, corrected or supplemented. Subsequently a first revision was required of the description of early graphic development, which we present within the framework of this publication (for details see the German version).

However, three general limitations must be considered:

• The findings presented here do constitute a first in-depth documentary evidence, but their representative character demands further studies.
• These documents do not facilitate an examination of indices, in a strict sense coded pictorial aspects (symbolic aspects), and expressions. This clarification itself also demands further studies.
• General inferences on the question of the relationship of graphic aspects to non-graphic aspects, and with them the question of analogy formations, are only possible in a fragmented sense using purely morphological investigations.

Moreover, due to the methodological setting, the present study does not address aspects of painting and aspects of material in the strict sense, the influence of the media in the broad sense, and the embedding of the concrete single graphic process in the broad context of the child in question. These aspects can, however, presumably only be investigated within the framework of extensive individual case studies.

In parallel to the critical examination of the morphology, as mentioned above, the description of the structure of the early graphic process as such represents a matter of investigation on its own.

Early graphic expressions are often taken as marginal and insignificant, earning them the name "scribblings". But their examination reveals a broad variety and formal differentiation, and the related conclusions to be drawn prove to be of primary importance both for our understanding of pictures in general and for our understanding of those who create them.