Hey All, Have read the entire thread and wish to return to its original purpose: Graphology.
The following citations of recent research prove that Graphology is bunko! A legitimate Forensic Document Examiner would confine him/herself to the likelihood of two documents being penned by the same hand. All the other psychobabble is in the class with astrology.
CARLA DAZZI, LUIGI PEDRABISSI (2009) GRAPHOLOGY AND PERSONALITY: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON VALIDITY OF HANDWRITING ANALYSIS. Psychological Reports: Volume 105, Issue , pp. 1255-1268.
GRAPHOLOGY AND PERSONALITY: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON VALIDITY OF HANDWRITING ANALYSIS1
CARLA DAZZI, LUIGI PEDRABISSI
Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization University of Padua
The aim of the present work was to examine validity of the graphological method to assess personality traits. The results of two studies are described. In Study 1, the Big Five Questionnaire was administered to a sample of 101 university students who provided a sample of a handwritten text. Two graphologists were asked to detect the same dimensions and facets measured by the Big Five Questionnaire using a 9-point scale. Correlations between the Big Five Questionnaire and graphological evaluations did not confirm the capability of handwriting analysis to measure Big Five personality traits. Also, interrater reliability was very low. Study 2 (N = 102) was carried out using handwritten texts with autobiographical content for the graphological analysis. Two different graphologists and two laypersons were involved. No evidence was found to validate the graphological method as a measure of personality.
On the basis of meta-analytic findings, this article examines
and summarizes what 85 years of research in personnel psychology
has revealed about the validity of measures of 19 different
selection methods that can be used in making decisions about
hiring, training, and developmental assignments. In this sense,
this article is an expansion and updating of Hunter and Hunter
(1984). In addition, this article examines how well certain combinations
of these methods work. These 19 procedures do not
all work equally well; the research evidence indicates that some
work very well and some work very poorly. Measures of GMA
work very well, for example, and graphology does not work at
all. The cumulative findings show that the research knowledge
now available makes it possible for employers today to substantially
increase the productivity, output, and learning ability of
their workforces by using procedures that work well and by
avoiding those that do not. Finally, we look at the implications
of these research findings for the development of theories of job
Should We Write Off Graphology?
1. Russell W. Driver2,
2. M. Ronald Buckley2,
3. Dwight D. Frink1
Article first published online: 3 APR 2007
International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume 4, Issue 2, pages 78–86, April 1996
The scientific study of graphology (handwriting analysis) has had a long history. Many practitioners believe that graphology is a valuable selection aid and use this technique in a selection context, and in some European countries it is quite well thought of. While a few articles have proposed that graphology is a valid and useful selection technique, the overwhelming results of well-controlled empirical studies have been that the technique has not demonstrated acceptable validity. A review of relevant literature regarding both theory and research indicates that, while the procedure may have an intuitive appeal, graphology should not be used in a selection context.
Personality and Individual Differences
Volume 8, Issue 3, 1987, Pages 433-435
Notes and shorter communications
Graphology and personality: Another failure to validate graphological analysis
Adrian Furnham and Barrie Gunter
Department of Psychology, University College London, London WC1H 0AP, England
Received 24 February 1986.
Available online 28 May 2002.
A group of 64 adults completed the EPQ and copied out a set text in their own handwriting. Independent coders (reliability 0.89) rated each sample of handwriting on 13 specific features which were correlated with the EPQ. Results showed few significant differences, once again questioning the validity of handwriting analysis.
My apologies for the length of this post, but I felt it is necessary to put graphology in its rightful place!
All the best to all, Mike
P.S. I'm on the fence regarding the "From Hell" letter, but lean towards it being a hoax.