# Graphology **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2014, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751 "2014-11-16T04:16:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/61 "2014-11-17T13:55:52Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Oh? If you were trying to associate something with success in sales, how would you go about it? The data is liable to be noisy, but you should at least see some correlation. If you saw an inverse correlation, or the noise drowned out the signal, you could reasonably conclude that if the aspect claimed to affect sales is either so minor as to barely matter or has no effect. > > But this is a poor example, because in psychology we can actually test for certain personality traits with fairly decent accuracy. Say what you will about Meyers-Briggs, but there is some validity to the model, and people who test one way are not likely to retake the test the next day and come out with radically different results. These are the tests that graphology is typically stacked up against. If you find those tests questionable, what does that say about graphology that there’s considerably _less_ concordance among results? ``` I am on your side here. Over and over in this thread I have stated the gross failures of graphology. Working with existing psychological testing methods is probably the only way it will ever be turned into a credble tool that can aid pschologists in evaluating patients. I should have stated the OP much differently, my only real claim is that I believe handwriting has the capacity to carry important coded clues about our personaities. I never sugested graphologists have successfully effectively decoded handwriting to be of any real value. I have suggested that they have made a sufficient amount of correct correlations to demonstrate the potential viability of the practice. If it were not for the uniqueness of handwriting I wouldn't see any point in pursuing such a complicated task. But as it stands I can't see any other human footprint with the capacity to store so much information. It would be a shame to write this off based on findings of loosely organized amatuers. The real arguable points here are possibly whether or not handwriting is an extension of body language, or in a best case scenario what could we hope to learn about a person from their handwriting. I will concede that I failed to bring a good arguement to the table in defense of the potential graphology. Most of the posts on here keep going back to the failure of the practice in its current form. Its a waste of time to keep addressing those same type of posts and saying I agree it has failed. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/62 "2014-11-17T14:03:04Z")
You keep talking about the failures of loosely organized amateurs impeding progress on this issue. Perhaps if you could give us the name of someone you consider _not_ to be an amateur we would have something solid to start with? ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/63 "2014-11-17T14:08:07Z")
I think the question is not prima facie ridiculous. Leeches, for example, were used in a lot of pseudoscientific ways before they found legitimate medical use and it’s perfectly possible that we’re in the middle-ages-leech stage of graphology and that further study will reveal real, legitimate and practical correlations. For example, currently, we’re able to determine [handedness and gender](http://www.dfki.de/~liwicki/pdf/LiSchLoBu07-01.pdf) at better than chance rates and both have links to personality so there’s clearly some ability to tease out traits. It’s not inconceivable that with further study, we could build models that end up having mild to medium correlations with important personality attributes but those models would probably be far more sophisticated than the current pseudoscientific state of the art. However, I think you end up having two large things working against you. 1. The entire field of graphology is in disrepute due to it’s quack community and so serious minds are disinclined to work on the problem and 2. The amount of handwriting is declining precipitously to the point where, even if graphology did work, it wouldn’t be useful. I think a lot of people in this thread are just prematurely pattern matching and **HoneyBadgerDC** ’s question is both reasonable and interesting. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/64 "2014-11-17T14:26:02Z")
> [@Erdosain](#): > > Can any European dopers attest as to whether or not they’ve had to submit a handwriting sample when applying for a job? According to these articles, between 50-75% of French companies use graphology to assess job candidates. > . When I was younger, you were essentially always asked to write by hand your motivation letter, and it was assumed to be for a graphologic analysis. I assume however that not all companies would hire a graphologist for every job they offered. Nevetheless, it was considered a very commonly used method of selection. My guess would be that it was used for a large part of managerial positions at least. I believed at the time that graphology actually provided somewhat accurate results. I only learned much later that it was complete woo. Possibly even on this board. I’ve no clue how it got such a hold in France, and it might be very specific to France. I also don’t know if it’s still commonly used, I didn’t apply for a job in a very long time. ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/65 "2014-11-17T14:30:52Z")
Forget about handwriting for just a few minutes and lets address body language. If you took body language out to its furthest form of expressiion where would it take you. How you arrange the furniture in your house, how you set up for a poject, like cooking, of building something. The way you hold the steering wheel when you drive? Everything we do that takes a physical action has some capacity for interpetation. Most of what we do is watered down by outside forces such as isles have to be open so people can walk through, or when we dress we usually like to dress in style or in a manner that will present us to the world the way we would like to be seen. ``` Handwriting is probably the least polluted form of body language and the most personailzed and being that it is the only personalized footprint humans really offer I am kind of baffled as to how easily most people are willing to dismiss it as useless. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/66 "2014-11-17T14:32:01Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > You keep talking about the failures of loosely organized amateurs impeding progress on this issue. Does she? I must have missed that. Can you point to the post where she says this, please. I’ve looked through the thread, searching for terms such as \*impede \*and _amateur_ and don’t see them. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/67 "2014-11-17T14:42:07Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Forget about handwriting for just a few minutes and lets address body language. If you took body language out to its furthest form of expressiion where would it take you. How you arrange the furniture in your house, how you set up for a poject, like cooking, of building something. The way you hold the steering wheel when you drive? Everything we do that takes a physical action has some capacity for interpetation. Most of what we do is watered down by outside forces such as isles have to be open so people can walk through, or when we dress we usually like to dress in style or in a manner that will present us to the world the way we would like to be seen. > > ``` > Handwriting is probably the least polluted form of body language and the most personailzed and being that it is the only personalized footprint humans really offer I am kind of baffled as to how easily most people are willing to dismiss it as useless. > > ``` Because we’ve already exhausted the low hanging fruit and we’ve yet to find any compelling evidence which means it’s unlikely that there’s any strong correlations or we would have found them already. There’s still the possibility that there’s mild to medium correlations, similar in magnitude to birth order or handedness for example, which are both scientifically valid effects but nothing much to write home about. And I dispute that handwriting is the least polluted form of body language. Body language and facial expressions date far back into human evolution and we have strong evidence that they are innate. Handwriting is a learned skill that’s only 6000 years old and mass literacy is barely 200 years old, far too young to have been affected by evolution. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/68 "2014-11-17T14:44:06Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Does she? I must have missed that. Can you point to the post where she says this, please. > > I’ve looked through the thread, searching for terms such as \*impede \*and _amateur_ and don’t see them. > [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > It would be a shame to write this off based on findings of loosely organized amatuers. There was a typo. ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/69 "2014-11-17T14:46:07Z")
She is a he, Badger is a male, bald head, harry chest, tatoos the works! ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/70 "2014-11-17T15:08:22Z")
Something I found interesting in my moms studies were that in later years she spent a lot more time studying the handwriting of family members and extended family. She comes from a very large close Italian family where cousins, nieces and nephews stay in touch. My mom had a panic disorder where she did not like leaving the house if it could be avoided. Several of her family members shared this disorder. It would often manifest itself in the early 20’s. It was fairly common in my family for both sexes. She felt that she had identified a characterisic in the handwriting that exposed this trait but readily admitted that it was not exclusive to this trait. She asked me one day if I had this disorder and I denied it, she pressed me a bit and I still denied it but the truth was that I did have the disorder in my 20’s and had worked through it fairly quickly. After she passed I felt bad that I had not admitted it. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/71 "2014-11-17T15:14:09Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Handwriting is probably the least polluted form of body language and the most personailzed and being that it is the only personalized footprint humans really offer I am kind of baffled as to how easily most people are willing to dismiss it as useless. Have you looked at any of the cites linked to so far in this thread? Do you find fault with any of the studies done so far on this subject that show that graphology falls short? ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/72 "2014-11-17T15:29:16Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Have you looked at any of the cites linked to so far in this thread? Do you find fault with any of the studies done so far on this subject that show that graphology falls short? Yes I have looked at all the cites listed plus many more. They all say the same thing I have been saying. Graphology is woo and does not work in it’s present form. I have failed in my attempt to argue that it has the capacity to work if properly researched. A valid development program would be extremely expensive, it could stretch out for a long period of time and the logistics of coordinating the whole thing could be a nightmare. We may never learn how to extract good data from handwriting but that doesn’t mean that the data is not there. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/73 "2014-11-17T15:40:43Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Yes I have looked at all the cites listed plus many more. They all say the same thing I have been saying. Graphology is woo and does not work in it’s present form. > > I have failed in my attempt to argue that it has the capacity to work if properly researched. A valid development program would be extremely expensive, it could stretch out for a long period of time and the logistics of coordinating the whole thing could be a nightmare. We may never learn how to extract good data from handwriting but that doesn’t mean that the data is not there. It also does not mean that it _is_ there. You seem to have this mistaken impression that proper science will eventually give you the answer you want(born out by the fact that you accept the personal anecdotes of your mother’s successes as solid evidence, but dismiss all the scientific studies done so far as being not just advanced enough to suit your tastes), but that just isn’t so. Is your premise that graphology will be proven to be legit falsifiable? By that I mean, what would it take to prove to you that graphology doesn’t work? ---
**Author:** ![HoneyBadgerDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honeybadgerdc/32/1033_2.png) [@HoneyBadgerDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HoneyBadgerDC)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/74 "2014-11-17T16:03:20Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It also does not mean that it _is_ there. You seem to have this mistaken impression that proper science will eventually give you the answer you want(born out by the fact that you accept the personal anecdotes of your mother’s successes as solid evidence, but dismiss all the scientific studies done so far as being not just advanced enough to suit your tastes), but that just isn’t so. Is your premise that graphology will be proven to be legit falsifiable? > " By that I mean, what would it take to prove to you that graphology doesn’t work? " It wouldn’t take anything, I know it doesn’t work. What would it take for me to believe it cannot work might be a better question. I can answer that. If a relatively small number of traits were identified that tended to stand alone or at least be less affected by other traits and then used as research points. Lets say we had 10 stand alone traits. Now we find 100 test subjects that clearly exhibit these traits. We get sample of handwriting and have experts examine these samples against subjects who positively do not posssess these same traits and looks for the similarities. All the tests I have seen are working with behaviours that could be influenced by a large number of very different traits. The real challenge is isolating the traits. A simple test like this yielding non conclusive results I would happily shake my head and walk away. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/75 "2014-11-17T16:06:58Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > ``` > If it were not for the uniqueness of handwriting I wouldn't see any point in pursuing such a complicated task. But as it stands I can't see any other human footprint with the capacity to store so much information. It would be a shame to write this off based on findings of loosely organized amatuers. > > ``` > > … > > Most of the posts on here keep going back to the failure of the practice in its current form. Its a waste of time to keep addressing those same type of posts and saying I agree it has failed. How is this any different from palmistry or phrenology or fingerprinting? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/76 "2014-11-17T20:57:20Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > How is this any different from palmistry or phrenology or fingerprinting? Fingerprinting? 😕 I do know that fingerprinting is not 100% accurate and some proponents go too far in their accuracy claims. Is there a pseudoscience thing with fingerprinting? Maybe related to palmistry? ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/77 "2014-11-17T21:03:44Z")
> [@Erdosain](#): > > Can any European dopers attest as to whether or not they’ve had to submit a handwriting sample when applying for a job? According to these articles, between 50-75% of French companies use graphology to assess job candidates. Never done it, never heard of it, seriously doubt it exists, also can’t imagine any scenario where a graphology would be invited to a court of law. Even lie detectors are considered hokus pokus, a graphology is something you consult at the fair, not in a court. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/78 "2014-11-17T21:42:45Z")
I’m left-handed, and learned to write from right-handed teachers. My father was left-handed, and like most of his generation, was forced to use his right hand. Both of us, like most members of our family, have had a slight but noticeable tremor all our lives. The result is that we both had perfectly unique, absolutely indecipherable handwriting. I don’t see what those factors mean about my, or my father’s, personality, though. And what about people like **DingoelGringo** who, because of illness or injury, don’t write the way they’re supposed to? ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/79 "2014-11-17T22:29:29Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > Graphology is woo and does not work in it’s present form. OK, I think I’m with you now. > [@](#): > > I have failed in my attempt to argue that it has the capacity to work if properly researched. Here’s the problem: you have not made an “argument” for this. An argument needs to be based on something. You need to have something to back it up. In this case, you’d need some _data_. What you have presented is nothing more than opinion, based on nothing at all. You keep citing your mom, and maybe your mom is the world’s first accurate graphologist, but without some hard evidence, your argument is incredibly flimsy. Further, you’re basing your line of reasoning on vague “personality traits” and other meaningless terms. It is your OPINION that there is potential in graphology. It is your OPINION that your mom is awesome at it. It is your OPINION that handwriting is the purest window into the soul. And so forth. That’s perfectly fine. You’re welcome to your opinion. But you will never ever convince a single solitary critical thinker that your opinion is correct or valid or worth considering without data, particularly since all of the available graphology data indicates that’s it’s a load of rubbish. You seem to believe these opinions firmly - so firmly that your brain has become convinced that there’s more to it than just your opinion. That’s why science exists: so we can check our opinions against reality and adjust them accordingly. ---
**Author:** ![Erdosain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/erdosain/32/7284_2.png) [@Erdosain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erdosain)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2014, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751/80 "2014-11-17T22:38:10Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Never done it, never heard of it, seriously doubt it exists, also can’t imagine any scenario where a graphology would be invited to a court of law. Even lie detectors are considered hokus pokus, a graphology is something you consult at the fair, not in a court. Well, the BBC seems to believe that it’s very popular in France. I have also heard the claim that graphology is accepted as evidence in court in Germany, but I can’t find a cite (or read German). I guess that one may be something that graphologists like to tell each other. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/graphology/704751.md?page=5)