Is the analysis of the writing really accepted by psychologists or is this just another thing like palm reading and other not so scientific ‘science’?
And if so, could someone direct me to a site that will help me analyse my own writing, I tried to google for it but didn’t find anything conclusive.
Thanks:)
I believe that handwriting analysis comes in two main flavours:
-Forensic analysis that attempts to determine whether two samples of handwriting were made by the same hand and writing implement.
-Attempts to divine (among other things)aspects of an individual’s character based on their style.
The latter is not widely respected and IIRC, does not usually fare very well in blind tests.
See the Skeptic’s Dictionary entry for graphology: http://skepdic.com/graphol.html
I just skimmed an article in Skeptic magazine (don’t have it with me) about the correlation between science education and skepticism. It had a sample question from a questionnaire listing different theories that were to be rated in terms of whether you believe in them or not (7= I have no belief in this, 1 = I completely believe in this). Handwriting character analysis was one of the theories, and everything else on the list of about 15 were things like dowsing, the Loch Ness monster, alien abduction–things that fall squarely in the crackpot category. To me, that indicates that scientists have pretty much the same opinion of this type of handwriting analysis.
You need to make a careful distinction.
Handwriting Analysis is a forensic technique in which the aim is to determine whether two samples of handwriting were written by the same person or not. It is well-established, there is nothing ‘mumbo-jumbo’ about it, it relies on scientific method, the results are falsifiable, the how and why are well-documented, and it is used routinely by the police and other official bodies who may need to resolve questions of this kind. Note that it is unlikely any serious decision, e.g. a conviction, would be secured on the basis of this kind of forensic evidence alone, but it usually has a role corroborating other case evidence.
Graphology is the supposed art of divining personality and character traits, including aptitudes and potential, from a sample of handwriting. It is completely bogus. Graphologists whose claims are tested scientifically fare no better than chance. Graphology is just another variant on “cold reading”, i.e. the set of deceptive psychological techniques by which one can appear to make perceptive and accurate comments about character or events when in fact offering nothing of the sort. As it happens, I’ve written a book on this (cold reading) which some very kind people have said is the definitive work. But it’s out of print at the moment.
Here’s a link to a recent thread on this topic.