· p reface the following studies are designed to canvass the possi bility of a s cientiﬁc...

be

WARW ICK 6”

19 19

CONTENTS

PART I.

IntroductionTh e B asa l Concepts of Gr'aphologyI . H andwritin g a s a form of D ram atic Express ion .

2 . Th e Cen tra l F actor in H andwriting Individu ality . .

3 . Con trol in H andwr iting4. Variab ility5. Th e Th eory of S ign s ; Th e Graphologica l P ortra it .Graphologica l Methods .

I . Th e Method of An a logy2. Appea l to P sychologica l P rinciples3 . Em p irica l Observation and Com parison(Effect on writing of Education ; P rof ession ; Age ;Sex ; F atigue ; D isea se ) .

4. In tu itive Method .

5. Experim en ta l Graphology6. P athologica l W r iting .

Th e Graphologica l Elem en ts (Com parative Su rvey of

Graphologica l, Mech an ica l, P athologica l, and Ex

perim en tal In vestigation s )1 . Graph ic D im en s ion s .

2. Force of Movem en t ; P ressu r e ; Lin e-Qua lity3 . D irection of Movem en t

A . S lan tB . A lignm en t

4. Con tin u ity of Movem en t5. P reportion above and below ba se lin e

PART II. EXPERIMENTAL .

D isgu ised H andwr itingIn tra- Individua l Variability (Influence of Men ta l and

P hys ica l condition on S ize , S lan t, and Alignm en t)

Graph ic Individua lity, (Com parison of H andwriting P attern W ith ch aracteristic E xpress ive Movem ent s ) 97

V I II. Graphologica l Study of H andwritin g of P sychologists .

(Correla tion of grapholog ica l and Ch aracterologica l arrangem en ts )

1 . P reoccupa tion w ith details versu s preoccupation w ithprincip les

2. F eelin g of Sel f -Worth3 . Origin a lity versu s Organ izing Capacity4. Aggress iven ess5. Tem peram en t6. Explos ive versu s In h ibited Make-up

IX. Sum m ary an d Conclu s ion sReferences

P REFACE

The fol lowing studies are designed to canvass the possibility o f a s cientific characterologi ca l util ization of handwrit ing . Their main purpose i s one of orientation , prelimin ary to an attempt to use graphi c activi ty in tests o f tem

peram en ta l or character trait s , tests which are now i n process o f standard ization .

The discussion fal l s into two par t s .’

P art I consists mainlyof a cri ti cal comparison of graphol-ogica l cont entions and theoutcome of m odern scient ific investigations o f handwrit ing .

P art I I reports a num ber of exper im en ta l studies , designedlargely to try ou t various methods o f approach . Free use i smade of results from other experimental investigations bymysel f which have been previous ly reported . The chapteron “Di sguised Handwriting” i s reprinted

,with a few minor

additi ons , from the Journal o f Appl ied P sychology .

The “Graphological Study of the Handwriting o f P sychologists” wa s made possible through the generous assi stanceof those psychologists who furni shed me with the materialnecessary for a characterologi cal rating . In the study on“Intra Individual Variabi lity , I am greatly indebted to JohnE . Anderson for fai th ful cooperation ; an d in other studies Ihave had the kind assistance of my pupil s and colleagues atthe Universi ty o f Wyoming. I take thi s opportuni ty o f expressing to all who have aided me my h eantiest than ks .

JU N E E . DOWNEY .

Unive rsity o fWyoming, August , 1918 .

P art I

CHAPTER I .

INTRODUCTION .

The present day preoccupation w ith appl ied and , partieu lar ly , with vocational psychology has revived an interest inattempts to analyze cha racter by means o f physical traits orobj ective products . We have, fo r example, systems o fcharacter ana lysis based upon so-called fundam ental phys ica l variables such as pigmentation , form , s ize, structure,and expression . Graphology as an al leged science o f psychodiagnosis util izes a particular form of expression , name/ly , handwrit ing . Graphology as so defined should , however, be discriminated from the graphology which i s a studyof g raphic signs o f service in the identification of writ ing.

Both uses of the word are current today ; in our present discu ssion we are m ainly interested in the former .I t h as been assumed by many scientific workers that .

graphology as a system of character diagnos is i s on a levelwith other pseudo- sciences which look for a faci le in terpretation o f one’s mental make-up from a reading o f the lines inthe palm o f the hand or the bumps on th e head . And, in ;fact , certain extravagant claims of certain ambitious graphologists relative to the possibi l i ty o f determining the color ofa writer’s eyes or the shape o f hi s nose or the elasticity of hi sbank-account from his chi rographic style j usti fy a healthyincredulity . The best graphologists show , however, a caution and conservati sm in interpretat ion that wins in a measure the reader’s confidence and a des ire to hear what thoseo f best repute have to say in de fense o f thei r a rt .So far as the details o f graph ologica l diagnos is go one

may, indeed , be exceedingly scept ical and yet unwilling todismiss th e whole matter on the ground that graphology i son a par with palmistry, phrenology , or ,

astrology . H ow

2 GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

ever mistaken and overly optimisti c graphologi sts may havebeen ; however obvious ly inadequate thei r control o f observat ions , the precipitate from the extensive study of such menas P reyer

,Crepieux-Jamin

,Meyer

, Schn eid'

em iih l, andKlages certainly deserves respectful consideration . Moreover, on the general ground of intimate relationship betweenconsciousness and motor express ion

,the graphic pattern

which we cal l handwri t ing individual ity demands carefu lscrutiny

” P ossibly th e determinants of handwriting individua lity may be wholly external to the individual

’s psychicmake-up, but the statement should at least be accompaniedby an interrogation point . A more conservative pos itiongrants the possibil i ty at some future day o f uti l i zing handwriting in psychodiagnosi s but would defer such an attemptuntil a more perfect technique has been acquired by psycholog ists for analysi s o f the grapho-motor process and thegraphic product . The wisdom of thi s posit ion i s evidentbut an en deavor to try out immediately certain graphologi cal

principles seems j ust ifiable for the following reason .

Mental testing Which i s Open ing out into such trem en

dous possibi l it ies with reference to the analysi s o f the in telligence make-up i s sti l l baffled by the problem of diagnostictests for character and temperamental t raits . But th e needo f such tests i s as obvious as difficulti es in the way o f getting them are great . Especial ly necess ary in vocationalselection is a determination of character qual ifications . Twoindividuals o f equally keen intel ligence may be very un

equally fitted for the same pos ition by reason of di ff erencein degree o f pers i stence, energy , ambition , sel f-confiden ceand the like . A fter a certain level o f intel l igence i s attained , barring cases of exceptional abil ity, success in l i fe wouldseem to be dictated more largely by temperamental qualiti esthan by mental ity status . The need for diagnosti c tests o fsuch qual it ies therefore renders u n necessa ry

'

an y exten siveapology for excurs ions even into debatable t erri tory . Theslightest chance of stumbling upon a use ful suggestion ofprocedure j ustifies s uch an excu r s1on .

INTRODUCTION

But on ly those readers who have attempted to workthrough it are aware how voluminous i s the l i tera ture o fgraphology . This l iterature i s found mainly in the Frenchand German languages . D i scuss ions o f graphology byEngl ish writers suffer greatly by comparison , so much moresubtle

,discriminating, and scholarly are the former . A

somewhat clos e reading o f a number o f these works hasconvinced me that a summary o f the points o f vi ew involvedmight be profitably undertaken . I f nothing more , i t maystimulate the psychology o f handwriting to novel methodsof approach .

In m y survey o f graphologica l doctrine I have followed ,largely, a comparative treatment . I have sought , that is , to

present graphological material in l ight o f the perspectivefurni shed by the modern scientific study o f handwriting.

Such study has pursued several di ff ering l ines o f interest ,very di fferently motivated . A word as to each wi l l serveto map out our territory .

1 . The most scientific study of h an dwr iting has centeredits interest in a de li cate analysis o f the graphi c m ovementsas a form of motor reaction . Such investigators have developed a n d are per fecting an elaborate instrumental technique . One recalls in thi s connection the fine work o f Gross

,

Diehl , Meum ann , Freeman and others .

2 . Much less controlled and obj ective in its methods butvaluable as an attempt to approach the analys is from anotherangle are attempts to determine certain mental factors thatcondition handwriting ; the study , for example , o f the im aginal and sensational control processes (Downey ) or the factor of unconscious imitation (Starch ) .

3 . A third investigation , motivated primari ly by peda

gog ica l interes ts , has served to establi sh definite standardsfor th e evaluation o f writing speed

,qual ity and legibil i ty .

Various scales of evaluation of graphic products have beenput to extens ive use , among them the widely known scalesof Ayers and Thorndike .


4. Under pressure o f practical need for accurate iden tifica tion o f handwriting for legal purposes , both civi l andcriminal

,the handwriting experts have given us detailed

analyses of the eff ect upon penmanship of writing systemsand writing apparatus . They have stimulated discuss ionso f the l imi ts o f variabil ity and o f di sguise in the hands o findividuals and have adopted a procedural technique thatoffers many a suggestion to the student o f other aspects o fthe general problem . P articularly stimulating i s the account by Osborn of the uti l ization by the expert o f the mostmodern o f m echanical appliances such as the documentmicroscope , the enlarged photograph , and delicate s cales fordetermination of line-Width, degree o f curvature o f connecting l ines and simi lar graphic details

5. Very greatly in contrast to the regulated analysis o fthe legal expert a f e the descriptions of pathological wri tingfurni shed us by psychiatri sts . Yet pathological writing a f

fords,as we shall see, a unique method o f checking up con

elus ions reached by other forms o f procedure .

6. Lastly, we may l i s t a l ine of investigation somewhatdifficu lt to characterize . It consists in the uti l ization o fwriting as a material which may be employed in discoveringcertain types o f perceptual and j udgmental reaction .

Strictly speaking our interes t in thi s connection i s not inthe psychology of writing, as such, but in the psychology o fthe observer of graphic products . This latter aspect of thes ituation i s impl icit in graphology in so far as th e g raphologist gives evid ence o f virtuosity in h is handling of graphi cmater ial . B inet’s investigation of the graphologist ap

proached the subj ect from this angle . P sychologi cal investiga tion makes a s imilar approach in uti l izing handwritingas a material for study of the subj ective j udgment in tracing fami ly resemblances , and in training the expert j udge of “

handwriting for school systems . The insistence by Osbornthat extreme blindness to graphic form on the part o f th epre s iding j udge may serious ly handicap presentat ion o f evidence in the courts also stresses the significance of th e sub

INTRODUCTION

jective factor in the appl i ed psychology of handwriting .

Our genera l plan of procedure may now be outlined . Thefirst part o f this l it tle volume proposes to di scuss , with thecritical background furni shed by the specific investigationsl isted above in addition to general psychological theory, thefol lowing topics

,

JI . The genera l concepts upon which the g raphglogistsbuild thei r elaborate structure .

“ W M

w —t —A “ c

/2 . The methods theym

ha‘

v

'

em

u tilized in thei r endeavor tom c_ —fl ~~ w 1

6 u -w m m -d W «A n-avm -r .

cor relate j'

p'

art‘

jéulag g raph i c W l tH pa r tlcu l’

a'

r’

mental or

Em peram en ta l traits .

/3 . The s ignificance o f certain c elements asterm in ed

The second part 0 devoted to reports onexperimental investigation o f a few specific graphologicalassumpt ions . S ince the question of method o f attack wi l l

,

necessari ly, be in the foreground , meagre pos itive resultsmay be ant icipa ted . Whatever posit ive conclus ions aresuggested wi l l encourage us in our search for diagnosti cmaterial . The particular prob lems we shal l attack in thi spart include handwrit ing disgui se as basal to al l efforts todiscriminate between the spontaneous and the controlledhand ; intra- indivi dual variabi li ty ; graphi c individuali ty ;and , lastly, a graphologi cal reading of a col lection o f handschecked by a characterological rat ing obtained by a modified form of the order o f merit method .

CHAPTER I I .

THE BASAL CONCEPTS OF GRAPHOLOGY .

From my reading of graphological l iterature,five concepts

emerge as essential to an understanding of the general assumptiou s . These concept s may be li s ted as fol lows

(I ) Han de t ing fl

a s a form of emotional or dramati c ex” w e

press ion ; Graphi c individual ity 3 5:31.l outcome of cen— fi ”

s ignificance for. psy ch od1agn os 1s f rom written products ;

w r fi fi v

(4) The range and significance o f graphic variabi lity ; and

(5) The conception of‘

f‘

fié‘

graphok—fgical

—signs and of the

g raphologicaLportrait . L et us discuss brie fly What i s involved in each o f these concepts .

I . H andwr iting as a form of D ram a tic Express ion .

A general presuppos ition o f graphology is that al l movement has dramati c nuance and mirrors tempe ramental tendencies . Writing is described as an expressive movementon a par with gesture and emotional attitude . The Frenchcharacterization of writ ing a s composed o f petits gestesconveys dist inctly the point o f view involved .

It may be said that thi s fundamental concept ion , even i ftrue , i s too general to be o f much value . A servi ceable appl icat ion demands a definite com m eh en sion of the principlesunderlying emotional and dramati c express ion and its appl icat ion to a series o f abbrevia ted movements that are primari ly const rained by the demands o f social communicat ionto the production of stereotyped signs that may vary onlywithin certain prescribed limi ts . At best we have a bafflingentangling of external and internal factors . Training

,

pract i ce , convent ion“rigidi fy” the petit gesture . Yet

,o f

course,all emotional express ion both yields to and yet

moulds conventional requirements,witness such forms as

tone of voice, facial accents , bodily postures . How far,in

fact,emotional atti tudes are an outcome o f conventionalized

6

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

8 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E P SYCH OL OGY OF HANDWRITING

The graphologist s,on the other hand, ass ume that the

individual stamp o f penmanship i s a matter largely of central origin .

“H an dscr ipt

” i s,essent ial ly

,

As evidence of thi s they emphasize an observation frequentlyfound in the l it erature o f the subj ect that the writing of agiven individual may be variously produced so far as muscu la tu re i s concerned and sti l l bear the individual stamp .

We are told specifical ly «that th e foot-writing and the mouthwriting of a given individual res emble his hand-writing .

It i s , m oreover, a matter o f genera l observationthat one’s free arm , magnified writing on the blackboard re

semb les one’s finer pen -script executed perhaps with deli catefinger movement .The pre sence of central factors cou ld not

,o f course, be

cited as deci s ive so far as significance o f graphic individual ity i s concerned . Obj ective condit ions might leave a deposit of memory images of design and proportion of lettersand the l ike which might wel l function in spite o f shi ft inperipheral musculature or writing apparatus . But, obviously , th e graphologi st must mean something more than this .H i s conception of graphi c style carri es implications o f thesame stamp being impressed upon other movements execu ted by the individual in which there could be no question ofthe operation of Specific graphi c habits . He has , indeed,

“claimed that a s imi lari ty eXiSfi t LWQQQ i fi fifl i fifi ndyyfihing and th e manner in which he walks o r gesti culates ; he hasasserted that the pencra ft o f the painter mirrors the pecu l iardist inction that marks the sweep of hi s brush across the canvas .I know o f no controlled observations supporting such

statements . Obvious ly there must be a wide range for errori f such conclusions are based merely upon casual observations that are motivated by definite expectation and interest .In the second part o f the book I shal l report an attempt totes t the assertion of the existence o f individual motor patterns which stamp gesture and walk and posture as wel l ashandwriting .

THE BASAL CONCEPTS OF GRAPHOLOGY

P sychologist s who have made a special study of writingm ovements have had l i ttle to say o f graphi c individual i ty .

Hi rt (23 a :3 86 ) Speaks o f unknown biological laws whichare basal to handwrit ing individuality . Meum ann holds , “Iti s the nature o f innervations coming from the cerebral cortex,

the form and extent to which they are synthesized , thati s the main determinant o f the character o f the writing .

”

(3 2:3 3 7 )Movement- individuality i s probably a product of many

diff erent factors more or les s fundam ental to personali ty asa whole . Such , for example , are sensory predispositions ,motor ski l l , degree of unidextral i ty and the l ike . Many ofthese contributing factors might wel l be di scussed in detai lbut s ince individuality i s a function of the complex as awhole rather than that o f the elements as e lements we maypostpone certain observations unti l later . Series o f samplesshowing the geneti c development o f hands would be o f verygreat va lue ' in helping us to analyze the appearance and th econsistency o f gr aphic individual i ty . The great indivi dua lvariation in the tim e at which handwrit ing sets or matureswith a consequent fixation o f “style” i s one of the most interesting aspects o f writing with which I am acquainted .

Time of fixation appears in many instances to be a familytrait and opens up the question o f the possibi l ity o f innateand very fundamental tendencies reflected in the existenceof family hands unless, of course, the fami ly type be whol lythe product o f social and educationa l envi ronment . P ersonally, I am convinced that fami ly resemblance in chirographyis not to lbe explained on the basi s o f s imilarity in teachingand social models . Nor indeed do I find its most impressiveaspect in simi lari ty in graphic detai ls such as des ign of letters but rather in the appearance o f genera l motor patterns ,a fluidity or rigidity of movement

,an inflection o f m anner

that seems to lie back of the assumed features . H ir t’

s observa tion s on this point are o f par tié u la r va lue and his interes tin g citation of h is own case carri es considerab le weightin favor of a heritab le factor being involved 1n the situa tion

I O.

GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E PSYCHOLOGY or HANDWRITING

(23 a z3 86 ) . My own col lection of cases carries the sameimport . (14h ) Whi le Thorn-dike on the assumption of anative factor has util ized the resemblance between the handwriting o f twins as a means of getting a scale of u n in ten tiona l resemblance . (46h ) More recently sti l l S tarch has reported a correlation o f .72 for speed of writ ing in a groupo f eighteen pairs o f adult s ibl ings , and a correlation of .46

for quality o f writing . (43 b)3 . Con trol in H an dwriting .

In a sense the concept o f voluntary control is the crucialone in graphology . Graphologists in accepting a specimendemand that it be a “bona fide” article . They refuse tohandle what they call cal ligraphic or purely conventiona lhands— hands that lack individual ity . They would seem torecognize the possibi l i ty o f wri ting from which al l individuality has been squeezed by pressure o f profess ional necess ityor by need for disguise . What it sought i s a handwritingspecimen in which the individual gives way to natural impulses of express ion . They pre fer for thei r purposes thefree wri ting which one addresses to one’s sel f in rapid notetaking or the writing in in formal letters to intimates ratherthan the chirography on sti lts which one assumes to impressanother or for formal examination purposes .

x That the limit o f control i s the crucial point in handwriting identification has been clearly seen by the legal experts .Sch n eiker t for example

,in planning for the Berlin

police system a method o f classification of the handwritingof criminals for purposes o f identification bases hi s generalscheme on the elements in writing that may be eas i ly disguised or th e reverse . Such graphic characteri stics as s ize ,s lant

,form of letters are easi ly modified at wil l whi le rela

tive proport ion between one and two or three space letters ,continuity o f writing

,m anneri sms in dotting the i , etc , re

main relatively constant even in an attempt to disguise writmg .

In general,the success of the legal expert depends upon

his knowledge of where to examine writing with the expec

TH E BASAL CONCEPTS OF GRAPHOLOGY

tation o f seeing the mask dropped . The most carefu l dis

guise lets light through at some point . Some trick 1n mak

ing a comma, or cross ing the“t” may give away the secret .

Furthermore,only the expert i s aware o f the sign ificance

of what we may cal l graph ic incons istencies , the appearance,for instance

,of an al ien letter- form in a writing o f a pa r tic

ular type . Almost supernormal control i s involved in inbibition of the numerous habits that have been evolved in thecourse o f learning to write . Moreover, thi s excess ive control mani fests i tsel f in the appearance in such artificial writing of numerous evidences o f writing inhibit ion , hes itations ,and retouching o f letters . O ften the flowing writing movement is replaced by a slow draw ing movement which in i tsel fis indicat ive o f a high degree of voluntary contro l or eff ort .

‘So much we learn from the legal expert . The experi

mental grapholog i st has not been slow to uti lize this conception of contro l in his study o f wri ting- types .Klages (26h ) discussing the meaning and l imitations of

the concept o f handwriting as a type o f individual beh avm r

states that one should attempt to diagnose character fromwriting only after a thoroughgoing eff ort to classi fy a particu la r writing with reference to the amount o f control exercised in the wr i t ing-act . He class ifies writing as either ( I )artificial or (2 ) natural . Artificial writing includes di sguised , call igraphic, and ornamental writ ing . Under natural or spontaneous writing we get (a ) a more control led and(b ) a more involuntary type of writing . Control in writing may arise either from mastery o f impulse or from execss ive inhibi tion . Involuntary or uncontrol led writing alsoshows variations dependent upon acqui red trait s . I t is

shown , however, that the concept o f an acquired"

handwri t~

ing absolutely inexpress ive of the wri ter’s organizat ion i sbut a limiting notion . P ower o f disguis e or a high degreeof sustained control a re themselves s ignificant t rait s .4. Va r iability .

The concept of variabi l ity i s all ied to that o f control . I tmay be considered from two standpoints

,first

,that o f spec

I2 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

ific variabi l i ty in the writing of diff erent persons under setconditions ; and, secondly, range o f variabil i ty in the writingof a particular individual .The extent and quality of graphic variations that may be

anticipated under given conditions such as emotional distu rban ce , nervous di sease and the like or those that are dependent upon age, sex, and profess ion wil l be rehearsed inother connections . We may confine ourselves here to cons ideration of variabil i ty in the writing of a given individual .I s thi s variabi l ity so great as to prohibit al l uti l ization o fwriting in character—study ?

Absolute invariabi li ty in graphic products i s , o f course,unthinkable . One of the most suspicious signs o f a forgeryby tracery cons ists in an exact reproduction o f a s ignature .

The existence o f two absolutely identical natural autographsi s an impossibil ity

,the experts tel l u s . Their compari sons

involve o f course microscopic measurements and not themere testimony of the bare eye . But granting a variableelement in al l graphic expres s ion

,i s i t so extreme as to lead

us to conclude that writing individuali ty is too fluid a thingto have diagnostic significance ?

Such a question could be answered only by an estimationof the actual extent of variabi l ity found in th e writing o f agiven reagent under cited conditions In the hope of getting some exact determination of the range o f variabil ity Igathered the material and made the measurement s reportedin on e of the studies in P art I I . The range o f variabi l i tywas found to be pretty extreme but without loss o f individua lity . Variabi l ity in parti cular graphic s igns and the interpreta tion o f the sign ificance of such specific variation i sanother matter .In any case , the common exclamation o f laymen, I never

write twice alike,” i s subj ect to big discount . The simi larity

in writings that may have e licted such a comment—on e Ihave heard again and again— may be so striking as to leadthe experimen t er to wonder at the bl indness of th e person inquestion . Undoubtedly, “however , one is more sensitive to

TH E BASAL CONCEPTS OF GRAPHOLOGY

minor variations in one’s own writing or in that o f m embersof one’s household than to variation in that o f acquaintances ,j ust as most of us are less ready than strangers to see re

semblances in th e family ci rcle .

It should be noted at thi s point that the writing- expert i saccustomed to find graphic variabi l ity l imited by the writ inghabits which are a p roduct o f th e kind of movement andwrit ing- systems learned and the amount o f practi ce orgraphic expertness . Variabi l ity i s introduced by obj ectivefactors such, for example , as the haste or leisure with whichone writes , the quality o f pen , paper, and ink , the in n um era

ble chance factors that have a casual and not a causal s ign ifican ce .

The best graphologists are aware of such factors condition ing the appearance o f a handwriting under examination .

They demand many specimens of a given writing producedunder varying conditions They re fuse, frequently, to a t

tempt interpretation oi unaccustomed , official , clerical , orso-called call igraphic writ ing . They ask for running wri ting produced under natural conditions of interest in thecontent .

5. Th e Th eory of S ign s ; Th e Gr aphologica l P or tra it .

In organizing their system s and pr esen ting a technique ofprocedure

,graphologists are wont to l i s t so-called grapho

logical s igns or e lements together wi th an interpretation ofthei r s ignificance . Variat ions occur, of course, in the various presentations . Under some form , however , al l writersupon the subj ect dea l with such graphic elements as s ize ,alignment

,s lant , degree o f continuity, proportion and the

l ike . Usually a multipli city of causes for the same e ff ect i scanvassed .

The mechanical aspect o f much of the work with signshas been d efinitely cri ti cized and in practice the gr aphologists modi fy thei r analytic procedure by an attempt to interpret each detai l in the l ight o f the sett ing in which it occurs . In the conception of the graphological portrait, thesynthetic function of graphology is stressed at expense o f

I4 GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

the analytic . The real measure o f a graphologis't’s expertness consi sts in hi s abil ity to interpret graphic s igns in thei rrelation to one another and to the whole complex in whichthey occur . He must synthes ize a mu ltipli city o f detai ls ,reconci le opposing symptoms and succeed in locating thecentral characteri st ic that furnishes the key to an understanding of the organization o f diverse traits into a uniquepersonal ityA ba lan cm g process s omewhat s imi lar i s urged by Dr .

Black ford (5) upon those who would use success ful ly hersystem of character- “analysi s . It i s not suffi ci ent to l i s t forany individual the fundamental physical variables

,color

,

s ize, texture , form and the l ike . One must be ski l led in determ in ing how one characteri sti c modifies another in theway of accentuation or neutrali zation ; as , for instance , thedegree to which convexity of f orm annuls brunette coloring .

One must discover a unity back of apparent contradictions .At this point scientific analys i s i s abandoned for artisti c

creation . Just as l i ttle as a cataloguing o f psycho-physi ca ltraits can give us the living personal ities o f fict i on and dramacan a tabular summary of graphic characteri stics and thei rsignificance give us the graphological portrait .Two very interesting problems are involved in this con

ception . Fi rst , to what extent, it any , wil l s cience ever succeed in capturing the inmost citadel o f personality ? And

,

secondly , can it force its way in by any such a tour de forceas that o f the t rained intuitions o f the graphologist or o f thephys i-ognom ist or other student o f express ion ?The attempt of the psychologist to penetrate the secrets

o f character-organization i s evident in hi s recent torturingo f the instinctive li fe in hi s search for an all- su fficien t principle o f interpretation . That he has made valuable discoveri es must be conceded so far as hi s ski ll in twitching outo f th e pa ttern certain threads i s in question . H i s successat synthes is i s les s evident as shown by the sense o f violatedpersonal ity that his analyses leave with us in contrast to ouracquiescence in the portrayal of th e same individual ity by

16 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

The proficiency of pro fessional graphologists in delinea-f

t ion o f the graphological portrai t can be est imated only bycontrol led tests . It i s not easy to win the consent of a profes sion a l to the precautions that are necessary . Binet (3 c) ,however , succeeded i n ga ining the confidence of the Frenchgraphologists but m order to estimate thei r success or fai lure in numerical form he was compelled to l imit h is test toinvestigat ion O f more or less muti lated aspects o f characterreading, namely the determination of sex , age, and com

pa ra tive intel l igence and morali ty from ch i rography . Th e

specific results o f Binet’s investigat ions we shal l have occasion to re fer to as the discuss ion develops . Suffice i t to sayhere that Binet concluded that although there was something oi truth in graphology as practiced by his collaborators , there was also much gross error and uncertainty .

Graphology he thought might,however, be a science o f the

future . Quite possibly handwriting may be util ized in character diagnosi s but in a much more modest form than i simplied in the notion of the graphologica l portrait .

CHAPTER I I I .

GRAPHOLOGICAL METHODS .

In connection with a detai led disc-uss1on o f the correlationof mental traits with specific graphi c s igns , we shall haveoccas ion to handle thi s topic wi th some care . In this chapter let us confine ourselves to general observations .

In reading graphological l iterature I have frequentlyasked mysel f what evidence could be cited for part i cularconclusions and

,frequently

,I have been unable to put my

finger on the method by which the conclusion was reached .

It i s,in fact

,a rather difficult matter class i fying or charac

ter iz ing the kinds o f evidence uti li zed . They are implici trather than explicit in the graphological treatment, as i susually the case when a complex materia l i s handled by amethod o f procedure that may be described as intuitiverather than analytical , arti stic rather than scientific . An exh au stive s tudy of the logic o f graphology would probablyrepay th e investigator . I shall

,however

,content mysel f

with characterization o f what I take to be the'

chie f methodsuti l iz ed by graphologists

,namely

, (i ) ) The Method ofAnalogy ; (2 ) The Deduction o f certain conclusionsfrom general P sychological P rinciples ; (3 ) The Induct ive Method o f Em piri cal Observati on and of Comparat ive Study o f Group and Individual Variation ; (4) The Intuitional P rocedure ; 5) Experimental Graphology ; (6)P athological Wri ting .

In actual procedure these di ff erent methods are prettythoroughly intertwined and some violence i s done to a particu la r treatment by twi tching them apart . Nevertheless

,

some schematism i s necessary .

I .W logy .

In reaking ground in every line of human endeavor recourse to analogy is evident . In primitive mental l i fe wefind I

'

lCh material for study o f the way in which many curI7

18 GRAPH OLOGY AND TH E P SYCHOLOGY or H ANDWRITING

ious practices may g row i

up through associations by simila r ity . Wel ls , (note ) quoting Josiah Moses , cites the following examples .

“Bloodroot , on account of i ts red j uice ,i s good for the blood ; l iverwort , having a lea f l ike the liver,cures disease o f the liver~ etc . These early analogies impress us as crude in the extreme and amusing as well as inconsequential . Yet organization of experience is to a greatdegree dependent upon fusion o f experiences -on the bas is ofrough and

,at first , superficial l ikenesses . And in more r e

fined forms this method continues to dominate thought .My general impression from reading graphological l it

era tu re was that considerable appeal was made to very superficia l analogies . But I do not find that I can li st manysuch associations . I have the feel ing, however, that the a ttr ibu tion of a given significance to a certain graphic signwas often based originally on a faci le use of a s socia tiom

xby

‘

s im ilia r ity and that the psychological grounding is an afterthought . P urely analogical , I should say , i s the deductiono f the serpent- temperament— that of the diplomat - froms inuous alignment or undulant bar o f the t ; and the parallel ing of graphic and mental continuity , so

-

that the quali ty o fcoherent thought i s ascribe d to the writer o f a connectedhand

,and intermittent flashes of inspiration credi ted to him

who indulges in frequent breaks in graphic connection .

Analogical reasoning would seem to be involved in citingi llegibi l ity as an indi cation of - diss imulation , and the product ion o f smal l writing as an evidence o f love of minutiae . As imi lar k in d of induction i s apparently involved in the relation assumed be tween an extensive movement of the penpoint above the line-heavenward as i t were l— and idealisti cprocl ivities

,an d ascription of earthly or material istic quali

ti es to the penman producing long down- strokes .Note .Mental Adj ustments , p . 93 .

2 . Appea l to P sy ch olog ica l P r in ciples .

The literature o f"

graph ology”

m akes frequent appeal topsychological principles . I have accordingly been somewhat s urprised to find that my reading has precipitated so

l

GRAPHOLOGICAL METHODS 13

little in the way o f d efinite reference of gr aphological interpretation s to the specific psychology of movement . A fewcitations are made to bear the weight of an elaborate superstructure .

-a . The genera l tendency of every psychic state to i ssue insome form of movement i s frequently cited as fundamentalto the graphological position although a limitation to i tsservi ceabi l ity as a principle o f interpretation may be recogn ized not only in its extreme general i ty but a lso in the di fficu lty in appli cation due to individual diff erences in the expressive threshold .

b . A second law to i s that 0

nam

gi tcom e o f mental energy , which i s , in turn , conditioned toa degree by external factors such as external i l lumination ,

temperature, w riting apparatus , etc . Si zem of fl yyritipg A

u

n d

p res sure are two “ graphic elem en t_s_in ter retation of which

” a ‘ r.

i s {éi'

éi’

red to thi s general p rinciple. he magn ifie~

d wr 1ting0 0 v c-a s . q v.

w “ v g fl w fl fl m "“ . J—d fi -I '

t -M “ CV N M m n “ A o ne “

of the ambitious and the m in u tefl

pen m an sh ip of the tired orv ! Q 4 -_A Q f uh . I-c -«l 1-0 n w l o m "

cautious person are described aswell as th eh

h e‘

avy s trofl

ke-A m p

of the strong-willed and‘

th‘e l ight stroke of theweak

-willedh o a".

c . A thi rd principle i s the so-called law o f emotional exm “ scu b a-” a v. w o k m n “ m a —fi g . a n . .

press ion which correlates centrifugal and centripetal moveO—t—h m ‘ (L n -f “ w u wbg u u m m u l v su nfi ‘ r r fl -m —v o “ .

m ent m m gy iaLaai d sm s é i edw rm 95.1s .

Thetreatment i s assimilated to much that we are famil iar within other applicat ions o f emotion al expre s sion , for instance ,the Delsartean system of eccentri c and concentri c postures .

Granting that thegeneral assumption o f emotional express ion is well grounded , we find some very dubious applicationsof i t in graphology . Ma inly u sp ghh h

applica tion i s t o,

be‘

foun d“An

in dea lin g p

with the significance of slant and al ignment . ThusM 1 . “ b an-o . . W -M ¢~ —w M u n-u a 4 W 4~ l“ A

falligg a lig nm entj s a Sm ! tOs L QQQLesSEuJike the drag“

stag:.faOtstep s games m a s sif.

tBack- s lant i s symptom atic o f , reserve just - as “extreme rign —m “ y a-t V -O m " d o-Q

s lant betokens emotional susceptibility and vert ical writingfi fl o p ?

indicates emotional control .

20 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

Two other principles o f interpretat ion are cited by K lages .

(26a ) . One (d ) {he calls the law of periodi c fluctuationo - m “ H Q — H

m m n v “ m .

of,

attention which results in relaxation of control at cerv -5 a s “ —r n— n -q—n g

ta in lines , words, and letters and hence makes i t0 - u w w .n -“ vw s

discriminate-"

between voluntary and spontaneo. a n. c‘ —Q Q u a -n “ w “

ous. graphic trai ts . Klages ’ chie f contribution,however,

ow “

concerns (e ) the“ a n d inh ibition indetermining certain graphic _patterns . The appl ication of

such a psychological principle does not favor the m ech an i

cal li st ing of i solated graphic t raits with thei r respective sign ifican ce so much as i t does the discovery of the poss iblecombination o f specific symptoms and their common reference to the general motor organization of the individual .Klages also cites in explanation o f certain graphi c s igns

a law of so- called feel ing for spatial analogy ; the implicat ion being, I take i t, that in certain cases a deli cate appl i cation of Empathy Operates in determining pre ference forcertain forms and slants .

The empirica l method consi sts in extensive study andcompari son of handwritings . Thus the hands of personso f known common traits are compared and a conclusiondrawn as to the way in which a given psychic character manifests i tsel f in script . Or a certain grouping o f hands re

su lts from one’s study a n d may lead to a cataloguing o f themental

,

traits possessed by the penman in order to dete rminewhether there a re any that are common to the gr oup .

Scholarly graphologists amass collect ions o f writ ing specimens whi ch may be uti l ized in the twofold way mentionedabove . Thus they may institute compari son between thehand-writing specimens found in collections coming fromthe intel lectually in ferior and the intellectual ly superior an dseek the graphic symptoms of intel lectual superiori ty o r infer ior ity . They may compare the chirography of criminalswith that of moral re formers and so on . This method maybe refined to any degree

,with an application o f the clas s ic

method o f agreement and difference .

GRAPHOLOGICAL M ETHODS

In any case a cri ti ci sm urged by Mr . Osborn i s undoubtcdly validl w

n am ely , that too l itt le in format ion 15"

c‘

urrentamong g raphologists as to the general CHGFL EPOH scr

’

i"

pt"

of—m

m “ w

thej gri ting sy stenl learned . These systems vary not onlyfrom one nation to another but within a given country fromone decade to another . ‘Thus in the United States alone i ti s possible to trace the vogue o f at least five systems ; namely , the old English round

“hand ; the modified round hand ;the Spencerian system ; the modern vertical ; and, in addition , an angular style taught in schools for girls . D i fference in des igns o f letters

,diff erence in proportions between

letter-parts,difference in slant and shading wi l l character

ize the script o f those taught diff erent systems . Moreover ,manneri sms from foreign systems may cling to a style ; thusthe influence of German script on writing is a very perceptible one . The unsophisti cated observer m a y find strikingsimi larities and di fferences in two writ ings that have no s ign ifican ce whatever other than witness ing s imi larity or di fference in

'

the system of writing th at was learned originally .

As an outcome of this masking of the individual chirog raphyby national and epochal habits i t wou ld seem that we mustseek for the distinctive graphic s ign o f say diplomacy orcandor or imagination in penmen who have learned di fferent systems of writing or we may institute a comparison o fhands for determination o f a particu lar di fference only whenconfident that in general the penmen have learned the samesystem of writ ing .

But there are other factors which might influence thegrouping o f a collection of samples but which have only alimited psychodiagnostic s ignificance . The best g raphologists are perfectly wel l aware of these con tr ibu ting ' elem en ts

and have given us a more or less detai led treatment o f them .

M yJE t these factors as fol lows : education and amount-o

of_pr_ac_tice in handwri ting ; profess ional requirements whi chh .

determine th e vertical hand of the l ibrarian , or the printI -Q—a

l ike hand of__t_he engineer page ; sex ; fatigue ; an d disease .

u n i -fl

A word as to the significance"

of each .

”

22 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWR ITING

A number of observations point to a fai rly general recaw . n . . ” ca n . ”

ogn ition of certain d1if erences between th e writing of thea—c m ~ w

educated at hQ uncultivated . Th e ch irography__of the latQ ' ‘n—n—ou—q ‘ . 4 _ -A

ter__ShOW S an unaccustomedne ss an awkwardness , an IIICXw —~ u _ a

pertnes s th_a_t_m arks i t rather unmistakeably . But one cannot always apply the contrasting adj ectives to the hand ofthe educated except in so far as accustomedness i s concerned . I t too may be both awkward and without grace

, a l

though usual ly rapid . Th e fundam ental diff erence growsout o f amount o f practi ce in using the pen . P ract i ce i s evident in the greater speed and smoothness with which thegraphic product i s produced . There exists

,however

,a so~

cal led cultured hand which indicates breeding to a very highdegree . I t possesses both grace and dist inction as wel l asthe faci l i ty that is the result o f much use of the pen . W i ththe increasing uti l ization o f the typist such hands are becoming rarer and the educated man i s sati sfied with a s crawlas a mark o f identification .

Since practi ce i s so great a factor in development o fgraphic virtuosity , we are not surpri sed to find certain l ineso f work leaving an imprint upon chi rography . The teach.er

’

5 han d is The! .

cler ical”hand is marked by

ease o f manner,speed and greater or less conventional i ty .

Even more conventional very deliberateand slow 15 the vert i cal hand of the cataloguer . The telegrapher

’s hand i srapid , fluent , marked by a defin itefl s‘y le and exhibi ting certain manneri sms as to the number of words per l ine and thelike Such hands are o ften cited 1n support o f the positionthat handwri ting individuality i s the product o f obj ectivefactors only . Graphic virtuosity , with i ts accompanyingspeed and satis factoriness o f outcome , i s the result o f correct and prolonged practice . A l l o f us might

,i t i s assum

ed,acquire the rapid business hand or the arti sti c print o f

the mechanic . The assumption is a big one . As have beenurged before

,hands that show to a very high degree the pos

s ibility of voluntary control undoubtedly exist , but not everyone can produce them . Not every one can acquire as a per

24 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWR ITING

bri l l iant young men, gi fted in law or l i terature , whose in

tellectu a l development has been remarkably precocious butwhose hands have “ripened” very s lowly . I am inclined tothink that a late maturing o f a hand i s an indication o f a“sensory” make-up an early maturing of a “motor” makeup

,a distinction to whi ch we shal l return later .Sex as a determinant o f handwriting has be en dealt with

at some engt fi gfim s . ostln raphologists aresom ew at conservative concerning the possibi l ity of deducing sex from handwriting . Binet’s tes t o f graphologi sts showed that the i r successes in detecting sex fromhandwriting ranged from 63 to per cent

,and under

favorable conditions might reach 90 per cent (3 c) , figureswhich were confirmed by a later experiment by mysel f .(l 4c ) . Curious inversion o f sex- s igns were

,however,

discovered by experimentat ion so that many women arefound to write hands that are unanimously chosen as masculine hands and a few men write unmistakeably ladylikehands . The interpre tation of the si tuation i s somewhat ambiguou s , s ince sex in writing may be largely an outcome o fsocial factors which emphasiz e neatness , grace , conventionali ty in the woman’s hand and speed, force , and originali tyin the man’s . On the other hand, Meum an n (3 2) reportsa masculine and a feminine type of hand

,diff erentiated by

the appearance o f characteri sti c pressure curves , types whichi f confirmed would evidence rather fundamental di ff erencesin kind o f motor control .The effect o f fatigue and of disease upon wri ting opens

up an extensive field for exploration . P ro fessor Janet,of

the Col lege de France , urges that experimental graphologyshould begin with studies in pathological graphology

,stud

ies on the eff ect upon handwriting o f diseases o f moti l ityand sensibi l ity, or of Specific di seases , such as those o f respir a tion and of circulation . From the more pronouncedmodifications of handwriting transi tions may then be madeto its more deli cate inflections . This recourse to pathologybids fai r to prove increasingly fruitful and deserves treatment in a separate section .

GRAPH OLOGICAL METH ODS 25

Within these generic types as outl ined above, the graphologist must conduct hi s search for character-complexe s ,guarding always not only against confus ion o f the generi cwith the individua l but al so against the accidental variationsthat are due to purely obj ective factors such as writing ap

paratus,i l lumination

,haste , social requirements , etc . I t i s

the complexity o f the problem that leads many psychologiststo ques t ion the possibil i ty of a servi ceable psychodiagnosi sfrom h andwrit ing . They m ay grant the revelatory characterof movement and yet despai r o f any very specific uti l izationof i t so far as writing is concerned . Yet precipitates from theextensive study and compari son of handwriting specimensby able observers certainly deserve cons ideration . I f nothing else , thei r conclusi ons aff ord suggestions for an exper i

mental program .

If I may j udge from my own experience,observation of

handwriting results in what may be described as conceptualprecipitates , composite images , very similar to the generi cimages of

'

facia l types . I fin dl nyfi

selfm m entaily classifyinghands as belonging l o the

“smooth flowing” type or the“ labored inhibited” t ype or

Such categories have developed from mywithout deliberation , although I find that I possess fai rlyclear-cut visual images of one or two specific hands thatmay stand as representat ive of a parti cular type . My mental fixation of a hand involves its classification with a particu la r group . My fai lure to note detai l s i s surprising butin spite o f it or perhaps because of it I have a rather unusual capacity for recognition and memory of hands . Mycomposite images o f hands have developed in connectionwith study of individuals so that as part o f my class ificationI am apt to question mysel f as to whether the penman inquestion belongs temperamentally with the group in whichhis writing places h im

‘

. Thus the “flowing” type of handhas so o ften in my experience been produced by the social lytact ful , adj ustable, often charming, sometimes merely plausible, individual that I find i t creates a definite expectation .

26 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWRITING

In additi on to these generic images o f hands that haveresulted in part

,from a native interest in graphic expres

s ion,and

,in part, from extensive preoccupation with chi r

og raphy as a material for experimental work , I find a second factor involved in my sensing a personal ity from handwriting . This second factor may be described as an attempt,although not an overt one , at motor mimicry or imitativeinterpretation . I find mysel f imaging kinestheti cal ly thetype o f movement suggested by a given handwriting . Theimitation results in a feel ing o f the assumption o f a foreignpersonal i ty . The general method i s similar to an attempt toget a clue concerning the permanent temper or casual moodo f another by mimicry of hi s walk or hi s atti tude . Whoeverhas tr ied copying another’s carriage

,his manner

,fo r ex

ample , oi carrying his crooked arms with elbows outspreadin true Irish fashion or hugging the body in diffiden ce i saware how enl ightening such mimicry may be . The suppressed mimicry of a graphi c pattern is

,o f course

,a much

mor e subtle matter . In my own case it i s released only byvery individual hands and only when I am in certain framesof mind . I have

,however, seen such a me thod uti l ized in

very expli ci t form by a l ittle gi rl of ten years who once servedme as subj ect . This child had recourse in th e most naiveway to mimicry by facial expression and bodi ly contort iono f the handwriting she was observing .

4. M MQM of Inpu l l lon ,

In the section on the concept o f the graphological portraitwe saw that there i s a point at which graphologists abandon an analytical for a syntheti c method of procedure . Indeal ing with handwriting as material for study I am

,there

fore , tempted to discuss a l i ttle more fully the opposition between a del iberate and an intui tional handling o f material .This discussion i s motivated by two observations

,first

,the

extraordinary diff erences that normal individuals show inthei r capaci ty to recognize and remember handwritings ;and, secondly, by the di strust o f the handwriting expert ofj udgments based on general appearance of writing .

GRAPHOLOG ICAL METHODS

B inet in his inves tigat ion of the extent to which age , sex,

intelligence,and morali ty could be told from script found

that such measure o f success as was achieved by pro fessionals could be approx1m ated by amateurs . My experiencewith reagents in an experiment on the sex j udgment resulted simi larly . (14c) . R , in particular— a

“highly sens itiveyoung woman with decided l i terary and art i sti c gi fts— gaveevidence o f ext raordinary faci l ity . Her record i s verynearly as accurate as that o f Crepieux-Jamin , the French expert . R . reported a very definite sensing of personali tyfrom writing, th e accuracy of which could not be tested asher help was available only for the one series o f exper i

ments .In a number o f other experim ents in which handwriting

lias been used,

as materia l a great individual variation infaci l ity in handling it i s evident, quite apart from trainingor extensive experience with it . In an experiment in whichreagents matched pai rs o f addresses wri tten by a given number of penmen , I found not only a wide ran ge of variationin a bi l ity lbu t also an approximation o f the best record by ag ir l o f eleven years . In an experiment on disguised handWriting I found on e whol ly unpracticed reagent whose penetra tion of a di sgui se excelled that o f very carefu l students o fthe subj ect . Osborn found a pract ical appli cation for suchindividua l di fference in i ts negative aspect ; fai lure to seesimilarity in handwriting often makes i t impossible for aj udge to follow the l ine of argument presen ted by a handwriting expert in court . The Osborn test for determinationof what he calls form-bl indnes s— namely the search forsamples o f words written by the same penmen—f revea led awide range o f variation in individual records

,namely

,from

100 per cent accuracy in 8 minutes and 3 5 seconds to 65percent of accuracy in 9 minutes and 55 seconds .

”

Bingham (4) report s , in compari son with other tests , a veryhigh coefficient of variabi li ty for the Osborn test .That the amateur should so closely approximate the rec

ord of the pro fes sional points to an interesting problem,i f

28 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E P SYCH OL OGY OF HANDWR ITING

only the identification of a field o f work in which practi ceeffects are at a minimum . It raises the question , for a specific s ituation , o f the value o f the intuitional method . Dearborn (l l b) has recently ana lyzed in most profitable fashion what '

h e conceives to be involved in intuition and he h asurged the psychologist to enter upon a scientific investigat ion o f this very promising concept . Rather than approachthe problem as a variation in sex- intel ligence , as Dearbornsuggests , i t would seem more auspicious to map out the fieldon the basi s o f di ff erent materials . Special ized virtuos ity inany field and , in parti cular , the automati c processes of artwould suggest themselves as promising material for an a lys i s . The contributions o f both original capacity and extens ive t raining could possibly be laid bare .

In my experience with reagents in tests on handwriting Ihave noted two varying tendencies ; one a preoccupationwith graphic detai ls , the other a preoccupation with the general appearance o f the hand in question . I cannot say onthe basi s of the results which i s generally the more successful ; but there can be no question that in some instances apreoccupation with detail s has completely bl inded a reagentto very striking individuali ty . I t i s with considerable astonishm en t that I have observed th e insensitiveness to generalappearance of certain very careful and highly intel l igentreagents who compare varying details with most pain fulexactness and yet total ly miss th e graphic pattern . Thispoint I have di scussed e l sewhere (14,d ) bu t only in such away as to set the problem . P ossibly we. have here an instance of j udgment o f general l ikeness (impressionist ic )versus one based on specific di ff erence .

The problem involved is very extensive in i ts appl i cation .

Work in systematic botany and zoology reveals,I am told ,

the same sort of distinct ion in scienti sts . A too-great preoccupation with s imilarities may lead to an oversight o f di ffer en ces that may prove basal from a cla ssificatory stand

point , while preoccupation with di ff erences may result in theendless spl itting of subdivisions . In an experiment on


handwriting simi lari ty and di ff erence I sought to determinewhether there existed an individual di fference in the r eadi

ness with which difference or s imilarity was perceived . Theresults seemed to indicate that most reagents are able toshi ft somewhat easi ly fro-m one mental set to another butthat there were reagents who were actual ly more succes s fulin maintaining one or the other o f the two sets . The moststriking example of faci li ty with likeness and incapacity tohandle diff erences occurred in the case o f a girl whose fai lure in botanical classifications was in great contrast to herusual academic success .

The handwriting expert in court procedure i s most distrustful o f a j udgment based on general appearance of handwriting . In study of handwriting he re commends placingword by word and letter by letter the material from the di s

pu ted document and the possible original . H i s j udgmenti s the outcome o f the most refined measurement and comparison of . deta ils . There can be no question of the j ustness o f the expert’s insi stance upon th e methodical and exacting testing of a questioned document nor hi s sceptici smof the unchecked and biased testimony o f the average u m

discriminating witness . But i t would , none the less , be ofgreat value to institute a compari son under controlledconditions of the j udgment of a picked reagent based ongeneral appearance and that of the expert based on a comparison of detai ls . The latter method makes poss ible asimpler process of presentation o f proof

,although enlarged

photographs might serve in the former case .

5. Exper im en ta l Gr apll a logy .

Graphological exploration has not been conducted solelyby empirical or intuitive methods . Actual experimentationhas been resorted to , although it has only been by slowdegrees that a crit ical understanding has been evolved as tothe precise problems under consideration and the controlof conditions necessary for sati s factory work . But a gradual refinement o f method of experimentation with in crea sing understanding o f the points at i ssue i s , of course, inherent in the development o f every investigation .

30 GRA PHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

Basal to every attempt at experiment has been the ideaof concomitant variation , change in writing with change inconditions under which i t has been produced . Thus theconcept o f graphi c variabi li ty i s found to be essential to thegeneral h ypothesis of grapho-psychodiagn os i s and not amere embarrassment as many critics have assumed .

The earli est experiments , as resumed by CrepieuxJamin , impress us as extremely ambitious in intentionand vague in execution . Yet s ince the quest ionat i ssue i s that o f t e revela tion of a personality throug hm tmg it i s not surpris ing that early attempts at tes ting thi sassumption 1n the experiments conducted by Ferrari

,Heri

court , and R ichet consi sted in seeking to determine the eff ectupon handwri ting o f suggesting succes sive personali ties toh ynotjze_d_subjects . Th ey eon clude thet

“th e

'

w’

ritten gesture . general” (9 3128 )and that

,in consequence , i t i s proved that variations in writ

ing are a function o f variations in personality . The vagueness of the conception of personal i ty renders such exper i

ments o f li ttle sign ificance . In a later attempt to render ex

per im en ta tion more definite comes the device o f suggestingi-fl c o m a-u . ~w “ 0m m :

to the hypnp tised subject '

th a t he assume fhe personality of‘ m . —o a

a individual i ty.

H

The writing produced under such suggestion may then be comparedwith that proceeding from the character thus simulated !Crepieux-Jamin recognizing the l imi ta tions o f the hyp

m otie method , in so far as the subj ect never completely loseshi s personality, rej ected the method as unnecessarily complicated and used simple persuasion . The reagent

,unac

qua in ted with graphology, i s first asked to write a givenphrase in hi s natural way, and then , under definite emotiona l suggestion , i s asked to write it again . The method i ssaid to be usable only when the subj ect i s . both susceptibleto suggestion and intell igent .It i s scarcely necessary to enter upon criticism of the a t

tempt to alter the fundamental individuali ty of a hand . Inaddit ion to difficult ies in the way of manipulating the reagent,

3 2 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

range of eff ect . Some of these factors have already beenmentioned . They such conditions as . qual ity o f

,

ink, quali ty an“

si ze an d position o f writ ing sur face , fin en ess

u

or“

fcoa rsen ess o f pen , obj ect ive.i l lumination and tem

pera ture ,'

extern a l pressure in the maintenance of speed orlegibili ty, form of movement employed

,-fin ger , wrist, or

forearm . Our estimate o f the actual eff ect o f such factorson writing i s , to be sure , somewhat crude . Other factorsmore int imately associated with the penman’s make-up wouldinclude influence of unconscious imitation (43 eff ect o fwritten content

,eff ect o f bodi ly fatigue and o f specific drugs

such as alcohol . (3 0 Crepieux-Jamin has report ed varia tion s in his writing under changes in weather, fatigue, illumination , visual supervis ion and the l ike . (9 :13 6f ) Hehas also cited changes produced by various emotional condition s .

(b ) Thi s last marks a transition to the second topic,namely specific variation under specific changes in sub

jective conditions , variation in mood , emotional excitement,sensory control and varying degree of impuls ion . In suchan inve stigation , i f anywhere , graphologists must find aj ustification for assigning specific significance to specificgraphic traits . But variation i s two sorts ; variation fromone indivi dual to another and variation in the written produ cts of the same individual ; there i s inter individual andin tra individual variation . Can one conclude because thewriting of a given individual varies in a characteristi c fashion under given conditions that on e i s j ustified in a similarinterpretation of variations in di ff erent hands ?

The question i s a vital one . To give a definite example .

There can be no question that the handwriting o f a givenindividual varies in s ize with change in sensory control .W i th increased attention to owr iting we get a decrease ins ize

,except under certain conditions which need not be

specified here,while with di stract ion of attention from writ

ing we get magnification of script . This outcome of experim en ta tion enables us to explain some interesting variations

GRAPHOLOGICAL METHODS

in s ize o f writing for a given individua l but what bearinghas i t upon variation in s ize o f hand from one individualto another ? The paral lel i sm is n ot as simple a one as appears upon the face of i t . I s one j ustified in concludingthat a hand relatively small i s a s ign of preoccupation withwriting as a process and that large writing i s due to au tom

a tism o f control ? The question can be answered only byan extens ive comparison o f the handwriting o f reagents ofknown mental habits . But in any case how set up a groupstandard for s ize

,particularly in view of the fact o f individ

ual variation in the express ive threshold ?I f one may parallel group and individual variation, i t

would seem that the interpretation o f th e significance ofsize

,pressure

,s lant and alignment should be de termined by

study of thei r variation in the individual and that the sign ificance o f proportion and continuity should be deter m m ed

by int er- individual comparison .

(c ) Th e qu estion of the range of voluntary control forwriting as a whole and for each graphic s ign has been tested in the experiments on disgui sed and retarded handwri ting.

“ A summary of these experiments wil l appear in theexperimental section . Suffice it to say here that , accordingto Meyer

,such experiments enable us to determine which

elements are produced under supervi sion o f attention , whichare spontaneous products o f motorimpulses . Thus s lant ,size, and form are found to be more artificial ly producedthan proportion , degree o f continuity and alignment . Moreover, by noting the specific effect o f increased attention uponwriting— which i s a result o f an attempt at disguise— weare enabled to determine j ust what t raits characterize thecontrolled hand in contrast with the spontaneous one . S izean d s lant , for example , are decreased in the di sguised hand ,and there are more breaks in continuity with an emphasi sof the long down-stroke

,results which lead us to attribute

to such a hand when it occurs under normal conditions ahigher degree of sel f-control (inhibi tion ) than we attributeto larger, more incl ined, more con tinuous script .


On e word more, i t i s not easy to say where graphologicalexperimentation— testing the hypothesi s that writing maybe us ed in psychodiagnos is— ends and psychologi cal exper imentation begins . Certainly the psychology of handwriting as such should be u ti l iz ed by a scientific graphology,whi le grapho-psychodiagn osi s i f ever substantiated wouldbecome a part o f appl ied psychology . We shall find in ourmore specific discuss ions considerable overlapping o f fieldso f work . One very great di ff erence in point of view should ,however

,be pointed out . The psychology of handwriting

i s concerned mainly with a . study of the writing mo . ;vementgraphology i s concerned with the written product . Theformer me thod i s highly analyticand has worked out ac

curate methods for observation as detailed in the K raepel

inian studies where precise instruments for regi stration ofpressure and speed and s ize are describedFreeman’s fine investigation of the writing movement alsonecess itates a command o f instrumental technique . (16a c) .

P sychologists interested in such detai led analyses are aptto dismiss the graphological program as premature in

'

its

interest even i f not absurdly ambitious in design . Eventu a lly ,

perhaps , the psychology of handwriting may havesometh ing to off er in the way of psychodiagnosi s . Meanwhile there is much elementary work to be done .

For practi cal purposes , however, j udgm ent must be pas sedon the graphic product, not the graphic process . This hasbeen evidenced by the evolution of handwriting scales as a

pedagogi cal device ; (2:46a ) . Nor can the uti l ization ofwriting in psychodiagnos is proceed far unles s transition is

possible from the movement to th e product o f movement .Freeman

,however , i s reported as directing a handwriting

investigation by means of the kinetoscope which suggestsfar- reaching possibil ities , one of which may be a convenientmethod of studying many individual hands in the process ofmaking. (Note )

NOTE— See Jou rn a l Applied P sych ology 1, 1917, p . 298.


6. P a tholog ica l Wr iting .

Graphologists and others interested in handwriting haverealized that in pathological writing they have a ferti lefor work . We have already seen how Janet urgedinvestigation of the significance of graphic symptomsld begin with determination o f the changes in writinge place under definite pathological conditions . Graphhave also realized the value o f such material andinclude in thei r discussions some re ference to pathowriting .

ologists , approaching the subj ect from a totally di fstandpoint

,have sought to uti l iz e writ ing in di ff erdisease . They have had littl e interest insuch ; they have , r ather, been searching

signs o f specific disturbances in the writing o f patients .

h a collection as the most interesting on e by Dr . K6ster

thi s for its obj ect . He gives characteri sti c hands forents su ff er ing from chorea , hysteria , seni le paralys is ,

em en tia precox , etc . (27 ) C l in icians who present speci1ens o f thi s sort in connect ion with case histories often fai l3 make any distinction between util ization o f graphic elet ents as such and util ization of the written content . O ften ,f course , disturbances o f attention , o f memory , and of

peech—function are evident in the written content quite

part from any specific grapho-motor disturbance . P en

1pses are usual ly analyzed as a product of mental disor.ers and not scrutinized for evidence o f concurrent disturbn ce of moti l ity .

Not only do workers in thi s field fai l at times to discrimnate between graphic and con ten tua l disturbances but , injenera l , they fail to realize the necess ity of presenting the.ormal writing of a patient for comparison with the patho) g ica l . For adequate compari son one should have a seriesf samples showing the progressive e ff ect o f the disease

.pon the writing. So inadequate,however

,has been the

on ception o f the requi rements for sati s factory comparisonha t much o f the materia l that has been publi shed i s o f veryLttle value .

3 6 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HAND

The same situation i s evident in study o fdrawings . Nacke (3 5h ) has drawn attentionof samples o f normal drawings by the patient forwith pathological productions . He makes the ppoint that inexpertness or lack of training may give aing an appearance of being pathological or atavi sti c intent al though it might be dupl icated easi ly by drawings frth e mentally normal . N éicke ’

s stri ctures are worth h eediNone the less

,there seems a res idue from the work

pathological drawing that indicates the possibi l ity ofing in some degree drawing in diagnosi s . The stereproductions o f the catatonics

,and the symbol isti c p

o f the dementia precox patient probably have sy m pt

value .

The appl ication o f conclus ions derived from stupathological writing to psychodiagnosis in general i ss imple one , and certainly not to be settled by a priors iderations . Whether or n ot pathological writingpsychomotor correspondences writ beg is a questianswered only a fter elaborate study .

D e Fursac, without attempting to pass j udgment uponoutcome o f graphological observation , remarks that incase the correspondences reported for normal cases dohold s imply under pathological conditions and he preshis material in such a way as to make compari son withtraditional treatment o f the graphic signs easy to achi

(18H i rt (23 a ) makes a threefold distinction of obvious

portance but one that i s frequently ignored . Quitefrom physi cal conditions the writing-act can proceed

qua tely only i f th e integrity o f the motor apparatserved . Hence i t i s necessary (a ) to study the physioli cal conditions o f writ ing and to note those cases o f patlogi cal writ ing that indicate structural changes , grossatomical changes possibly ; (b ) to work out in detai lpsychophysics o f writ ing, the correlation of determtal con ditions with peculiarit ies o f action

GRAP H OLOGICAL METHODS

sider characteri st ics o f path ological writ ing that are morespecifically psychological

,independent

,that i s

,of physio

logical condit ions .

From the physiological s ide the investigation o f writingdemands consideration of the general conditions o f volumtary m ovement and o f motor coordinat ion , including thepart played in coordination by visual s ensations and sensations from the moving parts . C l inical experience showsthat insens itive l imbs m ay be brought under eye- control .Ski ll once acquired i s lost only under certain conditions

,as

in ataxia . The writing of the ataxic,both with eyes open

and eyes closed , merit s care ful study . The psy chophysicso f writing involves study of individual variations in bothreflex and voluntary movements . Through observationsof the tendency to and in ten s ity o f movements which a manemploys in order to gain a certain en d

,important conclus

ions m ay be drawn relative to his personality . Individualtypes o f beha vior a re to be sought in the tem pora l relationsof movem ent ; in the writing reaction- types

,where the auth

or claims to have found experimental ly a sen soria l and am otor course ; in pr ess u re- types , corresponding to the s en

sory and m otor reaction—types ; in rhy thm ic pecu lia r ities ;and in va r ia tions in rapidity of writing and in flu ctua tionsin rapidity . Numerous problems are raised

,as

,for ex

ample, the cause of the increase or decrease of writ ing- s izewhen writing i s produced with the eyes closed .

In dealing with mental di sease s that are characterizedlargely by mental symptoms , H i rt appears to find a point o fdeparture for the characterological study o f handwriting .

“H ow discriminate with security,

” he asks,

“the writing of am aniac or melanchol ic from that of a m otor ly excited orm otor ly inh ibited man ?

” In the maj ori ty o f cases,patho

logical writing i s di ff erentiated from handwriting markedby personal peculia rit ies only by the h eightening of suchpeculiarit ies . Such comparison of the handwriting o f temperam en ta l and insane subj ects raises a question which psych ia tr ists are sti ll debating, the existence , that i s , o f certain


make-ups which are basal both to character varieties an t

anomalies,and to specific forms o f insanity which may re

sult in case o f strain .

In any case i t i s urged by competent authority,in agr

ment with the experimental psychologists , that the stuo f pathological writing should not be based on observa t

o f the graphic product but that there should be r eg ress iorito analyti c regi stration of the graphic movements of th etien ts who are under investigation . I t i s thought tha t. suuti l ization of writing-movements may have actual diagnoti c s ignificance .

40 GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HAND

tions in s ize are also s ignificant ; diminution in sizeing proceeds indicates am bition _.0r ardor that playscrease indicates waxing ardor .The determination o f whether letters shal l be c

large or small off ers considerable difficulty .

“M-M M

le ss than two m illim etegi he1gh t may , however ,as small ; and capitals that are less than eight mi llimeters .Small letters that run above _, th ree_ m i ll imeters are big andcapital s that are more than twelve millimeters high . (Note )Often , graphologists appear to uti l ize the capital s alone assufficiently indicative of character traits . In thi s connection they also m ake much of the variations in form of thecapital and the possibil ity it o ff ers for excess decoration .

The c’

haracterological interpretation appears to be baon feel ing for size as contributing to prestige ; th e m“consequential a conscious state i s felt to be , the more i

petu s toward large” express ion .

2 . Let us turn now to pathological writin g . I s increasedecrease o f graphic dimensions indicative o f any pa r ticumental condition ? De Fursac writes (18 :13 f ) Them en sion o f letters i s in large measure a functiopsychomotor activity or energy . P sychomotoror hyperkinesis mani fests itsel f under two di ff erent formswhich may be combined in variable proportions , increase inrapidity o f the graphi c movements and increase in the extens ion and energy of these movements . Specifical ly, sofar as extent of movement i s concerned , we find that augmentation of extent o f movement leads to an increase inth e height o f letters . The extent o f such magnification isclearly evident when the normal writing of a patient i s compared with tha t produced in a state o f maniacal excitement .Increased rapidity o f writing as shown by timed records isal so an outcome o f such excitement . The relation of suchincreased spe ed to amplitude i s o f great interest . Whenincrease in rapidity does not exceed certain l imits i t remains

NOTE— Cf . Graves , S . M . A Study of H an dwr itin g, Jou rn a l ofEducation a l P sychology, p . 483 -

494.

TH E GRAPHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS

compatible with increase in the height of letters , and am

plitude and speed are associated . But wh en_speed become svery g rea t d

th e inverse p henomenon occurs , namely-1 3 . dimvo -A u - m -m m m 0 w ‘ .

letters,a diminution which may result in

certain words being reduced to vague undulating lines ,quite i l legible . O ften in the same specimen we find bothmani festations o f hyperkines is

,— increas e in height an d

diminution of movement due to excessive speed .

The enfeeblement of psychomotor activity mani fests i ts el f ,in general , in a diminution in the height o f letters , conj oinednot with increased rapidity but with retardat ion o f thegraphic movement . Specimens are given of such decreasein size under conditions o f melancholy depress ion .

Som etimes a samp le o f writing from __patient“ M o“ oq on to- m m “ C M

Fatigue , for example , may .

lead to writing that becomes progress ively more diminishedin amplitude , while under the influence of automati sm writing increases in size

,a fact strikingly evident in stereotypy .

the outcom e, of variationin speed or i t m ay be determ inefi cly fl

by w dim in u tion in the powerof attention .

Specific mental disorders furni sh examples of such shi ftsin size . Thus the writing of the dementia precox patientmay be normal in s ize or very large or very extenuated depending upon the dominance of automa ti sm or hyperkinesisor fatigue . Even the m ani c does not alwaysproduce greatly magnified writing ; sometimes i rregularityin '

size i s more characterist i c than i s increase in dimensions .Very great decrease in s ize from the normal4

may occur in the case o f melancholi c depress ion,such de

crease being greater in spontaneous writing than in writingunder dictation , because of the greater mental effort involved in the former case . But

,as before

, irregularity in s izetestifies to tlie w

disgurbance g lu a tten tion .

Other special ists on pathological writing are in pretty fai ragreement with de Fursac . Both KOSter (27 ) and Hi rt(23 a :3 99 ) reproduce specimens showing magnified writing


when the patient i s in hi s manic period and very minutewriting produced unde r condit ions of depression . Decreasein siz e through fatigue i s substantiated . K 65ter reports ,also , an increase in s ize o f writ ing resorted to in an un con

s cious attempt to mask lack o f motor control— a device thatI have noted in elderly people .

Gross (22 fol lowing the more exact technique o fthe Kraepelinian investigations

,found retardation of speed

,

reduction in s ize , and sub—normal pressure during depress ion in circular insanity . Writing characters became prog res sively smaller instead o f showing the more normal increase in s ize . In mania , Gross reports that results wereles s clear—cut . W i th ri sing excitement there was

,however

,

a tendency to increased speed , increased siz e and increasedpressure .

H irt (23 a z3 97f ) reports :The melanchol i c patient entersupon the writing act with great slowness and with anxiety .

The stroke o f s ingle l ines i s at times surpris ingly weak andthe letters not seldom exceedingly minute . The maniac, onthe contrary , seiz es the pen boldly and dashes off th e givenproposi tion in large energeti c strokes . On the mental s idethe m elancholi c giyesj p ietyre_o__f inhibi tion , pedantry, auxiety, poverty of thought, sel f depreciation ; the man iac exh ibits want o f consideration , thoughtlessness , incoherence ,sel f- exaltation .

3 . Letter- s ize, the expert in forms us , i s largely dependentupon the writing system which has been learned . Variations in thi s respect are not s ign ificant in i dentification ofwriting unless they are extreme . Many external factors influen ce letter- si ze . Thus the fineness or coarsenes s of thepen with which on e i s writ ing wi ll influence the s ize o fgraphic product . O ften , too, the amplitude o f the sheetupon which one writes i s a significant factor . Everyoneproduces a m icrOSCOpic hand in address ing a dol l

’s envelope ,and a large one in labell ing an express package . It i s fairlyeasy to alter s ize voluntari ly and within wide l imi ts .

TH E GRAPH OLOGICAL ELEMENTS

Spacing, Osborn tel l s us (3 6a zl 49 ) 15 mainly changedby the s lant o f the upward or connecting stroke ,

” a h abitwhich i s also dependent upon the system of writing whi chone has learned . The old round hand and the modern vertical Show greater compactness than a Spencerian hand .

4. S ize , together with speed and pressure , i s a graphicelement that has been subj ected to Considerable experimentalobservation . The Kraepel in studies have givenparticular attention to it and Freeman (16C) has contributeda detailed analysis .There are some interesting relationships observable be

tween size and speed . A graphic rhythm develops in whichthere is an attempt to keep the t ime element constant for agiven form even under changed conditions o f size . In general , si ze__corre lated with increased speed :there is also progressive increase in s ize as writing continues , closely rela ted again to developing speed . As attentionis withdrawn from wri ting there is an increase in s iz e

,par

ticu la r ly evident in automati c writing . Writing that i s produced with the eyes closed also shows , normal ly , an increasein s ize, although there are many exceptions to this statement .Decrease in s ize of graphic movement is an outcome oflessened speed or o f INTENTIONAL increase in speed .

It occurs , in general , whenever eff ort i s involved in handlingthe si tuation . The direction of attent ion to the writingmovement as in disguised writ ing leads to a decrease insize, although this tendency may be overcome by voluntaryincrease o f dimensions and in exceptional cases the slowwriting approaches the conven t ional standard and thereforebecomes larger .Cutting through these results we fin d, moreover, smal l

writing as an outcome of graphic expertness . I l li teratewriting is large because o f lack of motor control .Al l o f the above statements

,i t should be observed, re fer

directly to changes in the extent of graphic movement whenwe are dealing with a parti cular individual under given ex

44 GRAPH OLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

perim en ta l conditions . To what degree we are j ustifiedin attempting to apply any o f these experimental findingsin an inter- individual comparison o f hands i s very doubtful . An extremely large and free hand may, however, indicate general freedom of impulse while an abnormallysmal l hand would l ead to suspicion of the presence of in

h ibitory tendencies wh i ch might vary considerably in nature .

Small writ ing may be due to exces s of control or to economyof effort as an outcome o f practi ce and ski ll ; i t may i ndi catese l f-consciousness and inhibi tion or i t may evidence expertness .

Dearborn (11,a ) in a series o f experiments in which a figure was learned by motor tracery fou nd that concentra tionon the conscious movement- sens ations led to decreased extentof movement . He concludes that the consciou s movementsensat ions a re inhibitory in function . There are

,he think s

,

two phases of kinesthesia,one unconscious and actuating,

the other conscious and in hibi tory in function . From thisi t m ay follow that large writing is , in general , produced bythe les s controlled , more automatic penmen , while smallwriting i s indicat ive of concentration on the writing movement or , perhaps , on the external product .

TH E GRAPHOLOGICAL EL EMENTS

40

88

08

8080

80

90

82080

8

2

0

80

0

00

80

0

5

8

23

000

8098

8

atom

$80

3

80

86

88

0

30

80

80

380

30

“0

80

30

8

380

000

8008

8

M8

5

230

50

800

8

<

M8

3238

0

“8

88

80

8

“a

000

0080

5

0

888

8«3

55

.

A

w88w08

8

40

33300

0

80

30

8

000

0080

88

3808

80000

0

80

008

2

300

88

32?

0008008

50

38

5

08

0

80

80

30

380

800

0

8080

8

2”

88

200

«0

80

300

58

80

88

380

80

88

on

80

8

8

80

8H

0

mwo

fl

880

680

83

8“

m

em

o

820

0

888

4

80

3

3

4880

.

m

d

8

88

8

“0

“8

880

8“

83080

“80

838

0

80

8

80

8-080

8m

m

A:

8809

2:

M8

000

8800

80

0

5

no

88m

080

N

S00

880

80

3

880

8

E

wEfibB

“0

M8

80

3

.

80

80

808

n

o

0

80

.

80

8

m

m

80

80

88

000

80

88

5

8

am

608

2

38

08

33800

888

80

080

m8

SEBm

0

889?80

bowu

fi

20

80

80

0

H

0

0

5m

.

8808

8

0

0

80

09

80

8w8

5

E38

82

800

80

28800

800

880

8

£08

M8523

0

2008

8

80

0

.

80

8

-80

8

80

320

“0

33

38

200

80

:m

8m

.

3

00088

00

0

M8

383

0

8

Q80

3

88

30

8“

.

00

88

M8

EEP

300

5009

4

0

80

8000

0

20

88

808

80000

08

0808

8008

8

8

.0

88

0

80

8

580

80

M8

58

30

808

00

800

80

m

60080

88

00

0080

8

8

880

3200

58

0

0

800

-0

80

08

0

80

88

00

0080008

880

800

58w8

§b$

00

00000

80

08

80

380

50

80

8

3

80

00

29

8

88

08

00

080

80

8

3

00000080

80

0

88

5m

8

0

0

80

0

80

88

88

0000000

Q

000

88

80

880

08

8808

50

88

00

0080

5

00

800

0

80

88

.

008

0

88mm

60080

00

800008

808

?

000

80

000

0

08

0

80

88

00

0080008


I . The particular graphic qual ity with which we aredealing in thi s. section i s somewhat difficult to define . Thereference i s to in tens ity , .or streng th of

m

m g y em en t as indicated by

.

heaviness g g ‘

delicacy p f th efi

lin e—quality,i ts smooth

ness Involuntary placing of emphasis , asdi st inguished from conventional shading, i s in

' question .

The gen erfl g ra phomgm l-.as sum a .appem s to .be th atstrong firm heavy lines are the outcome o f actual pressure

J o vu a -l ¢o m —u h fi “ h n m 4~ -&OM

against the sur fa ce of fthfie

q paper i s an

f rbm .em phatic. and firm m ovements“ ;weaknessmof wi ll

, “fromdelicate and tremulous Transitional forms oc

m m “ M m

cur ; persi st ence “ ism shown by r egula r ity'

n .

of .en er gy . ,and -f orce -by a bruptp ressu re . The club and Eta?cato strokes as they appear in the crossing o f the “t” or inpunctuation marks are thought to be s ign ificant .The explanation for such interpretation i s ci ted as sel f

evident ; nam ely, that strength and energy of wi ll expressthem selves in force ful and energeti c movement . It i s

,how

ever, observed that heavy wide lines in contrast to fine tracery are not always the outcome o f resolute movement . Thewrit ing materia l s , such as the cons i stency and quali ty of inkand qu ali ty o f ink and o f paper , the kind of pen used , and thepos ition in which it i s held , obviously condition line—quali ty .

A very j h ick s trokg poin-ts to material i sm ; while a

fl writing. W C V“ Juno-M O ” a -q ,

in which there i s no di st inction of ground and hair strokefl a n -“ w W u . u m v

C‘ A

(the so- called “teigig” or pa teu se” hand ) i ndicates sen

physi cal pleasures . The reason for conn ecting material ism with unusually heavy stroke i s notgiven ; i t i s , probably, purely analog i cal . P reyer states thatthe interpretation of the “

teigig” hand is supported by ex

per ien ce(but that the explanation i s in doubt . The explana

tion sometimes suggested is that such a writing is produced by holding the pen a t a very low angle with re ference toth e paper and that such holding of the pen i s i tsel f indicative of indolence and relaxation .

48 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWR ITING

right s lant wri ting more frequently shows an excess o froughness on th e right and lower side o f pen strokes”“The character and extent o f the roughness of the l ine edgesare great ly changed by ch anges in the character o f the surface o f the paper

,in i t s s iz ing

,and in the m aterial s of wh i ch

i t i s made .

‘

The result i s also affected by the chara cter andcondition o f the ink used and by the rapidi ty, direction , andweight o f the stroke .

”

The involuntary placing of emphasis i s one o f the mos tpersonal characteri stics o f writing and one that “almostbaff les s imulation .

” “The weight o f hand, graduation o fpressure

,and placing of emphasis radical ly change the ap

pear ance of a writing as a whole without changing the formin any way

,

” There may result a hand that suggests strength, on e that i s th e record o f rapid, nervous movement shown in i rregular broken lines ; or one that shows inthe heavy, ragged , uneven l ine lack of ski l l and cons tantvariation in pressure . P en pressure reveals the degree towhich writing i s free and unconscious or labored and halting.

4. In the experimental investigation of writing, distr ibution of pressure in graphic movements i s one o f the problems which has been attacked by the Kraepelinian methods .Gross report s a distinctive cu rve for every subj ect testedbut warns the reader that thi s curve can be detected on ly byinstrumental analysi s . (22 D iehl reports that l ightpressure and high involuntary speed may coexist . Forexample , practice leads both to acceleration of graphi c speedand decrease in pres sure . VOLUNTARY increase ofspeed i s accompanied by increased pressure . The relationsh ip between speed and pressure is somewhat indirect ; increase in pressure is due to increase o f eff ort o f wil l (Antriebor Anregung) zeal for work is indicated by ri sing pressure

H ir t’

s investigations (23 a z3 70) indi cate that writ in gpressure obeys certain fundamental physiologi cal andpsychological laws . It increases (1 ) in a given di rectionlof movement ; (2 ) under influence of rhythmic tendencies ;

‘

TH E GRAPHOLOGICAL EL EMENTS

(3 ) at conclusion of a series o f movements (final emphasi s ) . It i s

,however

,imposs ible to determine variations

in pressure from bare observation of writ ing-product . Onlyin part does i t parallel thickness or width o f l ine- stroke .

Such divergence between actual pressure and line-qual ity i sinvolved in the structure o f the pen-point , s ince strokeswhich are perpendicular to the transverse o f the nibs o f thepen are necessarily heavier than those which paral le l indirection the moving pen point , even though the pressurebe the same in the two cases .Apart from general laws governing pressure , individual

differences are apparent in the distribution of pressure . Twomain types are observable , correspondent to the motor andsensory reaction types . The first or motor type makes thewriting movements in one impulse ; the second, or sensorytype , fractionate these movements . The impulses o f themotor type are s impler

,more continuous , more uncontrol led

than those o f the sensory type . Th e firs t make movements ;the second , s igns . Writing size , duration, speed , and pressure vary f rom one part o f manuscript to another . A t thebeginning, writing i s proportionately small, s low,

and weakin p ressure . As writing continues there i s an increase to amaximum . Each line i s a unit in it sel f as wel l as a part o fa bigger whole . F luctuations in pressure give evidence ofrenewed will- impu lses . The attempt to produce writing offine qual ity causes more than the usual fluctuation in speed

,

size, and pressure, for attent ion is on the form of the individual letter . Writ ing becomes more uni form in proportionas it i s al lowed to proceed automatically . (23 a :3 83 )Meum an n on the ground o f diff erence in degree and dis

tr ibu tion of pressure distinguishes three types of writingcharacteristic of men , women , and children respectively .

The concentration of attention upon writing movementcauses an increase in pressure as i s evident in di sguised andretarded script, and, in general , increase in effort means increased pressure .

50 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWRITING

00000

0

0

0

0

880

80

0

0

0080

00

80

0

080

0

00

80

-000

8

00

8000

800

80

00

80

000

8

80

00

000000

00

000

80

.

800

0

0

800

-80

080

000

8000880

0800

800

0

800

3

000000

0

00

800008

00

0

50

880:

0

80

3

0080

0

30008

0000

0000

0

080

00000000

00

800

0

880

000

0

80

0

8080000

00

80000

8

8>00

m

080

00

0

88

0

0

000

80

0

0

00

00008

8000

080

08

80

08

00

8000

00

800

80

800

0

000

0000

-80

0000000

80

00

80000

8

080

80

80

8

080

00

0

3

0

0

00

0

80

080

88

80

80

00

80

8

-0000

0

08

800

0

88

0800

30

-80

000

0000

80

0

80

80

00

800

00

8

0>

0

0

80

0

00

0

4

.

080

-0080

80

08

0

0

800

08

880

000

Q

800

0

00000

0000

00

80

88000

80

8000

80

80

00

80

80000

0

08

800

00

80000

8

00

800

0

880

0000

00

.

8000

00

0

0

0

000

00

8

00

8000

00

00

80000

8

0

0

8008880

.

00

80

8

80

000880

00

80

80

0

800

0080

0

88

0

000

0

.

00808

0

80

00000

8

00

00

80000

8

00

80

80

8

080008800

80

8000

800

0

000

000

0

0

0

000

-0080

0

080000

8

0

00

00

800

00

8

80

00

8

808

8

0

0

800

0

0000

0

8

800

080

00

.

w80

0

0

8»

n

o

800

0

-0000

0

080

.

00

808

0

0

0000

0

80

00

80

8

0

0

00

080

800

00

0

0

8

-80

8

8088

0

080

80

0

M80

008m

-0

0:

80

a

00

80

8

80

08

0

00

00

0

8

080

00

.

8

0

80

000

00

80

0

8,

.

00

080

88

080

0

0

80

0

0»

080000

80

800

0

080

08

5

.

00

080

88

0

0

00

800

00

0

0

80000

000

8000

00c0

m

000

80

80

00000

00

80000

0

8

80

00

00

8080

880

0

00

80080000

00

80

80

80

8

0

0

088

80

800

00

0

00

0

080

0

o0

0

0

8o0

8

88m

dfim

fimw

00

8


3 . D irection . A . S lan t .

I . The graphological interpretation o f s lant i s pretty uniform . Slant to the right is natural and spontaneous . The

impuls iveness,emotional su scepti

N

bility the g reater the s lant the greater th e emotivity . Ver

tica l w vy r iting shows sel f- control , With the__head ru l ing theheart . Back- s lant i s indi cat ive o f difli den ce , reserve, amasking of the sel f which may be carried so far that itshows di sguiseo f the sel f, or even deceit fulness . Excess iveslan L to_th e r igh t “i s found in the chirography of noveli sts ,artists, .

and women .

thinkers . Actors , diplomats , pol it iciansmay slant thei r writ ing to the left

,and such slant may also

be indicat ive o f pathological hysterical tendenci es or o fcriminal tendencies . Great variabi l ity in slant i s thoughtto show variabi lity o f mood . Extreme right s lant may indica te pathol

‘

og ica l lack of control .Three suggest ions are found in the l i terature o f the sub

ject as to the possible explanation of the correlation o f s lantwith various emotional temperaments .

(a ) P reyer’s (3 9 ) explanation is the common one . Nat

ural writing slants towards the right as shown by the re

version to such s lant on the part o f those taught a verti calsystem . Vertical and left-s lanted wr iting ” dem an d moretime an d

‘

effort u

th an natural wr iting ‘

an d,there fore

,indicate

control and inhibition of natural impulses . Such writing i seviden tlxfi glffi qn sciou s . Vertical writ ing may have beenacquired during school years

,but i s usual ly replaced by a

more rapid form of writing except in the case o f those inh ibited individuals who refuse to permit themselves to follownatural impulses and who continue to obey the compulsionof school or other authority . Back—s lant i s taught in noschool and util ization of such an uncomfortab le method o fwriting shows impulse toward concealment or repress ion

,

vani ty .

(b ) Schn eidem iih l (42) has recourse to the general principle of expression , namely, that friendly , obj ective interest s

52 GRAPH OLOGY AND “

TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWRITING

are mani fested by centri fuga l outgoing gestures and att itude ; and the erect, or Wi thdrawn , posture is express ive ofemotional Wi thdrawal or reserve . In other words , s lant tothe right i s l ikened to eccentri c attitude or gesture ; verticalo r le ft s lant to erect and concentri c posture .

(c ) Klages (26a ) uti l izes the principle o f spatial Ein fuhlung in his characterologi ca l interpretation o f slant . A natural s lant to the right i s not cons idered significant but theproduction o f a verti cal hand is held to be indicative o fstabi l i ty and sel f- control inasmuch as i t reveals a feel ing forspace symbol i sm which associates fixity and sel f—masterywith erect posit ion . Ba ck slant i s ci ted as a s ignp f extremeemotionali sm w ith actual repress ion , rather than as an indi“ w . m ‘ * w m

cation of extreme coldness o f nature as many graphologi ststhink .

The graphologists cite as evidence o f thei r contentionspecimens o f writing from persons o f known characteristics .The pretti est b it o f evidence i s furnished by P reyer whoclaims that with advancing age and the los s o f emotive susceptibility , writing formerly s lanted shows a tendency to become verti cal . H i s material included two - thousand lettersfrom h is father whi ch showed in thei r sequence an in crea sing vertical ity . Furthermore, P reyer cites a case o f s lantshi fted towards ver t ical ity during a period of stress demanding sel f-control and concealment on the part o f a youngwoman of his acquaintance, a vertical i ty preceded and followed by slanted writing.

2 . De F ursae tel ls us that slant i s o ften modified in pathologi cal writing, th e normal incl ination toward the right being replaced by verti cal o r ba ck- s lanting writing . Sometimes thi s modification is systemati c ; th e patient seeks todisguise hi s hand or give it a touch o f origi nal ity . At othert imes

,generally when there i s weakening o f attention , such

shi fts in slant are trans itory and casual . In general,s lant i s

extremely variable in all con dition s'

in which attention i s profoun dly disturbed . Great variabi l ity in slant from right toverti cal and left i s cited as characteri sti c of writing produced


in the post-paroxysms of epi lepsy , and in the hyperk ineti cstate in manic-depress ive insanity .

3 . The handwriting expert (Osborn ) reports that s lantis very ,

la rgely due to the system o f writing that i s learnedoriginally . Moreover

,such mechanical factors as the gen

eral pos ition of the body with re ference to the writing surface

,the pos ition of the paper on the table , and pen -posi tion

are influential . The graphologists recognize , o f course ,such factors but consider them accessory rather than basal .In thi s connection one may quote from Freeman

“Irregulari ti es in s lant are due to the fact thatin making succeeding strokes the hand or arm is not in thesame position . Sometimes the variations in pos iti on andthe accompanying shi fts in slant occur frequently and at i rregular intervals ; and sometimes the s lant i s uni form for anumber of word s , or even lines , and then there i s a suddenchange . There i s also one other type of change in s lantwhich is due , paradoxi cal ly, not to a change in the manner ofholding the hand or arm but to the m a intenance o f thesame pos ition .

~ This is the increased slant which occurs atthe end o f the l ine .

”

4. Considerab le experimenta l work has been done on s lantof writ ing . McAllister estimated from actual experiment '

the speed of movement in the different quadrants and foundthat movement to the right i s more rapid than vert ical writing and that le ft s lant i s s low and difficult . “Free ful l forearm movements in a horizontal plane are made more rapidlytowards the body than away from it

,up strokes taking more

time than down strokes . ” Overestimation ofdistances arises from increased muscular eff ort and ir regular ity of slant may grow out o f conflict between eye andmuscle sense .

Experimental graphology has shown that in attempts atdisguise of wri ting , shi ft o f s lant i s one of the first pointsof attack, the common shi ft being, of course, from right s lantto a vertical or back- s lant . In general

,increase of atten

tion towriting results in less s lant from the vert ical . Starch

54 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWRITING

(43 ,a ) demonstrated that unconscious imitation operates tochange s lant when one is writing from a copy .

It would seem as though eviden c’

e were p retty completeo l “ -o -W

that verti cal writ in g,print

,and ba ck -han da r es lower (Note ) ,

less natural and comf ortabl e -tharL ..a .s lant right .

Vertical i ty and backslant indi cate greater motor tension ,greater conscious control , with eviden ce

‘of inhibition . So

much is plain . The real question i s why anyone writesthese hands when he might em brace the greater graphiccomfort of a natural hand . Vertical wri ting has , of course ,been taught at various times . It i s , al so, the accepted stylefor certain pro fessions . But the natural inclinat ion forthose who have acquired a verti cal hand is to modi fy i t assoon as pressure i s released . Retention o f verti cal habitwould evidence a conventional , control led type o f personwho fol lows the prescribed path . Occasionally, verti calscript might be adopted by one who had been otherwisetaught , through an impulse to imitat e or because it s leg ibili ty makes strong appeal . Whether vert icali ty i s ever adopted because of spatial symboli sm i s an interesting questionbut one not easi ly answered .

Why , however, doe s anyone write the awkward and un

comfortable backslant ? This style i s taught in no schooland i s advocated by no system o f writing . I t m ight originate, of course , through imitation and quite possibly i t maybe at times express ive o f aff ectat ion and sel f- consciousness .

But that these explanations are not sufficient in al l cases i sevident from reports from individuals who wri te a reversedhand . Quite o ften they report that they del iberately adopted this hand to reli eve the strain experienced when writing amore usual type o f script .Another factor in its production

,which has never been

sufficiently canvassed , i s its relation to ambidextral tendencies . Definitely le ft-handed persons o ften write very fluent

NOTE— Th e investigation of Graves (loc. cit . p . 490) does not

con firm th is sta tem en t so f a r a s back-h an d is con cern ed . H e foundback-h and m ost rapid bu t least stap le of a ll s lan ts .


70000

00

00

.

00

00

8

0

800000

000

00

080

880

008

0

0

08

80000

0

08

08

000

800

0008

00

00

“

000

88

-000

80

0

80

000

8

8

8

000

0

80

0

-800

0

000

00

00

8

80

0

0

80

0

8

800

80

800

0

8008

0

800

800

8080

080880

08

0

0

0

000

0

00

>

000

300

00

000

80

80

8800

080

00

0

30000

8000

0

88

.

0

808

0

008080

00

000

00080

800

0

-000

80

0

800

00

800

888

880

00

00

00

00

888000

0

80

5

80

8000

0000,

00000

00

0

80

000

8000

080

00

0

3

00

800

0

8000

4

.

000

8

-80000

000

0000

8.

800

0

80

880

800

?

0

808

0

000

0000

8008

88

-80

0000

80

0

00

00

00

800

3

0800

0

080

00

0

300

0

800

0

0

00

80

0

70

0800

0

00

800

000

8

-0

8

8

080

0

0

800

»0

0

00

80

800

00

0

80

0

800

0

80

800

0

08

800008

.

0808

00

800

00

008

0080

00

000

00

0

80

08

:

80

0

808

0

0

0

000

80

.

0

8000

08

-

80

00000

80

880

00

0

3

00

00

80

-00000

800

8

0008

0

0

800

00

0

08

0

000

80

6

.

08

800

80

00

808

0

0

800

00

0

0

8

88

0800

80

80

38

0

0

8000

“0

8000000

0

08

00

80

00

8

880

00

0

3

0

0

800

-0

80

88

00

80

800000

000

0

000

4

00 .

00

.

0

80

0

1

0000

0

080000

80

0

80

80

80

800»

0

808

0

80

0

800

0

0800888

000

800

00

0

0800

0

0

80

00

80

0000

800

.

0

80

80

000

-800

0

0

00

0

800

0

0001

0

-00

000

800

00

00

“

80

8000

000

P

8000

00

8000

000

000

80

308

88

-80

.

80

80

0

8000

80

8

0800

0

0

80

"0

800

0

00

0

808

0

0

8000

000

000

0

8080

0

00

000

80

00

0

0

800

8

8800.

TH E GRAP HOLOGICAL ELEMENTS

B . Al ignm en t.

I . Var iat ions in alignment are a lso correlated by thegraphologi sts with genera l temperamental t raits or withemotional fluctuations .

“Rising fl a lignm en tj n dicatfi ; op tim

i sm, _sel f or

“ ambition fallingw

a lignm en t , pess im

i sm , _depression or, si ckness .

Convexi ty and concavity o f line indi ca te waxing an d waning ardor, that fluctuates as work proceeds . Serpentinelin eg evidenceu

supplen ess o f mind, ski l l in finesse , fals ity ;g m en ting y ordS , quick . sensibi l ity, ag i tation , nervousness .

Modifications o f thes e traditional interpretations appearin the Standard texts . P reyer

,for example

,fai ls to find ser

pentine alignment in the writing o f many clever pol iticiansand diplomatists and

,on the other hand

,discovers i t in the

writing o f many persons who are total ly devoid o f such amake-up . Nor does P reyer find s traight a lignment correlated with equa‘bili ty o f temperament .The explanation suggested for the graphological i nter

preta tion is that o f emotional mim i cry . In j oyous excite- lment there is an incl inat ion to raise the arms upward, in ,

general , to aspi re . The sad let the arms fall . But P reyerobserves : “These and a lso many other mimicry signs haveonly a superficial analogy .

” He also calls attention to the fact that What in writing is called upward ordownward alignment i s in real i ty centri fugal or centripetalmovement ; only when writing on a verti cal surface do weactual ly get ri s ing or fall ing movement . P reyer accepts

,

largely on empi ri cal grounds , th e traditi onal a sserrtion con

cerning ri s ing and falling alignment and instances di ffe rences in al ignment in a letter o f condolence from that in aletter of congratu lation .

The bar o f the “t” furni shes another examp le o f al ignment, and the interpretation of an _up

- stroke,a

'

down-stroke,a serpentine.

s troke and the_l_ike same as for di rectionOi fine o f

,

writing . In this instance,however

,alignment i s

compli cated with variations in extent and force of stroke .

58 GRAPH OLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OL OGY OF H ANDWRITING

2 . D eF u r sac, commenting on al ignment in pathologi calwriting

,remarks that one might expect that pathological

conditions would have the same graphic express ion as thecorrespondent normal states

,that in the maniac pride and

sel f-exaltation would produce rising l ines and that humili tyand di scouragement would in the melancholi c produce falling alignment . Unfortunately the case i s not so simple .I t i s

,he asserts

,impossible in the present state of our knowl

edge to determine any constant or necessary relation between alignment and mental di sturbances . (18 Thefol lowing observations are , however, j ustified :( I ) Undulating l ines are significant from the motor s ide

o f incoordination o f movem ents and from the psychic sideo f feebleness o f attention .

(2 ) Fall ing al ignment i s seen o ften (but not always ) inconditions of motor weaknes s

,in particular in the pos t

paroxysmal exhaustion of epi lepsy .

(3 ) R i s ing alignment appears in the writing o f certainpatients who through lack o f initiative fai l to give their

‘paper the desi red inclination and permit thei r hand to movein an automati c fashion . Ri s ing alignment in such a casei s usually combined with a curved form of the line .

(4) The curved form of the line is associated with theundulating in certain maladies that are characterized byautomatic reactions , notably in the case o f the catatonics .The forearm remains immobile ; the hand moves around thewrist as a center .

Specifically, in general para lysi s l ines are o ften more orless undulating, due both to enfeeblement of attention andmotor incoordination . Fall ing alignment frequently occursin melanch olic and depress ive forms of nervous disease butthere i s no fixed ru le . In dementia precox

,the di rection of

l ines varies from a per fect horizontal in som e to a ri s ing orfalling alignment in other cases without any possibil ity ofestabl ishing a relationship between the di rection o f alignment and the cl inic character o f the disease .


In manic excitement,also

,there i s no constant relation

ship of alignment . R i s ing alignment occurs but so also doeshorizontal and fal l ing alignment a statementwhich also ho lds true for melancholi c depres s ive insanity .

3 . Osborn finds that alignment is largely the resul t o fpivotage of movement . The writing of the i l li terate usuallyshows an up

—hil l tendency . The “arm is so held that thelcen ter of motion i s so far to th e right that as the hand movesalong i t is inevitably raised above the general l ine o f writing.

”P erfect al ignment results when the elbow

is the center of lateral m ovement and the arm at right anglesto the l ine o f writ ing . W i th the wri s t as center o f motionthere may result l ines o f writing equal to short arcs o f acircle represent ing the reach of the hand with the wris t atrest . Most uneven alignment i s due to the fact that thea rm i s too far around to the right or the paper too far tothe left . Deviation from alignment in individual let ters i soften due to the design o f letter acquired when writing wasfirst learned .

4. F rom th e experimental side there i s l i ttle to report . Itwould appear from Woodworth’ experiments (48 thatvision functions somewhat in control of alignment and re

su lts obtained from writ ing when the eyes are blindfoldedconfirm his conclus ions . O ften a los s of alignment i s theonly noticeable result w i th loss o f visual control .Writing disguise aff ords l itt le material so far as align

ment i s concerned . A l ignment is an exceedingly variableelement and one which can be manipulated with ease . I twould , perhaps , seem on general principles that fall ingalignment might be cited as evidence o f inhibitory tendenciesand Klages in fact l i sts fal l ing alignment as one ch a racter istic of the inhibited hand . In experiments o f my own on t e

tarded writing a decided fal l in di rection appears as one outcome of excess ive control .Th e assertion is frequently encountered in the l i terature

of_experim ental graphology that the contents o f an emotion

60 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWRITING

a l letter or other manuscript influence al ignment . Such re

ports are of l i ttle import in the form in which they are givenfor there is no narration o f the conditions under which suchobservations were made. Compari son of a l ignment inepistles o f contrasting emotional content emanating fromdifferent penmen i s o f dubious value unless one have, also,specimens o f the normal writing o f each . In thi s instanceintra- indivi dual variabi li ty under prescribed conditions isthe point at i ssue rather than inter- individual variabi li ty.

The problem is a difficult one to attack experimentally sincei t i s not an easy matter to tap emotion for experimental pu rposes .

I have tri ed the following test . F i rst, I obtained from anumber of subj ect s specimens of thei r normal writing on theblackboard and determined the error in al ignm ent . Then atshort intervals I have had memorized and written sentencesof two or more lin es each ( I ) prophesying a gloomy outcome of the world war ; (2 ) suggesting encouraging pros

pects in the war si tuation ; and 3 ) commenting on certain éamusing aspects o f food conservation . P recautions weretaken that the first and second sentences shou ld be writtenat the same height and relat ive position on the board andthat the l ines should be approximately of the same length(one meter ) . Us ing the natural writing as the standard ofcomparison (in every case there was falling alignment ) Ifound that out o f fi fteen items (three averages each for fivesubj ects ) the gloomy content resulted in an increased fallin alignment twice out o f a possible five times ; the cheerfulcontent in a decreased fal l - in direction or even inalignment seven times out of a poss ible ten . The swere, o f course, absolutely unaware of the purposetest . They wer e adults seriously interested in thedition s .

A somewhat similar experiment with students,

satis factorily controlled, gave increased fall withcontent three times out of a possible four and one ri


contrasting test out of a poss ible s ix. Such results are inconclusive .

In P art I I , observations are reported on variabi l i ty ins lant and alignment under norma l changes in mood . Anticipat ing conclusions , I m ay say here that there was someevidence o f increased slant and unstable alignment underheightened em otional conditions but that these modificationswere so deeply embedded in genera l slant and l ine va r iabili ty as to make practical util ization very uncertain . Resu ltssuggest de F u r sac’s report wi th re ference to alignm ent inpathological writing . Under hyperkineti c and hypokineticconditions alignment departs from the horizontal but withlittle consi stency as regards di rection . Ri s ing, fall ing andundulating l ines are recorded .

62 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OE HANDWRITING

080

8800

0

00

0000

0

0

800

800

0

080

000000

0

00

000

8

080

88

80

0

80

.

000

800

0

00

000

0

3

0

80

800

3

000

80080

00080

80

0

8000

00

800

00

00

0

80

00

0

800

00000

00

0

0

800

80

0

88.

800

0

8000

0

0

0

000

800

8000

0

0

800

00

800

000

8

000

0

8

000

00

-0

080

0

80

88

80

0

800

0

00

800

880

080

800

8000

80

0000

80

0

0

800

00

0800

880000

008000

0

80

880

0

.

80

0080

0

0

80

000

00

0

0

80

00

808

00

0

80

M80

28

000

w0

8

0

20

00

00

80

0

0

8008

80800

80

.

08

3

00

800

008

0

0

w80

00

0

3

000000

0

0

00

880

800

0

80

000

80

80

0000880

0

80

8800

0

M8

830

000

00

0

00

00

800

3080

00

00

5

080

88000

0

0

00080

80

00

80

0

8

00

8000

800

00

800

00

>

00:

0

0

0

80

0

80

80

080

8008

0

800

00

80

08

800

30

.

800

0

00

00

0

8800

800

0

2

0800

008

8

00

808

0

00

08

4

.

0000

-000

0

0

800

0

0

0

080

008

-08

0

0

800

00

0

08

00

80

89

0

0

8

80

000

8000000

0

00

08

80

0

8

00

0

880080

E

000

80

0

000

8000

80

8800

0

0000008.

080

00

0

?

0

0

0

8

00

0

8

80

0

0

80

0

080

0

80

80

880

0000

00

00

000

800

00

800

0

5

00

80

80000

8

0

0

0800

0

38

0

0

0000

0

80

00

0

300

0

80

88080.

.

000

8

00

00

0000

00

00

00

800

000

00

00

0080

00

80

80

88080

M80

0

SH

00800

00

0

080

0

020

00>

9

000

800

080

00

9

80

0

.

00

00

80

0

0

000

8

-00

8880

"0

80

88080

0

80

88

5

00

80

0

"0

80

88080

0

800

00

3

.

0

80

8

0000

80000

0

800

00

888

.

800

8

m

m

fl

c

d

fidw

-0

000

8

0

0

80

88000

0

M8

50

8

800

00

8

80

.

800

-

80

0

80

"0

80

88

80

0

080

00

00

000

00

0

080

00

08

8

0

0

c0

0

0

8o0

8

8mm

64 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF H AN DWRITING

within words occur in an il logica l manner separating the

words into bizarre combinations o f letters , a trai t which i sci ted as significant o f im -practical i ty . (d ) I f the hand is

primarily a continuous one w i th few breaks , the penman isthought to possess the gi ft o f synthesi s with capaci ty forproper appreciation o f new ideas . This i s the writ ing ofscientists and statesmen who excel in organization , but areaccessible to new ideas . (e ) The completely continuoushand

,every word written without rais ing of pen , words

bound together by th e stroke o f the “t” and the like, i sthought to characterize the hand of the assimi lative typewho i s neither criti cal , original , nor ingenious .

Schneidemuhl,who cites thi s interpretation from P reyer ,

accepts i t only with considerable reserve s ince hi s own ob

serva tion s fai l frequen tly to confirm it . This much , however, he concedes , that the writer of the

“deductive” handcoordinates and renders coherent the material with which hedeals .

.P reyer’s ground for such characterological interpretationwould a ppear to be empirical , j ust as Sch n eidem t

’

ih l’

s dissent i s based on specific observat ions . I have found in theseauthors no psycholog i cal ground for thei r interpret

‘Crepieux-Jamin cites the “hachée” hand as in dica tivintui tion but also on occas ion as evidencing anguish

,or

cu la tory troubles . The connected hand he finds s ign ifi

of natural activity and of culture,or of precipitation

fl ight o f ideas .

2 . Turning now to de F u r sac’s treatment o f graphictin u ity , we find that di sconnected or even

“hachée” scr ifound, on the one hand , when movements are hesdeprived of regularity and harmony

,particularly in

who are affli cted with trembling,and

,on the

when attention is pro foundly disturbed . Whenwi th tremor, discontinuity may be the natural outattempt at s implification of m ovement . Scripttied together i s often produced under condit ionsexcitement . Not only the letters of the


words themselves are j oined . This tying together o f wordsmay be the outcome of excessive rapidity . But pathologi ca lwriting shows no greater extremes o f continuity and discontinuity than does normal wri ting.

A more or less connected script instead o f broken wri tingmay occur in conditions o f depress ion and motor enfeeblement

,in which case fai lure to raise the pen i s due to lack o f

energy Sufficient to accompli sh this movement . Sometimesin very great aff ect ive melanchol ia the pen loses contact withthe paper and causes a break even within letters .213 )3 . For the handwriting expert the degree o f continuity i s

largely a matter of expertness . Osborn writes :“W ith thosewho write clumsi ly or with difl‘icu lty the pen i s raised f requently to get a new adj ustment— with most writers , however, disconnections are more closely related to design o fletters than with movement , and the habit controll ing thi scharacteri st ic were acquired when writing was first learned .

”

4. From the experimenta l s ide there i s l ittle one can sayabout continuity . There i s plenty of evidence to show that,in part at least

,a flowing connected“ hand i s the outcome o f

graphic expertness . Many breaks in writing may be sign ifican t o f nothing more than graphic unaccustomedness .

Klages shows , further, that breaks in writing may resul tfrom motor inhibition and from excess ive attention to writing . Thi s appears from study of disguised and artificialwriting . One may, voluntari ly, introduce breaks into writing but it i s imposs ible to wi ll extreme continuity . Releaseof the motor impulse causes increased continuity ; whi le inh ibition results in decreased continuity .

It i s difficu lt to see any connection whatever between theselast observations and the tradit ional inte rpretation by graphologi sts o f the signifi cance o f graphic continuity . The on lypossibil i ty o f all iance wou ld be found in the determination

types and a con

66 GRAP H OLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF HANDWRITING

.

00080

000

80

00

880

00

8800

00

0

0

0

.

8

880

0

800

0

8000

808

080

00

0

30

0

1

0800

8

80

8080

0

8000

0

8000

8

000

8

080

00

0

3

0000

8000

0

80

80

880

0

800

000

00000

0

80

000

8000

080

00

0

3

00

800

0

8000

4

800

88

0

800

000

0000

1

80

00

88

80

000

0

800

00

008

00

800

0

5

800

880

0

80000

0

0

8000

-80

8080

00

08

80

800

0

000

8

000

880

0

800

0

8000

ME

80080

0

.

00

80000

000

8

0

0

3

080

00

0

3

80

8

3

0000

80

n

od

00

amwh®u0

8d

ao

wfi

fl

z

.

fiflw

an

o

flake

0

a

m“

08

8

000

800

000

80

8

0

80

080

800

0

.

000

0

00

0080

0

20

80

80

800

3

8080

0000000

000

00

80

8

"

080

00

0

3

8008

00

m

0

0

00

000

08

00

08

00

08

0

.

080

800

0800

00

800

8000

0

00

0

8

00

0

0

800

000

8800

000

80

8000

0000

8

600

0

0800

0

00

.

0

20

8000

0

30

8

0

0000

0

3000

88000

5

-0

8000

0080

00

0

3

00000880

0

080

800

80

00

30

8

0

00

M0mm

.

080

8

8

0

80

80000

0000

00

00

80

8

00 00

80

80

0

800

3

00

00

0

888

0

000

008

080

0

0

M>0w00

0 0www8m0m 0

000

0

3

08

3

00

080

800

80

0

000

000

0

THE GRAP H OLOGICAL EL EM ENTS

5. P f opfl grw tigzzl fl g égve an d bfi lozv th ei qgi jjn e .

I . The authoriti es are som ewh a t at odds in their in terpre1tion of the s ignificance of relative proportion of strokesbove and below the base l ine . Two tradit ional views emh a size two related but somewhat dist inct interpretations . A>ng

.

up. . i§ with

aon -long -d n zfitroke .yvith a im eispos ition for physi cal activity . The second point . of

- fl. W a n -“ n o “ n .

iew states th at thefi ng r

upzs tgglg‘gg ig n ifies i deal ist i c makeN M , “

ph ‘

i‘m pr actica l and out of touch with reality (the real

for ld )v

{556 the PEEQ QFPE EELOE with thingsia ter ia l . Balanced

.

offl oj g am za

on and admini stration .”

Both P reyer and Schneidemuhl are -sceptical o f the tradional bel i efs . P reyer finds in h is collection o f specimensum erou

-s examples of short upstrokes among penmen fol

)wing intel lectual pursui ts from motives di stinctly not mazr ia listic. He has , however , more fai th in the deductionf lack o f fores ight and ci rcumspection from very short

,in

) m plete, and attached down- strokes . Sch n eidem iih l fromis study of specimens i s inclined , on

’

empirical groundsh ly , toassert a correlation of decreased down—stroke withupa ctigalitx. V la slsfiL fszzsgig ll ta ir reso111219310 a p é ifé

'

il tit e in16: execu tion .of fl deta ils . Normal extension above and be)w_ th_e base-din e seem s sym ptom aticw

offl practical sense . Hetu tion s , however , conservati sm in such appl i cation and notesa t there has as yet been no psychologi ca l grounding sugested for such an interpretation .

2 . P athological writ ing affords l ittle in formation concern1g the trait in question . One outcome o f a hyperkineticm dition appears , however, in exaggeration of terminal>ops , of capitals , and in excessive prolongation of move1ents o f adduct ion .

3 . In the general analysis o f graphic elements by the exer t , relative proportion i s cited as very s imply dependentpon the system of writing learned . The Spencerian sys:m was organized on a scale of fi fths ; the verti cal system


in thirds . P rior to the adoption of modern Spencerian ,other proportions existed in relative height o f small and loopletters .

4. Some experimental work has been done on ease ofmovement relative to the body as a center . McAllister

found that “Free,full forearm movements in a horizontal

plane are made more rapidly towards the body than awayfrom it , up strokes taking more time than down st rokes .

”

In disguised handwriting we find considerab le attgiven to relative proportion as o f considerable im por tan ci dentification of a hand . While changes in absolute sizevery easi ly produced voluntari ly

,certain changes in

proportion are maintained only with the greatest difficuincrease in the length o f th e up

- strokes,for example .

crease in length o f the down- strokes,particularly in t

nal loops,may

,however

,be imitated with considerable e

Hands vary considerably in amount of di ff erence intension of small and lower loop letters . Very extremeequali ty i s usual ly found in minute writing

,

which Klages (26 :3 7f ) considers evidence o f theof strong inh ibitory impulses which operate in keeminimum letters small . Very long “long” letters inscript are interpreted as the outcome of intermittent fof the motor impulse . From Klages’ standpoint it i sble to make a connection between lack of circu m spec

the short down- stroke .


080

000

3

0

0

800

0

00

8

0

80

00

8

000

8

80

8

800

00

80

000

00

80

00

80

m

8200

0008

80

8

00

00

80800

0

20

>

.

0808

0

00

2000

00000

080

0

8000

88

000

08

000

00

080

-0

00

0

0

0

800

000800

8

0

30

00

000

0800

00

0

-800

0

08

80

0

80

8

00

580

0

300

8000

80

000000

80

.

0

80

0

0

80

000

000

8

80

000

20880

80

000

00000

80

8000

0000,

“

0

80000

80

0000

80

30

80000000

800

000

8

25

.

800

-0

00

00

80

0

0

38088

0

8000

80

8

20

800

00080

880

80

00

080

0

8w0

0

00

.

8000

000

0

000

8

0

0

80

00

00

000

080

8080

00

8000

0

830

8

00

08m

.

00

80

00

00

800

000080

.

0

800

0-8

300

w800

"00

00

28

0

00

0000

00

00

08000

0

88

w800

S0

00

£0

8

50

0

000

0

$88

-8

300

M8

E

3000

200

00

00

00

80

80

0

80000

08

“0

800

30

0

30

3

080

5

50

80.

800

000

00

8000

8

80

800

0

00

00

>

70 GRA PHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWR ITING

The preceding survey im presses one with the difficultiesthat must be compassed by a sci ent ific graphology . It suggests a program for preliminary exploration that i s overwhelming . Any attempt at present to uti li ze graphic products in psychodiagnosi s would seem futi le except that inmany instances a variation wh ich in i tsel f has l it tle s ign ifi

cance acqui res such through its association with other signswhich suggest the same motor pattern . It would seem

poss i'ble

'

to detect in certain hands signs o f inhibi tion , controlor retardation . Slow and in ter rverti cal or back slant

,great inequal ity 1

ness or heaviness o f pres sure point to inhLight rap1d continuous rhythmic hands , s lantedthe direction of writing, evidence lack o f inhibition .

o f course, possible to grant so much and yet deny a lla cterolog ica l s ignificance . Graphic h abits acquired 1n

may be sufficient to account for the free or inhibited pattern .

But that habit i s not al l- su fficien t as an explanation seemsevident from the following . P atholog i cal wri ting underprescribed conditions exhibi ts in the hyperkineti c hand anexaggeration of the exp los ive or free hand . Moreover , thechanges introduced into the wri ting of a given individualunder conditions of increased control or mental e ff ortencourage the interpretation of certain signs as sy m ptom at

ic o f control and eff ort i n general . In P art I I , we shall report a number of experiments that bear upon an attempt tointerpret the significance of explosive and inhibited hands .


be easi ly assumed a re of first importance from the theoretical s ide also .

A s ignificant item of diff erence between the emphasis ofthe handwriting expert and that o f the psychologist should,however , be noted . The expert approaches the problemlargely from the standpoint of the degree o f credibility ofthe witness testi fying in court concerning the genuineness ofhandwriting . The psychologist would pres s the matter further back and determine

,i f possible

,the reason for the great

individual di fferences that exi st,apart from training, with

respect to observation o f handwriting individual ity . Furtherm or e , he i s most curious concerning th e varying capacityfor di sguise“ exhibi ted by di ff erent penmen and the mentaltemperament that l ies back of virtuosity in the assumptionof different handwriting individuali ties . Lastly, heask what th e psycho-physical factors are that determease or difficulty with which di fferent graphic elementsbe voluntari ly altered .

The problem o f control in handwriting , which we haveemphasiz ed as a basal one so far as psychodiagnosi s IS concerned

,centers about two problems both o f which are open

to experimentation : ( I ) The extent to which disguise ofone’s habitual handwriting i s poss ible an d (2 ) the extewhich voluntary control i s maining as evidenced by the changes that take pwriting or writing under distraction . Inobvious indication of thi s latt er change i s ttween writ ing furbi shed up for state occasdesigned for domestic pu rposes , in negligee so to sIn ordinary writing

,control becom es progress ively less

as on e becomes interested in the content o f what he i sing or as speed of writ ing increases . The first hal f ofword

,the first hal f o f a written l ine

,and of a manus

give evidence of greater control than does the secondThe s ignificance o f this varia ti on in conscious controo ften emphasi zed by graphologists , need not detain us here !

Instead let us turn to the problem of voluntary disguise ofhandwriting .

DI SGU I SED HANDWRIT ING

For scientific purposes one strikes the problem at closequarters by an experimental treatment such , for instance,as that of Dr . George Meyer . (3 4a ) Meyer approachedthe question from four diff erent angles : Which graphiccharacters can be r epr essed voluntari ly ? (2 ) Which canbe assumed volu n ta r ily ? 3 ) What is the result of a deliber a te attempt to disguise handwriting ? (4) How far i simitat ion o f another hand poss ible ?To obtain an answer to question I , a large num ber o f sub

jects were asked to write as calligraphical ly as poss ible, intrue copy-book style of the school- room . Normals werealso obtained for compari son . To obtain an answer toquestion 2, definite variations in parti cular graphic characters were asked for from twenty—five di ff erent reagent s .

Question 3 wa s answered by asking subj ects to disguise theirwriting ; quest ion 4by asking for imitation of specific hands .From his study o f the meth ods of intentional disguise employed by unsophisticated subj ect s , Meyer was able to drawsome interesting conclusions concerning the graphic elements

ubject to control , which in the main are prese to which the average observer pays least atten

I have notes on an experiment o f my own simi lar 1n purpose to that o f Meyer but developed in a somewhat diff erentanm er .

I asked twenty- four unsophisticated subj ects to write aven verse on an unlined sheet o f standard s ize and quali tyin their usual manner . I then requested each o f them to re

write thi s verse ou a second simi lar sheet but disguis ingtheir handwriting as far as possible . No instructions weregiven as to method of disguise . Each subj ect could takeall the time and pains that he cared to in the di sguise

,which

was prepared away from th e laboratory . In selecting mysubj ects I choose twelve o f each sex . W i th re ference toage they fel l into two groups also

,twelve under twenty- six

years of age and twelve over thirty . The younger groupwas

, with one exception , composed o f college students ; the

74 GRAPHOL OGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWR ITING

older group, with three exceptions , of Univers i ty instructors ,Four o f the latter were psychologists . Such a selection ofsubj ects was di ctated by a des i re to see whether age and sexwere factors governing success in di sguise . The degreewhich a given disguise was held to be success ful was detmined by the submission of the seri es of disguised anddisguis ed writings to sixteen reagents for matching andcounting of the number of t imes ‘a disguised specimencorrectly matched with the undisguised specimen writtenthe same penman .

The material obtained in thi s manner was workedwith the fo llowing questions in mind : ( I ) What meto f disguise were uti l i zed by the group of subj ects ?

What extent were the individual attempts at di sguisetive as determined by the percentage o f fai lures on thof th e j udges in identification of th e disgui sed hand ? Werethe younger penmen more success ful than the o lder ones indisguise ? Was there any diff erence in the percentage ofSuccesses o f men and women ?In an attempt to answer the first question

,out of

num berles s observations that might be made relatchanges in the graphic characters

,tabulation was

to the obvious shi fts 1n s1ze, s lant , pressure or l ifor-m

,continuity

,alignment

,connecting-stroke

,relat ive

portion, and i-dot . See Table I .

DISGU ISED HANDWRITING

N

80000

8

30

00

00

00000

Q

m

00

00

000080

20:

o

h

0

000

808

8008

0(

H

00

.

0

80

m

76 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY op HANDWRITING

A word of comment upon each of these chosen elements isdesi rable . A change in s iz e o f writing i s a frequent outcome o f di sguise

,a decrease being more common than an in

crease in size o f letters . There i s,in fact, in the given speci

mens n o case of increased s ize comparable to the extremes ofdecrease . The decrease in s ize o f letters i s usually aecom

pan ied by greater compactnes s in texture leading to a compress ion in the hori zontal“ extension . This same compress ion appears also in a few cases in which the writing is in:creased in si ze but

,usual ly

,increased ampli tude i s aecom

pan ied by a looser texture .

A shi ft in slant was also noticeable in the disguised hand,usually in the direction of the vert ical or backhand . Sucha

' change i s one that readily appeals to the u n SOph ist ica ted,

although handwriting individual i ty i s but l ittle dependentupon slant of writing .

Th e degree to which pressure vari ed in the natural andthe disguised hand cannot be told with any degree o f accuracy from th e written product . Experiments on pressuredemand

,as we have seen

,actual instrumenta l registration .

Certain changes in l ine-quali ty were, however, very evidentin a large number of cases . In a maj ority o f specimens thischange i s in the d i rect ion of a heavier l ine . I do not find,unfortunately, a re cord of how many of my subj ects used adi fferent style of pen in attempting to disguise thei r hands,but in any case it i s unlikely tha t such a shi ft accounts forthe uniformity in direction o f change .

In consideration o f variations in letter- form,the Writing

specimen was scrutinized to determine whether on the wholethere was s implification or conventionalizing o f the naturalhand or whether the reagent attempted to disgu ise his handby the employment o f superfluous ornamentation or fantasti c forms . Recourse to a convent ional vertical hand or toprint i s on e o f the most eff ective means of di sguise but it ismore difficult to achieve than a hand decked out with allmanner o f superfluous curls . I t demands more consistentmotor control . The tabulation given overlooks the many

DI SGU I SED HANDWRIT ING

detai ls o f form that wou ld be so careful ly noted by the expert in attempting to prove or disprove the genuineness o fa given writing . Individual manneri sms , tri cks of style , areoften revealed in the form of individual letters and one o fthe most interesting questions involved in disguised handwriting is the extent to which a penman is aware o f his ihdividual peculiariti es and the cons istency with which he i sable to avoid tel l- tale mannerisms . Such observation doesnot

,however

,lend itsel f to tabulation . Changes in capitals

are more easi ly achieved than changes in small letters ; theyare made with a higher degree o f consciousnes s .A change m alignment occurs frequently but without much

uni formity as to the direction .

The degree of continuity in a given hand is one o f itsmost di stinctive marks . This character i s held to be verylargely dependent upon the general smoothness and regula r ity o f the motor impulse , a m atter , to a considerab le degree , of the original const itution . A break in continuity i smuch more eas ily init iated than i s increased continuity

,as a

simple outcome of intentional inhibition . It i s a much moredifficult matter to release deliberately the motor impulse andso increase the degree o f continuity .

Changes in the form o f the connecting st roke occur f requently, more commonly from an angular to a rounded conn ection than the reverse .

While the absolute s ize o f writing is easi ly shi fted,rela

tive proportion of parts i s pretty constant . The latter depends upon periodi city o f effort whi ch i s rooted in con stitu

tion a l rhythm . There are, however, a very great number ofpossible observations relative to proportion , among themthe following : Relat ive proportion o f strokes above andbelow the line , relative size o f one- space and three- Spaceletters , relative h ori zontal and vertical space relations o f theone- Space letters , relat ive proportion of capital and strokesabove the l ine . I t i s much more difficult to vary som e o fthese proportions than others . For example

,from my re

su lts, i t appears that a change in the relative s ize o f the one


space letters i s not in frequent, while changes in the relativeproportions o f up and down strokes is less o ften observed .

An increase in the relative length o f an up- stroke is said to

be parti cularly difficult to achieve and my specimens showonly two cases in which such a change was evident . An increase in the relat ive length of a down- stroke i s much morecommon , and , in general , an increase in diff erence in lengthi s twice as frequent as a decrease in diff erence in length .

The mannerisms exhibi ted in dotting the “i” are very constant . This i-dot may be observed from three points ofview ; i ts locali zation , that i s , the distance i t i s placed abovethe l ine and it s position directly above or to th e right or thele ft o f the secondly , its form ,

which varie s in an extr aordin a ry number o f ways from comma-shaped to wedgeshaped , not to mention its s ize ; and , thi rdly, the time of itsmaking, immediately a fter the letter i tsel f or a f ter the wordor l ine has be en written . One would need to watch thepenman while writing in order to establ i sh thi s latter habit .In the disgui ses I collect ed , there are no obvious changes oflocalization in the placing o f the dot , although in severalspecimens there i s gr eat variabil i ty i n the natural hand itsel f . So far as form was concerned there were several del iberate attempts to vary i t . Bizarre substitutions wereadopted , such as the ci rcle, o r a v-shaped figure . I amincl ined to think that two or three of these changes weremotivated by a knowledge on the part of th e penman of thefact that the dot o f an “i” i s most characteri sti c .

Some o f the changes j ust mentioned are deliberate, arevelation o f what the subj ect bel ieve s to be characteristico f handwriting . The more constant a mark

,the less con

scious awareness o f it . O f these del iberately sought shi fts ,some are eas i ly manipulated , s lant , for example, and changein absolute size . Others are handled with greater diffi cultybecause o f their dependence upon psycho-physical factors ,as , for instance, degree of connection . Stil l other changesare dependent upon th e general instruction to disguise thehand and are not directly wi l led by the subj ect nor even


Vertical ityCompress ionSlantW i dthIncrease in proportional lengthS implification .

Orna-mentationD i s connectionConnectionEmphasi s Of the upper strokeForm of the connecting strokeDecrease in proportional lengthChange in s ingle forms

A further point of interest i s a comparison of these shi ftsthat accom pany an effort to disgui se the hand , with concentration of attention upon the act Of writ ing, with thosethat are the outcome Of di straction of attention from writing and

,in some instances

,of com pletely automatic writing.

The shi ft in siz e that i s significant o f automatic wri ting hasbeen somewhat thoroughly discussed in another connection

(14a ) . Increase in s iz e i s a general outcome of increasedautomatism , j ust as decrease in s ize i s an effect o f coneentra tion Of attention upon writing, unless the latter result ina complete di ssociation of letters and a distinct motor impulsefor each . A decrease in pressure i s also an outcome ofautomatic writing but less evidently so than the increase insiz e . Completely automatic wri ting results apparently inscript that i s more continuous than the usual writing but incase o f incomplete distraction there would be alternate fixati on and release of attention with , probably, increased discontinuity . Changes in s lant do not occur in automaticwri ting as they do in disguised hands

,although there seems

to be in some cases a tendency to greater vertical ity . Changesin form are in the di rection of disorganiz ed or chi ld- l ikehands .Between the two extremes of voluntari ly di sguised writ

ing and writing produced without conscious supervision lies

DISGU ISED H ANDWRITING

the ordinary writing with which graphology deal s . It i sevident where one should look for lapse of control . P eriodi cfluctuation o f attention enables us to anticipate the fal l ofthe mask at various p oints . In ordinary writ ing there isheightened consciousness and hence greater control ( I ) atthe beginning of the activity, inscribing, for example , thefirst page Of a manuscript , the first word of a l ine , etc . ; (2 )after interruption of the writing activity by paragraphing orpunctuation marks ; (3 ) at variat ion in the form Of the activity such as the production of capitals . Controlled wri ting is smal ler

,more vert ical

,and more regu lar than un con

trol led writing,that i s

,the same signs appear as in di s

guised writing but in less pronounced form . Conventional r estraint becomes progressively difficult as speed Of writingincreases . W i th deepening interest in content , writing becomes freer and bolder . Every prolonged piece o f writingshows the shi ft from conscious to involuntary control

,and

in th is fact the graphologist finds an opportunity for ob

servation of certain characteri sti cs o f the motor impulse .

Let us turn now to the second question , the success Of adisguise as determined by the failure Of the j udges in penetration Of the disguise .

But be fore entering upon the question of the success ofthe individual penman , a word concerning the varying ski l lof the sixteen j udges . The range in success runs from onlyone correct identification of the twenty- four specimen s o fdisguised hands to an accurate pair ing Of eleven specimens

(a record made by a bank cashier ) . The average numberOf correct identifications (and the median record ) i s s ix,

ortwenty-five per cent .About hal f o f the j udges were taken from the col lege

commun ity which produced the disguised hands,and

,in

some cases , they recognized a number o f the natural hands .This famil iarity with the natural hand increased slightly thenumber of correct identifications . There exi sts

,however

,a

very great individual diff erence in the ease with whichhandwriting is recognized even when undisgu i sed an d i n the

82 GRAPH OLOGY AND TH E P SYCHOLOGY or HANDWRITING

faci l i ty with which handwriting specimens by the same penman may be paired . For ten Of my judges

'

in this test Ihave record O f thei r success in the matching Of undisguisedhands . Th e group is too smal l to be Of much value but theresults O f the two tests give a positive coeffici ent Of correlation Of .41 (P . E. ,

Th e outcom e o f this aspect Of the experiment j ustifies thedistrust on the part Of the most careful handwriting expertsOf the Opinion of the ordinary Observer as to the genuineness Of a given hand . The chance Of error i s so great thatthe j udgment Of the amateur can have li ttle weight, a l

though,Obviously , the opinion Of one may be worth more

than that Of another , —a matter which could be determinedonly by a controlled test . Certainly the confidence withwhich a witness— or a reagent in the psychological exper iment— expresses hi s Opinion bears l ittle relation to hi s valueas an Observer and might be most misleading in a trial incourtSuch strictures against handwrit ing- iden tifica tion on the

part Of the amateur only s erve to point the value o f thework of the expert , with his instruments o f preci s ion , hismicroscope , his enlarged photographs , his multipli cation ofObservations , and his knowledge o f where to look for sign ifican t variations .Th ree of the j udges who took part in the test on disguised

handwriting were given a second trial at matching afteran explanation had been given them concerning the s ign ifi

cant features Of writing individuali ty . They were advisedto ignore changes in size , s lant , and form Of capitals . Theirincreased success was as follows : (A ) from nine to twelvecorrect identifications ; (B ) from six to nine ; (C ) from fiveto eight .SO far as the individual di sguises are concerned

,some

were much more eff ect ive than others . Three hands couldscarcely be called di sgu i sed since they were correctly paired

,

by almost every j udge . Of the other twenty—one,four were

so wel l di sguised as to whol ly elude capture . Eight wereidentified by only one or two j udges each .


The three who fai l completely at di sguise write very ihdividual hands . Their fai lure was evident to themselvesand they made subsequent attempts to mask thei r writingwithout much greater succes s . O f the four completely success fu l disguises , on e i s a semi-print style ; another i s amost clever imitation Of a fri end’s hand included among thespecimens

,with which i t i s matched by four di ff erent

j udges . Two others show very great shi fts in s lant and size,changes which however easi ly manipulated seem quite e f

fective in deceiving the ordinary Observer . The more conven tion a l and immature hands that approximate a givensystem cause considerable difficulty in the test .Calculating the percentage of actual ident ifications , on

the basi s O f the possible number , for the groups o f Olderand younger subj ects respectively (twelve each ) , we findi t 34per cent . for the O lder group and per cent . fo r theyounger . The three reagents who completely fai led to disguise thei r hands al l belong to the Older groups . Droppingthese out and r

'

ecalculating on the basi s Of actual to possible identifications we find the percentage Of success ful identificati

‘

on for the Older group is and for the youngerper cent .

Calculating the percentage in the same way,but with a

division on the sex basi s (twelve each ) , we find the percentage Of correct identification i s in the case Of thewomen and 3 0 per cent for the men . Again dropping outthe three subj ects who fai led so s ignally at disguise (twowomen and on e man ) and recalculating,

the percentages runper cent for women and per cent for the men .

Our numbers are too smal l and too greatly a ff ected by individual records to be Of great value but so far as they gothey indicate t hat women are m ore success ful in disgu i sethan men , and the younger penmen more success ful than theOlder . Al l Of the four subj ects whose disgui se s were notpenetrated we re women (one from the Older group

,three

from the younger ) . O f the eight specim ens recognized byOnly one of the j udges , four were written by men (three o f

84 GRAPH OLOGY AND'

THE P SYCH OLOGY OF H ANDWRITING

the Older,one Of the younger group ) and four by women

(three o f the younger group , one o f the Older ) . The bestrecords

,so far as disgu is es are concerned , are made by the

young women .

The success of the younger group, parti cularly thosewri ting an immatu re hand

,i s not necessarily due to the as

sumption of another graphic individual ity . A return to theconventional system would cause a confusion Of such aspecimen with others s imilarly motivated . In a personalletter in whi ch he comments upon the specimens used in thepresent te st

,Mr . O sborn writes me :“Writ ing by those who

have not long been doing wri ting outside Of school i s boundto be s imliar in many ways and when such writing is di sguised its individual features may be modified and its general features remain

,which would tend to connect Specimens

written by di ff erent writers . ” Ye t this i s not the wholestory . In a few disguised specimens there i s

,very evidently,

the assumption Of a dist inct , yet di ff erent individual ity . Themost interesting disgui ses are those in which there occursuch curious changes in style . Some Of these di sguisescome from the Older group and lead to the conclusion thatan effective di sguise i s much more a matter Of the individualconsti tution than o f age or even sex .

It has been held that abi l ity to shi ft handwriting individu a lity i s akin to ability in acting . But we have as yet noanalys is of what trait s characterize th e dramati c type , a l

though Holt suggsts that The actor ’s i s me relythe excessively mercurial and labi le character .

” From myknowledge Of my subj ects I should say that those showing

,

much facili ty in the adoption of another chi rographic individu a lity , were , in the main , much more adaptable, morepl iable, than the others . There i s

,however

,one rather

striking exception to this statement . This reagent— a girlOf the younger group— i s very vi sual in type and talented :

in drawing and fine handicra ft . She took pleasure in produ cing for me an amazing variety of hands . P ersonally,she i s Of a distinct and somewhat inflexible individuality


who yields s lowly to socia l pressure . She i s artisti c, ratherthan imaginat ive .

Four O f the subj ects in thi s test were also reagents in myexperiments on control processes in handwriting (R , B , Sand D ) (14a ) . For these I have a fairly complete analysi sOf thei r general procedure in writing . O f the four , two (Rand B ) were highly success ful in thei r disgui ses and two

(S and D ) were inapt . D was particu larly poor and thatin spite o f the fact that she was probably more aware thanany other person who attem pted the di sgui se, of the tel l- talepoints in chi rography .

It i s certainly significant that the alignment o f these sub

jects in the test on handwriting disguise tal l ies with thatfound in the earl i er experiment . R and B belong to the socalled “motor” group ; D and S to the sensory . Character is tic Of the first group was the high degree to whichwriting was turned over to automatic control ; ch a racteristi c Of the second was the maintenance Of conscious writingcontrol , usually accom panied by a vivid sense Of kinestheti csensation . For the latter there i s consciousness o f museular eff ort in writ ing and evidence Of motor inhibition . Forthe firs t two the act of writing i s success fu l ly organized andthe motor impulse smooth and effective . (14a zl 4o f . )Interpreted on a conventional habit-basi s one might per

haps expect the first two subj ects to be less expert than theother two in di sgui se Of the hand . But undoubtedly our convent ional views Of .h abit need reconstr uction , especial ly alongthe line of ease in habit-breaking and the relation Of this tothe mental organizat ion and constitution as a whole . Verypossibly the cue to the interpretation must be sought in thesmoothness , eff ectiveness , and lack of confl i ct in the motorimpulses themselves , which would faci l itate both habit- formation and quick readj ustments .A dramati c reaction to the instruction to disguise one’s

hand , in which one initiates and then yields confidently to agraphic-motor pattern somewhat diff erent from his habitualone, i s more eff ective in disguise than is an eff ort ful dis


integrat ion Of graphic detai ls , with a constant eff ort at inh ibit ion O f habit . That both kinds o f disguise may be success fu lly achieved , i s , however, evident . P sychologicallyand practi cal ly they are Of di ff ering interest . The eff ortfuldi sguise

,although i t may conceal i ts source eff ectively , will

give evidence Of not being a natural hand by inconsi stencies ,by retouching, and by the presence Of fantasti c forms . Thistype o f disguise i s , poss ibly , that most O ften found in theanonymous letter . The dramati c disguise wil l be less eviden tly a di sguise and in i ts most success fu l forms points toan interesting ment al type . It occurs in certain forms Of

forgery .

Meanwhile we note that Klages cites versatil i ty in theShi ft o f hands as characteri stic Of the fluidi c personali ty .

Indeterminate personali ti es have less to control o r conquer .Graphic vi rtuosity i s evidence of hi strioni c abi l ity or Of thesplit personal ity o f the hysteric . The subj ect i s worth investiga tion both in connection with a study Of one type Of criminal— the forger— and investigation of the hysteri c temperament and O f the double personal ity . Several poss ibi l i tiesOf appli cation suggest themselves in connection with theuti l ization Of wri ting in diagnosti c tests .


For Subj ect I,the period under study proved to be one of

very great emotional stres s and strain , highly depress ing innature . On two occas ions there occurred Obj ective shocksOf considerable intensi ty . Subj ective fluctuations were alsorecorded . P eriods Of great absorption and interest in workwere described and some Of restles s excitement but gay orhappy moods were rather in frequent and in intens ity werenot comparable to the contrast ing moods . The physicalcondition was poor

,inducing rapid pulse , nervous irrita

bility . an d'

m otor incoordination .

For Subj ect I I,the mood changes were largely condi

tion ed by varying phys ical conditions . The usual conditionwas one Of energy and high interest in work , with occasionalfatigue and lapse o f interest in things in general . Threeperiods of low physical vital ity were recorded, one incidentto an attack Of la grippe , the second an outcome of vaccinat ion , the third the eff ect Of an accident . A characteristicreport o f Subj ect I I was the more or less periodi c appearance Of a day- dreaming mood , subj ect ive in tone , pleasant ,and accompanied by relaxation . A vacation period of tendays was toned by a sentimental and highly pleasurablemood .

My general procedure in checking over records was asfollows :Under the appropriate date I l i sted the descriptionOf the physical condition and Of the mood ; I also l i sted thepulse and energy record

,although I found these less com

plete than I would wish ; I measured in mill imeters and emtered in my tabular summary the horizontal extension Of

each autograph , the height Of three capitals in the name,the height or length of one three- space letter

,and the slant

Of these same four letters . There are n inety autographsava i lable for Subj ect I and one hundred and two for Subj ectI I . The specific ways in which thi s tabulation was uti l izedwi l l become apparent as the report develops .A l ignment was estimated in the following way : I meas

u red with care the departure from the horizontal for theparticular l ine on each sheet which recorded the mood,

INTRA-INDIVIDUAL VARIAB ILITY 89

choosing this l ine because i f content influences al ignment,as graphologists report

,i t should most typical ly represent

the condition for the day . This l ine was written about midway Of the sheet— another reason for choos ing it as represen ta tive . All the record sheets were Of the same si ze

x cm . ) but on account o f variab i lity in m arginalspacing there are some slight di ff erences in l ine lengths .A fter measuring the departure from the horizontal o f theline in question a general estimate Of the tendency throughout the whole record was Obtained . The measurementsthroughout are somewhat crude but probably sufficiently a c

curate for the purpose in hand . A more accurate measurement Of writing amplitude by means Of the cu rvim esser i s i nprogress .According to graphological tradi tion

,alignment i s deter

mined to a large extent either by general temperamenta l toneor by the mood dominant at the moment of writ ing . Thestraight line characterizes the person o f equable di spos ition ;the up- tendency appears in the writing o f enterpris ing

,hope

ful , optimist ic penmen ; and down-al ignment in the productions of those Of general ly pess imistic incl ination or of tem

porary depress ion , physi cal or mental . Cases are ci ted inthe l iterature in which great variations in al ignment resultfrom shi ft in mood . Slant i s also cited as dependent uponemotional instabil ity . S ize , so fa r as related to mood ,would show increased amplitude in energetic

,hope fu l states

and decrease in s ize in depress ive states .TO determine whether the mental condition had any eff ect

upon these three graphic elements , I checked over my tabulation of moods and selected , wh olly a t ra n dom ,

s ix for eachsubj ect , under the three fol lowing descriptions :I . NO emotional toning to consciousness . Neutral .I I . Consciousness toned with gayety, happiness .I I I . Consciousness toned with depress ion

,melancholy

,or

physi cal s ickness .Only five entries under the second rubric were discovera

ble for Subj ect I .

92 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E P SYCH OLOGY OF H AN DWRITING

Tables I I and I I I sum m a r ize the resu lts . Si ze and s lantmeasurements were made on the autograph as explainedabove . Under extension , the horizontal extens ion o f thewhole name i s entered ; under height the S UM in m illim et

ers o f the measurements on the f our chosen letters ; underslant the average degree o f s lant from the vertical for thechosen letters .Some interesting facts emerge from study of the individ

ual records . F i rst,that o f great variabi li ty in al l the ele

ments measured . Thus for Subj ect I, length o f nameranges from forty- four to eighty- three mi llimeters ; extensiono f the first initial from ten to twenty-nine millimeters ; average slant on the chosen letters from sixteen to forty—twodegrees . For Subj ect I I , the length of name ranges fromfif ty

- three to one hundred and ten mi l l imeters , extension ofthe ini tial capital from five to twenty- six millimeters ; andaverage slant from les s than five to near ly fifty - three degrees . Both penmen show ,

I suspect,an unusual ly exten

sive range of variation for the traits measured . Both showon occas ion a tendency toward excess ive slant ; toward thele ft for I ; toward the right for I I .

The tabulation o f the specific records indicates that resultsfrom Subj ect I I o ff er some confirmation of graphologicalprinciples . Average extension

,height and slant are al l in

creased in a pleasurable state whether comparison i s institu ted with the products o f the neutral state or with thoseo f depressed conditions . Not only i s this true, but, furthermore , depress ive states also show , in conj unction with decrease in amplitude, an increase in slant as compared withthe neutral , quite in accordance with graphological expectation . A l ignm ent presents les s straightforward results . Ingeneral , Subj ect I I produces a very irregular alignment .One can assert thi s m uch only, that there is a trifle greatertendency to up

-al ignment when consciousness i s pleasurablytoned than is the case otherwise .

Results from Subj ect I are very di ff erent . In thi s instance the records produced in the neutral or obj ective

INTRA- INDIVIDUAL VARIABIL ITY

minded states exceed the others in extension and slant ; therei s very little di ff erence in result between depress ive and gaystates . Alignment which is normally ri s ing shows a cons iderable incl ination to fal l in depress ion .

There was undoubtedly some di ff erence in the sign ificanceof the so- called neutral state for the two subj ects . For I ,the real contrast between the first and the other two condi ~t ions is expressed by the terms Obj ective- Subj ective (poss ibly extroverted- introverted ) . The obj ective state o f mindi s characteriz ed by intense interest and absorption in work ;it -i s unemotional but probably pleasant and is more character ized by energy than the contrasting states are . For Subject I I , the opposition i s between indi fferent and afi‘ectivelytoned states of mind . States o f great interest in work andof physi cal energy are happy states . Depress ion is , usually,the outcome of s ickness . For both subj ects , however , a r e

lation sh ip exi sts between energy and the resulting graphicexpress ion . W i th high energy there i s , in general , an . in

crease in scope o f movement .Anticipating a distinction to be em ph a swed later , we may

say that Subj ect I I writes a typically explosive hand,large

,l ight

,rapid

,centri fugal

,t ied together, with excess

of occasional movements and little dist inction in proportions .Subj ect I writes an inhibited hand

,small , somewhat s low,

centripetal an d broken , with great distinction in relat ive proportions . A lignment is the contradictory symptom in eachof these hands

,s ince I shows a tendency to ri sing al ign

m ent and I I a tendency to fal l ing alignment . Release o ftension such as occurs in states o f unsel f—conscious absorption in work shows in 1’s case in the production of a handmore explosive than usual

,increased in amplitude

, speed ,and continuity . Attention i s diverted from the graphicproduct . I I , naturally of a more obj ective mental set, exh ibits under pleasurable excitement increasing impulse butunder depress ion , restraint of movement .Whi le such results are of very great interest they sug

gest from the practical s ide the difficulty inherent in any a t

GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

was intensely interested . The mood was characterized asone of strain and excitement

,certainly hyperkineti c, but not

describable as pleasurable or the reverse . On November20,

when the subj ect was i l l with la grippe , the writingshows a fall ing alignment, varying from two to thirteenmill imeters . The maximal slant (nearly fifty - three degrees )occurs for Subj ect I I on two days when the subj ect was in ahumorous mood

,incident to edit ing the “yel low number

of the college paper .

I t i s.

noticeable that o ften a given mood prevai led for anumber o f days and continued to color graphic express ion .

Thus,a number o f l 1’s extreme records fall in one and the

same week,a vacation period toned with a pleasant sent i

mental mood that magnified and incl ined his writing . Fourof the contrasting records occur in one week and in the weekfollowing five others ; during this interval the subj ect wasstruggling with la grippe .

A number of Subj ect I ’s mos t diminutive specimens arefound in the first week of the experimen t . The explanationi s obvious . There was definite concentration upon thegraphic product which resulted , as we have reason to expeet , in small , even , somewhat vertical writing.

On the whole , the results of the experiment were mostenlightening . An increase in graphic movement aecompan ies heightened energy, while changes in slant and alignment appear influenced by emotional conditions but not inin unequivocal way .

CH AP TER VII .

GRAPHIC INDIVIDUALITY .

The assertion i s frequently made that graphic individuali ty is but a specific example of a pattern that i s impressedupon al l the expressive movements o f a given person . H ow

may one prove or disprove such an assertion ? Obvious lynot by casual observations which are subj ect to two veryserious sources o f error : ( I ) the difficulty o f accurately re

porting on the individual character o f express ive or graphicpatterns and (2 ) the bias sing of observation in both cases bya definite mental attitude which predisposes one to see s imilar ity or di ff erence between the two.

As a control on such compari son it seems necessary thatthe observations on the graphic and expressive patternshould be -made by diff erent persons . I t would be wel l i feach j udge were ignorant o f the specific point at i ssue, namely , the extent to which the two sets o f j udgments would befound to agree or disagree . In the s imple test about to bereported, thi s ignorance o f the purpose o f the expe rimentexisted only in the case o f the observers o f the express ivemovements . I mysel f passed j udgment on th e handwritingpattern .

My first attempt at handl ing the situation was unsuccessful . After careful study of the handwrit ing of fourteenstudents in one of my classes I attempted to describe thegraphic individuality o f each by five carefully chosen descriptive adj ectives . From these adj ectives I prepared alist o f words which I gave to the class

,requesting each

member to choose three which should characterize as ac

cu rately as possible the carriage , walk , and manner of gesture o f each mem ber o f the class . A comparison of theselatter j udgments with those I had passed on handwritingshowed cases of both agreement and di sagreement .

97

98 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY or HANDWRITING

I had,for example

,characterized P ’

s hand as expert ,grace ful

,mincing

,rapid

,and sel f- conscious . The fol lowing

tabulation was made of the j udgments on his expressivemovements : Neat , 7 ; graceful , 3 ; mincing, 3 expert (including fluent ) , 5; energetic , 2 ; conventional , 2 ; easy, 2

diminutive,I ; decided , 1 ; aff ected , 1 ; smooth , 2 ; finished ,

2 ; matter—of—fact , 2 . The most frequently chosen adj ectivei s “neat” which might have been appl ied to P ’

s writing withgreat appropriateness . As hi s writing is small ,

“dim in u

t ive” might als-o have been applied , etc . But , obviously , theadj ectives chosen were not sufficiently distinctive .In at leas t one case , a very evident disagreement between

handwriting and type of movement is recorded . The ob~

servers agree fai rly well on P t . Her manner and walk arecharacterized as decided , energe ti c, matter-of - fact, andrapid . Her writ ing was characterized as neat , unaggressive ,unemphatic , and diminutive .

On the whole , however , the test proved of li ttle value, notonly be cause of the vagueness o f adj ectives selected,

' bu t

also because o f the inconclus ivenes s of the j udgments passedon the express ive movements . There are instances in whi chtwenty-one out o f a possible thirty- four adj ectives were appl ied to one and the sam e person .

Accordingly I planned a new experiment . In order tocontrol observations more definitely I decided to submitcontrasting adj ectives , with instructions to apply one o f eachpai r to the individual whose walk, carriage , and manner ofgesturing were under observation . Furthermore

,I adopt

ed as a general principle for choice o f adj ectives ‘the di stin ction s that seem to hold for the contrasting types o f explosive and inhibited writing . This resulted in a series ofpai red adj ectives as follows :Rapid or slow ; l ight or heavy ;loose or compact ; expansive or restrained ; adroit or maladroit ; fluent or j erky (tense ) ; angular or supple (rounded ) ; conventional or individual : impulsive or deliberate ;concentric or eccentric .

I OO GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

Before giving out my blanks for these records,my j udg

ments on the handwriting had been fi led away . In somecases I found great difficulty in reaching a decis ion and atmany points dissati s faction with my record . I tri ed veryconscientiously to di smiss from my thoughts any characteristics o f an indiv i dual other than his handwriting, but itwould be impossible to assert that I succeeded absolutely insuch an endeavor . The rubrics which caused me the greatest .trouble were Light—Heavy” and “Individual-Convent ional . ” Note I . I had li ttle confidence in either of thesesets of j udgments except in a few extreme instances . Myj udgment on the divis ion

“Fluent or Jerky (tense )” was in

fluen ced by a study o f the line- qual ity under the microscope .

My observation on “Rapid- Slow” was based on general ap

pea ra n ce . But it was possible to obtain , later, t imed recordsfrom

'

all my subj ects and to compare these records with anorder o f meri t arrangement earl ier made by mysel f . Thecorrelational coefficient was 55when the arrangement wasbased on the normal writ ing and .6I when the correwas made with speeded writing . My biggest erroj udgment was underrating the speed o f D 3

’

s hand andestimating that o f P— errors which were not confirmmy collaborators’ j udgments on expression .

In pass ing j udgment on concentric or eccentricment I gave attention to slant . I grouped three speunder the rubrics “concentri c” ; one was a backhandsecond (S I ) presented num erous examples of

French cal l “é criture s in istrogy r e ,” that i s , curves

nal strokes turned in the reversed direction . S2 aa verti cal hand . D 3 was clas sed as

“eccentri c”

considerable hesitation ; thi s hand will , I believe,later a backhand , although as yet i t fol lows the convems lant . D 3 has s ince , in fact , i nformed me that in veryand careless wri ting there is a strong tendency totoward the le ft .

!Note I . I do n ot f eel a t a ll con fiden t ju st wh a t pa ir of term s

;!

sh ou ld be u tilized in discr im in atin g between the explos ive and thql

GRAPH IC INDIVIDUAL ITY

1h ibited h an d with r ef erence to th is poin t . In th e pr esen t set of

udgm en ts I in terpreted“in d ividu a l” a s equ iva len t to “

ea s ily iden tied

”bu t such a defin ition cau ses an in clu s ion in su ch category of

an ds th at a r e stylistic (S I ) a s wel l a s th ose th at a r e or igin a l . Aty lis tic h an d is, probab ly, in h ibited . On th e oth er h an d , a ca r elessand (W 1 ) , a s such , s hows explos ive ten den cies bu t it m ay n ot

epa r t very f a r f rom a conven tion a l style .!

Table V gives a detai led survey of the results . The j udgments on the express ive movements are summed under the

pprOpr ia te heads whi le in the third column of each set

he graphological j udgment is indicated by the initial letterf th e chosen t erm . A question mark after this init ial indiat es uncertainty in deci sion ; a plus mark shows that theua lity was evident to a high degree ; a minus s ign indi cateshe reverse .

As ‘ a rough approximation of the agreement between thewo sets o f j udgments we may take the percentage o f cases1 which the graphological j udgment i s in agreement withhe express ive j udgment . Chance would account for a fi fty

the actual agreement i s per cent ,chance to point an interesting problem .

mary disposal o f records i s o f much less intai led perusal . For example , there are indiexpress ive movements are obviously characteras shown by the preponderance of j udgments

another ; there are others whose move5 are most diffi cult to class i fy . As example o f the firs twe have A I

,D 1

,D 2

,P

, S I ; of the second , D 3 , H ,L

,

Agreement o f the expressive with the graphic j udgi s fairly consi stent for A2

,D I

,H

,P

,S I ; less evident

S2, and W ; for A I and D 3 there i s noteworthyt between the two sets of j udgment ; the j udgare balanced . Agreement in the two sets o fn the whole , more pronounced 1n case o f the

2, D 1

, B , S I , 82 , and'

P ) than of the women , (A I,

H , L , and W ) . H 15 an outstanding exception toem en t . A greater degree o f conventionality inpression or handwriting on the part of women prob

104 GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWR ITING0

wou ld u n doubtedly ran k fi r st by a sa f e m a rgin , a s h is wr itin g isvery la rge . B

’

s speed cou ld be incr ea sed by a redu ction in size of

letters, a device wh ich wou ld cer ta in ly be adopted by a pen m an of

di ff er en t m en ta l type!There i s s l ight preponderance in disagreement for the rubrics , Light-Heavy and Loose-Compact and only chance distr ibu tion for Adroit-Maladroit . Some disagreement isprobably to be attributed to ambiguity in the terms themselves . Thus I found mysel f interpreting “adroi t” as equiva len t to “expert ,

” “ski ll ful,while I am incl ined to think

that my collaborators stressed “grace . The records on concentri c express ion deserve parti cular study as the resultsare most suggestive

,and the agreement more extensive than

appears in a crude summing up by totals . Only in the caseo f P i s there striking disagreement . As my j udgments hadin thi s case a rather definitely determined obj ective basis , theresults are enhanced in value .

In conclus ion , i t m a y be stated that the outcome of theexperiment is s l ightly in favor o f an agreement betweengraphic and expressive movement but that the whole trendof the results i s indicative o f the great difficulty inherent inobservation o f expressive movement and the absence of allstandards for re ference . Certainly no sweeping assertion ofgeneral s imilarity can be ventured , although for a few traitsthere is strong evidence o f such harmony . I t i s rather interestin g to note in this connection that the percentage ofsuccesses when j udgments on character (see chap . VIII )were related to particular graphi c trai ts was usual ly higherthan that reported here . In the character investigation , Ihad

,however

,the ass istance of much more expert collabora

tors than in the experiments on graphi c individual ity .

CHAPTER VI I I .

GRAPHOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE HANDWRITING OF P SYCHOLOGISTS .

In 1906,Binet publ i shed hi s most interesting treati se on

Les révéla ti-ons de l’écr itu re d’apres un controle scien

tifique ,” wherein he presented the results o f a series of care

fully controlled tests designed to answer the fol lowing questions : Does handwrit ing revea l sex , age, degree of in telligence

,character ?

We have already had occasion to re fer to B inet’s conclu sion s with re ference to revelation by handwriting of ageand sex . Here we may briefly summarize his conclus ionsas to determination o f intel l igence and character from handwriting . Binet ‘ concludes that intel l igence i s revealed inchirography although the extent of thi s revelation vari eswith the individual ; the graphi c s igns o f intel l igence, granted an incontestable reali ty, are not always found in the writing of a man of great intel ligence . In selecting from pai redspecimens the hands produced by the more intel l igent o f thepenmen , Crépieux-Jamin gave 91 per cent . o f successes .

But the graphological portraits,correct so far as

they go , are often extremely vague . I t i s this vaguenessthat needs to be cleared up by greater precis ion in definitionand interpretation of graphological s igns . P erhaps theconservative statement that there is more truth than errorin the j udgments of graphologists anent intel l igence sums upB inet

’

s records on this point . Concerning hi s tests on therevelation of character in writing we may cite the generalconclusion that the errors in reading character from writingare much greater than those found in reading intell igenceand that the graphologi sts show greater uncertainty in thesecond than in the first test . In actual figures

, Crépieux

Jamin’

s percentage of successes was but 73 as comparedwith 9 I for intel ligence where a chance successof 50might have been a nticipated .

105


Binet’s interest in the above investigations centered largely in dis covering a method for testing graphological conclu s ion s . The question o f method i s

,in fact , crucial . In

the experiment I wish to report here I have endeavored tocheck up a chosen num ber o f graphological principles byuti li zing a modified form of the order of meri t method . Inmany respects my procedure was very di ff erent from thato f B inet . In the firs t place I was obliged to di spense withthe services of pro fess ional graphologists . In lieu o f th eirinterpretations I had recourse to measurements and observations on certain graphic signs that could be made by myselfand which could serve as a basi s for a serial arrangement .This arrangement I shall refer to brie fly as the g raphological arrangement . To obtain a characterological arrangement for correlat ion with the graphological one I was obligedto ask help from a number of psychologists whose average j udgment on a given individual I have taken as mybasis for compari son .

I may describe my procedure under four heads : (1 ) choiceo f graphic elements for measurement ; (2 ) determination ofgraphological scheme ; 3 ) material to be used in the exper iment ; (4) questionary and collaborators .

( I ) For graphic traits I was anxious to util i ze as far asi t was possible the same elements that I had studied in preceding sections of thi s book, namely s ize, s lant , al ignment,continuity , l ine-qual ity or pressure , and proportion . Thesegraphic elements lent themselves in a greater or less degreeto obj ective measurement, so that it was poss ible on the basiso f such measurements to arrange a given col lection of handsinto groups wh i ch represented a graded seri es in which agiven external character was present to a greater or less extent . As a matter o f fact with re ference to actual detailsthe procedure was not quite as s imple as the above statement would suggest . Modifications wil l become apparent inthe specific discus sions that fol low .

2 ) Difficulties enoug h presented themselves when I triedto correlate some simple graphological scheme with each

Io8 GRAPH OLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOL OGY OF H ANDWRITING

(4) My col laborators in this experiment , whose groupj udgment I util ized in getting a characterological rating,consi sted of twelve wel l-known psychologists who had hadconsiderable opportunity to know wel l many o f the otherpsych ologists whose writing I was uti l izing in the test . Toeach of my collaborators I sent a li st o f thirty-s ix nameswith the request that each individual be c lass ified undersome one divi sion of each of the given rubri cs . The specificgroups util i zed were as follows

G rou p I . P r eoccu pat ion w ith Det ai l s in Con t r a s t with In ter es t in Gen .

er a l P r in cip les ; F ive D ivi son s .

detai l s .

G roup I I . Feel in g of Se l f-Wor th (Pr ide ) ; F ive D ivi s ion s ,

2. Moder a ted 4. Modes t es

F eel i n g. o f F ee 1 i n g o f F eel in g o I t im a t e of s el f .Sel f-Wor th . Se l f-Wor th . S e l f-Wor th .

G roup III . O r ig in a l ity , Ju dgm en t a n d As s im i lat ive Ca pa ci tyFou r D ivi s ion s .

5. E xces s iv e

m odes ty .

1 . S t r o n g 3 . Aver a g e

t ion .

G r oup IV . F ive D ivis ion s on th e Grou n d of Aggr es s iven es s .

G roup V . Clas s ifica t ion on B a s is of Tem per am en t ; F ive D ivis ion s .

G roup V I . Exp los ive ver s us In h ibited Ty pe ot Act ivi ty ; F ive D ivi s ion .

3 . B a l an c e dIm pu ls ion .

5. Exces s iv 6In h ibit ion .

4. S t r o n ga n d u n e v e nIn h ibi t ion .

1 . Exces s iv e 2. Moder atedIm pu ls ion . Im pu ls ion .

Before giving the results of the investigati on I wish tocal l attention to a number of factors which undoubtedly op

STUDY OF HANDWRITING OF PSYCHOLOG ISTS

ers ted to reduce a correlation that might have been obtainedunder more favorable condit ions .

My uti l ization o f the graphological material was , o fcourse

,somewhat mechanical . I t i s abundantly open to

criti cism . In the first place I do not possess the backgroundthat a professional graphologist would have and in the second place I made little effort to modi fy the outcome o f mech an ica l measurement by what graphologists cal l the totalcomplex . In fact

,I del iberately avoided any attempt to

uti l i ze the graphological portrai t as a whole and leanedrather h eavi ly upon detai ls , with the very definite purposeof testing as stringent ly as poss ible certain specific a ssum ptions , with the assurance that pos itive results would therebybe enhanced in value . Such procedure also protected mefrom a possible incl ination to be somewhat influenced bythe profess ional reputation of the penmen . My personalacquaintance was limited to a few of the number . Whileon the whole I rested my case largely on a few specific measu rem en ts

, there were times when I was obl iged to have re

courseto a balancing o f two or more grap‘hic signs . Undersuch circumstances my weighting of individual elementswas necessari ly arbi trary as I could obtain l i ttle ass i stancefrom the treatises on the subj ect .Another prolific source o f error was the poss ible multi

plicity o f causes for the same eff ect . Thus,increase in s ize

o f writing may be determined by decrease in i l lumination orincrease in automati sm or effort to mask a lack o f motorcontrol . I had , of course , no knowledge of. the conditionsunder which the letters I

'

was using had been produced andno specific information concerning the penmen . In severa lcases I should greatly l ike to know whether or not vi s ion i snormal . Occasionally an age factor i s s l ightly evident .P robably the most s ignificant sou rce o f error in the pres

ent investigat ion was the lack in a number of instances o fsufficient material to j usti fy a j udgment . In th e case o ftwo specimens I was certainly reckless in attempting to passj udgment . One specimen (2 ) consis ted of two l ines scrawl

I I O GRAPHOLOGY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWR ITING

ed with great precipitancy at the close o f a typed lette r andthe other 6) of a few words fi l l ing in th e blanks on a printed card . I have omitted my measurements on these specimens from one or two groups as I shal l speci fy later . Specimen 8 was also very meagre .

So far as letter- content was concerned , my col lection wasa fairly comparab le one . D i fferent s ize o f letter sheetsprobably introduced some slight uncertainty in j udgment ons ize but

,on the whole

,thi s source of error was negligible .

So much from th e graphological s ide . A few words concerning the difficulti es encountered by my collaborators inthe characterological j udgment . Apart from the difficultyinherent in breaking up such a closely selected group, therewas the error ari sing from insufficient acquaintance with anindiv i dual or, at least, a more extensive acquaintance withsome of the psychologists than with others . As an outcomeo f my returns I found it necessary to discard s ix of thenames included in my original li st because o f fai lure to re

ceive a sufficient number of j udgments to j usti fy obtainingan average . Moreover

,I did not receive for every group

ing complete returns even for the twenty-nine remainingnames . My averages are obtained from individual i temsvarying from seven to twelve in number . Apparently mycollaborators found greatest difficulty in passing j udgmenton Temperament, and on the Explos ive- Inhibited make-up .

It i s , moreover, evident that the categories I adoptedleave much to be desi red in the way of logical cla ssification . Such inadequacy was , in part at least , due to the di fficu lty I found in reducing graphological implications to anyform of system . Rigid definition of rubrics might havebeen attempted , but I thought best in the present explorationto employ somewhat elasti c terms .The attempt to work out a serial arrangement o f hand

writing specimens is som ething of a strain upon even themost confident graphological principles . I have

, th

tabulated for each specimen under each rubri c theological group in which i t was placed before

I 12 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

getting my group class ification as follows : Regulari ty andinvariabi l i ty o f writing ; even spacing of words and l ines ;clear and sufficient formation of letters ; care for pun ctuation . An order o f meri t was prepared with these points inmind . The contrasting hand involved the presence of oneor more of the following traits : Rounded strokes ; extraIoops and high placed i-dot rising alignment ; insufficientlyclear letters and letters larger at the end than at the beginning of a word .

In using absolute size o f writing as a basi s o f cla ssification , one encounters th e fol lowing difficulty , namely , thats ize i s a m lost variable aspect of writing ; i t i s influenced bymany factors

,such as s iz e o f paper

,the pen one uses

,i llu

mination,ph ysical condition

,the care with which one writes .

Moreover , the group from which my collection came wasa closely s elected one and did not show the range o f variat ion in this respect that would be exhibited by a moremiscellaneous collection . The m ini scules ranged in heightfrom less than .5 to 5mm . My notes show the followingobservations : A lmost al l o f these hands show attention todetai l in the clear- cut stroke and complete letter- form . Thereare few ‘speculat ive’ hands among them .

” And again ,a fter completion o f my arrangement

,I find it very difficult

to make an order of merit . Many of the hands are bothla rg e a n d clea r -cu t . The final rating throws moreemphas i s on even , complete , and care ful writing than onabsolute s ize . Hands 7, 22

, 9, 29 are taken as the centralgroup because they show to a high degree signs o f bothcri ti cal acumen and interes t in principles . Th e les s evidentcases are th rown into groups 2 and 4. Groups I and 5present som e interesting extremes . Except for groups I and5, I have absolutely no confidence in this grouping ,

”

But in spite o f thi s lack of confidence the cor relat iorlbetween the graphological order of merit and the one obta in ed by averaging the group j udgments of my collabor

a tor s i s high , .61 (P . E . , The m ost consistentlyminute hands o f the group seem written by psychologi sts

STUDY OF HANDWRITING OF PSYCHOLOGISTS

Concentrate by pre ference on detai ls rather than prin3 . There are, however , a few large hands in whichi s overweighted by other symptoms o f care for detai l .ou tcom ie o f the experiment i s o f very great interest in

r previous query whether small writingof general inhibitory tendencies . It indi

affirm a tive answer . Certainly the strongly hyperands emanate from psychologists wh o are more

definitely interested in general theories than in detai ledcriticism or prolonged experimentation . The blurring o f letters in the hyperkineti c h and and the occasional trai l ing off

of the miniscules should not be confused with th e even ,clear

cut minuteness o f the hand which is characteriz ed above .

When we re fer to Table VI , we find that there was complete agreement in the graphological and characterologica lgrouping fourteen times out o f a poss ible twenty-nine

(including in thi s total the three hal f- step displacements ) .

The percentage of success ful grapho logica l placements i sas against a possible 20 per cent . chance success . Further- a

more , there are thirteen displacements o f only one step . Ashi ft from Group I to Group 2 i s les s serious than one fromGroup 2 to Group 3 or from; Group 3 to Group 4. Thereare two displacements

,for specimens 16 and 27, which

indicate decided disagreement between the graphological andcharacterological j udgment . Both are large

,uneven , excit

able hands . P robably both represent real con t radiction o fthe graphological position

,although the very extreme varia

tion on the characterological rating of 16 should be n oted .

The placement of thi s psychologi st by ten collaborators wasas follows : Group I Group I I Group I I IGroup IV ( I ) Group V2 . S ize an d Em ph as is of Capita ls ; F eeling of S elfWor th .

On the characterologi cal s ide a five- fold grouping wasasked for : ( I ) Strong Feeling o f Sel f-Worth ; (2 ) Moderate

‘

d Feel ing o f Sel f-Worth ; 3 ) Average Feel ing of Sel fWorth ; (4) Modest Estimate o f Sel f ; 5) ExcessiveModesty .

I I4 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF H ANDWRITING

The graphological arrangement was made on the basis ofs iz e

,emphasis

,and ornamentation o f capitals . In general

,

such characteristi cs as increased s iz e,emphasi s

,and orna

mentation are explained as dependent upon the heightenedconsci ousness with which the capital i s made . A detachmento f a capital from the fol lowing sm a l l letter and its production by a s low drawing movement i s also evidence o f augm en ted consciousness . The increase in size with increasein feeling o f sel f-worth i s explained ( I ) as a s pecific instanceo f feel ing for spatial relationship which correlat es size withprestige and (2 ) as a general outcome o f eff ort, striving,ambition . Subsidiary to s ize and emphasis o f capitals comesgraphic s ize in general , involving small as wel l as largeletters .

In making my a r ran gem len t I first measured in millime tersthe capital s o f each specimen and then measured the averageone- space letter ; I also found the relative height o f capitaland one- space letters . I then recorded observations on theorn amentation

,detachment

,and design of the capital letters ,

i n this instance examining with special care the autographas in th e autograph we find such features accentuated , and,sometimes

,striking variations introduced . In this connec

tion i t should be recalled that the uti l ization of relative heighto f siz e of capital and one- space letter in a given collection ofspecimens i s o f doubt ful value in view of the fact that thepenmen may use writing systems in which the standard proportion varies considerably . One who h a s been taught aSpencerian system would for thi s very reason show a greaterdifference between capital and one- space letters th an onewho has learned a vertical system .

The correlation between the g rapholog ica l.

a r rangem en t

and the average character rating was inconclusive ; .24 (P .

E . , There are som e remarkable agreements, pa r ticu

la r ly at the beginning and end of the two orders , butgreat di splacements . One 0for specimen 2

,already cited

I I6 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF H ANDWRITING

whole graphological port rait have achi eved greater successthan I was able to do in thi s l imited appl ication o f a specificprinciple ; obviously , I would have been in very considerableerror in about two-fif th s of m y readings . On the other hand

,

I would have h ad some bril liant successes to balance myfai lures !

3 . Graph ic Con tin u ity ; Orig in a lity of Min d versu s

P ower of Organ iza tion .

From ou r previous dis cussion o f graphic continuity i t i sevident that the graphologi cal interpretation of thi s elementis both ambiguous and uncertain . Briefly

,connected scr ipt

would seem to be the product of the practi cal organizingtype of mind ; broken script o f the intuit ive , original , ferti letype“ No psychological reason for such interpretation isattempted

,and , a s in every other case , multipli ci ty of causes

for the same eff ect i s recognized .

In face o f the somewh at bewildering disagreement s in thetraditional literature I decided to confine mysel f to P reyer

'

sinterpretation and with his five—fold scheme in mind (seechapter iv ) I turned tomy collection of hands to attempt , i fpos sible , an arrangement into classes on the basis o f degreeo f conn ectedness or di sconnectedness . I tabulated for eachspecimen and for a constant number of words the numbe r ofbreaks between letters of the same word and also the numbero f run ~on words and the tying together by From thistabulation I made my grouping . I t was

,however

,necessary

to consider in tabulation of breaks that certain ones weremuch more significant than others . For example

,a break

between a capital letter and a following small one i s lesss ignificant than a break between the small letters of thesame words

,largely because of the design of the capital and

its production by a separate impulse o f a ttention .

My study of my collection revealed no sam ple o f extremedisconnection . I t was possible , however , to m ake

‘

five groups ,as follows : ( I ) Num erous isolated letters and breaks inletters ; (2 ) I solated groups of letters ; 3 ) Occasionalbreaks ; (4) Highly connected hands , with (a ) unattached

STUDY OF HANDWRITING OF PSYCHOLOGI STS

capitals ; (b ) attached capital s ; 5) Completely connectedhands with words tied together . The margin o f di ff erencebetween these groups was , however , very slight and a fterconsiderati on I threw together the last two groups . P er

son a lly I felt that the three hands thrown original ly intogroup 5 (namely, specimens 18

,22

,and 23 ) represented a

very diff erent form of motor impulse from that o f group 4.

They engender a feeling o f breathless precipitancy ratherthan on e o f smooth expertness , and had I fol lowed my personal feeling would have been grouped wit-h I rather than 4.

Reverting now to P reyer,i t was evident that his cla ssifica

t ion could be appl ied to the present collection only in a modified form . H i s first class and possibly his second Class werenot represented at al l . My first divi s ion appeared to correspond to his thi rd ; my second divi s ion to hi s sub-group underthree . This latter divi s ion I eventually numbered I my firstgroup I re-n u m lbered 2 ; my third and fourth groupsrema ined as before . From the characterological s ide theinterpreta tion was as fol lows : (1 ) Original and ferti leminded

,l it tle j udgment or power o f organization ; 2 ) Orig

inal and ferti le-minded plus power of j udgment ; (3 ) Logica ltype ; combinative activi ty ; (4) Ass imi lative capacity, u tilization of the ideas o f others , neither crit ical nor ingenious .As a scheme for logical class ificat ion the above i s far II' OITllsati s factory . As one o f my collaborators wrote me in protest,the divi s ions are not mutually exclus ive . P ersonal ly I feltthe whole interpretat ion somewhat absurd

,and my tabula

tion on the bas is of breaks highly fantastic .

Because o f the small margin of diff erences i t did not seemfeasible to miake an order of meri t as I had in the precedingcases . In pr el iminary comparison i t seemed probab le thattwo groups would be sufficient to mark the real distinctionin degree o f connectedness . This twofold divis ion could beachieved by throwing together the first two and the las t twodivisions . Those psychologists included in the first groupwould be characterized by the predominance of original ity ;those in the second by predominance of o rganizing, cri ticaland logical capacity .

1 18 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

Uti l iz ing thi s twofold class ification I found the returnsfrom my questionnaire interesting, and, in the light o f myscept i ci sm ,

unexpected . From seven to eleven j udgm entswere pass ed upon 29 names o f my list and . in 20 of the 29cases there was a preponderance of j udgments in favor ofthe graphologica l rating

,per cent of c01n c1den ce . For

example,specimen No . 27, g rapholog ica lly in the second

group of th e twofold divis ion , i s placed by five j udg es ingroup 3 , by two j udges in group 4,

a n d by on e j udge ingroup I . Specimen No . 19 o f the first graphological groupi s placed by five j udges in group I , by four in group 2

,a n d

in group 4 by one j udge . N ine of th e j udges consider thepen-m a n original and ferti le-minded rather than logical . Twoof th e big discrepancies are found among the three specimensthat I placed at firs t in a fi fth group by themselves andincluded finally in group 4 with an inner protest .This comparison o f the graphologi cal and ch a r acterolog i

cal rating is too crude to be satis factory . We may , therefore

,turn “to the tabulation o f the fourfold grouping for

more complete returns . I t wi l l be observed that my collabora tor s were very chary in uti lization o f the fourth . gr oup buthad found more use than I had for Group 1 . In fact I hadplaced but one specimen in this group and

,un fortunately,

rece ived too few j udgments on thi s psychologist to j usti fyusing them . The tabulat ion indicates for the thirty handsused a practi cal agreement on fourteen specimens , orper cent o f success as against a twenty-five per cent chanceagreement . There are twelve one- step di splacements andfour greater displacements . A shi ft from Group 2 to Group3 or the reverse represents considerable error but a shi ft ine ither direction for Groups I and 2 i s not serious . The mostnoticeable error i s in placing 23 , of whi ch I have already

spoken . P robably in balancing al l traits ,"as would be done

in a profess ional reading, this error would have beenavoided .

.The outcome of this part of the experiment is as interesting as i t was unexpected . I t points to a problem which


diffi culty,I suspect , l i es in discriminating between the merely

explos ive hand and the hand which i s both explos ive andaggressive . P robably a similar difficulty would be en coun

tered in choos ing the deci sive character trait .

5. S lan t and Align m en t ; Tenipera in en t .

The graphic elements tha t are correlated with emotionaland temperamental capacit ies include s lant and alignmenton th e ground that both are akin to movements o f advanceor withdrawal as mani fested in emotional express ion in general ; the eccentric or centri fugal movement is correlatedWi th the pleasurable and th e concentri c or centripetal movement with unpleasant feel ings . The scheme uti li zed by thegraphologists wou ld th en be somewhat as fol lows : Degreeo f emotivity would be evidenced by degree of slant and byits variabili ty

,while the direct ion which this emotivity would

take would be determined by the alignment ; up-alignment ,optimism ; down- alignment

,depression ; fluctuat ing align

m ent , variabi l ity . A few other signs of excitabi li ty andvariabil i ty might also be taken into consideration ; the presence , for example , o f excess movements and general s igns ofvariabi l ity such as fluctuations in s iz e . Moreover , large s izei tsel f i s sometimes cited as symptomati c of hope fulness ;reduced dimensions , of depres s ion . The ch aracterologica lgrouping was as fol lows : ( I ) Optimisti c, hopeful , enterprising ; (2 ) Cheer ful , active ; 3 ) Equable, evenly active ;(4) Moody, variable , fluctuating atti tude toward work ;(5) P essimistic philosophy .

P rel iminary to my arrangem ent o f my collection I measu red the average slant o f each graphi c specimen and estimated the degree o f slant variab il ity . I then l isted themanneri sms o f alignm ent , including not only the divergenceof th e l ine itsel f from the horizontal but such alignment asCharacteriz ed the t-bar, since, according to P reyer, the mannerof crossing the “t” with an up or down or straight stroke isbut a special instance of align m ent in general . I then selectedfor my m idg roup

— the equable in temperament— the producers o f hands of s light and uni form slant, with straight


and uni form al ignment and general evenness and cal-n in essof script . This class ification was not diffi cult except fortwo specimens which combined minute siz e and verti cals lant, (3 a n d I next sorted ou t the hands that showedgreater extremes and variabi l ity in S lant, grading these withrespect both t o degree o f s lant and o f variabi l i ty and separat ing into two groups on the basis of up or down alignment .Sub-divi sion o f these groups was made on the basi s of degreeo f slant and of variabi li ty , but weight was also given to s izein separating Groups I and 2 and in Group 4 (Moody )were included cases of flu ctuating al ignment , part icularly theline convex or concave in form . Group 5 included handswith a perceptible down- alignment . I then arranged thenames within each group seriatim . Ca ses of fluctuatingalignment in combination with extreme slant were mostdifficult to place and in a number o f instances my notes indicate a wavering in deC151on be tween Groups I and 4, withfinal uncertainty as to proper placement .S lant and alignment as a ba s i s o f class ification involve

great chance for error inasmuch as both are especial ly variable . In making such observations

‘as the above,one should

have a t ha nd a number o f specimens of a given hand , whichwas not the case in thi s investigation except for a few penmen . In addit ion

,there a re the usual di fficultie s arising

from di ff erence in system of writing uti l ized ; a verticalsystem encouraging a less degree o f slant than the Speuce t ian . I t should

,however , be observed that the slant in the

specimens o f the present collection i s extreme in only a veryfew instances . A tendency to back- s lant i s perceivable in buta few specimens and then only in spots . I have stated elsewhere my conviction that such a tendency is related to latentam bidextra lity ,

a point which would have no connectionwhatever with temperamental traits unles s possibly the m orehighly un idextrou s person i s more obj ect ive-minded a n d

,in

consequence ,'

more cheer ful and hopeful in temperamentthan the ambidextral type, an hypothes is h ighly speculativebut in h a rni on y with a number of observations which I have


gathered . The present col lection yielded on ly one specimenof com plete backhand writing and unfortunately too few ofmy col laborators were acquainted with thi s individual tomake poss ible a characterization of him .

I t was evident that m y collaborators found great difficultyin arranging in temperamental groups th e names sent them .

Considerable personal acquaintance i s necessary be fore onecan confidently risk such a j udgment . Just as I experienceduncertainty in separating Groups 1 and 2 , so too did certainof my collaborators , in di cating this by l inking the twogroups . A lthough the groups do not give sa t i s factory basisfor an order o f meri t

,I have attempted such a serial arrange

ment a s a pos s ible way o f bringing the records together .The correlation between the graphological and character

ologi cal arrangement P . E . , . 12) i s too low to be siguifican t . Study of the serial arrangements indi cates , however ,an agreement on one- thi rd o f the twenty- seven names . Abig discrepan cy occurs for specimen 19, pla ced g raphologically in Group 4 but wi th a question mark, as possiblybelonging in 1 or 2 . Seven o f nine j udges placed 19 ineither the first or second group so that th e evidence o f moodin ess would seem deceptive . Specimen 4, placed by theaverage j udgm ent wel l up toward the cheerful end of thespectrum!, exhibits , g rapholog ica lly speaking, every S ign ofa moody, fluctuating dis position . Five j udges place 4 inGroup I ; one in Group 2 ; and three in Group 4. Amongthese la tt er j udges i s the individual who probably knows 4most intim ately . Group 5 was very sparingly used by mycollaborators and the graphological arrangem ent includedonly three names in this group . Only in one o f these threecases i s the graphologi cal rating in harmony with the average j udgment . No . 17 i s of especial inte rest i n thi s connec~

tion . I t presents an extraordinary fall in alignment, a

characteri st ic which I “have noted in a number o f specimensof writing by thi s same penm a n . I have a feel ing— but without specific in formation to back it— that th i s hand presents

patholog i cal features ; i t may be conditi oned by de fective


automat i sm . On the other hand , the writer o f th e explosivehand is one whose attent ion is di rected away from the writing act

, wh o confidently surrenders to graphic habits .

1We have already seen that the maintenance o f a highdegree of sel f- control shows itsel f in decreased size o f writing, decreased slant , greater degree o f di sconnection , lessenedspeed

,increased pressure

,an d increased conven tion a lity .

’

Fol

lowing Klages therefore , I used one of each ofthe following pai rs o f term s in description of each specimen

I . Rapi d or S low .

2 . Expansive or Restrained .

3 . P ressure-weak or P ressure- strong .

4. Flowing or Intermittent .a . Rounded or Angularb . Continuous or Broken .

5. Zealous or Retarded .

a . Open or Compact .b . Incl ined or Vertical .

6. Ri ch in Excess Movem ent or Meagre in Movement .

7. Cent ri fugal or Centripetal .a . Right- s lanted or Back- s lanted .

b . Abductive or Adductive .

A . Emphasi s o f upper strokes or emphasis oflower strokes .

B . Ri s ing Al ignment or Falling A l ignment .8 . As sured Coordination or Unassured Coordination .

a . Slight or Excess ive D i ff erence in Lengths .9. Individua l or Sty l i stic .

In describing each specimen under such a scheme therewas

,o f course

,considerable cross ing over from one class to

another . I had difficulty also in determining with any degreeo f accuracy the pressure o f a hand and its speed . Experi

mental i sts warn us against an attempt to estimate force ofstroke from line qualit y , while from test s on mysel f I haveconcluded that u ty j udgment on the relative rapidity .of ahand is subj ect to considerable margin of error . Evidences


of extreme eff ort may blur eff ect o f speed or a flowing movement may enhance such a ppearance .

My study o f my collection from the present po int of viewproved most enlightening . I t was undoubtedly poss ible topick ou t hands that gave evidence of explosive traits andinhibi ted ones . P arti cularly was I interested in the questionwhether the individual o f strong impulses and exaggeratedinhibition could be discriminated from one with moderateimpulsion an d deficient inhibition . I bel ieve this to be possible . My collection contained no hands evidencing bothweak impuls ion a n d deficient inhibition— such individualsachieve no measure o f success— bu t I have seen such character less hands in my experience with students .A fter my prelim lin a ry descript ion I arranged the hands in

five groups : 1 . Excess ive Impuls ion 2 . Moderated Im pu ls ion ; 3 . Balanced Impuls ion ; 4. Strong and Uneven In h ibitiou ;5. Excess ive Inhibi tion . Then , as before , I a ttemptedto arrange my groups seriatim . This proved a baffling taskfor I had

,o f course

,no notion as to the proper method o f

weighting the various graphic charact ers . As I h ave saidbefore some of my material was inadequate . In thi s connection I discarded two specimens (No . 2 a n d No . the firstconsi sting of two lines sprawled in great haste at the closeof a type-wri tten letter , the whole effect of which would beto increase the signs o f impulsion ; the second, consisting o fa few words fi l l ing in blanks on a card .

The correlation with the twenty—sixother h ands i sa correlation high enough to suggest a most interesting andpromising field o f work . W ith proper weighting and defin ition of graphi c indications of impuls ion and inhibition

,

more extens ive observation of graphic specimens,and

more adequate presentation of material a significant correlation might be anticipated . I t i s a long thi s l ine that I ammaking exploration of a series of tests usable as an indexto temperamental pattern s .The two orders

“

o f meri t indicate,i t i s true

,certain cases

in which either my application o f the scheme i s at fault or


the graphological im pl ications inaccurate . There are at leasttwo hands that give evidence both o f extraordinary im pu ls ion and of grea t confl i ct ; I have entered them as inhibitedtypes but my col laborators group them a s explos ive . Therei s

,on the contrary

,one exceedingly smooth and supple / h an d

(10) that i s produced by an individual o f evidently inhibitedtendencies . Another specimen (8 ) baffles me completely .

P ossibly I am !deceived by i ts extreme fluidity, th e utterabsence of res istance to be ove rcom e , in which case it maycharacterize a person not only of grea t impuls ion but also ofcomplete lack of confl i ct ing or inhibit ing ten dencies .Turning to the parallel tabulation of the most frequently

recorded character- j udgment and the grapholog i ca l grouping we find nine agreements in group—placement, or percent o f successes . There are eleven one- step displacementsand eight bad displacements . In the latter group fal l hands

5, 7, 10,I I

,I5, I6, 24, and 3 0. Five o f these errors occur

in connection with my group 5. These part i cular handsbear th e impress o f very extreme graphi c inhibiti on . I finddiffi culty in bel ieving tha t on e would fai l to find this pa ra lleled in some form of temperamental inhibit ion , such asundue reserve

, tirntidity , scrupulosity , extreme sensit ivenessand the like . But in the absence of evidence such an a ssum ption has

,o f course , no particular value .

On the psychological s ide we are pretty much in thedark as to relation o f impu lse—tendencies and psychical types .

The returns I received in the present investigation suggestedthe existence o f some rather general character-pattern s . Itherefore found it interesting to ask whether a com parison ofcharacter j udgments gave any evidence o f wha t elementsconst ituted the explosive make—up . W i th thi s question inm ind I obtained th e coefficients o f correlation for the serialarrangement On the basi s o f Explosiveness- Inhibit ion andthe other five characterological arrangements .The results are unmi stakable . The correlationa l coefficients

are al l positive and high . It i s evident that the explosivetype i s characterized by a strong feel ing of sel f worth


tion a l than the aggressive prideful impulsive type or thenon-aggress ive sel f-distrustful inhibited type . The temperamental classification shows one inhibi ted individual who is ,none the less

,o f a cheerful cast o f mind . Three explosive

individual s are class ified as variable in mood and fluctuatingin attitude . This rai ses a question which has hovered in thebackground pretty persi stently , namely , what appl i cationshould be m ade in this connection o f the fluctuation inexplos ive- inhibited tendencies so evident in unstable persona lities ? The ra ism g of this question must suffice at present .A study o f Table VI confirms the existence o f certain

definite character patterns . Obviously 29, 24,15, 12 ,

I I, 5,

and 2 belong to a balanced type . A more extreme patterni s suggested for 23 , 26, 19, and 4. Again , a glance at thetable in dica tes g reat di fference with respect to the certaintywith which the di fferent individual s were grouped . Therei s very extreme variation on 16, I7, 14, 19,

and 22 ; muchless variation in th e placing o f 29, 23 , 2 ,

10,and 1 . O f the

latter. group the graphological rating of 29, 23 , and I wasparti cularly success ful

,but the same cannot be said with

reference to 2 and 10. The difficulty with 2 wa s largely dueto an attempt to pass j udgment on insuffici ent and hastywriting ; 10, however, as m entioned before , presents a realproblem for graphological analysi s .

In general conclusion to thi s investigation i t may be urgedthat graphological contentions deserve more considerationthan they have received . Four of the s ix correlations betweengraphological and characterological ratings that were put tothe test gave posi tive results , certainly much m ore strikingresults than I should have ventured to anticipate . Thegraphic traits uti l ized for the deduction o f feeling Of sel fworth and the uti l ization o f slant a n d align m ent provedl argely inconclusive , although even in these instances thesuccesses exceed those that might be dictated by chance . Thecorrelation o f small

,even , and clear-cut script with a cri tical

habit o f mind ; of a speculative tendency with broken script ;o f aggress iveness with heavy l ine-quali ty and staccato

STUDY OF HANDWRITING OF P SYCHOLOGI STS

stroke ; and o f an explos ive make-up with a hyperkineti chand should receive consideration . The instrumental studyo f handwriting should find here certain problems worthy o fextens ive investigation .

Klages ’ l i st o f inhibi ted and explos ive traits i s largelydetermined by features that characterize artificial or di sgu ised writing in contrast with spontaneous writing. Butit i s interest ing in thi s connection to bring the resu lts intorelationship with pathological writing . In general , theObservations are in ha rmony . Hyperkineti c writing, as character ized by de Fursac , i s exaggerated in size with exces s offlourishes and big lower loops ; i t i s a running hand , o ftenwith words tied together ; i t may be of such excess ive speedthat certain letters are obli terated (eff aced ) i t i s variable ins ize , and s lant, and presents mal formations o f the mini scu les .

I ts energy may be apparent e ither i n the increased s ize , theexcessive rapidity , or the great pressure . Such a descriptioncorresponds fairly wel l with Klages ’ more specific anddetailed scheme of graphic s igns o f release or checking o fimpuls ion . Variabi l ity i s

,however , more emphasized than

any particular kind of variation and pressure appears as anelement o f hyperkinesis , rather than as a trait symptoma ti cof retardation .

The hypokinetic or relaxed hand a s i t o ccurs in pathological wri ting is not , however, the parallel o f the inhibi tedhand , which exhibits , as it were , brakes put upon explosiveness . The signs o f tens ion or inhibition lis ted by Kla ges arethe outcome o f attention to writing

,sel f- consciousness and

the like . They do not indicate dis turbances . of attention orof motor coordinat ion . The moderately inhibi ted hand i smore normal than the highly explos ive .

I t i s possible to select hands from the present collectionthat closely resemble those produced under psychic exaltation . Specimen 26, for instance , shows such variations insize from m agnified capita l s to miniscules that are only anundulation o f the pen as to closely resemble some of thesamples reproduced by de Fursac a s characteristic o f manic


exci tement . Two other hands the col lection Show pathologi cal s igns . One exhibits a fine tremor very evident underthe microscope and the other presents an extraordinary fallin alignment .

CHAPTER Ix

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

We are now ready to venture upon a few con cludin

remarks with re ference to certain problems sugges ted inintroductory chapter

( I ) The specific results of, and program for , investigatiprecipitated by graphological d i scussions

,an d

(2 ) The poss ibi l ity o f uti l i zing graphic productsdiagnos ti c tests .

( I ) To recapitulate briefly . We have found reasonbel ieve that graphic size i s sym ptomatic of the free releo f energy or the reverse and that extremeconventional standards hacomparison as wel l as in intra- individual comparisonhave found that a high degree o f variabi l i ty in size

,

al ignment , and similar graphi c elements , witnesses lmastery o f the motor impulse by reason o f defect iveor excess ive impetuosity , and that there i s reason tothat such extrem e variabi li ty i s evidence o f the posof specific mental traits . Effort ful control o f graphic movements l ikewise int roduces very definite s igns . We havefound reason to correlate frequent breaks in graphic contin u ity in an experienced hand with speculative interests , andthe contrasting hand with practical ity . On the other hand ,(we have encountered a stumbling block in our attempt toiu tilize slant and alignment in temperamental diagnosi s . Even'

here , however , indications were not wanting of some curiousconfirmations o f the graphological posi tion . Su ch indication,for example

,i s found in the correlative changes that

occurred with shi fts in mood for Subj ect I I in the investigation on individual variabil ity, and in th e curious similaritybetwe en type of slant and expressive a ttitude which the

,

experiment on graphic individuali ty revealed in a num be r ofcases . The concept o f the explosive versus the inhibi ted

I 3 2

SU MMARY AND CONCLU SIONS

proved particularly enlightening although the l imitaf graphic expression by conventional standards greatlyasses interpretation of symptoms .

rm ore , the records from study of a given collectionsuggest that certain very specific psychodiagnosti c

l consideration . Our percentsuccesses compared very favorably with thoseby Binet in h is investigation in spite of the fact thatdealing with Specific rather than general correlath a very l imited range o f material , and weredispense with the services of the expert g rapholo

ai led report of our employment o f handwriting inbe compared with Hollingsworth’s

on o f the worth o f j udgments o f character basedy o f a photograph . Limiting ourhe records made by the individual j udges in Hol3 test (see page 52 ) we find that our one ama teurgist was , on the whole , rather more uni formly suc

cess fu l . But the trait s on wh i ch j udgments were passedwere not , o f course , di rectly comparable . It i s rather interesting in this connection to note that in the case o f the onetrait where a com paris on may be insti tuted , namely ,

theaverage estimation of “Conceit” from the photograph andof

“Fee l ing of Sel f-Worth"from handwriting,the second

source o f in formation was slightly more accurate . A l l thisby the way .

Ch iefly , ou r ,resu lts are o f value in that they outline a pro~

gram for further investigation . They witness the need of

more preci se analysi s o f graphic elements and the influenceupon each of varying degrees o f impuls ion and of inhibit ion .

Another s uggested problem i s the relation o f certain type sof attention to the smoothness or interruption o f the motorimpulse . We have found some curious problems inherentin back-slant ; the causes that determine i t should be investigated . A genetic study of the development o f individual ityin hands should be undertaken

,and

,also

,the tracing o f


similari ty in the specific characteri sti cs of fami ly ch irograph y .

(2 ) Th e attempt to uti l ize graphic products in diagnostictests involves , as a prel iminary, scrutiny of possible classification of mental types . A number of sim ple bipartite classifica tion s which are current in psychological texts bearobvious implication of a pattern fundamental ly motor inorigin . The parti cular categories we have in mind havebeen cited frequently in the preceding chapters . They includethe fol lowing organization of types . Explosive or Oh

structed ; Sensory or Motor ,Hyperkineti c or Hypokine tic

(akineti c ) . Another di stinction i s rapidly becoming widelyaccepted, namely, the divi sion into an introverted “

or an.

extroverted disposition . A lthough the angle of approach 15

i n th is instance very di ff erent , the divi sion i tsel f eff ects avery simi lar grouping o f individuals and hence rai ses againthe question as to the relationship o f motor im pu lses_ _to thesepsychic patterns , a question which suggests a method ofexperimental attack of certain m odern theories which up tothe present have be en presented largely in dogmatic form .

W ith re ference to the other organizations of type s wemay say a few words . James ’ classi c description of theexplosive and obstructed wil l has been appealed to in ourexperimental sections . Certainly the varieti es o f reactioncharacterized by him under the above terms have been foundmost enlightening in our everyday comprehension o f character

,including as they do the two forms o f explosive will

because o f either exaggerated impulsion or de fective inh ibiti on

,and the two forms of obstructed will

,because of either

insufficient impuls ion or excessive inhibiti on . Naturally oneexpects to meet extreme types but rarely and one recognizesthe fact that emotional excitement m a y change the inhibitedindividual into the explosive or that age may trans form theexplos ive person into th e inhibited . Moreover, many individua ls appear to fluctuate from one type to the other moreor less periodical ly .

I 3 6 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

di ff ering psychophysical personal i ties are mirrored in thesereaction types ? H i r t appears to a s sume the truth o f thislatter proposition but he adds that an individual of one typemay in a parti cular activity belong to a contrasting type . Sowriting- type constitutes only on e symptom out o f manyposs ible symptoms . The motor reaction i s the more rapid

,

energetic, and emphatic ; the sensorial more heavi ly slowand control led .

The thi rd distinction to which we referred,namely

,hyper

kineti c or hypok ineti c (akinetic ) types i s an outcome of studyo f n eu rOpa th ic or psy chOpa th ic consti tutions . O f this distin ction Southard (44) writes :

“In confronting instances ofover or under-activity , the analytical student should consider in turn whether hi s given example of hyperkinesi s i shyperkines i s by defect or by excess ; and the same process iso f value in the analys is o f akineti c phenomena .

”

H i rt observes that the mani c and depress ive make-upsexhibit parallel ism in psychic and in expressive activitiesand l i s ts sel f-confiden ce , indiscret ion , mental energy, hasty,unmotived and rapid acts as characteri sti c o f the first ; retardation , indeci s ion , anxiety , lack of sel f-confidence and inactivity as characteri sti c of the second . From overt expressionon e draws conclusions concerning the mental make-up .

In the study of temperamental organization , uti l ization ofsome form of motor expression should

,there fore , prove of

great value i f i t were poss ible to di sentangle the ch a racterological phases from those impressed upon the movement by

pressure o f the envi ronment . Handwriting suggests itsel fas more convenient to uti l ize than manner of walk, gesture ,or emotional express ion because o f the fact that i t producesa record which can be uti l ized for repeated Observat ion . Iti s mani festly o f great complexi ty and subj ect to greatenvironmental pressure , but in this respect i t certainly presents no more diffi culties than do other forms of express ion .

And it would seem more simply susceptible of analysis thani s posture or walk or gesture .

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION S

Our preceding s tu dy has revealed distinctions ih - handsthoroughly in l ine with the theoret ical categories l i stedabove . But granting the existence of explosive and inhibitedhands

,o f motor and sensory writing, of hyperkineti c and .

hypokineti c chirography , what guarantee have we that theypoint beyond them selves to a general motor make-up . Can,any specific motor pattern lead to in ference of a genera ltemperamental pattern ? Do not habit and train ing causestrange inconsis tencies in express ion ; fluency , for example!in speech but halt ing gesture ? r “

S igns of inhibition may indeed aris e as an outcome o fmotor confl i ct , but how various ly such confl i cts may bemotivated!Reverting to inhibitions in graphic movements ,we have found that they may originate in shi ft from on e

system of writing to a second , in bad eyes ight, in trans ferfrom right to the left hand in writing or the revers e

,or

even aris e from the writing material that is uti l ized . Onthe other hand , graphic smoothness or expertness or chirograph i c impetuosi ty m ay possibly origi nate in ample praetice , or in thorough grounding in the best form of graphicmovement . Does adequate comprehension of the multipl ici ty of causes for graphic eff ects check any tendency todiagnostic general ization ? Yes , and no . It undoubtedlyenforces conservati sm in att i tude and insistence upon exper i

mental procedure but i t does not place an impassable barrierin the way of positive interpretation o f results . The f oregoing account in it s comparative treatment o f th e variousmethods o f studying handwriting and in its experimentalstudies has furnished some indication of where to look forpositive results , sufficient material to at least encourage afurther search for a series o f graphic tests which might beut i l i zed to get insight into the type of organiza tion o f areagent and so supplement intel ligence tests . SO far, ofcourse , as these tests concern the characterization of thestrength or weaknes s of the m otor im fpu lse, i ts energy orfree release or retardation they would have value in givingthe form o f personali ty only . They would give us no

I 3 8 GRAPHOLOGY AND TH E PSYCHOLOGY OF HANDWRITING

in formation as to the direction in which those impulseswould be appl ied , nor insight into the mani fold individualdifferences in fundamental impulses and sensitivities whichare basal to character organization .

Our further search along this line for diagnostic tests willconsis t not wholly in uti l ization of free handwri ting but insuch restriction s of i t as arise in retarded , accelerated , disgui sed

,and automatic wri ting . In the hope of reaching

positive resu lts I am now pu ttin r' such tests to the proo f .


(f ) H an dwr itin g D isgu ise, Jou rn a l App . P sy . ,

1, (1917)15. Er len m eyer , A . : D ie Sch r i f t, Grundzu eg e ih rer P hys iologic u .

P a thologie .

16. F r eem an, F . N . : (a ) P relim in ary Exper im en ts on Writin g Re

action s . P‘

sy . Rev . Monog . , 3 4, (1907)P roblem s an d Methods of In vestiga tionin H an dwr itin g . Jou r . of Ed . P sy .

, 3 ,

(c) Exper im enta l An a lys is of th e W r itin gMovem en t . P sy . Monog . 75,

(d ) Th e Teach in g of H andw r itin g .

17. F ren ch , W . L . :W h a t You r H an dw r itin g Revea ls .

18. de F u r sac, R . : L es Ecr its et les D ess in s dan s les Ma ladies n er

veu ses et m en ta les .

19. Gesell, A . L . : Accu racy in H an dwr iting a s related to SchoolIn telligence a n d Sex . Am er . Jou r . P sy . , 17,

20. Grom m es, M . :L es F acteurs Mu scu la ires du Graph ism . L e RevueP sy . , 6,

3

Gray, C. T. : Th e Tra in in g of Judgm en t in th e U se of th e AyersSca le f or H andwr iting . Jou r . of Ed . P sy , , 6,

Gros s , A . : Un ter such u n gen u eber die Sch r i f t Gesunder undGeisteskranker . P sy . Arb .

, 2,

23 . H irt, E. : (a ) Ueber em pirisch beg ru en dete Bewertun g der nor

m a len und pathologisch en H an dsch r i f t . Arch .

f . d . g es . P sy ., 23 ,

(b ) Un tersuch u n gen ueber da s Sch r eiben 11. die

Sch r i f t . P sy . Arb. , 6,H ollin gwor th H . L . : Voca t ion a l P sychology .

25. H olt, E. B Th e F r eudian W ish .

26. Klages , L . : (a ) D ie P rob lem e der Graphologie : En twu r f ein erP sychodiagn ostik . (1910)

(b ) Begri ff u n d Tatbestand der H an dsch ri f t,Zsch . f . P sy . , 63 ,

Koester , R . : D ie Sch r i f t bei Geistesk ran kh eiten .

28. Lem a itr e, A . : U n Test ba sé su r le m odification de l’

écr itu re .

Arch . de psy . , 3 ,29. Lom er, G. : (a ) Ein F a ll von z irku la r er P sychose, g rapholo

giseh g ewu erdig t . Zsch . f . d . ges . N eu r u . P sych iat, 20,

(b ) Ueber graphologisch e Ken n zeich en des Schwachs in n s . Arch . f . P sy ch ia t, 53 ,

30. Mayer, M. : Ueber die B eeinflu s sun g der Sch r i f t du rch den Alkohol . P sy . Arb.

, 3 ,

3 1 . McAllister , C. N . : Research es on Movem en ts Used in H and

writin g . Studies f rom Ya le P sy . L ab., 8,

REFERENCES

3 2. Meum ann , E. :Vorlesungen zu r Ein fueh rung in die Exper im en

telle P aedogog ik u nd ih re psychologisch enGrundlagen , 2,

3 3 . Meyer, A. , Jelliff e, S . E. , H och , A . : D em en tia P raecox .

3 4. Meyer, G. : (a ) Ueb(er S

)ch r if tver stellun g , Grap

’

. Mon atsh e f te,4, 1900

(b ) D ie w issen sch a ftlich en Grundlagen der Graphologie .

35. Naecke, (a ) B iologisch es und For en sisch es zu r H an dsch ri f t .N eu r. Cen tbl . , 3 0,

(b ) Ein ige Bem erku n gen bez . der Zeich n u n gen un d

anderer K u en stler isch er Aeusseru ngen von

Gel steskranken . Zsch . f . d . g es . N eu r . u . P sych ia t, 17,

3 6. Osborn , A . S . : (a ) Question ed D ocum en ts . A S tudy of qu estion ed docum en ts w ith an outlin e of m ethods by wh ich th e f acts m ay be discoveredand shown .

(b ) Form B lin dn es s or P sychology of S igh t inRelation to Lega l P rocedu r e. Ca se and

Com m en t, 19,

(c) Errors in Iden tifica tion of H andwriting .

Am er. L aw . Rev. , 48,

3 7. P ella t; S . : L’

Educa tion a idée pa r la Graphologie .

38. P oppée, R . : Graphologie.

P r ey er ,W . : P sychologie des Sch r eiben s .

40. P r ince, M. :Th e D is socia tion of a P erson a lity .

41 . Sch n eicker t, H . : (a ) Graphologisch e U eberg r if f e . A rch . f .

Krim .-An th ropol . u . Krim in a listik, 39,

(b ) D ie n eu e H an dsch r i f ten sam m lun g der

Ber lin er Kr im in a lpolizei . Arch . f . Kr im .

An th ropol . u . Kr im in al istik, 39,

A 42 . Schn eidem ueh l, G. : (a ) H andsch r i f t und Ca rakter . Ein Leh rrésum é of th e research es and experim en ts

Grun d w issen sch a f tlich er u n d p rak ti

sch er Studien .

‘ (b) D ie P sychologie der H an dsch ri ft .N eur . Cen tbl . , 3 1,

43 Starch , D . : (a ) Un con sciou s Im itation in H andwritin g . P sy .

Rev 18,

(b ) Th e S im ila r ity of B roth er s a n d Sister in Men

ta l Tr a its . P sy . R ev . ,24,

44. South ard , E. E. : Gen era l P sychopathology . P sy . Bu ll . 1445. Thom pson ,

M . E . : P sychology and P edagogy of W r i tin g : a

r ésum é of . th e r esearches and experim en tsbea r ing on th e h istory and pedagogy of

wr iting .

142 GRAPHOLOGY AN D TH E P SYCH OL OGY oF HANDWRITING

46. Thorndike, E. L . : (a ) H andwritin g . Teach ers College Record,1 1 ,

(b ) Th e resem blance of young tw in s in h andwr itin g . Am er. Natura l . , 49,

47. Woodworth , R . Th e Accu racy of Volun tary Movem ent .P sy . Rev. Monog . 13 ,

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE

CARDS OR SLIPS FROMTHIS POCKET

UNIVERS ITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

· p reface the following studies are designed to canvass the possi bility of a s cientiﬁc...

Documents