“How is your signature?: How you draw will reveal your personality”: The title of a handful of online articles that specify the size of letters, the presence of margins, or the curvature of letters. can describe many characteristics of the authorincluding his psychology and identity. We’re talking about personality tests that give general results with no validity or proven scientific rigor.

What is the scientific basis for these claims? None so far. Graphology is the pseudoscience we have believed in for a very long time.

For some “experts”, if we are right handed and tilt the letter on the left, we may have a rebellious spirit. Also “dotted i”, “cross t”, spacing of letters, heights, closing moves and a long one etc. There may be physical manifestations of unconscious mental functions. On the other hand, there are many who put their last name or not, close the signature with a circle or put a period. And they say that says a lot about the author.

So much so that the human resources departments of many companies use graphology in personnel selection because “it helps to know the abilities and possibilities of each subject for a job”.

First of all, and for those who don’t know, graphology is the so-called science that claims to reveal personality traits by analyzing the subject’s handwriting. Somehow, it has been tried throughout history with it ‘deciphering’ people’s individuality. It is also suggested that it can determine the general characteristics of character, mental and physiological balance, emotional state, and even intelligence types or emotional abilities.

Yes, it’s all about how you take the pen and move it across the paper.

However, the reality is very different. There are other psychological tools (and scientifically validated and compared) with ample empirical evidence that actually manage to measure what graphology aims at, such as psychometric tests for measuring personality traits. Y most contrast with graphology in many ways. In 2009, Carla Dazzi and Luigi Pedrabissi conducted a study comparing the results of 101 people who were subjected to the Big Five Surveys while also being subjected to a graphology test. The results were never assimilated.

Not only that. A comparative analysis was then made with the results of another graphologist, where no similarity was found. In 1986, Ben-Shakhar, Bar-Hillel, Bilu, Ben-Abba, and Flug evaluated the possible validity of graphology through a study that showed no difference between assessments by expert graphologists and assessments made by other uninformed professionals. graphology proving that the event is completely random.

Is this science?

Although some features of our article can be associated with certain personality traits, firm conclusions cannot be drawn about the individual behavior of a person. Researcher Geoffrey Dean compiled 16 academic papers studying graphology at work. And the results revealed little correlation between the graphologists’ forecasts and business success.

We have discussed this phenomenon before at Magnet. And just like that, we analyzed dozens of studies that replicated these results and insisted that graphological analysis was the (not so much) modern equivalent of reading tea grounds or the guts of dead animals.

Another characteristic that emerges quite easily in graphology is the Forer effect. It consists of the observation that people show a high degree of approval when their personalities are defined, when appropriate descriptions are given to them. they are actually vague and very general enough to apply to a wide range of people. Let’s dig deeper: psychologist Bertram R. Forer gave his students a personality test and then asked each of them to rate their test results from 0 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). In the end, an average of 4.2 was obtained and it was explained to them that the explanation was the same for all students. In short: the placebo of tests.

In addition to all this, there is another big problem: the lack of standardization with which different groups of graphologists come together. use different methods or techniques. For example, one analyst might say that a certain trait represents sadistic behavior, while another is a joker. In addition, more than 200 studies show that there is no relationship between the personality of the individual and the characteristics of the writing. It is argued that graphology’s ability to “guess” is implicitly based on widespread knowledge of gender and social position in the way letters are drawn.

Although graphology is widely considered a pseudoscience, it is still practiced in fields as diverse as psychology, medicine, criminalistics, education, and the workplace. It’s a huge worrying misconception, as research has repeatedly shown its lack of validity and reliability. At a time when we start recruiting staff according to the zodiac sign, this does not surprise us.