Handwriting Analysis & Personality Mood Study

[jeanwilson]

I wish someone could find a handwriting analyst who would be interested in looking at 24 *people* - for free. I'm not curious enough to hire someone.
I would like to submit 6 examples from 4 people - people like me who have studied many different calligraphy styles - and can morph them into styles that look like everyday penmanship. Each of the 4 penman would then write three samples while in a pleasant/positive mood - and then three while thinking about things that fill us with frustration/anxiety/dread/rage - whatever.
I'd be curious to know if the analyst would figure out that all the samples came from just 4 people - and whatever else they had to say.
Does anyone even know if there are still practicing handwriting analysts?
It seems like companies used to use them when hiring.

And @Zivio - - in the book The Cult of Personality - do you recall if it debunked the MMPI?
I haven't heard of that survey in a long time.

[Starlee]

@Zivio So happy you liked my post! The field of personality psychology is outside my expertise, but with my understanding now of the brain after readings over the years, I agree that the issue of assuming personality extends into other metrics, including various personality tests…even the famous Myers-Briggs. I am guilty of taking them though as they are fun! I also like them because they motivate me to self-reflect in ways I might not otherwise. That said, I take the tests with a grain of salt. Like IQ tests and the concept of ‘intelligence’, so too has the concept of personality become much more fluid in recent years. Many scientists recognize now that humans simply cannot be categorized neatly into boxes. It’s interesting because in my field, we struggle with this concept in cell biology as well. We are constantly classifying cells into different ‘states’, but now my field is shifting and acknowledging that a cell’s tissue environment plays a huge influence on its responses, as much as its genetic makeup. This notion can be extended to human personalities, which will be reflected in the outwards traits we show, including our writing.

@jeanwilson I would have loved to take on your challenge, but now I am biased knowing your plan. Lol! I definitely think personality can sneak in to a certain extent in calligraphy, just not as much as in handwriting. This is evident since some calligraphers often end up developing a style that is recognizable by others over time. However, I find that that is more a reflection of their artistic flair. That said, I can easily see how a calligrapher’s mood and other traits can become evident. In those instances, multiple exemplars from the same person would be required as you assumed Jean. In addition to the variance issues I describe in my reply to @Zivio, I think an additional challenge with calligraphy is needing to take into account the skill level of the calligrapher. Strokes of a new calligrapher will often be shaky, uncertain. A person new to calligraphy tends to focus on the strokes and learning a new tool, often to the point of ignoring their own style. I think an analysis of this type would only work on calligraphers who have reached a skill level such that they have that ‘automatic’ freedom with the pen that only comes with repeated practice over time. This isn’t an issue as much for handwriting analysis as it is typically done in adults, who have already had years of practice by that point. However, given the decline in the use of handwriting, that advantage might be on the decline…

@Erica McPhee Thank you! I love playing with my pen and especially love when my work is well received. Still...I only consider myself a practiced hobbyist at best. Perhaps when I retire and can devote the time I need to up my game. I have a ways to go yet though!

[jeanwilson]

@Starlee - I could collect some examples of writing  - you would not know how many people participated - and you would not know the skill level --I am more interested in samples that are intended to be penmanship - but are influenced by styles of calligraphy - like italics, Spencerian, Palmer, and the endless variations that people can come up with - after studying a script style.

I regularly correspond with 20+ people who are fond of penmanship - so I could ask each of them to send me a sample - or two or three -- if they have a variety of ways of writing.

Would it be better to have everyone write the same text? And how much text would you need? I assume you would want something that included all 26 lower case letters - right?

Feel free to say no - if you do not have time to do this.... I will not be offended.

[Starlee]

@jeanwilson I would absolutely LOVE to take part in this!

I really like that the number of people will not be known. The more, the better to have a proper sampling. One page letter (short paragraph of a minimum of ~3-5 sentences) would work nicely as a single sample.

3 pieces from each person would be ideal. Text need not be the same, but I think capturing a similar intent/feeling behind the submitted pieces should be consistent among those participating.

E.g.,
1) Letter to a favourite person
2) Letter to the Queen
3) Letter to someone with whom they are frustrated but have to correspond with anyway

To help with consistency, we could request each person to imagine the person they are writing to for a couple of minutes before beginning to write; purposely invoking the emotions associated with that person (suggest they keep letter anonymous though, or writing with classifier names, like Mom, Son, Bestie, Snuggleuphagus, etc.

[Zivio]

@jeanwilson  and @Starlee  Thank you for joining in on this exchange of ideas!  Hoping this isn’t too off topic for the Flourish Forum, but I think everyone these days know how to filter for themselves mail, junk or e-, media feeds, etc. for what is of interest. 

A few comments:

@Starlee   Star had used “immutable personality traits” in an earlier reply. This phrase immediately caught my attention.  Two reasons: (1) I had a huge paradigm shift when reading The Cult of Personality because it challenged the ability to measure something so dynamic; and (2) the oft-misunderstood Buddhist “no-self” doctrine (anatta) teaches a similar thing – the concept of an inherently and permanently enduring self is illusory.  I find these intuitively true – I am a different person depending upon environment, who I’m with, what stage of life I’m in, what I'm doing, etc.

This excerpt from the book [Books.Google.com] states it well and forever changed my thinking about, but not joy in taking, “personality tests”.  This also sums up much of what we've already shared in this thread:

"... In life, he [Walter Mischel – “The Marshmallow Test” researcher haha!!] observed, our actions are driven not only by our personalities, but by the situations in which we find ourselves. We adjust our behavior according to our role (worker, parent, friend), to the occasion (a meeting, a family outing, a party), and to a thousand other details of our ever-changing environment. Such mutability, though "acknowledged in the abstract" by personality researchers, was ignored by them in practice, largely because it seemed to defeat the possibility of accurate measurement. From the time the very first personality tests were developed, psychologists attributed stable, consistent personalities to their subjects - not because they had proof such personalities existed, but because the task of assessment would be much easier if they did."

And @Zivio - - in the book The Cult of Personality - do you recall if it debunked the MMPI?

@jeanwilson  To your specific question regarding the MMPI, it’s been probably twenty years since I read the book but I found answers in a few GoodReads members’ reviews which I’ll excerpt here:

“... Murphy goes through the history and methods of different types of personality tests that were or still are popular: phrenology, Rorschach inkblot test, MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory), TAT (Thematic Apperception Test), MBTI (Myer-Briggs Type Indicator), and a few others. These tests are used, often over the objection of scientists and serious psychologists, in courts and educational institutions and corporations and other places with sometimes significant consequences. The popularity of these tests, as Murphy demonstrates over and over, has nothing to do with the rigor of their methods and the accuracy of their results ...”

And here …

“The real problem with the tests though is their embrace by governments and corporations. There is an industrial testing complex and it caters to things like mandatory tests for employees, or subjecting welfare recipients the invasive MMPI to "find out" if they are addicts (in liberal Contra Costa county no less, right across the bay from me.) This is all nonsense, and Paul is good at pointing out how it impersonalizes the preservation of the status quo: Maybe you aren't being groomed for leadership because you have the personality of an administrative assistant.”


The author certainly came against the validity of many of the assessments, but was most seriously concerned with their misuse.  I hadn’t included the full title of the book earlier, but this subtitle best states her general thesis:

How Personality Tests Are Leading Us to Miseducate Our Children, Mismanage Our Companies, and Misunderstand Ourselves


For all of the above and many other great thoughts on this thread, how ever could our writing itself connote personality?  I'm liking Jean's idea a well-constructed experiment and assume Star having conducted research finds it interesting.   I'm still holding out for some "woo woo" factor though.     Need controls!

[jeanwilson]

This is great, Starlee, (or Star?)

If anyone would like to participate - please send me a direct message through FF
and please give me:

Your actual name.
A regular email for communicating directly

Once I get my list of participants - I will send directions to everyone and give them my mailing address.

Feel free to offer suggestions if anything comes to mind.
These will have to be actual letters on paper mailed to me.
Electronic images won't work.

Soooo much fun.

[Cyril Jayant]

@jeanwilson  and @Starlee  Thank you for joining in on this exchange of ideas!  Hoping this isn’t too off topic for the Flourish Forum, but I think everyone these days know how to filter for themselves mail, junk or e-, media feeds, etc. for what is of interest. 

A few comments:

"... In life, he [Walter Mischel – “The Marshmallow Test” researcher haha!!] observed, our actions are driven not only by our personalities, but by the situations in which we find ourselves. We adjust our behavior according to our role (worker, parent, friend), to the occasion (a meeting, a family outing, a party), and to a thousand other details of our ever-changing environment. Such mutability, though "acknowledged in the abstract" by personality researchers, was ignored by them in practice, largely because it seemed to defeat the possibility of accurate measurement. From the time the very first personality tests were developed, psychologists attributed stable, consistent personalities to their subjects - not because they had proof such personalities existed, but because the task of assessment would be much easier if they did."




“The real problem with the tests though is their embrace by governments and corporations. There is an industrial testing complex and it caters to things like mandatory tests for employees, or subjecting welfare recipients the invasive MMPI to "find out" if they are addicts (in liberal Contra Costa county no less, right across the bay from me.) This is all nonsense, and Paul is good at pointing out how it impersonalizes the preservation of the status quo: Maybe you aren't being groomed for leadership because you have the personality of an administrative assistant.”


The author certainly came against the validity of many of the assessments, but was most seriously concerned with their misuse.  I hadn’t included the full title of the book earlier, but this subtitle best states her general thesis:

THIS IS ONE OF THE FACTS THAT I FIND IN ALL OF THE  "3-LETTER AGENCY'S" MISSIONS.

How Personality Tests Are Leading Us to Miseducate Our Children, Mismanage Our Companies, and Misunderstand Ourselves

I REALLY AGREE ON THE ABOVE...

For all of the above and many other great thoughts on this thread, how ever could our writing itself connote personality?  I'm liking Jean's idea a well-constructed experiment and assume Star having conducted research finds it interesting.   I'm still holding out for some "woo woo" factor though.     Need controls!

This is an interesting topic.
I have read lot of things  about these Personality  tests through someone's writing. I was so curious though in some circumstances  like people who are calligraphers  and artists on lettering how they could apply these tests. I understand  they have the abilities to to develop their writing styles and change them all the time.
More over those people who develop those tests use statics to dominate their personal view rather than getting into a general science to prove something but to manipulate an idea to push forward.
I read a lot about mind controlling - remote viewing-  Physics- human Mind etc.
So I came to know Three letter agency is the best manipulator in all of the human mind. All of their work has been/ and is being based on many collective human mind testing. They do all of these kind of testing. They always do a double blind or triple blind tests. So back to the topic how that test could filter some ones work in progressive developments is my curiosity. I'd love to join this to see as a fun.

I don't believe anything anyone say against my character  except if he or She is a Tarot- card reader.  That is a fun and my take is  we have more opportunities to open for many claritis to look forward into the future through those reading..

   

[Starlee]

@jeanwilson I like Star

[Zivio]

@Starlee
@Jean Wilson
@K-2

Just read the following about Camillo Baldi's theory on the topic!     [From The History and Uncertain Future of Handwriting, by Anne Trubek.]    Never mind ... 

[Starlee]

So neat. Thank you for sharing!!