skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 186077 Find in a Library
Title: Graphology and the Courts: An Ultraexpertarian Approach
Journal: International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners  Volume:5  Dated:December/January 1999  Pages:117-122
Author(s): George J. Throckmorton
Date Published: 1999
Page Count: 6
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: Canada
Annotation: More than 500 people participated in a series of blind tests to determine whether the principles of graphology are accurate and consistent.
Abstract: One of the duties of a forensic document examiner is to examine handwriting for the purpose of identity or non-identity of authorship. Extensive training based on scientific principles allows examinations to be done accurately and consistently. In recent years a number of handwriting analysts trained entirely in graphology (the personality assessment of handwriting) have been giving testimony in court on matters that pertain to forgery detection. Although they claim their methodology is accurate and "scientific," can it stand up to the analytical scrutiny of blind test research? In the current study, each of 506 individuals was instructed to write a standard paragraph of writing on a blank sheet of paper by using their normal handwriting style. All of the writing samples were submitted for analysis to one or more handwriting analysts, including four graphologists with a combined total of just over 70 years experience and two "master" graphoanalysts with a combined total of just over 25 years experience. A written report was obtained from the analysts, and the results were scrutinized according to five criteria: consistency, self-evaluation, peer evaluation, clinical evaluation, and comparison. The results of various blind tests showed no correlation between a person's handwriting and their personality traits. The research indicates that graphology is neither accurate nor consistent. Since non-scientific methodology should not be used to justify a scientific opinion, it is a fatuous proposition for people trained exclusively in graphology to be allowed to offer courtroom testimony as an expert witness. 4 tables and 6 references
Main Term(s): Criminology
Index Term(s): Document analysis; Forensic sciences; Forgery; Handwriting analysis
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.