Being's
that I am a criminal justice major I found high interest in the chapter of
graphology. As most of you know the analysis of
handwriting is quite relevant in the field. Whether it be examining documents,
death threats, and so forth, they have issued many specialists to take on these
tasks. An article I came across on the CIA page illustrates some of the basic
problems with today's use of graphology.
First it starts off with a line that captured my attention,
"it acknowledges that traditional
psychological assessment is preferable to handwriting analysis when direct
access to the individual is possible". I love this! Think about it, as the
video in the slides gave insight into a place of business which turned to
handwriting analysis when interviewing new potential employees. For starters,
is this even right? Should a business be allowed to base a
pseudoscience belief on hiring employees? Just as this article starts off, I'm
questioning why do some people turn to psychological beliefs when direct access
and communication with an individual is available?
As the article continues, it brings up issues discussed
within the cognition chapters. Will you begin to relate broad statements to
situations that CAN, not always, pertain to a given situation? It begins to
talk about a study done in which students were given a survey in which they
answered true and false questions about their selves, such as “do you have a tendency
to be critical of yourself”. Once you have formed so many true answers, it’s
hard to give such broad analysis that would NOT apply to people. Plus, just
like stated when dealing with astrology, you must make broad claims. You must
leave room so whatever the actual analysis or response is, it can be easily
believed by the respondent. Look what happened within the study done with
college students and Nostradamus, claims so broad people almost comfortably
drew comparisons to his prophecies. So with graphology, isn’t this just basing
broad claims on general writing habits in order to get a respondent to agree
with a given analysis?
Lastly, the article begins to come to a close on the pros and
cons. It states that graphology is an art, not a science. Early on in the book
we note that a science can be reproduced.. can graphology really be produced
and turn out to be 100% accurate every single time? Questions in my mind would
be, couldn’t a person’s current state of mind possibly affect their writing
style? And the article states that you cannot predict sex based on handwriting
even though it is usually distinguishable. I personally feel as if graphology
can be used as supporting factors in life, not as a basis of hiring, firing,
guilty or not guilty (unless of course we can successfully match a forged check
to a person’s handwriting). If we have direct access to an individual why try
to literally “read between the lines?” It might not ALWAYS be accurate.
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol3no3/html/v03i3a04p_0001.htm
Ignore the white highlighted text!
ReplyDelete