Graphology: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
→‎Gender and handwriting: less editor opinion, more what the sources say. removing paper that doesn't appear to have been published in any peer reviewed journal and is not RS
not sure if the section belongs in the article at all, but it sure doesn't belong in "Legal considerations"
Line 188:
 
=== In the United States ===
 
==== Gender and handwriting ====
A 1991 review of the then-current literature concluded that respondents were able to predict the gender of handwriting between 57 and 78% of the time.<ref name="ReferenceB">{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/0141192910170204|title=Sex Differences in Handwriting: A comment on Spear|year=1991|last1=Hartley|first1=James|journal=British Educational Research Journal|volume=17|issue=2|pages=141–145}}</ref> However, most of these samples, as well as subsequent studies, are based on small sample sizes that are collected nonrandomly. A much larger and more recent survey of over 3,000 participants only found a classification accuracy of 54%.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://blog.survata.com/identifying-gender-by-handwriting-youre-probably-not-as-good-at-it-as-you-think#:~:text=Gender%20equality&text=Men%20identified%20male%20handwriting%20successfully,of%2049%25%20to%2045%25 |title=Archived copy |access-date=2020-09-17 |archive-date=2020-08-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200810042715/https://blog.survata.com/identifying-gender-by-handwriting-youre-probably-not-as-good-at-it-as-you-think#:~:text=Gender%20equality&text=Men%20identified%20male%20handwriting%20successfully,of%2049%25%20to%2045%25 |url-status=dead }}</ref> As statistical discrimination below .7 is generally considered unacceptable,<ref>{{cite journal |title=Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Diagnostic Test Assessment |journal=Journal of Thoracic Oncology |date=1 September 2010 |volume=5 |issue=9 |pages=1315–1316 |doi=10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ec173d |last1=Mandrekar |first1=Jayawant N. |pmid=20736804 |doi-access=free }}</ref> this indicates that most results are rather inaccurate,<ref>{{Cite book|doi = 10.1007/978-3-030-01424-7_60|chapter = Handwriting-Based Gender Classification Using End-to-End Deep Neural Networks|title = Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2018|series = Lecture Notes in Computer Science|year = 2018|last1 = Illouz|first1 = Evyatar|last2 = (Omid) David|first2 = Eli|last3 = Netanyahu|first3 = Nathan S.|volume = 11141|pages = 613–621|arxiv = 1912.01816|isbn = 978-3-030-01423-0|s2cid = 52909281}}</ref> and that variation in results observed are likely due to sampling technique and bias.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bradley |first1=Sean |title=Handwriting and Gender: A multi-use data set |journal=Journal of Statistics Education |date=March 2015 |volume=23 |issue=1 |pages=1 |doi=10.1080/10691898.2015.11889721 |s2cid=123033133 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
 
The reason for this bias varies; hypotheses are that biology contributes due to average differences in fine motor skills among males and females,<ref name="ReferenceB"/> and that differences arise from culture and gender bias.<ref>{{Cite journal|doi = 10.1080/00224545.1996.9712254|title = Inferring Gender from Handwriting in Urdu and English|year = 1996|last1 = Hamid|first1 = Sarah|last2 = Loewenthal|first2 = Kate Miriam|journal = The Journal of Social Psychology|volume = 136|issue = 6|pages = 778–782|pmid = 9043207}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/0141192890150304|title=Differences between the Written Work of Boys and Girls|year=1989|last1=Spear|first1=Margaret Goddard|journal=British Educational Research Journal|volume=15|issue=3|pages=271–277}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/00224540209603929|title=Judging Gender from Samples of Adult Handwriting: Accuracy and Use of Cues|year=2002|last1=Burr|first1=Vivien|journal=The Journal of Social Psychology|volume=142|issue=6|pages=691–700|pmid=12450344|s2cid=39650656}}</ref>
 
==== Employment law====
Line 198 ⟶ 193:
 
== Applications ==
 
==== Gender and handwriting ====
A 1991 review of the then-current literature concluded that respondents were able to predict the gender of handwriting between 57 and 78% of the time.<ref name="ReferenceB">{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/0141192910170204|title=Sex Differences in Handwriting: A comment on Spear|year=1991|last1=Hartley|first1=James|journal=British Educational Research Journal|volume=17|issue=2|pages=141–145}}</ref> However, most of these samples, as well as subsequent studies, are based on small sample sizes that are collected nonrandomly. A much larger and more recent survey of over 3,000 participants only found a classification accuracy of 54%.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://blog.survata.com/identifying-gender-by-handwriting-youre-probably-not-as-good-at-it-as-you-think#:~:text=Gender%20equality&text=Men%20identified%20male%20handwriting%20successfully,of%2049%25%20to%2045%25 |title=Archived copy |access-date=2020-09-17 |archive-date=2020-08-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200810042715/https://blog.survata.com/identifying-gender-by-handwriting-youre-probably-not-as-good-at-it-as-you-think#:~:text=Gender%20equality&text=Men%20identified%20male%20handwriting%20successfully,of%2049%25%20to%2045%25 |url-status=dead }}</ref> As statistical discrimination below .7 is generally considered unacceptable,<ref>{{cite journal |title=Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Diagnostic Test Assessment |journal=Journal of Thoracic Oncology |date=1 September 2010 |volume=5 |issue=9 |pages=1315–1316 |doi=10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ec173d |last1=Mandrekar |first1=Jayawant N. |pmid=20736804 |doi-access=free }}</ref> this indicates that most results are rather inaccurate,<ref>{{Cite book|doi = 10.1007/978-3-030-01424-7_60|chapter = Handwriting-Based Gender Classification Using End-to-End Deep Neural Networks|title = Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2018|series = Lecture Notes in Computer Science|year = 2018|last1 = Illouz|first1 = Evyatar|last2 = (Omid) David|first2 = Eli|last3 = Netanyahu|first3 = Nathan S.|volume = 11141|pages = 613–621|arxiv = 1912.01816|isbn = 978-3-030-01423-0|s2cid = 52909281}}</ref> and that variation in results observed are likely due to sampling technique and bias.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bradley |first1=Sean |title=Handwriting and Gender: A multi-use data set |journal=Journal of Statistics Education |date=March 2015 |volume=23 |issue=1 |pages=1 |doi=10.1080/10691898.2015.11889721 |s2cid=123033133 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
 
The reason for this bias varies; hypotheses are that biology contributes due to average differences in fine motor skills among males and females,<ref name="ReferenceB"/> and that differences arise from culture and gender bias.<ref>{{Cite journal|doi = 10.1080/00224545.1996.9712254|title = Inferring Gender from Handwriting in Urdu and English|year = 1996|last1 = Hamid|first1 = Sarah|last2 = Loewenthal|first2 = Kate Miriam|journal = The Journal of Social Psychology|volume = 136|issue = 6|pages = 778–782|pmid = 9043207}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/0141192890150304|title=Differences between the Written Work of Boys and Girls|year=1989|last1=Spear|first1=Margaret Goddard|journal=British Educational Research Journal|volume=15|issue=3|pages=271–277}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/00224540209603929|title=Judging Gender from Samples of Adult Handwriting: Accuracy and Use of Cues|year=2002|last1=Burr|first1=Vivien|journal=The Journal of Social Psychology|volume=142|issue=6|pages=691–700|pmid=12450344|s2cid=39650656}}</ref>
 
=== Employment profiling ===