Sociotypes and Graphological Features of Handwriting

V. L. Talanov

The features of people’s handwriting were studied for the purposes of the present work by the questionnaire method, based on respondents’ self-reports concerning the presence in their own handwriting of one or another graphological feature described in sufficient detail and unambiguously in the research questionnaire.

Several experiments were conducted with samples of different sizes. The total sample sizes used to investigate individual handwriting properties ranged from 225 to 1170 people.

The respondents’ sociotypes (types of information metabolism, TIMs), namely the 16 standard temperament types of the neo-Jungian typological classification adopted in socionics and Myers-Briggs typology, were also diagnosed by the questionnaire method. The basic socionic dichotomies were not used in diagnosing respondents’ sociotypes – diagnosis was carried out by a different method, exclusively on the basis of the covariance correspondence between respondents’ self-description vectors and standard holistic TIM portraits derived from the entire research program for each specific research questionnaire. The calculated reliability of the final TIM diagnosis (also empirically verified by us) was thereby ensured at a level of no less than 95% agreement with the true TIM. By the true TIM we mean here the averaged socionic typological diagnosis that would have been assigned to a respondent in face-to-face typing by the majority of experts from the professional socionic scientific schools of Moscow and Kyiv (it is in these major cities that the socionic schools are closest to the views of the founders of socionics and, at the same time, are in good agreement with one another both in their conceptions of the principal characteristic properties of sociotypes and of the boundaries between the standard sociotypes).

In all of the tables below, the mean TIM-specific values of particular properties in the subsamples are expressed in fractions of the standard deviation of the general population, while the mean value of the corresponding property in the general population, that is, its population mean, is taken as the zero reference level.

1. Angularity or Roundness of Handwriting

The angularity or, conversely, roundness of letter forms is a feature that graphologists necessarily take into account when analyzing handwriting. Zuev-Insarov considered this property to be a graphological expression of firmness and, at the same time, a certain conflict-proneness of human character.

Table 1. Level of handwriting angularity depending on TIM

The SEI, LIE, SLI, and ILE types tend to have more rounded handwriting, whereas the EII, EIE, SLE, and LII types, by contrast, tend to have more angular handwriting, with a larger number of sharp breaks in the lines. Handwriting angularity may to some extent be regarded as a characterological feature of the type (that is, it is possessed by no fewer than 70% of representatives of the type) for the EII and EIE TIMs. Similarly, rounded handwriting is a characterological property of the SEI TIM.

Can these results be used to confirm Zuev-Insarov’s view that angularity is a graphological expression of conflict-proneness of character? Apparently, yes. The SEI, LIE, and SLI types are not among the conflict-prone types and possess strong diplomatic abilities. By contrast, the EII, EIE, SLE, and LII types, which have the most angular handwriting, are known in the socion precisely for their conflict-proneness or, at least, their undiplomatic directness.

2. Elaborate Signature with a Large Number of Curls and Flourishes

Zuev-Insarov considered this graphological property to reflect suspiciousness and distrustfulness of character combined with a negative and arrogantly egocentric attitude toward other people.

This property proved most characteristic of the SLE, SEI, and IEI types, although only for SLE does its statistical expression in the subgroup of “Marshals” rise to the level of a characterological property that could be used among other characterological features in the socionic diagnosis of type. The property of an “elaborate signature” is least characteristic of the ESI, LII, and EII types.

Table 2. Habit of using an elaborate signature with a large number of curls and flourishes

3. Tall Capital Letters, Twice or More the Height of Lowercase Letters

Zuev-Insarov considered this graphological property to reflect an emphasized, acutely vulnerable sense of personal dignity. Well, Zuev-Insarov was apparently right. The property is expressed significantly above the average level in the LSE, LSI, ESI, and SEI types, and to some extent in SEE and LII. It is represented below the average level in the subgroups of the IEE, LIE, EIE, and EII types. That is, this should be understood to mean that these latter four types do not become preoccupied with thoughts of emphasizing their own dignity, and either they are absolutely self-confident by virtue of a particular inner uninhibitedness, or the victim role is to some extent to their liking (possibly the latter applies to the EII type). Some questions may arise with respect to the SEI type. However, if we recall the example of one of the best-known SEI diplomats, namely Prince Talleyrand, the puzzlement perhaps disappears. The ability constantly to maintain cynical imperturbability, as well as to pretend that no one has supposedly insulted you in public, is one of the many talents of the SEI, along with peacefulness, tact, diplomatic saccharinity, conformism, the ability to betray at the right moment, and exceptional egocentric material self-interest.

Table 3. Habit of using tall capital letters in writing

4. Degree of Rightward Slant of Letters, Toward the Line of Writing

Zuev-Insarov considered this graphological property to reflect enterprise and, to an even greater extent – flexible sociability in relationships, bordering on selfish unceremoniousness.

A strong rightward slant of handwriting is expressed to the greatest degree in the EIE and SEI types, and to a somewhat lesser degree in ILE. By contrast, a tendency toward upright handwriting or even handwriting with a leftward, “negative” slant is found among business logicians, especially those of the fourth quadra.

Rightward slant correlates with belonging to the socionic poles of “Ethical” and “Merry.” The positive correlation with the expression of Ethics of Emotions is especially large, as is the negative correlation with the expression of Business Logic. At the same time, the correlations with Ti and Fi are zero. Not many properties are known that distinguish in any fundamental way between manifestations of Te and Ti, or Fe and Fi. This graphological property is one of those few. As a characterological diagnostic feature, it can be used in diagnosing the EIE, SLI, and LSE types (of course, within a fairly long statistical series of other properties as well, since one-hundred-percent type-specific properties do not exist in nature). The property can also be successfully used for differential diagnosis between the SEI and SLI types, and between EIE and IEI.

Table 4. Degree of rightward slant of letters, toward the line of writing

5. Direction of the Writing Line – Upward or Downward Bend

Zuev-Insarov considered the graphological property of an upward bend in the writing line to be a sign of optimism, a positive background mood.

This property is most characteristic of the ILE, SEI, and SLE types, and for ILE it can quite well be regarded as a characterological diagnostic property.

This property (an upward bend) is not characteristic of the LSI TIM (a straight writing line is typical for it, without any bend at its end, whether upward or downward). Approximately the same straightness of the line occurs for the EII type, although in this case downward bends of the line, while occurring rarely (the line is more often straight), are nevertheless more likely than upward bends.

A “downward” bend at the end of the writing line is very characteristic of the ILI type and, to a somewhat lesser degree – of the LSE, LII, and EIE types.

In the language of socionic traits and functions, it follows that an upward bend is promoted by irrationality, extraversion, merriness, judiciousness, carefreeness, positivism, developed Ti, and weakness of Te and Ni. Conversely, a downward bend of the line is promoted by belonging to the opposite poles of the socionic traits named above, as well as by developed Ni and Te and, to a somewhat lesser degree, weakness of Si and Ti.

The property can be used for differential diagnosis between ILE and LII.

Table 5a. Direction of the writing line – upward bend at its end

Table 5a. Direction of the writing line – downward bend at its end

6. Handwriting Size

Handwriting can be large and sprawling, or it can be small and bead-like. Accordingly, different sociotypes may have a tendency to incline selectively toward one of these two extremes.

For the ILE type, large, sprawling handwriting is a characterological property, while small, bead-like handwriting is entirely uncharacteristic. By contrast, small handwriting occurs more often among the ESE, ILI, LII, and LSI types. SLI, SEI, and EIE most often deny any size-related peculiarities of their handwriting – in either direction.

What has been said does not mean, of course, that all LIIs, for example, have small handwriting. But such a tendency does exist. Therefore, if an LII displays large, sprawling handwriting (which also occurs), one should suppose and look for simultaneous strong accentuations toward ILE or, less probably, LIE.

It is not difficult to see and calculate from Table 6 that, among the socionic traits, large handwriting is promoted most strongly by belonging to the poles of Yielding, Carefree, Questim, Extravert, and Irrational – specifically in that descending order of contribution. Conversely, small, bead-like handwriting is promoted by the opposite poles of the traits named above. There seems to be something common to all these poles in this case, does there not? The suspicion that some very simple common factor is present here is especially reinforced by the fact that the list of socionic traits influencing handwriting size ends abruptly with this set: all other traits, as well as all functions, quadras, and clubs, prove to have nothing at all to do with handwriting size.

Attention should be paid to the fact that contemporary graphologists, including those well acquainted with socionics and Myers-Briggs typology, in the old-fashioned manner usually associate large letter size in handwriting with extraversion (see, for example, I. Goldberg, 2006), although, according to the experimental data presented in Table 6, the poles of Yielding and Carefree, that is, high emotional and sensory reactivity, exert a much stronger influence on this property.

Table 6. Predominance of the tendency toward large handwriting over the tendency toward small handwriting

7. Overall Graphological Consistency and Legibility of Handwriting

Overall graphological consistency means the harmony and legibility of handwriting and low variability in the formation of the same letters. By contrast, clumsy, erratic, poorly legible handwriting, with unattractive letters that constantly differ in size and form, cannot be regarded as graphologically consistent.

LSE, SLI, and ESE lead in the graphological consistency of handwriting. Clumsy and often poorly legible handwriting is found, as a statistical tendency, among EII, LIE, ILE, IEE, and SEI.

High graphological consistency of handwriting is ensured to a very strong degree by Sensing (first and foremost, the predominance of Si over Ne). Following this, substantial contributions to the property are made by the Questim, Obstinate, and Dynamic poles. Graphological consistency increases as Te increases and decreases as Ti and Fi increase.

There is no substantial association with quadras, but there is an association with clubs. Practicals sharply exceed all Intuitives, both Scientists and Humanitarians (although this occurs primarily because of the Dynamic Practicals of the fourth quadra). Socials, in terms of the averaged expression of the property as a whole, are somewhere in the middle, or only very slightly above the “middle.”

It is evident that the degree of graphological consistency of handwriting can be used for certain well-founded assumptions about socionic functions. If a person writes “like chicken scratch” and cannot write otherwise, this indicates with high probability strong Ne (with lower probability – strengthened Ni, Ti, and Fi), as well as a sharply weakened combination of Si and Te. Se is weakly negatively associated with careless handwriting; overall, however, it is almost indifferent to the graphological consistency of writing, as is Fe.

Table 7. Graphological consistency, calligraphic quality, and legibility of handwriting

8. Clockwise Direction of Hand Movement When Drawing the Circles of the Lowercase Letters “о” and “в”

What is meant is writing the letter “о” and the lower circle of the lowercase letter “в” not counterclockwise, as most people usually draw them, but clockwise. Drawing circles and loops counterclockwise is called left-turning or garland-style in graphology, while the less common drawing of these elements with a clockwise hand movement is called right-turning or arcade-style (because the loops and arcs drawn in letters in this case resemble rising arches more than sagging garlands, as in the first case).

It should be emphasized, however, that this particular property (Table 8) does not concern the overall arcade character of handwriting, that is, not the predominant clockwise direction when drawing most loops and arcs, including when drawing the arcs connecting the vertical strokes of the lowercase letters “т”, “и”, “п”, “ш”, and “щ”, but rather the specific particular case of arcade-style movement only and exclusively when drawing the circles in the letters “о” and “в”.

As can be seen from the table, the property is only very weakly linked to socionics and is of little use for diagnostic purposes or for any far-reaching conclusions. Nevertheless, some tendencies can be traced. Among the socionic traits, the Positivist pole makes the largest contribution in relative terms to clockwise directionality, although in absolute terms this contribution is weak, at the boundary of statistical significance.

To a certain extent, with the reservation that there is substantial statistical variability within TIM groups, this graphological property can be used for differential diagnosis between EIE and EII (to a lesser extent – between SEI and IEI).

It should also be noted that Zuev-Insarov’s explanation of clockwise movement in writing the lower circle of the letter “в” (“demonstrativeness”) is hardly justified if one proceeds from the results of Table 8. Rather, one may speak of a certain protest “effect” associated with self-assertion.

Even more amusing are the explanations given at the beginning of the last century by some graphological theorists for clockwise movement in writing the lowercase “о” (“absence of logic”). And this with respect to LII and LSI, in comparison with EIE!

Table 8. Clockwise movement when drawing the circles in the lowercase letters “о” and “в”

9. Graphological Connectedness of Handwriting

This graphological feature means the obligatory connection of letters within words by lines. Low graphological connectedness means a high percentage of letters drawn in isolation, not connected by lines to neighboring letters within the same word.

Graphological authors have most often asserted, and continue to assert, that high connectedness signifies analytical thinking (accordingly, low connectedness negates analyticity). Sometimes the isolation of letters is also linked to the subject’s supposedly high artistic “intuitiveness.”

The feature of isolated letter formation in words (more than half of all letters are not connected by lines to neighboring letters) was tested by us on a socionic sample of 187 people (Table 9). The sample is not particularly large, and the results obtained must therefore be approached with a certain degree of caution. Nevertheless, it is immediately striking that none of the above “canonical” explanations of the property of isolated letters in handwriting is consistent with the experimental data obtained and presented in Table 9. Indeed, what special analyticity of IEI and EII, in comparison with LSI and LSE, can one speak of? And what relationship between letter isolation and Intuition (even artistic Intuition) can be discussed if, overall, this property turns out to be correlated in sign with the poles of Sensing types, Negativists, and Processors? Among the socionic functions, Si most strongly promotes the isolation of letters (so it turns out), whereas Ni, by contrast, contributes most strongly to their connected formation.

If one is to speak at all of comparing some form of “analyticity” with the degree of graphological connectedness of handwriting, then analyticity should most probably be understood as something related to the poles of Resultors, Positivists, and Ni Intuitives, but unrelated to Logic and Ethics.

For the time being, we leave the question of this property open, limiting ourselves to posing and sharpening the clearly existing problem here, which has not yet been fully resolved.

Table 9. Isolation and disconnectedness of letter formation within words in ordinary rapid handwriting

Conclusions:

1. Most of the principal graphological features of the “temperamental level” used in graphological analysis prove to be substantially associated with socionic personality parameters – as, in general, should have been expected.

2. It must be regretted that the extensive available scientific literature on graphology in Russian, written over more than a hundred years, does not include a single properly designed experimental study that would clearly compare, in mathematical and statistical terms, graphological-level features with other independently determined psychological traits already existing within some scientific psychological paradigm.

3. Our study is apparently the first (in the Russian-language scientific literature) to attempt to fill the indicated scientific gap at least partially. The results obtained show that some widely used graphological associations between individual graphological properties of writing and psychological characteristics are scientifically well-founded and justified, being confirmed experimentally, whereas other associations that are equally widespread among graphologists are either myths or, at the very least, require serious terminological clarification.

4. The study conducted is also useful for socionic theory. In particular, it clearly demonstrates that only a small proportion of the graphological properties of handwriting can be fully explained by linking them to the basic socionic dichotomies and the aspect-based socionic basis. A substantial proportion of important graphological properties prove to be most strongly associated with the poles of such “extra-functional” socionic traits as Yielding-Obstinate, Carefree-Farsighted, Questim-Declatim, Process-Result, and Positivist-Negativist.

References:

1. Zuev-Insarov. Notes of an Expert Graphologist. Leningrad: 1928.

2. Shchegolev I. V. 16 Personality Types – 16 Handwriting Types. From a Graphologist’s Notebook. St. Petersburg, Piter Publishing House, 2006. – 144 pp.

3. Goldberg I. Handwriting Analysis as a Tool of Psychodiagnostics. Dm. Lytov mailing list (www.socioniko.net), issue No. 31, 19 June 2006.

Viktor Lvovich Talanov, June-July 2008.

Copyleft V. L. Talanov 2008

Copyleft in this case means the author’s permission to reproduce and copy the article in the original or in an adequate translation into other languages on any Internet sites and other electronic information media.

Posted in July 2008 on the website http://www.newsocionicsmodel.narod.ru/