Novice Ideas: Handwriting Comparisons Conducted by an Untrained Individual

Forensic analysis of questioned documents includes chemical analyses of paper and ink as well as handwriting comparisons. Several elements affect handwriting analyses, including the presence of discriminatory factors that can individualize a handwriting sample and whether the handwriting has been disguised. Five handwriting samples were gathered from six individuals comprising of one reference, three natural unknowns, and one disguised sample per person. A novice conducted analyses on every collected sample and conducted comparisons of the reference sample to the unknown and disguised samples in an attempt to correctly source the unknown and disguised samples. The novice showed a high level of accuracy in correctly sourcing the natural sample but made erroneous conclusions when analyzing the disguised samples

Handwriting analysis for diagnosis and prognosis of Parkinson’s disease

At present, there are no quantitative, objective methods for diagnosing the Parkinson disease. Existing methods of quantitative analysis by myograms suffer by inaccuracy and patient strain; electronic tablet analysis is limited to the visible drawing, not including the writing forces and hand movements. In our paper we show how handwriting analysis can be obtained by a new electronic pen and new features of the recorded signals. This gives good results for diagnostics. Keywords: Parkinson diagnosis, electronic pen, automatic handwriting analysi

Historical Analyses of Disordered Handwriting

Handwritten texts carry significant information, extending beyond the meaning of their words. Modern neurology, for example, benefits from the interpretation of the graphic features of writing and drawing for the diagnosis and monitoring of diseases and disorders. This article examines how handwriting analysis can be used, and has been used historically, as a methodological tool for the assessment of medical conditions and how this enhances our understanding of historical contexts of writing. We analyze handwritten material, writing tests and letters, from patients in an early 20th-century psychiatric hospital in southern Germany (Irsee/Kaufbeuren). In this institution, early psychiatrists assessed handwriting features, providing us novel insights into the earliest practices of psychiatric handwriting analysis, which can be connected to Berkenkotter’s research on medical admission records. We finally consider the degree to which historical handwriting bears semiotic potential to explain the psychological state and personality of a writer, and how future research in written communication should approach these sources

The Models of Authority Project: Extending the DigiPal Framework for Script and Decoration

The DigiPal project for palaeography has featured in previous DH conferences. It includes a generalised framework for the description and analysis of handwriting, initially applied to Old English of the eleventh century but subsequently extended to Latin, Hebrew, and decoration; it incorporates a novel model for describing handwriting; and a recent addition allows the embedding of linked palaeographical images into prose description. The purpose of this poster is to present new developments which form part of two further major grants, one of which is the Models of Authority project. Specifically, the focus here is on the incorporation of textual content into the model for handwriting

National characteristics and variation in Arabic handwriting

From each of four Arabic countries; Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan and Oman, 150 participants produced handwriting samples which were examined to assess whether national characteristics were discernible. Ten characters, which have different configurations depending upon their position in the word, along with one short word, were classified into distinguishable forms, and these forms recorded for each handwriting sample. Tests of independence showed that character forms used were not independent of country (p < 0.001) for all but one character-position (this was dropped from subsequent analyses). A correspondence analysis ordination plot and analysis of similarity (R = 0.326, p = 0.0002) showed that whole samples were discernibly grouped by country, and a tree analysis produced a classification which was 71% accurate for the original data and 83% accurate for 80 new handwriting samples that underwent ‘blind’ classification. When the countries were combined into two regions, North Africa and Middle East, the grouping was more marked. Thus, there appears to be some scope for narrowing down the nationality, and particularly the wider geographical region of an author based upon the character forms they use in Arabic handwriting

Handwritten Arabic character recognition: which feature extraction method?

Recognition of Arabic handwriting characters is a difficult task due to similar appearance of some different characters. However, the selection of the method for feature extraction remains the most important step for achieving high recognition accuracy. The purpose of this paper is to compare the effectiveness of Discrete Cosine Transform and Discrete Wavelet transform to capture discriminative features of Arabic handwritten characters. A new database containing 5600 characters covering all shapes of Arabic handwriting characters has also developed for the purpose of the analysis. The coefficients of both techniques have been used for classification based on a Artificial Neural Network implementation. The results have been analysed and the finding have demonstrated that a Discrete Cosine Transform based feature extraction yields a superior recognition than its counterpart

The development of a handwriting screening assessment for academic accommodations at the University of Witwatersrand

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Therapeutic Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Johannesburg July 2017A small percentage of students at the university are academically compromised by their handwriting. Various components of handwriting and performance skills have been associated with dysgraphia and inefficient handwriting such as posture and the presentaion of handwriting in terms of corrections made, which are not include in handwriting assessment for students in higher education. The current study addressed the development of a new screening assessment to be used in awarding concessions for examinations to university students with dysgraphia or handwriting deficits which therefore evaluated observable motor and process performance skills related to handwriting in three sections, an Observation Checklist, a Writing Checklist and for Handwriting Outcomes (copying speed, legibility and automaticity of writing). The study was completed in three phases with the first phase addressing a pilot study on the development of the Handwriting Screening Assessment based on steps in instrument development and criteria for screening assessment development. Item validity was established using a review of the records of 287 students who had been referred for handwriting assessment. The Handwriting Screening Assessment was piloted for content validity and item and subtest validity as well as dimensionality using Rasch subtest analysis after adjustments to items on both checklists. Construct validity of the items on the three sections of the Handwriting Screening Assessment and the unidimensionality of the checklists were considered satisfactory for field testing with typical students and those referred for handwriting assessment in Phase 2. In the second phase the Handwriting Screening Assessment was tested for construct validity and reliability on a sample of 298 typical students and 61 students referred for assessment of handwriting or dysgraphia. Construct validity of the items and subtests were confirmed for this sample of students using Rasch analysis for the checklists. Differences for known group factors and between the two groups of students indicated construct validity and reliability were satisfactory although not all subtests differentiated between the typical students and the students referred for handwriting assessment. v The Rasch subtest analysis resulted in low person separation index scores which did not allow for students to be identified for different levels of risk for dysgraphia or handwriting deficits using the scores on the Observation and Writing Checklists. A similar result was found for the Handwriting Outcomes. This was due to individual differences and not all students presenting with deficits in all the subtests of the three sections of the Handwriting Screening Assessment. Therefore normative scoring cut-off points and “at risk quotients” (ARQS) were established for the each subtest so students’ level of risk for handwriting deficits or dysgraphia could be identified. Significant differences between the typical students and the students referred for handwriting assessment were found for the three sections of the Handwriting Screening Assessment confirming satisfactory construct validity based on the ARQs. The clinical accuracy of the Handwriting Screening Assessment assessed on the ARQs indicated adequate negative predictive values for all sections and adequate specificity for all sections except legibility. While the assessment eliminated those without handwriting deficits and dysgraphia the low sensitivity meant that some students with handwriting problems may be missed. The Handwriting Outcomes - copying speed and automaticity were convergent with reference assessments of handwriting speed and oculomotor dysfunction, Detailed Assessment of Handwriting Speed 17+ and the Developmental Eye Movement, confirming the validity of this subtest in the Handwriting Screening Assessment. All other subtests had divergent validity with the reference assessments indicating they assessed different components related to handwriting problems not usually assessed in students in higher education which were found to identify them at risk for handwriting deficts and dysgraphia. The usability and utility of the Handwriting Screening Assessment was established in Phase 3 of the study. A detailed analysis of the results for the students referred for assessment of handwriting dysfunction was completed to inform the usability in terms of interpretability of the screening assessment and guidelines for further assessments. The profile of the students referred for handwriting assessment and demographic factors and items on the Handwriting Screening Assessment that placed them at risk for dysgraphia or handwriting deficits were determined. These results indicated that the subtest for pen grasp should be discarded but that other subtests which did not differentiate the students referred for handwriting assessment from typical students should be retained as they were moderately or strongly correlated with the risk for dysgraphia. The utility of the Handwriting Screening Assessment in terms of the types of dysgraphia to guide concessions that should be awarded and the benefit of the assessment in terms of academic outcomes were analysed. The Handwriting Screening Assessment can be used to identify students in higher education at risk for dysgraphia handwriting deficts and to suggest further assessment and guide concessions required but the validity can be improved with further adjustment and revision of items and scoringMT 201

Motion in Limine to Exclude Expert Testimony Pertaining to Handwriting Analysis

The Estate of Sam Sheppard’s motion to exclude the handwriting analysis of the word “yes.” Sam allegedly wrote the word under the phrase “Did Sam do it?” during a book signing in Columbus, Ohio. The Estate’s brief explains that handwriting analysis is extremely unreliable and should not be admitted as evidence. The brief concludes that since the handwriting analysis is unreliable, the book should be excluded from evidence. See order denying this motion

Motion in Limine to Exclude Expert Testimony Pertaining to Handwriting Analysis

The Estate of Sam Sheppard’s motion to exclude the handwriting analysis of the word “yes.” Sam allegedly wrote the word under the phrase “Did Sam do it?” during a book signing in Columbus, Ohio. The Estate’s brief explains that handwriting analysis is extremely unreliable and should not be admitted as evidence. The brief concludes that since the handwriting analysis is unreliable, the book should be excluded from evidence. See order denying this motion