
This study examined the reliability and validity of graphology as an assessment tool in selecting candidates for an infantry officers' training course. Six professional graphologists' predictions were compared with those of 6 psychologists and 6 laymen who evaluated the same 65 handwriting specimens on 13 scales. Coefficients of concordance in the graphologists' group were relatively low and ranged from .20 to .37 but were higher than those of psychologists (.17 to .36) and laymen (.09 to .20). The median validity coefficients of graphologists in predicting success in the course ranged from .11 to .26, while the validities of psychologists were from .07 to .23 and of laymen from —.05 to .17. The median validities of a General Evaluation Scale were .26, .20, and .11 for graphologists, psychologists, and laymen, respectively. The possible uses of graphology in selection and direction of research were discussed.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 6 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
