Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-13T20:28:29.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Traditional and Mainly Discredited Assessment Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2021

Adrian Furnham
University of London
Get access


Records of how to select people date back 3,000–5,000 years and there are supposed incidences in the Bible. There remain, to this day, an interest and belief in astrology despite there being little evidence that place and time of birth relate to any major individual difference factors. There is also still an interest in graphology, which is the belief that the dramatic differences in writing between individuals is an importantly and stable marker of personality or motivation. Study after study show there is no validity in handwriting analysis. The situation with regard to phrenology is different. The Victorians believed that the shape of the head reflected the shape of the brain which was primarily responsible for individual differences. The fanciful connect between head shape and brain location and psychological characteristics has however been revived by neuroscience and fMRI scanning. Similarly, the idea that body shape and build was a strong marker of personality has been discredited, but the modern interest in BMI and WHR has shown that these are indeed markers of different kinds of behaviour.

Twenty Ways to Assess Personnel
Different Techniques and their Respective Advantages
, pp. 75 - 114
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Alley, T. R. (1988). Physiognomy and social perception. In Alley, T. R. (Ed.), Resources for ecological psychology. Social and applied aspects of perceiving faces (p. 167186). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W., & Vernon, P. E. (1933). The present status of experimental graphology. In Allport, G. W. & Vernon, P. E., Studies in expressive movement (p. 185211). MacMillan CoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Shakhar, G., Bar-Hillel, M., Bilu, Y., Ben-Abba, E., & Flug, A. (1986). Can graphology predict occupational success? Two empirical studies and some methodological ruminations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(4), 645.Google Scholar
Berry, D. S. (1990). Taking people at face value: Evidence for the kernel of truth hypothesis. Social Cognition, 8(4), 343361.Google Scholar
Brosnan, M. J. (2006). Digit ratio and faculty membership between prenatal testosterone and academia. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 455466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruchon-Schweitzer, M., & Ferrieux, D. (1991). Les méthodes d’évaluation du personnel utilisées pour le recrutement en France. Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle.Google Scholar
Burke, K. (2012). Big Five personality traits an astrology. Unpublished PhD thesis. Pacific Graduate University, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Butterworth, B. (1999). The mathematical brain. Macmillan.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. (1985). A double-blind test of astrology. Nature, 318(6045), 419425.Google Scholar
Clarke, D., Gabriels, T., & Barnes, J. (1996). Astrological signs as determinants of extroversion and emotionality: An empirical study.Journal of Psychology, 130(2), 131140.Google Scholar
Cleridou, K., & Furnham, A. (2014). Personality correlates of aesthetic preferences for art, architecture, and music. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 32 (2), 231255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. M. Jr (1973). A new syndrome with hypotonia, obesity, mental deficiency, and facial, oral, ocular, and limb anomalies. Journal of Pediatrics, 83(2), 280284.Google Scholar
Cooter, R. (1984). The cultural meaning of popular science: Phrenology and the organization of consent in nineteenth-century Britain. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crepieux-Jamin, J. (1909). L’ecriture et le caractere. Alcan.Google Scholar
Davey, D. M. (1989). How to be a good judge of character: Methods of assessing ability and personality. Kogan PageGoogle Scholar
Davies, J. D. (1955). Phrenology, fad and science: A 19th century American crusade. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dazzi, C., & Pedrabissi, L. (2009). Graphology and personality: an empirical study on validity of handwriting analysis. Psychological Reports, 105(3), 12551268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, G. (1987). Does astrology need to be true? Part 2: The answer is no. The Skeptical Inquirer, 11(3), 257273.Google Scholar
Dean, G. (1992). Does astrology need to be true? In Frazier, K. (Ed.), The hundredth monkey and other paradigms of paranormal (pp. 279319). Prometheus.Google Scholar
Driver, R. W., Buckley, M. R., & Frink, D. D. (1996). Should we write off graphology? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 4(2), 7886.Google Scholar
Edwards, A. G., & Armitage, P. (1992). An experiment to test the discriminating ability of graphologists. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(1), 6974.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J., & Gudjonsson, G. (1986). An empirical study of the validity of handwriting analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 7(2), 263264.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Thomas.Google Scholar
Furnham, A. (1988). Write and wrong: The validity of graphological analysis. Skeptical Enquirer, 12: 6469.Google Scholar
Furnham, A. (2004). The future (and past) of work psychology and organisational behaviour: A personal view. Management Review, 15: 420436.Google Scholar
Furnham, A. (2008). Personality and Intelligence at Work. Routledge.Google Scholar
Furnham, A. (2010). Phrenology. In 50 Schlüsselideen Psychologie (pp. 184187). Spektrum Akademischer Verlag.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., & Gunter, B. (1987). Effects of time of day and medium of presentation on immediate recall of violent and non‐violent news. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1(4), 255262.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Callahn, I. (2003). Does graphology predict personality and intelligence? Individual Differences Research, 1(2), 7894.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., McClelland, A., & Mansi, A. (2012). Selecting your boss: Sex, age, IQ and EQ factors. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 552556.Google Scholar
Garoot, A. H., Safar, M., & Suen, C. Y. (2017, November). A Comprehensive Survey on Handwriting and Computerized Graphology. In 2017 14th IAPR International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR) (Vol. 1, p. 621626). IEEE.Google Scholar
Gauquelin, M., Gauquelin, F., & Eysenck, S. B. (1979). Personality and position of the planets at birth: An empirical study. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18(1), 7175.Google Scholar
Gauquelin, M. (1969). The scientific basis of astrology. Stein and Day.Google Scholar
Gauquelin, M., Gauquelin, F., & Eysenck, S. B. (1979). Personality and position of the planets at birth: An empirical study. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18(1), 7175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genovese, J. E. (2015). Interest in astrology and phrenology over two centuries: A Google Ngram study. Psychological Reports, 117(3), 940943.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1986). Some informal explorations and ruminations about graphology. In Nevo, B. (Ed.), Handbook of scientific aspects of graphology (p. 281293). Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
Gwada, B. (2014). Lack of evidence for the assessment of personality traits using handwriting analysis. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 45(1), 7379.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M. M. (1995). Incorporation of astrology-based personality information into long-term self-concept. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10(3), 707.Google Scholar
Hampson, E., Ellis, C. L., & Tenk, C. M. (2008). On the relation between 2D: 4D and sex-dimorphic personality traits. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37(1), 133.Google Scholar
Hartford, H. (1973). You are what you write. Macmillan Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Hassin, R., & Trope, Y. (2000). Facing faces: studies on the cognitive aspects of physiognomy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 837.Google Scholar
Hu, Y., Parde, C. J., Hill, M. Q., Mahmood, N., & O’Toole, A. J. (2018). First impressions of personality traits from body shapes. Psychological Science, 29(12), 19691983.Google Scholar
Hull, C. L., & Montgomery, R. B. (1919). An experimental investigation of certain alleged relations between character and hand writing. Psychological Review, 26(1), 63.Google Scholar
Kravitz, D. A., Stinson, V., & Chavez, T. L. (1996). Evaluations of tests used for making selection and promotion decisions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 4(1), 2434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, O. P., Alfaro-Almagro, F., & Jbabdi, S. (2018). An empirical, 21st century evaluation of phrenology. Cortex, 106, 2635.Google Scholar
Kelly, I. W. (1997). Modern astrology: a critique. Psychological Reports, 81(3), 10351066.Google Scholar
King, R. N., & Koehler, D. J. (2000). Illusory correlations in graphological inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6(4), 336.Google Scholar
Klages, L (1917) Handschrift und charakter. Bovier Verlag Herbert Grundman.Google Scholar
Klages, L. (1930). Graphologisches Lesebuch [A graphology reader]. Johann Ambrosius Barth.Google Scholar
Klimoski, R. J., & Rafaeli, A. (1983) Inferring personal qualities through handwriting analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology , 56, 191202.Google Scholar
Kretschmer, E. (1925). Physique and character (trans. WJH Sprott). Kegan Paul, 266.Google Scholar
Larkin, J. C., & Pines, H. A. (1979). No fat persons need apply: experimental studies of the overweight stereotype and hiring preference. Sociology of Work and Occupations, 6(3), 312327.Google Scholar
Lester, D., McLaughlin, S., & Nosal, G. (1977). Graphological signs for extraversion. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 44(1), 137138.Google Scholar
Lewinson, T. S. (1986). Handwriting analysis in diagnosis and treatment of alcoholism. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62(1), 265266.Google Scholar
Lindová, J., Hrušková, M., Pivoňková, V., Kuběna, A., & Flegr, J. (2008). Digit ratio (2D: 4D) and Cattell’s personality traits. European Journal of Personality: Published for the European Association of Personality Psychology, 22(4), 347356.Google Scholar
Linton, H. B., Epstein, L., & Hartford, H. (1962). Personality and perceptual correlates of primary beginning strokes in handwriting. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 15(1), 159170.Google Scholar
Lippa, R. A. (2003). Are 2D: 4D finger-length ratios related to sexual orientation? Yes for men, no for women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 179.Google Scholar
Lippa, R. A. (2006). Finger lengths, 2D: 4D ratios, and their relation to gender-related personality traits and the Big Five. Biological Psychology, 71(1), 116121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lombroso, C. (1895). Criminal Anthropology: Its Origin and Application. Forum Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Luxen, M. F., & Buunk, B. P. (2006). Human intelligence, fluctuating asymmetry and the peacock’s tail: general intelligence (g) as an honest signal of fitness. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(5), 897902.Google Scholar
Mayo, J., White, O., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). An empirical study of the relation between astrological factors and personality. The Journal of Social Psychology, 105(2), 229236.Google Scholar
McArthur, L. Z., & Berry, D. S. (1987). Cross-cultural agreement in perceptions of babyfaced adults. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18(2), 165192.Google Scholar
Michon, J. H., & Desbarrolles, A. (1872). Les Mystères de l’écriture,… art de juger les hommes sur leurs autographes, par A. Desbarrolles et Jean-Hippolyte [Michon]. Garnier frères.Google Scholar
Miller, E. (1996). Phrenology, neuropsychology and rehabilitation. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 6(4), 245256.Google Scholar
Mishra, A. (2017). Forensic graphology: Assessment of personality. Forensic Research & Criminology International Journal, 4(1), 00097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nanninga, R. (1996). The astrotest. Correlation, 15, 1420.Google Scholar
Neter, E., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1989). The predictive validity of graphological inferences: A meta-analytic approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 10(7), 737745.Google Scholar
Nevo, B. (1988). Yes, graphology can predict occupational success: Rejoinder to Ben-Shakhar, et al. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66(1), 9294.Google Scholar
Nias, D. K. (2016). Hans Eysenck: Sex and violence on television, the paranormal, graphology, and astrology. Personality and Individual Differences, 103, 140147.Google Scholar
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175220.Google Scholar
Oosthuizen, S. (1990). Graphology as predictor of academic achievement. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71(3), 715721.Google Scholar
Paul, R. J., & Townsend, J. B. (1995). Shape up or ship out? Employment discrimination against the overweight. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 8(2), 133145.Google Scholar
Puhl, R. M., & Brownell, K. D. (2003). Psychosocial origins of obesity stigma: toward changing a powerful and pervasive bias. Obesity Reviews, 4(4), 213227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pingitore, R., Dugoni, B. L., Tindale, R. S., & Spring, B. (1994). Bias against overweight job applicants in a simulated employment interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), 909.Google Scholar
Rafaeli, A., & Klimoski, R. J. (1983). Predicting sales success through handwriting analysis: An evaluation of the effects of training and handwriting sample content. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(2), 212.Google Scholar
Register, C. A., & Williams, D. R. (1990). Wage effects of obesity among young workers. Social Science Quarterly, 71(1), 130.Google Scholar
Roehling, M. V. (1999). Weight‐based discrimination in employment: Psychological and legal aspects. Personnel Psychology, 52(4), 9691016.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, D. A., & Lines, R. (1978). Handwriting as a correlate of extraversion. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42(1), 4548.Google Scholar
Rothblum, E. D., Brand, P. A., Miller, C. T., & Oetjen, H. A. (1990). The relationship between obesity, employment discrimination, and employment-related victimization. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37(3), 251266.Google Scholar
Rothblum, E. D., Miller, C. T., & Garbutt, B. (1988). Stereotypes of obese female job applicants. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 7(2), 277283.Google Scholar
Sachs, G. (1999). The astrology file. Orion.Google Scholar
Sen, A., & Shah, H. (2017). Automated handwriting analysis system using principles of graphology and image processing. ICIIECs Conference.Google Scholar
Shackleton, V., & Newell, S. (1994). European management selection methods: A comparison of five countries. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2(2), 91102.Google Scholar
Sheldon, W. H., Stevens, S. S., & Tucker, W. B. (1940). The varieties of human physique. Harper and Bros.Google Scholar
Singh, D. (1993). Body shape and women’s attractiveness. Human Nature, 4(3), 297321.Google Scholar
Swami, V., & Tovée, M. J. (2005). Female physical attractiveness in Britain and Malaysia: A cross-cultural study. Body Image, 2, 115128.Google Scholar
Tett, R. P., & Palmer, C. A. (1997). The validity of handwriting elements in relation to self-report personality trait measures. Personality and individual differences, 22(1), 1118.Google Scholar
Van Rooij, J. J. (1994). Introversion-extraversion: astrology versus psychology. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(6), 985988.Google Scholar
Vestewig, R. E., Santee, A. R., & Moss, M. K. (1976). Validity and student acceptance of a graphoanalytic approach to personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 40(6), 592598.Google Scholar
von Eye, A., Losel, F., & Mayzer, R. (2003). Is it all written in the stars? A methodological commentary on Sachs’ astrology monograph and re-analyses of his data on crime statistics. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 45(1), 78.Google Scholar
Watson, P. R. (1993). Benefits of graphology. Professional Manager, May 4.Google Scholar
Wetsman, A., & Marlowe, F. (1999). How universal are preferences for female waist-to-hip ratios? Evidence from the Hadza of Tanzania. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(4), 219228.Google Scholar
Yu, D. W., & Shepard, G. H. (1998). Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature, 396, 321322.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats