Graphology is often labeled a pseudo-science, yet opinions from experts in psychology suggest it should not be dismissed outright. In a conversation with socialbites.ca, Dmitry Deulin, who leads the Faculty of Extreme Psychology at Moscow State Psychological and Pedagogical University, argued that there are observable regularities linking handwriting patterns to personality traits. He emphasized that while not every claim in this field may be scientifically proven, it would be short-sighted to assume there are no meaningful connections at all.
Deulin added that some conclusions in graphology have yet to be rigorously verified by modern science. This does not imply that the method is invalid, but rather that more robust research is needed to prevent it from becoming a form of fortune telling with letters. In today’s research climate, reinforcing empirical support is essential to determine the boundaries of what handwriting analysis can reliably reveal about an individual.
The expert noted ongoing challenges in the field, particularly regarding the quantity and quality of scientific studies. Consequently, he recommends using handwriting analysis cautiously and in conjunction with established psychological techniques rather than as a stand-alone tool. A careful, evidence-based approach helps mitigate overinterpretation and contextual bias when evaluating handwriting data.
According to the discussion, handwriting analysis can be categorized among projective psychological methods that do not yet carry broad scientific consensus. Yet it remains possible to infer certain conditions of the writing situation, such as emotional state, perceived threat, or level of stress at the moment of writing. Forensic professionals sometimes employ handwriting examination alongside other evidence to glean insights about a writer’s state during the act of composition.
In addition, the discourse references a former polygraph examiner who mentions three practical ways to detect deception without specialized tools. These observations underscore the broader principle that multiple lines of evidence are often necessary to form a reliable assessment of truthfulness in real-world scenarios.