University
of Westminster - Last modified 18 Sept 2009.
Corrections to bradlen@wmin.ac.uk
hits since Sept 2009
Cite as: Bradley N (2009) Graphology: A Projective Technique for Qualitative Marketing Research (Unpublished)
Available at http://www.wmin.ac.uk/marketingresearch/graphPROJECT.htm
The purpose of this paper is to provide evidence to show that handwritten expression has long been considered to be a projective technique and to investigate the role it can play in qualitative marketing research. The literature on projective techniques and graphology was examined to provide an account of the position of handwriting as a projective technique. This inquiry shows the absence of handwriting analysis from practitioner market research. Graphological procedures are outlined and handwriting specimen sources are identified in a marketing setting. It is posited that the theoretical and practical framework created by graphologists can be applied to qualitative marketing research. Three examples are given; these are the pre-interview questionnaire, the letter task and the shopping-list task. The present study provides a starting-point for further research into the use of graphology in qualitative research. Validity and reliability for the use of handwriting analysis as a research tool have not been established. Although the framework has been suggested in the past, investigation has been rather limited. The approaches have been devised to be feasible and practical. They therefore offer a promising additional tool for the researcher.
Conceptual paper. Keywords: Handwriting, projective technique, graphology, interviews, personality,
Marketing investigation relies on deriving information from the market-place. The present article suggests that handwritten expression can play a valuable role in marketing research. Numerous techniques have been developed to create insights but in general terms they rely on either questioning or observing people. Both questioning and observation have their weaknesses in that respondents may answer or behave in such a way that our understanding of the person’s situation is not accurate. Projective techniques support questioning and observation by taking a different viewpoint, they hold the promise of enriching our understanding of the individual. They offer an alternative to direct questions, and allow us to open the respondent’s mind to topics in a very unique way. Their use originated in experimental and psychiatric settings, so we can trace association techniques back to Galton (1879, 1883) and the term “projection” back to Freud (1894).
In 1939 Lawrence Frank wrote an extremely informative article on the subject and defined projective methods as follows: “The essential feature of a projective technique is that it evokes from the subject what is in various ways expressive of his private world and personality process”.
It was perhaps inevitable that such techniques should move from psychology to marketing. Ernest Dichter has been credited as the person who introduced projective techniques to consumer research from 1940 onwards (DePaulo 1990, cited in Stern 2004). In the present day projective techniques are commonly used in focus groups and many, such as word association, are widely known to the general public.
In his 1948 book Frank went on to identify the many methods and proposed five divisions based on the 1939 article. These were: constitutive, constructive, interpretive, cathartic and refractive methods, explained in Table 1.
In 1961 Lindzey attempted to embrace these methods and derived a slightly different nomenclature, again as five divisions: association, construction, completion, choice or ordering and expressive techniques. This classification was featured in a practical qualitative market research guide by Gordon and Langmaid (1988), and has been adopted and adapted by subsequent marketing research textbooks. This shows that the subject area has clearly been introduced into the field of marketing. An outline of common marketing projective techniques is shown in Table 2. These approaches have all been used in commercial marketing research, and some authors (for example Donoghue, 2000; Boddy, 2005) provide a valuable critique of their use, with practical examples.
As we have seen, handwriting has long been seen as a projective technique yet we find it absent from marketing research applications, indeed it is not regularly considered as part of the marketing research toolbox. The present article suggests that it can play a valuable role in qualitative marketing research.
Table 1 Frank’s 5 Divisions of Projective Method (Frank, 1939 & 1948)
|
Method |
Description |
Example |
|
Constitutive
|
Person imposes a structure or form or configuration (gestalt) upon an unstructured or partially structured field. |
Rorschach cards, painting |
|
Constructive |
Person builds with the materials offered but reveals a pattern relating to his life at that period |
Block-building, play technique, role playing |
|
Interpretive |
Person tells what a stimulus-situation means to him |
Picture interpretation, TAT |
|
Cathartic |
The person discharges affect or feeling upon the stimulus-situation and finds an emotional release that is reveals his affective reactions toward life situations represented by the stimulus situation |
Playing with clay, dolls or toys |
|
Refractive |
Conventional modes of communication are altered idiosyncratically. “Give clues to the subject’s personality process by the way he alters or distorts a conventional medium of communication, such as language or handwriting.” |
Handwriting analysis |
Table 2 A collection of projective techniques (Bradley 2007)
Association
Word association Image response
Picture association
Completion tasks
Sentence completion Thematic apperception test
Story completion Cartoon completion
Picture completion Rosenzweig’s Picture-Frustration Test
Picture interpretation
Analogy
Analogy Symbolic analogy
Obituary Role playing
Personification Third person test
Brand personalities Indirect questions
Metaphor Job interview
Techniques that require respondent effort
Future scenario Construction tasks
Fantasy Psychodrama
Psycho-drawing Brand mapping
Creative writing Gaming
Guided dreams Collage
Photo sorts Pictured aspirations technique (PAT)
Storytelling Photo and tale method
Postcard writing Protocol analysis
Role-play Friendly Martian
If we return to the 1939 article on projective techniques, we find that Frank mentions handwriting in the following context:
“Expressive movements, especially handwriting, offer another approach to the understanding of the personality who reveals so much of his characteristic way of viewing life in his habitual gestures and motor patterns, facial expressions, posture and gait.”
Frank’s 1948 work uses the name refractive and proposes that such methods are made up of conventional modes of communication that are altered in a way that is unique to the individual. A contemporary of Frank, a professor of Psychology, Werner Wolff was one of several people to publish on this specialist area, his work imported graphological knowledge from Europe to the USA. The title of his book was compelling: Diagrams of the Unconscious, it concentrated on the use of graphology to uncover hidden meaning, he described the “paper as a screen for projection”. Therefore the notion of handwriting as a projective instrument had been stated and supporting knowledge was made available. The status of handwriting as a projective technique was continually emphasised in academic publishing, for example in the Journal of Projective Techniques (McNeil 1952).
Handwriting is a “learned, highly practiced human motor skill that involves the control and coordination of complex movement sequences” (Poluha et al 1998). It is a form of expression that contains communication in two ways: firstly in the content of the words chosen and secondly in the way that the writing instrument is used; we can distinguish between what is written and how it is written. Content analysis allows us to understand what is written and graphology allows us to derive meaning from how something was written. Indeed a body of knowledge has been established to derive meaning from handwritten expression.
Graphology is “a technique of observation and interpretation that enables the personality to be studied through the examination of handwriting” (Graphologist European Code of Conduct 1992). It will be noted that this global definition mentions personality and this is relevant to marketing because the personality embraces such areas as motivation, attitude and energy level.
The study of graphology has been documented in over 4000 books and numerous articles published from 1900. These are mainly in English, German and French (Moody 2009, Gille-Maisani 1992). Current interest in the subject is maintained by individuals and groupings of graphologists who hold training courses, lectures, publish journals and conduct research. To determine the number of graphologists in each country is a challenge: a study in 1999 (Bradley 2005) drew from various sources, including Yellow Page listings, association membership numbers, and training results. This suggested that Switzerland, France, Israel and Italy have a high number of graphologists in relation to the “active” (working) population of those countries, by way of example, Switzerland was said to have an estimated 500 graphologists and France an estimated 5000.
Two examples of current activity are the French Graphology Society and a graphological Institute associated with the University of Urbino, Italy.
La Société Français de Graphologie (SFDG) was founded in 1871 and has a membership of around 3000 individuals. It offers three years of part-time tuition and awards a diploma, the number of diplomas awarded over the years varies, but we can suggest around 50 per annum. Tuition is based on the work of Crépieux-Jamin (1858-1940) whereby graphic features (or signs) are identified, grouped and given a psychological meaning.
The Istituto Grafologica Moretti (IGM) is associated with the University of Urbino in Italy. Tuition is based on the work of Girolamo Moretti (1879-1963). This body, like the French society, has for decades offered three years tuition leading to a diploma. In the case of the IGM, award of the diploma is dependent on the submission of a research thesis; up to 40 such theses have been submitted annually since the 1980s. In the Moretti system signs are identified, and then quantified for intensity on a ten-point scale. A grouping, or combination of signs, is created and given a psychological meaning.
Elsewhere other researchers have examined the subject extensively, significantly in Germany, researchers at the University of Bielefeld have pursued the issue of validation of graphological judgements (Lockowandt 1988).
Many different services are offered by graphologists to employers, these are for recruitment, team-building, assessing aptitudes, coaching, career management, promotion and internal mobility. Outside the corporate world there are many other applications of graphology. One important use is to help private citizens in vocational guidance, for genealogical research, for entertainment, in medical diagnosis, in social welfare and also in legal work.
Graphologists look for the presence of features, which are sometimes called signs. There are dozens of signs under the headings of pressure, form, layout, continuity, and speed. The signs are considered together, and in their context, the intensity of these signs is then judged and ‘clusters’ are created, sometimes called ‘resultants’ or ‘combinations’. The graphologist can create a personality portrait based on this information. Although a thorough analysis will typically take around 5 hours, “quick analyses” also take place. The French use the term “Flash-Grapho” to describe this approach whereby an instant judgement is made and communicated swiftly to a client. In the world of recruitment this may be as simple as a recommendation to consider the candidate as interesting or possible or not appropriate. This procedure can mean dealing with numerous applications, so a sorting procedure replaces individual portrait creation.
These procedures are simplified in figure 1 below.
Figure 1 Simplified Graphological analysis
|
Specimen Examined
|
è |
Graphic Features (signs) Identified |
è |
Signs Analysed |
è |
Personality Described |
|
|
|
ê |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intensity Judged & signs combined |
|
|
|
|
In recent years, the use of personality typologies has been incorporated into reporting. This means that two or more convenient headings describe a series of characteristics that make up a personality. Some of these have been borrowed from mainstream psychology; others have been created by graphologists themselves. For illustrative purposes some of these typologies are shown in Table 3. The use of these typologies is well documented (for example Moore 2002) so an in-depth discussion and critique is deemed unnecessary here and left outside the scope of the present article. It must be said that typologies have met a certain amount of resistance from some graphologists who feel that these tend to detract from the major strength of graphology which is to understand the unique nature of any one individual. Additionally there is a criticism that such complex schools of thought can be reduced to 3 or 4 categories.
Table 3 Some Typologies
Moretti (4 types) Yielding, Resistant, Aggressive, Cautious
Hegar (2 types) Active, Passive
Hippocrates (4 types) Sanguine, Lymphatic, Nervous (or Melancholic), Bilious (or Choleric)
Le Senne (8 types) EAP, EAS, EnAP, EnAS, nEAP, nEAS, nEnAP, nEnAS
Jung I (2 types) Extrovert, Introvert
Jung II (4 types) Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, Intuition
MBTI (16 types) Combinations of Extrovert, Introvert, Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, Intuition
Freud I (3 types) Id-dominant, Ego-dominant, Superego-dominant
Freud II (5 types) Oral, anal, phallic, latency, genital
Adler (4 types – Reactions to inferiority complex) Lack of reaction, Compensation, over compensation, virile protestation
Horney (3 types) Moving towards, moving against, moving away
Fromm (5 types) Productive or non-productive (receptive, exploitive, hoarding, marketing)
Maslow (5 types of needs) Physiological, shelter/safety, love/belonging, recognition /status, self-actualising
There is an obvious appeal for advertising agencies and marketing planners to see individuals placed into the neat boxes offered by graphologists. Indeed, as quantitative researchers, we can envisage tabulations in which these definitions are used as cross-breaks against product usage, opinion and behaviour. Media-consumption tables with the same cross-breaks would allow us to access such groups. Therefore profiling and segmentation is an obvious application, this is clearly followed by assisting in deciding which targets hold promise. Positioning can also be helped; we can determine how the communications mix might best be used for specific customer types.
These are all valuable end uses, but graphology can assist the “means”; it can identify differences between focus group members within seconds, it can suggest what tone of questioning should be used, it can anticipate reaction. For example it can tell a moderator to concentrate on shy individuals in the knowledge that the dominant ones will make their views known without probing. After focus groups the handwriting can be used to help interpret what was said, basic associations may be suggested between the personality and related reactions to questions. It is pertinent to say that graphology is used by legal professionals in jury work (Burnup 1987, Santiago 1987, Lowe 2000 Morcom 2004). Before a trial, both prosecution and defence can question prospective jurors and dismiss them as unsuitable; handwriting is used to inform this decision. Additionally graphologists work with lawyers to identify the personalities of juror members in order to create “mirror juries” who will consider information from trials, this will then be used to simulate and anticipate jury reaction and accordingly guide the steps to take in court.
Outside traditional data collection it can be used on any handwritten material - such as complaints letters, open ended questions on self completion etc. in order to provide a greater insight into intentions. Specimen collection is not difficult: self-completion questionnaires with substantial open-ended sections can be used; personal interviews could be adapted to include a self-completion page, focus groups can incorporate a writing task. Specimen sources shown in Table 4 include warranty cards, requests for information, complaints and suggestions letters. The important consideration for graphological analysis is that a specimen should have been produced “spontaneously”. Most projective techniques need a setting or context, for example they are carried out in the controlled situation of a focus group or depth interview. Whilst graphology can be applied in these situations they are not the only, and may not be the best, settings for the production and collection of specimens. The best setting is one where an individual can produce a spontaneous handwriting in his or her own time without the pressure of other eyes. It is advisable to make respondents aware that their handwriting may be analysed, this would be in line with the principle of “informed consent” which is built into codes of conduct outlined by both graphological bodies and Market Research bodies. For example the Market Research Society (MRS) code of conduct B15 states that “If there is to be any recording, monitoring or observation during an interview, respondents must be informed about this both at recruitment and at the beginning of the interview.” Additionally code B17: “respondents must not be misled when being asked for cooperation to participate.”
Table 4 Handwriting Specimen Sources
· Recruitment Questionnaires
· Shopping lists
· Open ended questions on forms or questionnaires
· Warranty cards
· Credit application forms
· Competition entries (I like brand x because....)
· Complaints and suggestions letters or cards
· Requests for information
· Sales force records
· Correspondence with researchers
· Correspondence with sellers (requests for assistance, fan mail, warranty details)
· Order forms
· Visitor books
· Postcard technique
· Storytelling technique (handwritten)
· Production of notes in a meeting/focus group
· Sentence completion tests
Graphological analysis in marketing research was first proposed in a 1967 article by James McNeal in the respectable Journal of Marketing Research under the title of Graphology: A New Marketing Research Technique. The article provided operational details, some reassuring information on reliability and validity and was a positive introduction. This was followed in the same journal two years later by a short validation study of 400 writings related to credit scores; the analysis gave another positive endorsement “graphology has some use in marketing” (Myers et al 1969). In the same issue it is interesting to read a letter from Henry Durant, the then director of the Gallup Poll, London, who said that a graphologist tested the handwriting of senior members of “a very well known American market research company” he was certainly impressed by this and other outcomes.
Another two years on there was a validity and reliability study (Green et al 1971). This indicated low predictive ability and low-inter judge reliabilities across the predictions that were made. We do have a few examples of “niche use”, for example Poizner reported a personal communication with J.Gondar in 1992. This revealed that a marketing research firm uses handwriting analysis to classify focus group participants into market segments reflecting attitudinal differences and correspondingly, different buying behaviours.
All of these contributions were interesting but clearly not sufficiently compelling to lead the market research community to adopt the technique widely. One obstacle mentioned (by McNeal in 1967) was the lack of suitably qualified personnel to use graphology. This may be the reason, but there are now options that allow work in this field. Existing researchers can receive graphological training or can work alongside a graphologist. Alternatively specimens can be sent to qualified graphologists in order to gather further insight or triangulation to supplement traditional data capture and analysis.
In order to illustrate possible applications for researchers, Table 5 provides three ways in which graphology can be incorporated into focus groups; it includes comments and guidelines for interpretation. The specimens should be passed to the moderator as soon as possible, otherwise the moderator is “blind”, it is tempting to ask respondents to read their contribution, instead the moderator should make a brief comment from their specimen and ask them to elaborate, while they do this the researcher can understand the handwriting and that of other group members. Note that the market sector chosen should be changed to satisfy the subject under study and these materials should be used during analysis after the group session. They can easily be used in a depth interview situation.
Table 5 Three Ways to Incorporate Graphology into Groups
|
Exercise |
Instruction |
Comment |
Interpretation |
|
Pre-interview questionnaire |
At home a self completion questionnaire is filled in. Several sections have free pages for open-ended comment with key questions for example “explain your experience of driving different makes of car” The form is sent to the research team by post before the group. |
Outside the group the respondent is more likely to write spontaneously. At the group photocopies of these forms can be given to respondents as a trigger to discuss their experiences. The questionnaire should state “Please use your own handwriting as this may be analysed by our researchers” |
A graphologist can create a full personality portrait which allows the moderator to move the group forward very quickly and to probe further than would otherwise have been possible. |
|
Letter task |
Write a letter to the manager of your regular supermarket with compliments, comments or complaints. All letters passed to the group moderator. |
The paper should be unlined. A postcard can be used but a full size letter is preferable. A selection of pens are offered (selection of instrument is important). The task should be when the group is settled, near the start. |
The moderator uses the content to guide discussion but has an instant understanding of the personalities to guide discussion. |
|
Shopping-list task |
Write a shopping list of brand names for soft drinks with a few words of comment about each |
No time limit is given; the task will end when the last person has completed the task. These show “spontaneous awareness”, so a second phase can be to read a brand list and ask respondents to add ones they missed and do not particularly like. |
The choice of names, the way they are written and their position will suggest the degree of favourability. “Emotive” words often differ from other (size, pressure etc.) Respondent personality will be evident and this information can be used in probing. |
The key questions for the market researcher are related to validity and reliability. Does graphology really describe personality and if the analysis was repeated (by the same graphologist, or another one), does it yield the same results? The simple answer is that research to date has proved inconclusive, some studies have offered support, and others have apparently discredited the subject.
The definition of personality is the first problem area. In the Penguin Dictionary of Psychology (1985) Arthur Reber debated personality definition heavily, citing C W Allport (1927) who “culled nearly 50 definitions from the literature”. Personality inventories circumvent the problem somewhat since respondents themselves decide which items apply to their situation, and the researcher amalgamates similar categories.
Let us take “ambition”. We could have a five point scale, where 1 = Not at all ambitious and 5 = Extremely ambitious. To decide if a person is ambitious we could ask that person, we could ask their next of kin, their employer, their subordinates, we could not ask questions, we could look at behaviour and decide if it shows ambition. With this simple example, it is clear that many different interpretations are possible – ambitious in love, work, in career, in the short term etc. Each of these methods has inherent errors, and on any scale there can be as many judgements as people. This is before even considering any correlation with graphological observations.
A 1992 book called The Write Stuff (Beyerstein) is highly critical of graphology and it contains a meta-analysis of over 200 graphology studies which, in spite of the sceptical tone of the book, concluded, “Yes, graphology is valid”. There is a clear dispute between graphology supporters and their critics. Supporters accuse the critics of using a suspect methodology, unrealistic situations, biased researchers, the “wrong” graphologists, and “isolated signs.” They also say that communication is a problem, down to the meaning of single words. They also say that more research is needed. Focus Groups are one of the most used "tools" for developing new products, government policy and management policy. Should they be dismissed as a true tool because studies don't support their validity? The same goes for job interviews and references. Many people think that graphology is worth investigating; the renowned psychologist Hans Eysenck even said that graphology could "be of outstanding importance to abnormal as well as to experimental psychology." He was involved with research in graphology until his death. (See Eysenck's involvement with graphology in Nyborg 1997).
Can a technique tested for validity and reliability in one context be applied to another? In other words can validity and reliability in human resource management be directly transferred to market behaviour applications? Is it necessary to validate graphology in this way? If the graphological groups discriminate between different groups then they offer a suitable way of segmenting markets. Certainly it is useful if it gives a pathway to further questions, if it opens further lines of enquiry.
The theoretical and practical framework created by graphologists can be applied to qualitative marketing research. Although the utility of graphological methods has been suggested in the past, investigation has been rather limited. This means that the validity and reliability for the use of handwriting analysis as a research tool have not been established. Three approaches have been devised to be feasible and practical. The examples given are the pre-interview questionnaire, the letter task and the shopping-list task. The approach offers a promising additional tool for the researcher. It is hoped that this conceptual paper will be seen as a starting-point for numerous studies that can benefit from this unique tool.
Beyerstein Barry L., Beyerstein Dale F. (eds) (1992). The write stuff: Evaluations of graphology - the study of handwriting analysis. Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY.
Boddy C, (2005) Projective techniques in market research: valueless subjectivity or insightful reality? A look at the evidence for the usefulness, reliability and validity of projective techniques in market research. International Journal of Market Research (47)3 239-254
Bradley, Nigel (2005) Graphologues: Image Sociale et Statut Professionnel. La Graphologie 257: 52-54 Accessed on 26 June 2009 at http://www.wmin.ac.uk/marketingresearch/graphology/2158imagefr.htm
Bradley N (2007) Marketing Research: Tools and Techniques. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Broschk, Sonja (2004) Graphology and personality: a correlational analysis. MA Thesis etd-10042004-132105 Rand Afrikaans University, (now University of Johannesburg), South Africa. Accessed 11 Oct 2008 at
http://etd.rau.ac.za/theses/available/etd-10042004-132105/
Burnup Robert, H. (1987) Jury Selection by Graphoanalysis, American Legal Tech, USA
DePaulo, P.J. (1990) View from the front: an interview with Ernest Dichter, Ph.D., The Communicator (the Newsletter of the Society for Consumer Psychology), 25, pp. 4–9.
Donoghue, Sune (2000) Projective techniques in Consumer Research. Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences, Vol 28, 47-53
Durant, Henry (1969) Graphology as a Marketing Aid. Journal of Marketing Research Vol VI Feb 108
Frank L. K. (1939). Projective Methods for the Study of Personality. Journal of Psychology 8, 389-413.
Frank L. K. (1948). Projective Methods. CC Thomas, Springfield Ill.
Freud, S. (1894) The Neuro-psychoses of Defence, Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud ,edited by. J. Strachey, vol. 3, London.
Galton F. (1879) Psychometric Experiments. Brain A Journal of Neurology 2 149-162
Galton F. (1883) Inquiries into the human faculty and its development, Macmillan, London. Full text accessed at http://galton.org/books/human-faculty/index.html 26 June 2009
Gille-Maisani J-Ch (1992) Psychology of Handwriting. Scriptor Books, London
Gordon, W. & Langmaid, R. (1988) Qualitative Market Research. A Practitioner’s and Buyer’s Guide. Gower, Aldershot.
Green P.; Vithala R. Rao; Armani D. (1971) Graphology and Marketing Research: A Pilot Experiment in Validity and Later Judge Reliability. Journal of Marketing Vol.35 No.2 April pp.58-62
Lockowandt O. (1988) The problem of Validation of Graphological Judgements. pp.146-167 of Oxford 1997 The First British Symposium on Graphological Research edited by BRADLEY N., NRB Publishing, Chesterfield
Lindzey, G. (1961). Projective Techniques and Cross-Cultural Research. Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc USA
Lowe, Sheila (2000) Handwriting Analysis for the Attorney. 2pp accessed 28 June 2009 at http://www.sheilalowe.com/PDFs/OCLawyer2.pdf
McNeal, James U. (1967) Graphology: A New Marketing Research Technique. Journal of Marketing Research Nov 363-367
McNeil, Elton B; Blum, Gerald, S. (1952) Handwriting and Psychosexual Dimensions of Personality. Journal of Projective Techniques 16: 476-484.
Moody, Patricia (2009) A Bibliography of Handwriting Analysis. Unpublished, Margate, UK ongoing database.
Moore, Milton (2002) Identifying Jungian and MBTI Types through handwriting analysis. Self-published, Charlottesville, Virginia. Summary accessed 28 June 2009 at http://home.wmin.ac.uk/marketingresearch/2179Milt01.htm
Morcom, David R. (2002) The Landscape of the Mind. Colby-Sawyer Alumni Magazine. Spring-Summer 10-11 accessed 28 June 2009 at http://www.pentec.net/articles/landscape.pdf
Myers, James H (1969) More on Graphology and Marketing: An empirical validation of Marketing Graphology. Journal of Marketing Research Vol VI Feb 107-108
Nyborg H (1997) The Scientific Study of Human Nature: Tribute to Hans J Eysenck at Eighty. Pergamon/Elsevier, Oxford.
Poluha, P., Teulings, H., Brookshire, R. (1998) Handwriting and speech changes across the levodopa cycle in Parkinson's disease. Acta Psychologica, 100: 71-84
Poizner, Annette (2004) Graphology in Clinical Practice. Psychologica Newsletter for the Ontario Association of Consultants, Counsellors, Psychometrists and Psychotherapists 24(1) Spring
Rabin, A.I. (1981) Assessment with Projective Techniques. A concise introduction. Springer, New York
Reber A. S. (1985) The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology Penguin, London
Santiago, F. (1987) Handwriting analyzed to screen to jurors. August 13 Des Moines Register,pg1
Stern, Barbara B. (2004) The Importance of Being Ernest: The Importance of Being Ernest: Commemorating Dichter's Contribution to Advertising Research. Journal of Advertising Research, 44:2:165-169
Thiry B. (2006). Graphologie et projection. Psychomédia, 11, 34-37.
University
of Westminster - Last modified 18 Sept 2009.
Corrections to bradlen@wmin.ac.uk
hits since Sept 2009