‘Sciencey’ Myths: Why Looks Can Be Deceiving

     Graphology is the pseudoscientific idea that handwriting can indicate personality traits. It may seem convincing and scientific, but the reality is that graphology fails when examined scientifically.

     Graphology has been applied in real-life scenarios, including hiring processes, even though there is strong evidence that it has no real link to job performance or personality. This serves as a perfect illustration of what Daniel Kahneman might refer to as a System 1 error: our quick, intuitive minds enjoy simple stories and patterns, even when they lack factual support.

    Similar to palm reading and astrology, graphology depends on vague generalizations (for example: "You have a strong desire for others to like you, but you also value your independence") These claims sound precise, but they could apply to nearly anyone. Additionally, because we are naturally inclined towards confirmation bias, we often only recognize the aspects that seem accurate. This subject connects directly to our conversations about critical thinking, heuristics, and pseudoscience. We explored cold reading, the halo effect, and how individuals can be easily misled when something appears scientific but lacks evidence. Graphology, like many pseudoscientific methods, frequently employs technical-sounding terminology, charts, and data to create an illusion of credibility. By recognizing cognitive biases such as confirmation bias and associative coherence, we can begin to see through these deceptions whether it’s a psychic reading, a horoscope, or an analysis of handwriting.