Both authors contributed equally to this article. The authors would like to thank Nadav Yakobovitch for his assistance with the research process. The study was funded by the University of Haifa, Research Authority.
Comparing the handwriting behaviours of true and false writing with computerized handwriting measures
Article first published online: 28 AUG 2009
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Volume 24, Issue 8, pages 1115–1128, November 2010
How to Cite
Luria, G. and Rosenblum, S. (2010), Comparing the handwriting behaviours of true and false writing with computerized handwriting measures. Appl. Cognit. Psychol., 24: 1115–1128. doi: 10.1002/acp.1621
- Issue published online: 28 AUG 2009
- Article first published online: 28 AUG 2009
The goal of this study is to compare the handwriting behaviours of true and false writing. Based on the cognitive load and dis-automaticity known to be experienced while communicating a deceptive message, we hypothesized a difference (in temporal and spatial, pressure measures and peak velocities) between the handwriting of true vs. false messages. Thirty-four participants wrote true and false sentences on a digitizer, which is part of a new system called the Computerized Penmanship Evaluation Tool (ComPET). The ComPET evaluates brain-hand performance, as manifested through handwriting behaviour, and was found to be a valid measure for detecting the dis-automaticity that is indicative of certain diseases in the clinical field. Differences were found in mean pressure, spatial measures (mean stroke length and mean stroke height), but no differences were found in temporal measures and in the number of peak velocities. The use of ComPET in lie detection is discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.