Is there an actual science to signature matching?

[Stevicus]

I was browsing through the news feed this evening and came across this latest gem from my state's wonderful legislature: Republicans in Arizona House advance 2 election bills - KTAR.com

The key point is made right at the beginning of the article:

PHOENIX (AP) — Arizona House Republicans on Monday advanced a measure requiring election officials to give prosecutors records of mail ballots that get rejected because the signature doesn’t match the one on file.

Republicans said the measure would help find potential criminals trying to illegally cast ballots. But Democrats said there’s no evidence of widespread fraud, and the measure would promote the myth that the 2020 election was marred by illegal votes.

They're sending records of mail ballots to prosecutors if the signature doesn't match the one on file.

I've been familiar with this process much of my life, where people want to check signatures and see if they match. But is it the kind of thing where someone just eyeballs it and says it looks good, or is there an actual science that would be considered reliable?

Democrats said the vast majority of signature mismatches are innocuous, and the bill would lead to the intimidation of voters questioned by criminal investigators. They said it would have an especially big impact on older voters, those with health conditions or disabilities that limit their motor skills, and younger voters who haven’t yet solidified their signature.

So, it would appear that it's not reliable and could affect older voters, people with health conditions or disabilities that limit their motor skills, and younger voters who haven't yet solidified their signature. Are they going to go around accusing people of forging their own signature?

I sure I hope they don't look at my attempts to sign my name with my finger on a screen. I do much better with pen and paper.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's more rubbish considered legit and widely accepted. To great detriments.

 

[epronovost]

I've been familiar with this process much of my life, where people want to check signatures and see if they match. But is it the kind of thing where someone just eyeballs it and says it looks good, or is there an actual science that would be considered reliable?

Graphology, that is the "forensic science" of matching's people writing or trying to parse information about the writer's through the esthetic of their writings is generally considered pseudoscience or at best a dubious, highly subjective practice. Though, it has a long history of being used and accepted as evidence in court of Law despite its unreliability and often completely bunk analysis. Due to its consistent failures, it has lost a lot of usage and adherents. No matching signature isn't a good method to assess of someone is trying to fraud. You are just as likely to have false positive as you are to get fooled by a forgery. It's largely a waste of time.

 

[Suave]

I was browsing through the news feed this evening and came across this latest gem from my state's wonderful legislature: Republicans in Arizona House advance 2 election bills - KTAR.com

The key point is made right at the beginning of the article:



They're sending records of mail ballots to prosecutors if the signature doesn't match the one on file.

I've been familiar with this process much of my life, where people want to check signatures and see if they match. But is it the kind of thing where someone just eyeballs it and says it looks good, or is there an actual science that would be considered reliable?



So, it would appear that it's not reliable and could affect older voters, people with health conditions or disabilities that limit their motor skills, and younger voters who haven't yet solidified their signature. Are they going to go around accusing people of forging their own signature?

I sure I hope they don't look at my attempts to sign my name with my finger on a screen. I do much better with pen and paper.

"The process of professional, forensic handwriting analysis is all about thoroughness. An analyst will use a magnifying glass and sometimes even a microscope in the comparison process. An analyst is looking for a wide array of individual traits:

• Letter form - This includes curves, slants, the proportional size of letters (relationship between size of short and tall letters and between the height and width of a single letter), the slope of writing and the use and appearance of connecting lines (links) between letters. It's worth noting that a person may form a letter differently depending on where the letter falls in a word - beginning, middle or end. So an analyst will try to find examples of each letter in each placement.
• Line form - This includes how smooth and dark the lines are, which indicates how much pressure the writer applies while writing and the speed of the writing.
• Formatting - This includes the spacing between letters, the spacing between words, the placement of words on a line and the margins a writer leaves empty on a page. It also considers spacing between lines -- in other words, do strokes from words on one line intersect with strokes in words on the line below and above it?"

How Handwriting Analysis Works

 

[Valjean]

My signature looks nothing like my signature of 50 years ago, which looks different from my signature of of 25 years ago, and my current signature is different still.
Moreover, the signature I used at work was different from the one I used at my bank. I have multiple "official" signatures.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

My signature looks nothing like my signature of 50 years ago, which looks different from my signature of of 25 years ago, and my current signature is different still.
Moreover, the signature I used at work was different from the one I used at my bank. I have multiple "official" signatures.

Mine tends to vary based on my mood. Low mood and not caring tends to make it look more stick like, scratched in, rigid doctor handwriting. But the better my mood the more bubbly and legible.
Also, the amount of times I have to sign also changes it, with the more I have to sign bringing on more of scratched in scrawl of a scribble.

 

[Heyo]

I was browsing through the news feed this evening and came across this latest gem from my state's wonderful legislature: Republicans in Arizona House advance 2 election bills - KTAR.com

The key point is made right at the beginning of the article:



They're sending records of mail ballots to prosecutors if the signature doesn't match the one on file.

I've been familiar with this process much of my life, where people want to check signatures and see if they match. But is it the kind of thing where someone just eyeballs it and says it looks good, or is there an actual science that would be considered reliable?



So, it would appear that it's not reliable and could affect older voters, people with health conditions or disabilities that limit their motor skills, and younger voters who haven't yet solidified their signature. Are they going to go around accusing people of forging their own signature?

I sure I hope they don't look at my attempts to sign my name with my finger on a screen. I do much better with pen and paper.

I'd be for the bill if I lived in Arizona. I'd want to know if my ballot got rejected and I'd want to know how many ballots get rejected, where and by whom. I'd want this to be investigated. Rejecting ballots by signature mismatch may be the biggest voter fraud (voters getting frauded) there is.

 

[fantome profane]

"The process of professional, forensic handwriting analysis is all about thoroughness. An analyst will use a magnifying glass and sometimes even a microscope in the comparison process. An analyst is looking for a wide array of individual traits:

• Letter form - This includes curves, slants, the proportional size of letters (relationship between size of short and tall letters and between the height and width of a single letter), the slope of writing and the use and appearance of connecting lines (links) between letters. It's worth noting that a person may form a letter differently depending on where the letter falls in a word - beginning, middle or end. So an analyst will try to find examples of each letter in each placement.
• Line form - This includes how smooth and dark the lines are, which indicates how much pressure the writer applies while writing and the speed of the writing.
• Formatting - This includes the spacing between letters, the spacing between words, the placement of words on a line and the margins a writer leaves empty on a page. It also considers spacing between lines -- in other words, do strokes from words on one line intersect with strokes in words on the line below and above it?"

How Handwriting Analysis Works

Using a process like that, I wonder how long it would take to check 158 million signatures.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Signature check is not without substance. Even if someones signatures seem different, the pressures , letter formation, etc. will tell a tale. I will go with @Suave.

 

[Altfish]

Signature check is not without substance. Even if someones signatures seem different, the pressures , letter formation, etc. will tell a tale. I will go with @Suave.

This.
It is a very good guide when used by experienced people ie Not by Cyber Ninja.

 

[ChristineM]

My signature changes every time i sign something. It was a major bind when writing a cheque for example. It got to the stage of me phoning the bank if i issued a check, gave them the details to be accepted.

 

[Suave]

My signature changes every time i sign something. It was a major bind when writing a cheque for example. It got to the stage of me phoning the bank if i issued a check, gave them the details to be accepted.

Your signature may appear to differ, but your pressure points, curves, slants, and spacing are somewhat consistent hallmarks of your unique handwriting style. Right?

 

[ChristineM]

Your signature may appear to differ, but your pressure points, curves, slants, and spacing are somewhat consistent hallmarks of your unique handwriting style. Right?

Usually but my writing is not usual. I never learned to write until i was in my teens and even then it was not formal but self taught. I usually write individual letters book style. Joined up writing is an anathema to me. So a signature is no more than a best shot at best.

 

[Suave]

Mine tends to vary based on my mood. Low mood and not caring tends to make it look more stick like, scratched in, rigid doctor handwriting. But the better my mood the more bubbly and legible.
Also, the amount of times I have to sign also changes it, with the more I have to sign bringing on more of scratched in scrawl of a scribble.

I suspect your handwriting has some consistent traits, i.e.- pressure points,, curves, slants, and spatiality. Right?

 

[Revoltingest]

Easy to fake.
Easy to get wrong.
Ever see graphology used in court?
It's little better than phrenology.

 

[Estro Felino]

Graphology, that is the "forensic science" of matching's people writing or trying to parse information about the writer's through the esthetic of their writings is generally considered pseudoscience or at best a dubious, highly subjective practice. Though, it has a long history of being used and accepted as evidence in court of Law despite its unreliability and often completely bunk analysis. Due to its consistent failures, it has lost a lot of usage and adherents. No matching signature isn't a good method to assess of someone is trying to fraud. You are just as likely to have false positive as you are to get fooled by a forgery. It's largely a waste of time.

It is considered juridically reliable. In court.
Otherwise it would be easy to falsify testaments and any written act having juridical value.

 

[jonathan180iq]

$20 says that of the thousands of "inconsistent" signatures sent off by these "auditors", maybe .05% come back as being actually odd... which is what happens with every single election audit ever.

I'm a poll manger in Georgia. For every umpteen thousand votes we process, maybe 1 or 2 are funny. And of those, it's usually simply a voter card that's filled out incorrectly, or a poll worker assigned the wrong voter to a card, or a person who cast a ballot when they were living died before the ballots were counted, or a memory card was left sitting in a machine in some precinct somewhere and voted had to be added in later, etc...

A bit off topic, I know. But if we weren't so obsessed with telecasting immediate results the night of an election, our first counts would be more accurate and the process would feel among the people as secure as it actually is.

 

[Stevicus]

Signature check is not without substance. Even if someones signatures seem different, the pressures , letter formation, etc. will tell a tale. I will go with @Suave.

True, although an experienced forger could imitate that and come up with a reasonable facsimile, putting the entire process into doubt.

 

[metis]

Republicans in Arizona House advance 2 election bills - KTAR.com

It's the Pub way of having a solution in search of a problem, and it so terribly an issue that we have only one party who actually endorses democracy, and this isn't hyperbole on my part.

 

[Aupmanyav]

True, although an experienced forger could imitate that and come up with a reasonable facsimile, putting the entire process into doubt.

I don't know if a forger can be that proficient. Those who get fooled are not Forensic experts, like the bank people in India, perhaps sometimes intentionally. But they have insurance cover.