Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Melo,Ana Patrícia Carvalho de
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Bezerra,Byron Leite Dantas, Lopes Júnior,Celso Antônio Marcionilo, Lima,Fernanda Gabrielle Andrade, Lucena,Luciana Vaz de Oliveira, Stodolni,Murilo Campanhol, Meneses,Denise Costa, Advíncula,Karina Paes
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista CEFAC (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462021000500506
Resumo: ABSTRACT Purpose: to analyze the criteria most used by experts in the handwriting analysis report. Methods: a descriptive, quantitative, inferential, and cross-sectional study, with statistical analysis of the results obtained with a form administered to the experts. The statistical calculations were made with R language, version 4.0.1, with statistical significance set at 5%. Results: the absolute frequency analysis indicated a greater occurrence of the use of initial and final pen strokes and handwriting progress, with a relative frequency above 70%. A detailed evaluation with univariate analysis showed that these criteria are not relevant to correct conclusions in the expert analysis report. It also pointed out that morphology is a relevant criterion to infer whether an evaluation is correct. The data showed that initial pen stroke, inclination, dynamism, and evolution, when observed in terms of multivariate modeling, were not significant, indicating that subjectivity is essential for the experts to make correct analyses. Conclusion: the most reported expert handwriting analysis criteria in relation to the experts’ correct analyses were not statistically relevant for the development of the analysis reports.
id CEFAC-1_5acab6ad08e0acb6e70940cb959b4078
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1516-18462021000500506
network_acronym_str CEFAC-1
network_name_str Revista CEFAC (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signaturesExpert TestimonyHandwritingSpeech, Language and Hearing SciencesABSTRACT Purpose: to analyze the criteria most used by experts in the handwriting analysis report. Methods: a descriptive, quantitative, inferential, and cross-sectional study, with statistical analysis of the results obtained with a form administered to the experts. The statistical calculations were made with R language, version 4.0.1, with statistical significance set at 5%. Results: the absolute frequency analysis indicated a greater occurrence of the use of initial and final pen strokes and handwriting progress, with a relative frequency above 70%. A detailed evaluation with univariate analysis showed that these criteria are not relevant to correct conclusions in the expert analysis report. It also pointed out that morphology is a relevant criterion to infer whether an evaluation is correct. The data showed that initial pen stroke, inclination, dynamism, and evolution, when observed in terms of multivariate modeling, were not significant, indicating that subjectivity is essential for the experts to make correct analyses. Conclusion: the most reported expert handwriting analysis criteria in relation to the experts’ correct analyses were not statistically relevant for the development of the analysis reports.ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial2021-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462021000500506Revista CEFAC v.23 n.5 2021reponame:Revista CEFAC (Online)instname:Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)instacron:CEFAC10.1590/1982-0216/20212351721info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMelo,Ana Patrícia Carvalho deBezerra,Byron Leite DantasLopes Júnior,Celso Antônio MarcioniloLima,Fernanda Gabrielle AndradeLucena,Luciana Vaz de OliveiraStodolni,Murilo CampanholMeneses,Denise CostaAdvíncula,Karina Paeseng2021-11-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-18462021000500506Revistahttp://www.revistacefac.com.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistacefac@cefac.br1982-02161516-1846opendoar:2021-11-09T00:00Revista CEFAC (Online) - Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
title Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
spellingShingle Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
Melo,Ana Patrícia Carvalho de
Expert Testimony
Handwriting
Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences
title_short Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
title_full Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
title_fullStr Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
title_sort Analysis of the main criteria used in expert handwriting analysis of signatures
author Melo,Ana Patrícia Carvalho de
author_facet Melo,Ana Patrícia Carvalho de
Bezerra,Byron Leite Dantas
Lopes Júnior,Celso Antônio Marcionilo
Lima,Fernanda Gabrielle Andrade
Lucena,Luciana Vaz de Oliveira
Stodolni,Murilo Campanhol
Meneses,Denise Costa
Advíncula,Karina Paes
author_role author
author2 Bezerra,Byron Leite Dantas
Lopes Júnior,Celso Antônio Marcionilo
Lima,Fernanda Gabrielle Andrade
Lucena,Luciana Vaz de Oliveira
Stodolni,Murilo Campanhol
Meneses,Denise Costa
Advíncula,Karina Paes
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Melo,Ana Patrícia Carvalho de
Bezerra,Byron Leite Dantas
Lopes Júnior,Celso Antônio Marcionilo
Lima,Fernanda Gabrielle Andrade
Lucena,Luciana Vaz de Oliveira
Stodolni,Murilo Campanhol
Meneses,Denise Costa
Advíncula,Karina Paes
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Expert Testimony
Handwriting
Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences
topic Expert Testimony
Handwriting
Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences
description ABSTRACT Purpose: to analyze the criteria most used by experts in the handwriting analysis report. Methods: a descriptive, quantitative, inferential, and cross-sectional study, with statistical analysis of the results obtained with a form administered to the experts. The statistical calculations were made with R language, version 4.0.1, with statistical significance set at 5%. Results: the absolute frequency analysis indicated a greater occurrence of the use of initial and final pen strokes and handwriting progress, with a relative frequency above 70%. A detailed evaluation with univariate analysis showed that these criteria are not relevant to correct conclusions in the expert analysis report. It also pointed out that morphology is a relevant criterion to infer whether an evaluation is correct. The data showed that initial pen stroke, inclination, dynamism, and evolution, when observed in terms of multivariate modeling, were not significant, indicating that subjectivity is essential for the experts to make correct analyses. Conclusion: the most reported expert handwriting analysis criteria in relation to the experts’ correct analyses were not statistically relevant for the development of the analysis reports.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462021000500506
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462021000500506
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1982-0216/20212351721
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial
publisher.none.fl_str_mv ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista CEFAC v.23 n.5 2021
reponame:Revista CEFAC (Online)
instname:Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)
instacron:CEFAC
instname_str Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)
instacron_str CEFAC
institution CEFAC
reponame_str Revista CEFAC (Online)
collection Revista CEFAC (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista CEFAC (Online) - Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistacefac@cefac.br
_version_ 1754122582981869568