Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1988-10
On the Validity of Graphoanalysis: A Rebuttal of Vestewig and Moss' Rejoinder to Crumbaugh's Reply to “Validity and Student Acceptance of a Graphoanalytic Approach to Personality”
Vestewig and Moss, in attacking the validity of graphology, have attacked the present writer's statistical interpretations, which are herein defended. These authors have also attacked this writer's experimental conceptualizations, which are also defended. They have further argued against the presence of a built-in handicap of Graphoanalysts in the Vestewig, et al. experiment, interpreted as against graphology, which this writer shows to be an inadequate argument.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CrumbaughJ. C.A reply to “Validity and student acceptance of a graphoanalytic approach to personality” by Vestewig, Santee and Moss. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1977, 41, 351–352.
2.
JensenJ.Invalid correlation. Human Behavior, 1978, 7(2). [Quoted in Journal of Graphoanalysis, 1978 (April), 13.]
3.
VestewigR. E.MossM. K.On the validity of Graphoanalysis: A rejoinder to Crumbaugh's reply. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1977, 41, 589–590.
4.
VestewigR. E.SanteeA. H.MossM. K.Validity and student acceptance of a Graphoanalytic approach to personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1976, 40, 592–598.
