Well, this is only the same as saying that extroverts generally like things "bigger and better." Which might overall be true, but for a specific individual, I'm not sure it's even helpful to say, "Susie has 'large' handwriting, she must be an extrovert." And what about medium handwriting? I think we can all eyeball text and agree on what is small vs large... but there's a lot in the middle that wouldn't be agreed up as to which it was normal vs large/smalll.The size of a person's handwriting indicates the degree of extraversion. The bigger someone writes, the more likely he is an Extravert. With this in mind, you'll notice that actors and actresses tend to have large handwriting whereas the handwriting of scientists and writers, who are more often Introverts, tends to be small.
Whatever. That sounds like completely fluffwash to me. I'd be more apt to say someone with swirls and flourishes in their writing is more apt to be N and/or F, but that's still not useful in drawing hard and fast rules, such as, "Jimmy is a Sensor, therefore his writing will middle/lower zone focused." Upbringing, training, individual circumstances, personal needs all infiltrate handwriting.The emphasis on the lower and middle zones indicates a greater likelihood that a person is a Sensor, while upper zone development means that a person is probably an iNtuitor. This makes sense because the middle and lower zones represent aspects of one's daily life and his physical drives; the upper zone represents intellect, thought, and imagination, qualities often associated with iNtuitors.
Probably true as a generality, but again, not the greatest in terms of determining by handwriting what someone actually is unless the writing is extreme.Lack of loopiness and angularity is usually found in Thinkers, who look at the facts and essence of an experience; Thinkers are more interested in what happened than who was involved. Feelers, who are more people oriented and emphasize the emotional impact of an experience, have loopier and rounder writing.
This one, maybe moreso. Judgers typically like things precise, and you typically also see this in their art style (not just for handwriting). Perceivers have a looser, more generalized approach to art, more rough; there is no need to create false closure, and ambiguity is permitted. (As far as art styles go, you'll see pastiche more among P's, maybe SFPs; you'll see reverb and resonance and metaphor and suggestive images in N art; SJs tend to veer toward more realistic, linear drawing, or replication of existing things; etc.)The judger/perceiver trait is the trickiest one to pinpoint in handwriting. In general, Judgers often have controlled writing with letters that stop abruptly, while Perceivers tend to have somewhat looser writing. "
I think this generalization is probably more true than some of the others the author made, but again, if a P wanted to create perfect and consistent handwriting, he or she could, whereas a J who just doesn't give a crap can end up looking far looser.
All in all, I think these ideas are interesting but not very useful in determining what someone's type is.