Document Type : Original Research Paper


1 Department of Architecture, College of Architecture, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran

2 Department of Architecture, College of Architecture, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran.


Background and Objectives: Visual representations in the form of manuscripts are the most important tools for expressing ideas and generating concepts for designers and architecture students. Its wide application is always considered by designers due to the simplicity of tools and speed of expression. Examining the types and methods of drawing design by students show that each uses a unique method and structure in drawing. An analysis of the concepts underlying the manuscript and identifying the possible relationship between graphic expression and personality type is very similar to research on graphology and the relationship between personality and handwriting. graphology is examined in psychology and personality analysis and means the analysis of physical features and handwriting patterns representing the author's personality. Conceptual sketch is the first visual representation of the mental ideas in the process of representation and interpretation embedded on paper, and similar to approaches of line psychology, it reflects many of the mental attributes of the designers and guidance for architecture design professors to understand the students' ability. The research problem is to identify the hidden concepts of conceptual sketch and how different personalities function in problem-solving.
Methods: An exploratory descriptive study with an exploratory approach that with direct observation of architectural design and personality test seeks to find out the relationship between the qualities of drawing with personality type.
Findings: The sample of the results of the personality and design test shows that perceptual and intuitive personalities have a broader approach to problem-solving ideas and are more skilled in open issues, but they are faced with defective details and lacking a fixed idea.  In contrast, logical and judgmental personalities are more powerful in closed issues. They face flaws in detail and fail to come up with a well-established idea, and rational and judgmental personalities are more capable in closed issues.
Conclusion: The results show that extroverted personalities have a general approach to the problem, while introverts do not pay attention to the essence of the problem and the real world, with mental ideas, especially in solving open problems by gathering a lot of information and drowning in an idea. Isolation and anxiety in the type of drawing indicate their lack of self-confidence. In intuitive and sensory personality, the way of receiving and interpreting the problem of designing and transmitting it becomes more visible. Attention to narrative and narrative aspects makes intuitions more successful in analyzing multidimensional problems; Therefore, they are more successful in solving open problems by creating various ideas, and in contrast, they are less careful in paying attention to details, especially in closed problems
By primary interpretation of these sketches, professors can detect and correct these issues. Knowing students’ capabilities with respect to their varied personalities facilitates their guidance in the right time فخ strengthen their design ability and take the right path of productivity and fixed ideas.


Main Subjects

©2020 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, as long as the original authors and source are cited. No permission is required from the authors or the publishers. 

[1] Below PA. Longman dictionary of psychology and psychiatry. United Kingdom:  Longman Group; 1984.
[2] Nevo B. Scientific aspects of graphology: A handbook Springfield. IL: Thomas; 1986.
[3] Maheshwari A, Shah K. Offline handwriting recognition with emphasis on character recognition: A comprehensive survey; International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology. 2018; 3(1): 322-327.
[4] Broadbent G. Design in architecture: architecture and the human sciences. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1973.
[5] Cross N. Natural intelligence in design. Design studies. 1999; 20(1):25-39.
[6] Thacker J. Educating architects edited by Martin Pearce and Maggie Toy (Book Review). RSA Journal. 1995; 143(5461): 85.
[7] Gille-Maisani JC, Vels A. Psicología de la escritura. Spain: Herder; 1991.
[8] Driver RW, Buckley MR, Frink DD. Should we write off graphology? International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 1996; 4(2):78-86.
[9] Furnham A, Gunter B. Graphology and personality: Another failure to validate graphological analysis. Personality and Individual Differences. 1987; 8(3):433-5.
[10] Gawda B. The computational analyses of handwriting in individuals with psychopathic personality disorder. PloS one. 2019; 14(12): e0225182-.
[11] Baldi C. Trattato come da una lettera missiva si conoscano la natura, e qualita dello scrittore. Vaschieri; 1983.
[12] Hartley J. Sex differences in handwriting: A comment on Spear. British Educational Research Journal. 1991; 17(2):141-5.
[13] Lockowandte O. Lockowandte, Oskar present status of the investigation of handwriting psychology as a diagnostic method. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology. 1976; 6: 4-5.
[14] King RN, Koehler DJ. Illusory correlations in graphological inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2000; 6(4):336.
[15]James B. Graphology is serious business in France: You are what you write? New York Times. 2010.
[16] Goodwin CJ, Goodwin KA. Research in psychology methods and design. US: John Wiley & Sons; 2016.
[17] Schäfer A. Graphology in German psychiatry (1870–1930). History of psychiatry. 201627(3):307-19.
[18] Champa HN, AnandaKumar KR. Artificial neural network for human behavior prediction through handwriting analysis. International Journal of Computer Applications. 2010; 2(2):36-41.
[19] Djamal EC, Darmawati R, Ramdlan SN. Application image processing to predict personality based on structure of handwriting and signature. In proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Computer, Control, Informatics and Its Applications (IC3INA). Jakarta: IEEE; 19-20 Nov 2013; 2013 p. 163-168.
[20] Ramya S, Shama K. Comparison of SVM Kernel effect on online handwriting recognition: A case study with Kannada script. In Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Computer and Communication Technologies, IC3T 2016, Data Engineering and Intelligent Computing. Singapore: Springer. 2017; pp. 75-82.
[21] Poizner A. Clinical graphology: An interpretive manual for mental health practitioners. Charles C Thomas Publisher; 2012.
[22] Mendes FF, Mendes E, Salleh N. The Relationship between personality and decision-making: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology. 2019. 
[23] Marić A. Comparison of personality type and their relationship with project success.. 5th International Scientific Conference LEAN Spring Summit2019 Jan 1.
[24] Popoola GA, Graves CA. Artificial Intelligence architecture inspired by personality theory. In proceedings of 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Signal Processing and Information Technology (ISSPIT) 2018 Dec 6. IEEE; 2018. p 041-045. 
[25] Kacker R, Maringanti HB. Personality analysis through handwriting. GSTF Journal on Computing (JoC). 2012;2.
[26] Mallgrave HF. The architect's brain: Neuroscience, creativity, and architecture. US: John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
[27] Nadimi H. AS. [Translation of How Designers Think–The Design Process Demystified]. Lawson B (Author). Tehran: Shahid Beheshti Press; 2005.  Persian.
[28] Fraser I, Henmi R. Envisioning architecture: an analysis of drawing. US: John Wiley & Sons; 1993.
[29] Nadimi H. AS. [Translation of What designers know]. Lawson B (Author). Tehran: Shahid Beheshti Press; 2004.  Persian.
[30] Herbert G, Donchin M. The collaborators: interactions in the architectural design process. UK: Routledge; 2016.
[31] Furnham A, Treglown L. High potential personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences. 2018; 128: 81-7.
[32] Kaufman AS. Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues. US: Guilford Publications; 2018.
[33] Jung CG. Psychological types (HG Baynes, Trans.). London: Kegan Paul. 1923.
[34] Myers IB, Myers PB. Gifts differing: Understanding personality type. Nicholas Brealey; 2010.
[35] Huber D, Kaufmann H, Steinmann M. The missing link: The innovation gap. In Bridging the Innovation Gap. Springer, Cham; 2017.p. 21-41.