Case Study: Writings of a person with dissociative identity disorder -- A longitudinal and a kinematic study.

Full text

CASE STUDY / RESEARCH
WnruxGS oF A pERSoN wrrH DrssocrATrvE forNrrry DrsonnER - A
LoNcrruDINAL AND ,q, KINnIVIATIC Sruny
Bonnie L. Schwidl and Hans-Leo Teulings2
Abstract: Forensic Document Examiners (FDEs) may confront questioned
handwritings of persons diagnosed with a Dissociative Identity Disorder
(DID), formerly known as a multiple personality disorder. While there is
scientific research on DID, most of the literature related to handwriting in
DID is anecdotal. Many articles refer to modifications of handwriting for
each personality, but no evidence has been found to indicate that handwriting
was analyzed using a kinematic approach to collect dynamic data from the
writing. This paper will be the first known study to compare the dffirent
personalities of a participant diagnosed with DID by recording pen movements
and establishing dynamic variables using a Wacom@i pen tablet and the
MovAlyzeR@ii soflware,iii an objective standard .for measuring writing .for
scientific research in handwriting. The results of the kinematic analysis are
then compared to a conventional analysis. Initial results show both static
and kinematic dffirences between the personalities. Additionally, this study
documents the stability of the personalities oyer time, from 1993 to 2011.
Reference: BonnieL.SchwidandHans-LeoTeulings(2013).CaseStudy:WritingsofaPersonwithDissociative
Identity Disorder - a Longitudinal and a Kinematic Study. J. Forensic Document Examination,
YoL23, pp. 41-61.
Keywords: Dissociative Identity Disorder, DlD, Multiple personalities, Multiple personality disorder,
Handwriting movement recording and analysis
1. lntroduction
Persons who have Dissociative Identity
Disorder (DID), formerly known as multiple
personality disorder, may become involved
in handwriting disputes. DID can develop
in persons who suffer early severe abuse,
1. Diplomate, Board of Forensic Document Exarniners
1001 W. Glen Oaks Lane,#279
\{equon, WI53092, USA
En-rail : blschu,id@gmail.conr
3. Neuroscript
-li5 E. Carson Dnr e
Tempe. \Z :51:1. - S r^
frrrrrl:l:.:,.. --. - -.- -:,:r;.. r'tl
whereupon, they attempt to create alternate
personalities to handle the trauma (Lewis et
al., 1997). Occasionally, Forensic Document
Examiners (FDEs) will face questions whether
differences in handwriting are the result of
alternate personalities in DID diagnosed
persons or whether these differences result
from an attempt to disguise the writing. There
is currently very little in the research that will
answer the questions FDEs will confront in
these specialized cases. Most of the papers
refer to modification of each personality (Rost,
1992; Whitey,19991' Friesen, 1991; Lewis et al.,
1997).In 1992, Schwid and Goodwin presented
a poster session about Mary Reynolds, the first
person dia_rnosed u ith DID in the country in

42 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
the early 1800s to the Intemational Society
for the Study of Multiple Personality and
Dissociation. The presenters, including an FDE
and a psychiatrist specializing in Ms. Reynolds,
and three additional FDEs studied the writing of
Ms. Reynold's three altemate personalities. The
FDEs participating in the research were unable
to conclude that the same person wrote all
three samples of writings because of significant
differences among them.
A year later, the author was asked to examine
signatures of the current participant, James,
who was incarcerated for a crime unrelated to
the forensic case concerning forged checks.
The forensic examination in 1993 resulted in
an inconclusive opinion because of the poor
quality of the questioned materials, but the
author stayed in touch with James and visited
him in prison several times between 1993 and
1997. During an earlier visit, the FDE learned
that an altemate personality named George had
become interested in handwriting identification.
George's interest in handwriting identification
motivated him to provide handwriting samples
of his and the alternate personalities for this and
for later research.
In 2011, the authors decided to conduct
research using the MovAlyzeR@ software with
the Wacom@ tablet to compare the results of
examining handwriting from the static trace,
the conventional method used by FDEs, and by
using an objective method to record the dynamic
features of the writing. The authors wanted
to study more precisely whether there were
invariant handwriting characteristics among
the alternate personalities and whether there
were significant differences. The FDE author
collected the handwriting exemplars under
the direction of the co-author who developed
the kinematic method to record the dynamic
features in real time.
2. Participants
2.1 James
The core personality is James who was
born in Texas in 1950. Both his mother and
father were abusive. He was beaten for minor
infractions such as being scared at a movie or
getting his sports clothes dirty. Because of the
overwhelming abuse, and, like other people
with DID who suffer severe abuse, James
was able, on some level, to create alternative
personalities to handle threatening situations.
The alternate personalities began emerging
when he was three years old.
In 1986 James was diagnosed with DID.
James'case has been documented in publications
(Arneson, 1987; Kerley, 1994), court cases,
court records, medical records, presentations.
and videos showing how each personality was
manifested. There are three major personalities
named George, Ray, and Sergeant (Sgt.). Mike
Murphy. In addition, there are many minor
or fragments of personalities. James calls the
group of all of the personalities "The System."
During the writing sessions from 1993
through 1997, Iames, the core personality, was
meeting his attomey and the author, an FDE,
through George. James was actually 'sleeping'
according to George, but he was called out to
participate in the writing sessions. James rocked
back and forth, holding his head between his
hands because of a severe headache. His nose
and eyes ran profusely. He cried and was unable
to write a sentence, but was able to write his
signature. He signed his name each time in
the sessions and quickly went back 'oinside"
whereupon the symptoms of the runny nose,
watering eyes, and the headache stopped. James
is the only personality within the system with
this condition, and was not asked to participate
in the 2011 writing session.
2.2 George, Ray, and Sgt. Mike
Table I is a summary of characteristics of
George, Ray, and Sgt. Mike. When appearing
for the writing exercise, each personality
could be identified visually or orally and was
confirmed by asking the personality's name at
each session. Additional details per personality
are described next.
As mentioned in the introduction this
research began after a forensic examination

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 43
in 1993 by the author that involved the
participant, James, who was incarcerated for a
crime unrelated to the forensic case concerning
forged checks.
The handwriting samples were collected
from James' main personalities during several
Table 1. Characteristics ofthe three alternate personalities.
visits. Originally the different personalities
would come out in a fixed sequence with
George being first, then Ray, then Sgt. Mike.
A personality would lall into a self-hypnotic
state that appears as though he is asleep. Upon
awakening, the next personality would manifest
and reorient himself to the surroundings. In
2011 the personalities were able to switch
easily from one to the other. For example, when
asking a question of one personality, a different
personality may answer because he has more
information about the topic. The author learned
to recognize each personality visually and by
his demeanor. These writings by one individual
under different personalities form the basis for
the longitudinal study. Table 1 summarizes the
behavioral characteristics of George, Ray and
Sgt. Mike.
2.2.1 George
George emerged in 1987 while James
was in prison. George is pragmatic and was
created with knowledge and abilities that had
been garnered from previous experiences with
attomeys and the legal system. He and another
altemate personality, Ray, comprised the 'legal
defense team'to handle the legal matters relating
to their treatment. George did the research. Ray
acted as secretary.
2.2.2 Ray
Ray is anxious and avoids conflict by
"going away." He is sociable and friendly.
James developed a facial tic when very young
and complained frequently of 'brain aches.'
The tic was observed in Ray by the author at
the 2011 session. According to Coons (1988),
severe headaches and/or the twitching of facial
muscles often accompanies the switching from
one personality to another. Interestingly, in
1994 Pray reported that he weighed 195 lbs (88
kg) but that George is overweight at 260 lbs
(118 kg).
2.2.3 Sergeant Mike Murphy
Sergeant Mike Murphy was one of the first
personalities to be created when James was still
very young. Sgt Mike's role was to take beatings
because he would not cry. He decides whether
it is safe for James, himself, to appear. If not,
James remains asleep. Sgt. Mike is militaristic,
Name of Personality George Ray Set. Mike
Birth year. 1987 1954 t953
Age Same as James Remains about 30 One year older than
James
Msible characteristics. Confident, strong Social, nervous,
fidgety with large
smile
Carries himself as a
marine and appears
suspicious
Audible characteristics Deep with slight
southern accent Strong southern
accent Very deep, cryptic
content
Wears corrective lenses Yes No No
Diabetes Yes Yes No
Psychogenic seizures Not observed Yes Not observed
Allowed to drive a car Yes No Yes

2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination - 44
rigid, a man of few words, and when he does
speak, he uses military terms such as negative,
or affirmative. Sergeant Mike takes over in
troubling or threatening events. He typically
hand-prints while George and Ray write in
cursive.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1 Longitudinal Study
Samples were collected informally during
multiple sessions from 1993 through 1997 and
then in 2011. At each session, the personality
was identified by name and sight and asked
to provide a writing sample. Samples from
each personality were analyzed for evidence
of stability over time, attempted disguise and
differentiation of participant’s personalities.
One ballpoint pen was used for each session,
but the pen varied per session. The type of paper
varied per session with one or more sessions
using lined paper, and other sessions using
plain copy paper. The personalities were asked
to write a paragraph of his or her choosing so
the writing would be more natural than dictated
writing. James, the core personality, was only
able to write his name. Each writing session
lasted from 30 - 60 minutes.
For the switch from one personality
to the next, the present personality closed his
eyes and went into a self-hypnotic state that
resembles sleep. He remained very quiet, and
within about five seconds, the next personality
would appear as though he was waking up from
a deep sleep. Either he or the attorney identified
the personality that was present. In the author’s
experience, George always manifested first,
then Ray, and then Sgt. Mike, but George has
stated that the sequence was coincidental.
The other personalities came out as
requested by either the author or by the attorney
for the sessions up to and including the 1997
session. At the 2011 writing session, the various
personalities were able to switch from one to
the other easily. The term ‘switching’ is used
throughout the literature for transitioning from
one personality to another.
One right-handed, 60 year old male, James,
participated in the testing on January 9, 2011.
Although James could not participate himself,
the aforementioned alternate male personalities
with different ages and behaviors took part in
the test in the order of George, Ray, Sergeant
Mike.
Each of the three personalities was made
aware of the purpose of the experiment and
agreed to cooperate. George, the greeting
personality, was informed about the procedure.
He was seated at a table and provided with the
electronic pen. The author called out the different
personalities in the order of George, Ray, and
Sgt. Mike. The sequence of personalities as
they were “born” is not the same sequence of
those that were tested.
3.2 Sample Collection
The kinematic and longitudinal samples
were collected in 2011 using an electronic
tablet (Wacom® Intuos® Version 2 8x6 pen
tablet - XD68USB) and an electronic inking
pen (Wacom® Intuos® Version 2, XP-110).
The tablet was covered with a sheet of lined
paper about 6” x 8.5” or 15.2 cm x 21.6 cm).
The sheet was held in place by the participant
by using his left hand. The inking pen looked
and felt like a normal ballpoint pen. It had a
standard mini ballpoint ink refill similar to the
refills used in 4-color ballpoints.
The software recorded the horizontal and
vertical position of the pen tip on and off the
paper (while the pen is lifted up to 1 cm) and
the pen pressure on the tablet. Pen-tip position
and pressure were sampled at 100 Hz and a
resolution of 0.001 cm (corresponding to 2540
dpi). The accuracy of the raw samples had an
RMS error of less than 0.01 cm. There may be
small differences between ink trace and pen
tip movement because the ink deposit is not
always centrally under the ball of the ball point
pen tip because the pen tip position is measured
at the electromagnetic coil that is in the lower
part of the pen barrel. Therefore, changes in
pen tilt will affect the position measurement.
The writing was recorded and processed using

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 45
George Ray Set. Mike
George (1994),
Ray (1994),
Sgt. Mike (1993) .fl /& on ,,/' 4" n,Xc
Personal pronoun
I, by
George (1995)
Ray (1995),
Sgt. Mike (1997) r€ d*f* f ,e# a!fref
Personal pronoun
I, or name in 1996 t ,*^/-7 2, ,/) ,/
,/ //a^A- ,., C7Z-1-atzfa
g-&?*7t
ma
.fied
.or's
irst,
has
AS
rney
997
ious
re to
used
iom
mes,
011.
.self,
lities
rt in
reant
nade
and
:ting
Jure.
h the
erent
, and
)S AS
ce of
Table 3: Longitudinal Conventional Analysis 1993-1997 of the 3 personalities George, Ray, and Sgt. Mike. No changes were detected.
A1l images were scaled 300o2
3.2 Sample Collection for the Kinematic
Study
The kinematic and longitudinal samples
were collected in 2011 using an electronic
tablet (Wacom@ Intuos@ Version 2 8x6 pen
tablet - XD68USB) and an electronic inking
pen (Wacom@ Intuos@ Version 2, XP-l10).
The tablet was covered with a sheet of lined
paper about 6" x 8.5" or l5-2 cm x 21.6 cm).
The sheet was held in place by the participant
by using his left hand. The inking pen looked
and felt like a normal ballpoint pen. It had a
standard mini ballpoint ink refill similar to the
refills used in 4-color ballpoints.
The software recorded the horizontal and
vertical position of the pen tip on and off the
paper (while the pen is lifted up to 1 cm) and
the pen pressure on the tablet. Pen-tip position
and pressure were sampled at 100 Hz and a
resolution of 0.001 cm (corresponding to 2540
dpi). The accuracy of the raw samples had an
RMS error of less than 0.01 cm. There may be
small differences between ink trace and pen
tip movement because the ink deposit is not
always centrally under the ball of the ball point
pen tip because the pen tip position is measured
at the electromagnetic coil that is in the lower
part of the pen barrel. Therefore, changes in
pen tilt will affect the position measurement.
The writing was recorded and processed using
NeuroScript@ MovAlyzeR@ Version 6.1
software running on an Acer@ MS Windows@
laptop.
When the participant was writing, the
computer display showed the entire writing
tablet (Background color was white; Relative
luminance 100%). When the pen tip moved
across the tablet, the computer displayed the
trajectory of the pen tip as it touched the paper
as a blue line of medium thickness, (i.e., 2
pixels; Relative luminance 50%). The blue line
showed the individual pen-positions recorded as
red dots of 2 pixels in diameter and with relative
luminance 50%. While the pen was moving off
the paper and lifted up to I cm, a light gray line
was produced with relative luminance 88%.
3.3 Electronic Data Processing
Data processing of pen strokes involved
low-pass filtering to reduce the sample errors,
velocity estimation, segmenting, €.9., in
successive upward and downward strokes, and
feature extraction of each individual segment
(Teulings & Maarse, 1984). Direction, duration,
speed, fluency, and pen pressure were estimated
per segment size.
The pen-ink traces were optically scanned
at 600 dpi 24-bits RGB color using HP ScanJet
7400c and Adobe Photoshop and stored in PSD

46 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
/,7.u"-1-,,< * f/*1 Lrn I -- 6. */- 4-,*\,r- *-*- **1 */-
-/ 6,*.-A- 6rz-7- ,>a
Figure la: George's handwriting collected on Oct. 26,1994, on letter-size, lined paper using a ballpoint pen.
Figure lb: George, performing handwriting tasks on a sheet of
steno paper positioned on the tablet and writing with the tablet's
inking electronic pen in 201 L
file format. The PSD files were then opened in
Adobe Photoshop CS3 and converted into the
PNG format. These PNG files were then opened
using MS Paint, aligned, pasted into MS Word,
cropped and rescaled along both horizontal
and vertical axes identically to match the pen
movement recordings. Larger images were
"stretched" trll 50oA or 25Yo,thus downsampling
from 600 dpi to 300 dpi or 150 dpi.
3.4 Experimental Conditions and
Instructions
Table 2 lists the handwriting tasks (i.e.,
experimental conditions) from si mple (C ondition
1) to complex (Condition 6) that participants
were requested to perform. Each recording (i.e.,
trial) started when the pen touched the paper and
continued until the pen was lifted off the paper
for more than 2 seconds or after a recording
time of l0 seconds, whichever occurred first.
Each of these conditions were attempted three
times by each participant in a randomized block
order. Randomization reduces confounding
between condition and practice where one
condition always received more practice than
another condition. The entire test of 18 trials
(i.e., 6 conditions x 3 trials) took less than 10
minutes per personality.
4. Results
4.l Analysis of the Longitudinal Study
We compared participant handwritings
longitudinally from 1993 to2011. Samples were
chosen for similarity or difference of qontent
and/or writing features whenever possible.
George's writing remained consistent from 1993
through 2011. There is no evidence in George's
handwriting that he attempted to disguise his
writing, nor was there an evolution of writing
maturity during that time.

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 47
/aZ-^
('**1 &1 r'Y
-tt
I -. /
,l (--'l;''t, U
Figure 2a: Ray's handwriting collected on Oct. 26, 1994 on letter-size, lined paper using a ballpoint pen
Figure 2b: Ray performing handwriting tasks on a sheet of steno
paper positioned on the tablet and writing with the tablet's inking
electronic pen in 2011 (Page 1).
The writing pattern for Ray was consistent
from 1993 through 20ll- Ray's writing did not
exhibit maturation of the writing system, nor
evolution of writing over time. There was no
indication of an attempt to disguise his writing
by changing slant, letter formations, size or
fluency in Ray's handwriting in 1994, see
Figure 2a.ln Figure 2d, Ray attempted to copy
George's handwriting that was collected a short
time before on the same sheet of paper.
./
*-1 .f
# -1..e /q.J
Figure 2c: Ray performing handwriting tasks on a sheet of
steno paper positioned on the tablet and writing with the
tablet's inking electronic pen in 20 I I (Page 2).
Figure 2d: Ray trying to simulate George's writing of the
rvords rr.l name onOct.26, 1994,He wrote on the same page
as Figure 2 using a ballpoint pen.
I/
//C-z,Lffi.-
2 a^---
&/'/*^-
- lL.
tst
//-o
/9
,-7

48 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
f,
-* kv#s ** d'/. fl s&/ *{ {-
Figure 3a: Sgt Mike's handwriting collected in 1997 .
There are insufficient writing samples from
Sgt. Mike for longitudinal comparison because
his earlier specimens were hand- printed, and
writing for the test was unnatural for him.
There is no evidence of maturation or evolution
of writing over time (Figures 3a and 3b).
4. l. I Personality Dffirentiation
Natural variation is an important feature in
a handwriting analysis. George's writing over
time remained consistent throughout with some
variation of the personal pronoun l. The script
is very small and tightly controlled. It is barely
Figure 3b: Sgt Mike performing handwriting tasks on a sheet of steno
paper positioned on the tablet and writing with the tablet's inking
electronic pen in 201 1.
legible when taken out of context or to someone
unfamiliar with his style. The upper and lower
loops are mostly closed or nonexistent. There
are few extraneous strokes. The pressure onto
the paper visually appears to be moderately
heavy with highly diminished fluency. Because
of the small size and differences in leffer
formations, afid, in spite of the formations of
the personal pronoun I, George's writing can be
distinguished from Ray's.

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 49
1e
fe
to
,ly
SC
;er
of
be
Table 3 compares three samples from three
personalities over time. It demonstrates that
there were minimal changes over time and
some similarities among the handwritings but
that they are not sufficient to conclude that the
samples were written by the same person.
Figure 3b is an example of Sgt. Mike
performing handwriting tasks on a sheet of
steno paper positioned on the tablet and writing
with the tablet's inking electronic pen in 2011
Pictorially, the writing of George, Ray and
Sgt. Mike appear to be by different people
(See Table 4). George writes in a very small,
compact, controlled and nearly illegible script.
The upper and lower loops are tightly closed
and there is variable spacing between letters
with wide spacing between words. Ray writes
in a more expansive script with a conflict
between fluency and dysfluency. His writing in
2011 is much larger than earlier writing. The
loops are open with irregular formations for
circle letters. His writing is jerky and he has
difficulty adhering to the printed line. In early
writing Ray limited the upward extensions
to stay within the printed lines on the paper
while in the 2011 test, the upper and lower
extensions were expanded to twice the height
of the early writing. The cause of this anomaly
is unknown, but strong anxiety about the test
may have contributed to the increase in size and
dysfluency. Sgt Mike usually prints in small and
precise letters, mixing upper and lower case.
The loops are variable, and there is jerkiness in
the 20ll writing, perhaps due to inexperience
with cursive writing.
In 2008, Dr. Manoj Raghaven, a neurologist
at the Veteran's Administration Hospital in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, using MRI imaging,
diagnosed James as having psychogenic
seizures. Ray also exhibits this type of seizure
occasionally when he is present. The seizure
manifests as rolling his eyes up into his head,
stuttering, thrusting his tongue forward and
jerking his body. Dr. Meyers concluded
that the results of an electroencephalograrn
showed abnormal brain activity based on
an Electroencephalographic Report from
West Jefferson General Hospital in Marrero,
Louisiana, dated l113165. While they should
be noted, it is unknown whether these seizures
affect the writing. It also is unknown whether
the seizures in 1965 or 2008 were actually
experienced by James as himself or by George,
Ray or Sgt. Mike acting as James.
4.2 Kinematic Analysis Compared to
Conventional Analysis
When exemplars are recorded on paper
using a pen tablet with an inking electronic
pen, kinematic analysis can be performed (See
Figures 7b, 2b-2c, and 3b). The kinematic
analysis yields accurate information about pen
speed, movement sequence, pen movements
above the paper, and axial pen pressure. The
kinematic analysis shows several additional
intriguing similarities and differences between
the three alternate personalities that are not
revealed by the conventional analysis. We
will conduct t\\,'o types of kinematic analyses:
visual ization of a parti cular trial or exemplar and
statistical information u,hen trials or exemplars
are automatically processed, summarized, and
analyzed in terms of averages and standard
deviations across all exemplars available.
4.2.l. Kinematic Visualization of
Individual Trials
We illustrate only two particular trials or
exemplars in each altemate personality. One
trial is from Experimental Condition 1 (A
sequence ofcursive l-loops; See Figures 4a-c).
The other trial is from Experimental Condition 6
(The ri'ord Today; See Figures 5a-c). It appears
that the kinematic comparison reveals a unique
feature in each of the alternate personalities.
Figure 4a illustrates that George's
handu'riting had hesitations (i.e., velocity
reversals) in nearly all upstrokes (See Labels
1-10) but virtually not in the downstrokes.
The top panel shows the enlarged image
on paper based on the 600 dpi scan as in the
conventional analysis. The image includes rule
lines and overlapping, thick pen strokes. But

50 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
Jamest
Personality George Ray Sgt. Mike
Letter height Tiny :Large Normal
Slant Forward Forward, Upright
Letter height
and slant
differ. t{aruuat,
,.tttta,wad
'&/l
. // t
) I r,:r.{
/--LU4
,4 W
{-{
tjrLft}}$
/)ntirfu/t
Twisted
loops similar
Scale 300%
/t
fatu,U&4 *t f r,t,t"l
Scale 200%
Split toda1,
into two
words -!{ CI
Scale 300% 'l*
To J,4
fr&-)
Scale 200%
Table 4a.1: Side-by-side comparison of the handwritings by George, Ray, and Sgt. Mike. Samples are shown in real size unless a
scaling is listed. There are noticeable differences and similarities.
the conventional analysis does not show the
hesitations clearly. The second panel shows
the pen tablet recording using a 2540lpi tablet.
The tablet recording is smoothed to reduce
the random data noise and quantization noise,
enables us to achieve very high accuracies.
It is important that these recordings are free
of obscuring factors such as rule lines and
overlapping pen strokes. The third panel shows
the vertical position as a function of time.
This panel highlights the possibilities of the
kinematic analysis. Viewing from left to right,
the upward segments represent upward strokes.
The downward segments represent downward
strokes. The horizontal segments here and there
are the intervals where the pen stands still.
The kinematic analysis enables the automatic
segmentation into upward and downward
strokes. The color of the line expresses absolute
pen velocity. Where the pen is moving at high
velocity the line is given a dark blue color.
Where the pen is standing still, the line is given
a light pink color. Therefore, this panel clearly
shows the light pink segments of the movement
stops. These movement stops occur during most
upstrokes but not during many downstrokes.
The vertical velocity as a function of time is
shown in the bottom panel. The positive phases
are the upstrokes and the negative phases are the
downstrokes. The intervals where the pen stands
still are in this chart the zero velocity int<irvals.
They occur mainly during the upstrokes.
A stop or hesitation separates an upstroke
or a downstroke into two submovements.
Submovements are normally defined as a stop
after the highest velocity peak within a stroke

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 51
James'
Personality George Ray Sgt. Mike
Letter
heisht Tiny Large Normal
Slant Foru,ard Forward Uprieht
Misspelled
lonely as
loney by
George and
Ray only *.{r***..*
Scale 300%
Scale 250%
Similarly
shaped
letters r
and c in the
word nice Scale 300% Scale 150% Scale 300%
Different
continuous
letters o
Scale 300% Scale 300%
Table 4a.2'. Side-by-side comparison of the handwritings by George, Ray, and Sgt. Mike. Samples are shown in real size unless a
scaling is listed. There are noticeable differences and similarities.
(Teulings & Romero, 2003; Caligiuri et al.,
2010). Furthermore, hesitations in George's
upstrokes usually occurs before the highest
velocity peak, rather at the beginning of the
upstroke (See bottom panel). Therefore, the
standard submovement analysis would not
reveal this systematic difference.
Figure 4b illustrates that Ray's handwriting
had hesitations at the tops of the loops. (See
Labels I and 5.). The enlarged, scanned
image (top panel) does not clearly reveal this.
The second panel shows the tablet recording
colored by absolute pen velocity (dark blue
signifies high velocity and light pink signifles
lou' r'elocity). This panel shows hesitations as
pink se-ements on top of two loops. The third
panel shorvs the vertical position as a function
of time. A hesitation is now shown more clearly
t
tu/w\
,*4,
.f,F**V*C
ezw

52 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
Ray,2011Scanned lmage
:,I
Recorded Movement Colored by Absolute Velocity
12.0
E
.s)11.5
11.0
^ 10
g
tr
go
-10
W8
x(cm)
12.5
Etz.o
g
>tt.s
11.0
Time (s)
Figure 4b: Ray's cursive l-loops. (Top) Scanned image (300 dpi, PNG, scaling 200%). (2nd Panel) Recording
on a pen tablet. Line color signifies absolute pen velocity (Blue = high, light pink : low or zero). (Labels 1 - 2)
Movement stops as the tops of some loops. (3rd Panel) Vertical position y of the pen tip versus time. (Labels 1 -
5) These and additional movement stops can be discerned as horizontal segments at the tops ofthe up and down
strokes. (Bottom). Vertical velocity as a function of time. The movement stops at the tops of the loops are shown
as multiple zero crossings between the positive (i.e., upstroke) and the negative (i.e., downstroke) phases of the
vertical velocity
Vertical Position vs Time Colored by Absolute Velocity
1 /^2 .1
ff1/U1]m
'[.'r,"" :'"' " "' * -'I'; " ; "'; - I'i^ li i,
-"1
;'
" "''
tl [l U ll u,iU_ ll,u_'tr
r r r r,,f,, f ,i2',t3:',4,

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 53
lmage
Ee
l,
>9
Scanned George, 2011
9.8
9.2
5.5
x(cm)
9.6
E
o
*.4
9.2
(s)
(s)
Figure 4a: George's cursive l-loops. (Top) Scanned image (600 dpi, PNG, scaling 525%). (2nd Panel) Recording
on a pen tablet at 2540 dpi. Line color signifies absolute pen velociry (Blue : high, light pink : low or zero).
(Labels 1 - 10) Beginnings of movement stops or hesitations (i.e.. submovements). (3rd Panel) Vertical position y
of the pen tip versus time. Movement stops begin uhere venical position as a function of time starts a horizontal
segment. (Bottom panel) Vertical velocity \\'\,ersus time. Positive means up stroke. Negative means down stroke.
Movement stops begin where veftical velocig' crosses the zero-r'elociN line within a positive velocity phase (i.e.,
up stroke) of the vertical velocif.
.6
.4
5
4.
34 Time
Qz
E
g0
,-2
4
-4 34 Time
Recorded Movement Colored by Absolute Velocity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BI
/
irMW
Vertical Position vs Time Colored by Absolute Velocity
5 6 7 8 9 10i\
l',,'\t\,'\\'\'/\,
\ ,'\ , \ ,{,
1
11n
,ll
ll
lt
:,
:i
U
,10
Velocity vs Time Colored by Absolute Velocity
I
6
I
f
t
j
:l,
U
7
,
t'
5
&
h
I
I
,i
i:
lI

54 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
i" - ..-. -
: Scanned lmage
9.6
J.4
E
!s.z
9.0
8.8 6.0
x(cm) 6.5
9.6
^9.4
E
$.2
9.0
8.8
Time (s)
Figure 4c'. Sgt Mike's cursive l-loops. (Top) Scanned image (600 dpi, PNG, scaling525Yo). (2nd Panel) Recording
on a pen tablet. Line color signifies absolute pen velocity (Blue: high, light pink: low or zero). (3rd Panel)
Vertical position y of the pen tip versus time. (Bottom). Vertical velocity as a function of time.
,201,1
sgt.!
5
o
t-
go
-5
Absolute Ve
lJ\n/
rtical Po
/\I 1
vs Time
/\,'\,
Time (s)

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 55
C;;'#, zoir i
t
f
5.8
5.7
5.6
E5.s
9s.+
5.3
5.2
5.1
5.0
Figure 5a: George's writing ofthe first word ofthe sentence: Today... recorded on a pen tablet using the inking
pen. (Top) Scanned image (600 dpi, PNG, scaling 575%). (Middle) Recording on a tablet. Line color signifies
absolute pen pressure (Blue : high, light gray : zero, i.e., pen is above the paper). (Bottom) Vertical position ofthe
pen tip versus time. (Label 1) Beginning of the upstroke of the word to. (Label 2) t-bar crossing. (Label 3) Touch-
down at letter d but no writing. (Label 4) Word da-r:
as a horizontal, gray colored segment at the Figure 4c illustrates that Sgt. Mike's l-loop
top of several loops. The bottom panel shows sequence has only incidental hesitations at the
the vertical velocity as a function of time. A tops of loops as in Ray's handwriting and only
hesitation is here shown as an additional zero incidental, minor hesitations in the upstrokes as
crossing between the upstroke of the loop and in George's handwriting. Therefore Sgt. Mike's
the downstroke. handwriting has properties in between those of
George and Ray.
r Scanned lmage
Ft
*i t
t/
t//
://
i r-]
:Il
i
6.46.26.05.85.65.45.25.0
Recorded Movement C
e
\r/
-,/4) (
/
il I
Vertical Position vs Time C
\l
IA
Time (s)

56 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
1't.0
10.5
Figures 5a-c show the comparison for the
complex writing pattern in the experiment, the
flrst word of the sentence Today is a nice day
(Condition 6).
Figure 5a illustrates that only George's
letters a andy appear angular (See the top and the
Scanned Image Ray, 201 1
/,rlJ
Recorded Pressure
F'
I
6
x(cm)
ertical Position vs Ti Colored by Press
11.0
Time (s)
Figure 5b: Ray's writing ofthe first word ofthe sentence: Today ... recorded on a pen tablet using the inking pen.
(Top) Scanned image (300 dpi, PNG, scaling 150%). (Middle) Recording on a tablet. Line color signifies absolute
pen pressure (Blue : high, light gray : zeto, i.e., pen is above the paper). (Bottom) Vertical position ofthe pen tip
versus time. (Label 1) Beginning of the word to. (Label2) Beginning of the word day.
$ro
9.
9.0
8.5
E'o o
9.5
9.0
8.5
7
10.
middle panels). The kinematic analysis shows
that those strokes are produced fluently as the
movement is performed without intemrptions
(See bottom panel). The other two altemate
personalities did not use these angular letters.
In the figures, the the color of the line
expresses pen pressure (dark blue is high
h,/l
./ /t
1 .,'4
qr
. /1
/t
tf/l
i, /L-'7 11
vlt\ /J\J

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 57
Scanned Image
pressure and light gray is zero pressure, i.e., pen
lift). The bottom panel shows the vertical pen
tip position as a function of time. The vertical
direction is from the bottom of the sheet to the
top of the sheet. Labels I -4 mark the beginnin_es
Sgt. Mike, 2011
ofthe four ink trajectories that are separated by
pen lifts. The pen movement on paper begins
with a fast upstroke of the word to as revealed
by the steep, increasing, blue curve (Label l).
After the first stroke the pen stands still (or
tu f*
=
h
e.6.6
6.4
6.2
6.0
7.2
7.0
Time (s)
Figure 5c: Sgt Mike's writing of the first word of the sentence: Todoy . .. recorded on a pen tablet using the inking
pen. (Top) Scanned image (600 dpi, PNG, scaling 360%). (Middle) Recording on a tablet. Line color signifies
absolute pen pressure (Blue: high, light gray: zero, i.e., pen is above the paper). (Bottom) Vertical position of the
pen tip versus time. (Label 1) The first stroke is a down stroke ofthe letter 7. (Label 2) The second stroke is a left-
to-right stroke of the letter L (Label 3) Letter o. (Label 4) The letters day are written without pen lift.
{
-ir
-4|t r'!
elN *
(c{
,{
7.2
7.4
6.8
6.8
h
e.6.6
6.4
6.2
6.0
('"il
rbh
by Ti Golored by Pressure

58 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
makes no vertical move) for 0.18 seconds at the
top of letter t. This can be deducted from the
flat, blue curve. The t-bar is performed within
0.13 seconds (Label 2). Subsequently the pen
is lifted for 0.35 seconds. The long, blue, flat
line expresses that the pen is on the paper but is
not moving for as much as 0.76 seconds (Label
3,). Finally, the pen is lifted and placed again
on paper on the same spot while increasing pen
pressure very slowly to write the letters day
(Label 4).
Figure 5b illustrates that Ray's handwriting
has many extra loops, e.g., in letters d and a.The
movement is fluent as the vertical position versus
time chart.(bottom panel) shows no horizontal
segments representing intervals where the pen
stands still. The loops are typically the result of
high speed. There is an extended pause of 1.34
seconds between the letters to (Starting at Label
1) and day (StartingatLabel2) as shown by the
extended pink segment in the bottom panel.
Figure 5c illustrates that Sgt. Mike begins
each pendown segment with a movement in t he
opposite direction and then a reversal into the
planned direction. These reversals are invisible
in the scanned image but they are clearly visible
in the kinematic data. See the strokes starting at
Label 1 (downstroke of the capital T), Label 2
(top stroke of the capital T), Label3 (letter o),
and Label 4 (letter d). There is a large distance
between to and day but only a brief pen-lift
movement of 0.20 seconds as shown by the pink
segment between Labels 3 and 4. Interestingly,
the letter a seems to have the same loops as in
Ray's writing. However, Sgt. Mike fuses the
latter part of the a with the first part of the y
yielding letters e7.
4. 2. 2. Statistical Analys is between
Alt ernate P ers onal ities
The detailed analysis of individual trials
should be used to derive features for all
exemplars or trials available, yielding statistics
for each feature. For this type of analysis we
will focus on the standard features and not
on the more elaborate features suggested by
^0.21
I5o.zo
G
jo.rs
10.18
0.17
George Sgt. tUife Riy
Personality
Figure 6a: Stroke duration in seconds for Personalities (We
reordered the sequence from smallest to largest writing).
Vertical bars indicate the 95Yo confidence intervals. As
the confidence intervals overlap between the alternate
personalities there are no significant differences.
George Sgt. Mike Ray
Personality
Figure 6b: Letter height in cm for Personalities (We reordered
the sequence from smallest to largest writing to highlight the
size sequence). Vertical bars indicate the95o/o confidence
intervals. As the 95% confidence intervals do not overlap
between the alternate personalities and the numbers of
observations are comparable per personality, the differences
are significant: George, Sgt. Mike, and Ray have successively
larger letter heights.
o
J
o
o
0.7
ECI.6
c,
*0.5
ct
'60.4
-90.s
o
6o.z
0.1
0.0

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 59
the previous, detailed individual trial-based
analysis. Each trial is segmented into up
and down strokes and standard features are
calculated per stroke. The averages and standard
deviations can be summarized across strokes
trials, conditions, or altemate personalities. To
visualize significant differences (e.g., at the
5o/o probability level that the observed data
can be explained from a random variation) we
will specify 95%o confidence intervals. The 5%
confidence interval can be estimated by 1.962
times the standard error. The standard error is the
standard deviation of the average. The standard
error can be estimated by the standard deviation,
divided by the square root of the number of
independently assumed observations.
850
g
ilaoo
o
o,
t750
tr
t700
o,
E6s0
!.oo
550
George Sgt. Mike Ray
Personality
Figure 6c: Axial pen pressure for Personalities (We reordered
the sequence from smallest to largest writing). Pen Pressure
1000 is approximately equivalent with 300 gram (i.e., 3
Newton) and Pen Pressure 0 with 0 gram (or pen lift). Vertical
bars indicate the 95o/o confldence intervals. As the 95%
confidence intervals do not overlap between the altemate
personalities and the numbers ofobservations are comparable
per personaliry, the diflerences are significant: George, Sgt.
Mike, and Ray have successively lower pen pressure.s..
We compared various standard features,
averaged across all exemplars between the three
personalities of George, Ray, and Sgt. Mike.
As Sgt. Mike's handwriting has properties in
between those of George and Ray, we reordered
the sequence of handwritings into those b1,
George, Sgt. Mike, and Ray, respectively.
Many standard features did not reach
signiflcance, likely because six very different
task conditions were included. For example,
there was no difference in stroke duration
between the three alternate personalities (See
Figure 6a). This suggests that the alternate
personalities wrote at the same speed. However,
we could statistically confirm that in 2011, the
personalities had different writing sizes: Figure
6b presents evidence that the handwriting by
George is significantly smaller than that of
the other alternate personalities and that Ray's
handwriting is significantly larger. We can tell
that becaus e the 9 5%oconfi dence intervals for the
alternate personalities do not overlap. Figure 6c
shows that pen pressure by Ray is significantly
smaller than by Sgt. Mike or George. These
examples illustrate that the kinematic analysis
can yield significant differences for features that
could be estimated from the static handwriting
traces on paper (e.g., writing size) and also
significant differences of features that can only
be measured via pen tablet recordings (e.g., pen
pressure).
5. Discussion
This case study is the first known study
to compare the different personalities of a
participant diagnosed with DID by recording
pen movements and establishing dynamic
variables using a Wacom@ pen tablet and the
MovAlyzeR@ software. The results of the
kinematic analysis were then compared to a
conventional analysis. Initial results show both
static and kinematic differences between the
personalities. Additionally, this study documents
the stability of the personalities over time, from
1993 until 2011 and examines the handwriting
of the participant's personalities for similarities
andlor differences.
While there might arguably be some similar
formations between the writing of George and
Ray, it is unlikely that an FDE would be able
to reach a definite conclusion that they are
one and the same person because of the many
differences. Both kinematic and conventional
analysis lead to this result. However, kinematic

60 - 2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination
analysis is able to detect differences in
movement that are not visible in a static image.
An FDE would rightly question whether there
is enough material available for Sgt. Mike to
reach a conclusion. For those FDE's who do not
state conclusions but point out the differences
and similarities, the jury or judge would more
likely than not be expected to conclude that
they are different people.
According to medical records, personalities
within the system respond to medications
differently, for example, anti-anxiety medication
was prescribed for Ray but it adversely affected
Sgt Mike's equilibrium. It is unknown whether
or how medications any of them take affect the
writing of others within the system. Sgt. Mike
was able to monitor George while he was writing
on the tablet, but Ray was not. Therefore it is
unknown whether they benefited from George's
initial famihanzation with the writing test due to
the commonality of the neuromuscular system
ofthe body.
The tablet recordings and the scanned
images show minute differences between
kinematic and ink data caused by wiggling of
the pen because the pen's receptor coil is inside
the lower barrel of the pen and because the ink
deposits by the ball point may not be in the
middle of the ball.
We established that the writing styles of
the personalities are sufficiently stable during
extended periods. Stable formations suggest
that it is unlikely that any of the personalities
attempted to disguise any of his writing.
Kinematic analysis in a forensic situation
would reveal hesitation and features common
to disguise as a supplement to conventional
analysis.
Additionally, since writing for most people
evolves in some way as the person ages, the
analyst compares writings over time for signs of
natural modifications. There is a commonality
of the neuromuscular system amongst the
personalities, and some personalities remain
the age of the body at the time it was created.
It appears that the handwriting also remains at
that period of time. For some, the age of the
personality is uncleaq and George reports that
Sgt. Mike has no particular age.
While collection of writing samples from
1993 to 1997 was informal, future studies will
follow predefined scientific protocol. FDE's are
cautioned about using signatures in research to
be sure to have proper release since much of
the writing includes signatures. Ascertaining
the identity of the personality providing an
exemplar in a forensic case may or may not
reveal which personality actually performed
the questioned writing. FDEs are alerted to the
fact that even though DID is rare, it should be a
consideration if there are any minute formations
in the questioned materials that are also found
in the exemplars.
Further studies into brain activities such as
brain mapping while each personality is writing
would be useful as an adjunct to the kinematic
and longitudinal studies.
6. References
Caligiuri, M.P., Teulings, H.L., Dean, C.E.,
Niculescu, A.B., Lohr, J.B. (2010). Handwriting
movement kinematics for quantifuing EPS in
patients treated with atypical antipsychotics.
Psychiatry Research, 177, 77 -83.
Coons, Philip M. ( 1988). Psychophysiology Aspect
of Multiple Personality Disorder. Dissocicttion,
1(l), p.49.
Friesen, James G, Ph.D. (1991). Uncovering the
Mystery of MPD, Its Shocking Origins and Its
Surprising Cure, Here's Life Publishers, San
Bernardino, California, USA.
Lewis, D.O., Yeager, C.A., Swica, Y., Pincus, J.H.,
Lewis, M. (1997). Objective documentation of
child abuse and dissociation in 12 murderers
with dissociative identity disorder. Am J
Psychiatry, I 54, 17 03-17 10.
Ray, George and the Guardian Angel. (1993),
Prisoner of Pain. Minds Uniquely Linked
together in a Productive Loving ExisJence
(M. U. L. T.r. P. L.E), 2(2).
Rost, Nancy. The Crowded Cell/Inmate with
Multiple Personalities Denied Treatment. The
Madison Edge,3 (22), October 7-20, 1992.
Schwid, 8.L., & Goodwin, J. (1992). Forensic study
of the handwriting of a multiple-personality

DID: A Longitudinal and Kinematic Study - 61
disorder. Intemational Society for the Study of
Multiple Personality & Dissociation (ISSMPD).
Poster, Chicago, IL.
Schwid, 8.L., & Wilson Marks, L. (1994). Forensic
analysis of handwriting in multiple personality
cases. In C. Faure, P. Keuss, G. Lorette, A.
Vinter (Eds.), Advances in handwriting ancl
drawing: A multidisciplinary approach, (501-
513). Paris, Europia.
Teulings, H.L., & Maarse, F.J. (1984). Digital
recording and processing of handwriting
movements. Humqn Movement Science, 3,
193-217.
Teulings, H.L. & Romero, D.H. (2003).
Submovement analysis in leaming cursive
handwriting or block print. In H.L. Teulings,
Van Gemmert, A.WA. (Eds.), Proceedings
of the llth Conference of the International
Graphonomics Society (107-l l0).
Whitey, Bob. A Frightening Scenario (1999). Judge
orders release of Mendota patient the state
refuses to treat. Mental Health,Ianuary 22.
Notes
Ameson report to officials at Mendota Mental
Health Institution. ( I 987).
Kerley, Gillam. Letter addressed to first author
(tee4).
Lowery, James, Jr., Trust Me: The Dilemma of
the Incarcerated Multiple Personality Patient.
Monograph by James while incarcerated in
Waupun Correctional Institution. Undated.
Lowery, James v. Darrell A. Kolb, Thomas Biever,
Sheila E. Dresen and Kent Mannis United States
District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Case No. 8l-C-1225. Affidavit of James
Lowery January 9,1989.
Lowery James v. Robert Miller, Greg Van Rybroek,
Gary Maier, and Lou Roach. State of Wisconsin
Court of Appeals, District V, July 26,1990.
Wisconsin vs. James G. Lowery Kenosha County
Court Case 85-CF-261.
Unsigned report on Cedar Creek/ Family Counseling
letterhead, dated October 6, 1996 to Attorney
Thomas G. Halloran. Reported by James
Lowery to be from Todd Zangel.
7. Acknowledgments
The authors thank our participant James for
helping us record and document Dissociative
Identity Disorder. We thank Lorie Pelc, Ph.D.,
for valuable improvements of the presentation
and organization of this manuscript.
Disclosures
Bonnie Schwid. No disclosures.
Hans-Leo Teulings is owner of NeuroScript@ where
the MovAlyzeR@ software was developed and is
marketed. No fuither disclosures
(endnotes)
i Wacom and Intuos are registered trademarks by
Wacom.
ii MovAlyzeR is a registered trademark by NeuroScript
iii Wacom and Intuos are registered trademarks by
Wacom.

2013 Journal of Forensic Document Examination - 44
rigid, a man of few words, and when he does
speak, he uses military terms such as negative,
or affirmative. Sergeant Mike takes over in
troubling or threatening events. He typically
hand-prints while George and Ray write in
cursive.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1 Longitudinal Study
Samples were collected informally during
multiple sessions from 1993 through 1997 and
then in 2011. At each session, the personality
was identified by name and sight and asked
to provide a writing sample. Samples from
each personality were analyzed for evidence
of stability over time, attempted disguise and
differentiation of participant’s personalities.
One ballpoint pen was used for each session,
but the pen varied per session. The type of paper
varied per session with one or more sessions
using lined paper, and other sessions using
plain copy paper. The personalities were asked
to write a paragraph of his or her choosing so
the writing would be more natural than dictated
writing. James, the core personality, was only
able to write his name. Each writing session
lasted from 30 - 60 minutes.
For the switch from one personality
to the next, the present personality closed his
eyes and went into a self-hypnotic state that
resembles sleep. He remained very quiet, and
within about five seconds, the next personality
would appear as though he was waking up from
a deep sleep. Either he or the attorney identified
the personality that was present. In the author’s
experience, George always manifested first,
then Ray, and then Sgt. Mike, but George has
stated that the sequence was coincidental.
The other personalities came out as
requested by either the author or by the attorney
for the sessions up to and including the 1997
session. At the 2011 writing session, the various
personalities were able to switch from one to
the other easily. The term ‘switching’ is used
throughout the literature for transitioning from
one personality to another.
One right-handed, 60 year old male, James,
participated in the testing on January 9, 2011.
Although James could not participate himself,
the aforementioned alternate male personalities
with different ages and behaviors took part in
the test in the order of George, Ray, Sergeant
Mike.
Each of the three personalities was made
aware of the purpose of the experiment and
agreed to cooperate. George, the greeting
personality, was informed about the procedure.
He was seated at a table and provided with the
electronic pen. The author called out the different
personalities in the order of George, Ray, and
Sgt. Mike. The sequence of personalities as
they were “born” is not the same sequence of
those that were tested.
3.2 Sample Collection
The kinematic and longitudinal samples
were collected in 2011 using an electronic
tablet (Wacom® Intuos® Version 2 8x6 pen
tablet - XD68USB) and an electronic inking
pen (Wacom® Intuos® Version 2, XP-110).
The tablet was covered with a sheet of lined
paper about 6” x 8.5” or 15.2 cm x 21.6 cm).
The sheet was held in place by the participant
by using his left hand. The inking pen looked
and felt like a normal ballpoint pen. It had a
standard mini ballpoint ink refill similar to the
refills used in 4-color ballpoints.
The software recorded the horizontal and
vertical position of the pen tip on and off the
paper (while the pen is lifted up to 1 cm) and
the pen pressure on the tablet. Pen-tip position
and pressure were sampled at 100 Hz and a
resolution of 0.001 cm (corresponding to 2540
dpi). The accuracy of the raw samples had an
RMS error of less than 0.01 cm. There may be
small differences between ink trace and pen
tip movement because the ink deposit is not
always centrally under the ball of the ball point
pen tip because the pen tip position is measured
at the electromagnetic coil that is in the lower
part of the pen barrel. Therefore, changes in
pen tilt will affect the position measurement.
The writing was recorded and processed using