Graphology unrelated to the handwriting metrics of graphologists. Professional graphologists using handwriting analysis were just as ineffective as lay people at predicting performance in a 1989 study. A broad literature screen done by King and Koehler confirmed dozens of studies showing the geometric aspects of graphology (slant, slope, "etc.") are essentially worthless predictors of job performance. Rowan Bayne, a British psychologist who has written several studies on graphology, summarized his view of the appeal of graphology: "[i]t's very seductive because at a very crude level someone who is neat and well behaved tends to have neat handwriting", adding that the practice
What Is History? art. Though Carr conceded that historians cannot predict exact events in the future, he argued that historical generalizations can supply information useful to understanding both the present and the future. Carr argued that since scientists are not purely neutral observers, but have a reciprocal relationship with the objects under their study just like historians, that this supported identifying history with the sciences rather than the arts. Likewise, Carr contended that history like science has no moral judgements, which in his opinion supports the identification of history as a science. Carr was well known for his assertions in "What Is History?"