A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Signatures as an object of autoforgery (self-forgery). | LitMetric

Signatures as an object of autoforgery (self-forgery).

Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol

Institute of Law and Economics, Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz, Poland.

Published: April 2024

The study presents the results of research aimed at isolating the graphic features most frequently and least frequently modified by people committing autoforgery (self-forgery) of signatures in situations where the appearance of their natural signatures is not known to the recipient. The research covered a total of over 12,000 signatures from 200 individuals. The most successful attempts at autoforgery of legible and illegible signatures of each test subject were selected for the final evaluation. It was found that autoforgery changes are most often focused on the most striking features of the signatures, such as the structure of letters in the initial part of the signature, size, readability, impulse, and slope. Secondary features, more difficult to notice or those whose existence the writers are not aware of (such as the presence or absence of additions, the arrangement of letters in relation to each other, the shape and direction of signature lines, the format of legible signatures) are usually omitted in autoforgery activities. Detecting autoforgery can be a big challenge for experts, because in practice, any significant differences between the questioned signature and comparative signatures are often mistakenly considered to be the result of forgery. Therefore, in order to detect autoforgery, it is necessary to analyze the structure of easily noticeable features that most influence the so-called pictorial effect of the signature in combination with the unattractive features that remain unchanged in most cases of autoforgery. The more characteristic the latter are, the more their consistency in the questioned and comparative material proves self-forgery, regardless of the differences in the primary features. In the case of a forged signature, the opposite is true: the most easily noticeable features of the signature are imitated by the forger, and the differences occur mainly in secondary features.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4467/16891716AMSIK.23.013.18688DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

signatures
8
autoforgery
8
autoforgery self-forgery
8
features
8
secondary features
8
easily noticeable
8
noticeable features
8
signature
6
signatures object
4
object autoforgery
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!