Handwriting Analysis Can Tell Who Filled in Bubbles on Tests, Ballots

By Veronique Greenwood | June 9, 2011 2:00 pm

The way bubbles are filled in encodes quite a bit of identifying information

What’s the News: Standardized tests aren’t as impersonal as you might think. Much as detectives analyze a note’s handwriting to pinpoint its author, scientists have developed a way to identify test-takers, voters, and so on just from the way they fill in bubbles.

How the Heck:

  • The researchers (from Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy) used a set of 92 surveys of 20 questions each to train and test their computer program.
  • After setting aside eight questions from each survey, they analyzed the remaining 12 to determine the distinctive characteristics of each individual’s bubbling style. Maybe they tend to fill bubbles with a squiggle, or a series of diagonal strokes that point to the right or left, but whatever their quirks, the program learned to identify individual test takers. Its specifications are quite detailed—it draws on 804 different features concerning color and shape of the mark.
  • To test its abilities, the team then sicced the program on the eight questions it hadn’t seen during its training. If the bubbles had been filled in with random patterns, it would have given the correct answer only one out of 92 times. But it returned the right test-taker 51% of the time, and 75% of the time, the correct answer was in its top three choices.

What’s the Context:

  • Fill-in-the-bubble forms are used in tests and in elections, among other settings. This program represents a rare way to tell whether cheating has occurred on a standardized test: “Imagine that a student takes a standardized test, performs poorly, and pays someone to repeat the test on his behalf. Comparing the bubble marks on both answer sheets could provide evidence of such cheating. A similar approach could detect third-party modification of certain answers on a single test,” says coauthor Will Clarkson in a blog post.
  • Of course, when it comes to election ballots, the potential uses lean toward the dastardly. While the program could be used to detect fraudulent absentee ballots, it could also be used to violate anonymity and reveal how an individual voted, which Clarkson points out is a worry in areas where scanned images of ballots are released, like Humboldt County in California. Election officials should carefully weigh the costs and benefits of releasing such information, given that this kind of analysis is possible.
  • The senior author on the paper, Ed Felten, is an influential internet security researcher and chief technologist of the US Federal Trade Commission. He’s known for breaking the watermarks used for digital rights management (aka DRM) by music companies and for pointing out various flaws (sometimes very, very large ones) in the security techniques used by companies like Sony.

The Future Holds:

  • Findings like this are an important reminder that perfect anonymity is more elusive than it seems. The researchers will present their work (which you can read in its entirety here [pdf]) at the 2011 USENIX Security Symposium in San Francisco this August.
  • Ah, but can you disguise your bubble identity, or can forms to be changed to make identification more difficult? The researchers were hoping you’d ask that—they have a whole section in their paper dedicated to it. Using ink stamps, as some areas do, removes the possibility of making identifiable markings, and being careful not to color outside the lines mitigates it too.

Image credit: Will Clarkson

  • http://www.cashrenegadex.com Natalie

    Really interesting article. There is no anonymity anymore.

  • Cathy

    This seems applicable to the standardized test scandals that rocked Georgia last year. The state now requires that students use special pencils with chemical signatures in their erasers, so that they can tell if teachers are later going back and revising the answers (the teachers don’t get those pencils. Or something like that.) I think scanned bubble analysis is a bit more practical method of determining “cheating.” (In reality, a teacher confided in me that they did indeed help students erase their answers – because the lines are easy to mix up, and a little first grader could merrily mark answers down the row and not even realize they’ve skipped an answer!)

    The GRE solves this entirely with the computer adaptive test. Just you and the program, and you get your score at the end of the test. No bubbles, pencils, erasers, or bubble analysis programs involved.

  • JH

    This guy seems to have a huge amount of time to waste.

    Probably he gets paid by a government grant.

  • Jazz

    JH- seriously! Nothing to do with handwriting, and frankly, if they want to know who I voted for , or if I cheated, faster to ask me, maybe?

  • http://www.help-tax-relief.com/ tax relief

    Someone necessarily lend a hand to make severely articles I’d state. That is the first time I frequented your web page and to this point? I amazed with the research you made to create this actual put up extraordinary. Wonderful activity!


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


80beats is DISCOVER's news aggregator, weaving together the choicest tidbits from the best articles covering the day's most compelling topics.

See More

Collapse bottom bar