And so, if you are subsequently questioning the validity of Astrology, and want to research further, here are some places to look, and some not to look…
Thorough, Primary Study:
Three of the best sources I read were actual data results from conducted tests, all of which were executed in respectable scientific matter. “Popular Horoscopes and the ‘Barnum Effect’” by Catherine Fichten, “Science Versus the Stars: A Double-Blind Test of the Validity of the Neo Five-Facto Inventory and Computer-Generated Astrological Natal Charts” by Alyssa Wyman, and “A Statistical Test of Astrology” by Jayant Narlikar are all individual studies that produce individual results. I have scrutinized the studies and determined their method was valid; their use of sophisticated, independent analysis helps validate their conclusions. Note: all were peer reviewed as well!
Two of the items I read—one peer reviewed, one not—became lacking by the same value. “Is There an Association Between Astrological Data and Personality?” by Gerald Goldstein is simply too short of an analysis to really develop any worthwhile information. The information he does “discover” is both common sense and unoriginal; it brings no new perspectives. “Astrology: Fact or Fiction?” by Michael Bakich is nullified by its lack of focus in fact (ironically enough). He instead chooses to focus on the history of Astrology and other random tangents.
Relevance to Modern Society:
This brings me into another overlying quality of these articles to look for; how or if they address the question of how my myth applies to everyday life! Bakich’s study, as I just mentioned, is rooted almost entirely in how Astrology, the “science,” came about. While it’s somewhat interesting (and his writing style is certainly more entertaining than the average peer reviewed journal) it really has no relevance to supporting or debunking this myth.
An article titled Starry Messengers: Recent Work in the History of Western Astrology by Anthony Grafton takes the opposite approach. Grafton manages to see how Astrology is applied in modern cultures around the globe, examining both their use of it, the weight of it as a science, and how its current standing came about. It puts Astrology into real, tangible terms: how it is affecting how we live right now. Also, the Barnum Effect by Fichten and the Statistical Analysis by Narlikar both do an excellent job of introducing ideas of how the prevalence of a belief in Astrology has affected current society. Fichten introduces her journal by saying that in the U.S. “an estimated 90% of daily newspapers carry horoscopes.” If newspapers are associated with relative truisms, what are the use of horoscopes saying about the validity of astrology? Narlikar’s article, on the other hand, seems to have a grudge against common confusion of the distinction between astrology and astronomy—perhaps a personal grudge, but all confusions should be alleviated!
Refers to Possible Relevant Studies/Inquiries
The second best thing to the quality of a study is the quantity of relevant studies to it. Both Fichten and Wyman bring up the hypothesis of the Barnum Effect (as could perhaps be inferred by Fichten’s title) in their works. P.T. Barnum was a Circus ring owner who was famously quotes as saying “There’s a sucker born every minute.” The Barnum theory, then, is that people will assume the most general, umbrella personality statements are most accurate to themselves. This could definitely help explain the inability to prove astrological descriptors as less than chance accuracy. Wyman even includes the psychological Five-Factor personality test, a supposedly proven accurate test based on five “elements”: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. In fact, in the study, a significant majority did pick their Five-Factor personality test as most accurate to themselves; this study not only backs up the original question of Astrology birth charts’ validity, but supports the connection to the Barnum Effect previously proposed. Another article I read, The Prophecy That Never Fails: On the Uses and Gratifications of Horoscope Reading by Gabriel Weimann takes a theory most often applied to mass communication and media—uses and gratifications—to the purpose and benefit of horoscopes. The definition of uses and gratifications theory is to “utilize the information/media to the users benefit.” People who read horoscopes may alter their decisions based on the predictions made by their zodiac horoscope.
An article called “Season of Birth and Personality: Another Instance of Noncorrespondence” by Uwe Hentschel, alternately, decides to compare her study to an incomprehensible theory she calls “chronobiological theory.” If Hentschel attempts to explain it, it’s not discernible. The inclusion of this theory serves only to confuse the subject. I wouldn’t be surprised if they made it up themselves.
References:
Bakich, M. (2004). Astrology: FACT or FICTION?. Astronomy, 32(12), 50-56. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Fichten, C., & Sunerton, B. (1983). POPULAR HOROSCOPES AND THE 'BARNUM EFFECT.'. Journal of Psychology, 114(1), 123. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Grafton, A. (2000). Starry Messengers: Recent Work in the History if Western Astrology. Perspectives on Science, 8(1), 70. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database
Hentschel, U., & Kiessling, M. (1985). Season of Birth and Personality: Another Instance of Noncorrespondence. Journal of Social Psychology, 125(5), 577. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Hume, N., & Goldstein, G. (1977). IS THERE AN ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ASTROLOGICAL DATA AND PERSONALITY?. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(3), 711-713. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Narlikar, J., Kunte, S., Dabholkar, N., & Ghatpande, P. (2009). A statistical test of astrology. Current Science (00113891),96(5), 641-643. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Weimann, G. (1982). The Prophecy that Never Fails: On the Uses and Gratifications of Horoscope Reading. Sociological Inquiry, 52(4), 274-290. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database
Wyman, A., & Vyse, S. (2008). Science Versus the Stars: A Double-Blind Test of the Validity of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory and Computer-Generated Astrological Natal Charts. Journal of General Psychology, 135(3), 287-300. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
I like the way you set this up! Good work.
ReplyDeleteThis Japanese astrology may be a little off topic, but I'll try to link it to this blog.
ReplyDeleteFirst, it is interesting that Japanese astrology is introduced as a blood-type personality test.
Second, the website introduces a scientist who proved the astrology. Though, from here , I found that he lived before WWII...
Third, the website tells that even companies used the astrology to recruit people, lending support to the credibility of the practice.
Overall, even though Japanese astrology is not about stars, I assume that similar reasoning errors to your astrology may exist in Japanese astrology too, such as Burnum effect.
They do it as a blood-type personality test? How fascinating!
ReplyDeleteI guess that's not more far-fetched than linking earthly events to the position of constellations, though! I had never considered how differently astrology could be measured in different cultures.
And yes, I bet a lot of the Astrology still lies on the Barnum effect and being general/multiply-applicable. We are all fools for compliments and generic labels!!
Emily, I was also going to suggest you look at Japanese astrology. In doing research for my blog, I was studying the culture and beliefs of many, including Japanese.
ReplyDeleteHere is the link:
http://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/12-zodiac.shtml