Research disproving astrology

Articles

  1. Search form
  2. Another study disproves Sun Sign astrology - Astrological Musings
  3. Astrologers fail to predict proof they are wrong
  4. Explainer: Is There Any Science Behind Astrology?
Latest stories

Half of the subjects picked the correct chart, half chose the incorrect chart. McGrew, John H. Six expert astrologers independently attempted to match 23 astrological birth charts to the corresponding case files of 4 male and 19 female volunteers. Case files contained information on the volunteers' life histories, full-face and profile photographs, and test profiles from the Strong-Campbell Vocational Interest Blank and the Cattell P.

Personality Inventory.

Astrologers did no better than chance or than a nonastrologer control subject at matching the birth charts to the personal data; this result was independent of astrologers' confidence ratings for their predicted matches. Astrologers also failed to agree with one another's predictions. A study of 2, people, most born within minutes of one another, tracked over several decades. The study looked at more than different characteristics, ranging from IQ to ability in art and sport, from anxiety levels to sociability and occupation - all of which astrologers claim are influenced by heavenly bodies.

He found no evidence of the similarities that astrologers would have predicted. The experimenters found no evidence of similarities between the "time twins". Dean said that the consistency of the findings weighed heavily against astrology: "It has no acceptable mechanism, its principles are invalid and it has failed hundreds of tests.

But no hint of these problems will be found in astrology books which, in effect, are exercises in deception," he said. Dean is ready for a torrent of criticism: "I'm probably the most hated person in astrology because I'm regarded as a turncoat.

Search form

Dean said: "They sometimes argue that times of birth just a minute apart can make all the difference by altering what they call the 'house cusps'," he said. In the Survey Research Centre of the University of California Berkeley sampled adults in the bay area getting information on natal signs and lots of attributes claimed by astrology to correspond. For instance, Leos are supposed to have good leadership qualities. An analysis by Ralph Bastedo found no correlation for leadership, political stand, intelligence, belief in astrology, musical ability, artistic ability, confidence, creativity, occupation, religion, ability to make friends, to organize or to feel deeply.

This showed that these tendencies do not differ between signs, so natal signs cannot be used to predict personality traits. In Michel Gauquelin put an advertisement in Ici-Paris offering a free horoscope. Recipients were asked to reply saying how accurate they and their friends found the horoscope.

Unfortunately, they all got the same horoscope, that of Dr. Petiot, a notorious mass murderer.


  1. Not really. But those Pisces have something fishy going on..
  2. horoscop acvaria sagittarius saptamanal.
  3. horoscope of 5 january.

These were written by a couple of top astrologers. Astrologers are no better than pastry cooks, taxi drivers or any of us at predicting. An astrologer who took up the challenge was given the birth information of twelve people and had cast their charts. He interviewed the twelve without knowing who was who and was to identify them by matching them with horoscopes. He got none right. Finally, Michel Gauquelin created a long running affair, starting in the late 60s, called the Mars effect with some research that looked very promising for astrology.

He collected enormous amounts of data from catalogues of famous people ending up with data for thousands of sporting champions, scientists, actors and writers. He found statistically significant correlations between the birth of sports champions and the position of Mars, between actors and Jupiter, between scientists and Saturn and between journalists and Moon. This shouldn't have been too much encouragement because it was only four planets, only four professions, and only for the top couple of percent of those professions.

He found no correlations at all for any planet with random samples. Because of the enormous amount of data it was difficult to reproduce and one attempt at refuting it boiled into a scandal where doubt was cast on the credibility of the refuters. Eventually, a French group, with Gauquelin's cooperation, set up another test of over a thousand sports champions and found a negative result. Gauquelin then argued that some of the champions weren't champions at all and that several other champions had been missed and should have been included.

Needless to say these changes produced a positive result but are clearly post-hoc data manipulation introducing bias. Since none of these tests are positive for a random sample of people it depended exclusively on how you define champion. Gauquelin wasn't cheating or insincere but he was giving himself permission to select his data by focusing on champions and it was just too much work to find nothing.

Journal of Psychology.

Another study disproves Sun Sign astrology - Astrological Musings

Vol 1 , Investigated 1 individual differences associated with horoscope reading habits, 2 the reliability and validity of daily and monthly horoscope forecasts and astrologically based personality descriptions, and 3 the effects of knowing the zodiac sign on the perception of the usefulness of horoscope forecasts and on the accuracy of astrologically based personality descriptions. Results indicate that females were more likely to read their horoscopes. Although locus of control was unrelated to horoscope reading habits, Neuroticism on the EPI was closely related.

Daily and monthly forecasts were unreliable and invalid.

Astrologically based personality descriptions had some reliability, and knowledge of zodiac sign affected ratings of horoscope usefulness and accuracy of astrologically based personality descriptions. We investigated the relationship between date of birth and individual differences in personality and intelligence in two large samples. In no cases did date of birth relate to individual differences in personality or general intelligence. No support could be found for such associations.

We conclude that the present large-scale study provides no evidence for the existence of relevant relationships between date of birth and individual differences in personality and general intelligence. Hat tip to Hokum-Balderdash Assay. Reblog 0 Digg This Save to del. You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post. Hello Richard, I enjoy your blog, and was especially delighted with this entry, as it speaks directly to an argument I recently had with someone.

Posted by: Paul February 16, at PM. Posted by: Skeptico February 17, at AM. Posted by: Paul February 18, at AM. Excellent summary of astrology research. In a way it's sad that so much time has been spent investigating nonsense like this, and it's even sadder that astrologers won't listen. I know of one study that you didn't mention. The abstract is here.

www.cantinesanpancrazio.it/components/hycaluso/1047-applicazioni-per-spiare.php

Astrologers fail to predict proof they are wrong

This study was abused by some astrologers who claimed it vindicated astrology when of course it does nothing of the kind. What it showed is that people are willing to incorporate astrological predictions of personality into their concept of self. They also found that daily and monthly forecasts have no validity. Posted by: lambic March 17, at AM. Their personality is to an extent formed around what astrology tells them it should be.

Posted by: Skeptico March 18, at PM. Posted by: buddy July 27, at PM.

Explainer: Is There Any Science Behind Astrology?

Posted by: Skeptico July 27, at PM. It seems that the "Skeptical Inquirer" is as guilty of bad science as the astrologers it seeks to disprove. It is very true that Michel Gauquelin failed to find any connection between sports champions and Sun, Moon or Ascendant sign. He did, however, and completely against his expectations, discover a positive correlation between sports champions and Mars on an angle Ascendant, Descendant, MC or IC.

The question is still open as to how significant this correlation is - and there are good arguments on both sides of the debate. However, to conveniently ignore this piece of evidence does no service to science. The word "sceptic" correctly means someone who is open minded.

Sadly, it is often used to describe a mindset that has a particular agenda, and means "anti" I live in the UK - and the term "Eurosceptic" here doesn't mean someone who is open minded about the European Union, but someone who is strongly against it; the Skeptical Inquirer seem to have the same concept of the word. Chris, I honestly hope you are one of the "fence-sitters" the people we are trying to help when it comes to the paranormal, so please excuse my blunt approach.

Correlation proves shit , and does not prove causation. If I found a group of 50 people with severe back pain, and they all had a quarter in their pocket, would that prove anything? That's why real scientists, armed with this and the knowledge of selection bias , shoehorning , and especially confirmation bias pay no attention to this person's "correlations".

I'd be willing to wager that if you took every sports champion ever born, no more than chance would be born under a Mars angle. Heck, research it yourself, you could win a million bucks. I read some of the "data" on this case, and would love to show you how easy it is to take a group of people and find a commonality, similar to my brief example.

I bet Skeptico already has Again, hopefully you haven't made up your mind. Read some more articles on this site and click the links. There are different kinds of skeptics, but readers here are scientific skeptics. We ask for proof, evidence; stuff that is not full of fallacious information.

Astrology tried, according to this article, 36 or more times. Let's put it to rest and just say it doesn't work. Posted by: Rockstar August 02, at PM. The result has never been replicated in fact I believe similar studies in other countries found no correlation , and IIRC the original data have been lost. Posted by: Skeptico August 02, at PM. Let's see if there is anything to this astrology stuff. The program made two predictions. So, if I believed this I would houseclean my stock portfolio NOW and sell off any stock that I have held for one year or more.

I would then repurchase stock after the last two weeks in November at a great savings. Also the people I gravitate toward are mainly, though not exclusively, of particular signs.