psychology

Peer 3

Why do people believe Astrology is a Science?

In this paper Written by Nick Allum called, “What Makes Some People Think Astrology is Scientific?” (Allum & Science Communication, 2011, 26.) He goes over three

hypotheses to answer just that. [1] Europeans can not distinguish between what science and what pseudoscience is: The first idea is that everyday astrology claims to be pseudoscience. Science and pseudoscience are mistaken to be the same and the two reasons as to why pseudoscience seems reliable is because it allows someone to make sense of things such as: major decisions in life and one’s self. [2] The general public are confused on what Astrology is: Every-day astrology claims are often positive and motivational to the reader so they are more likely to believe it. (Dean, 1987; Glick, Gottesman, & Jolton, 1989) They're often very vague claims in someone’s personality leaving space for the Barnum Effect to kick in. Astrology described by William Lily as, the fortune telling of human affairs and other events which depends on the positions and aspects of the stars and Horoscope is the specific chart of fortune telling of one's own individuality and personality based off of birth date. (Allum & Science Communication, 2011, 2) [3] Those who have authoritarian beliefs are more likely to believe in astrological claims.

In this section, it explains the reason as to why those who have an authoritarian view have these set values: “obedience and conformity” (Allum & Science Communication, 2011, 7) So in a sense, why would you try and argue against something that you were born into(Speaking of Zodiacs.)

If I was a researcher I would conduct an experiment on how individuals interact with each other after reading these zodiac or personality tests. How I would do it: I would ask the participant to take 3 tests/quizzes: A quiz asking various topics stemming from their own unbiased beliefs, then introducing my own made up personality quiz. The quiz I’d make would introduce new sets of “personalities.” In the beginning of the test I will state false facts on how scientific and reliable the quiz is using different types of psychological theories. The outline of this would be similar to the 16 personality quiz

made by Isabel Briggs Myers but one half of the personality results will display more negative personality traits and the other more positive. Later, I would put participants in two settings: [1] 2 minute talk for two talk rooms for a total of 4 minutes. First talk room will have one person with more positive personality results who is paired up with someone who has negative personality results. The second talk room will have two of similar test results. This is to just observe how they each act while interacting with each other. Does one display more confidence posture? Does the other display the opposite or do they act similar? How do each of them discuss certain topics to everyday questions to more serious life decisions.

[2] in the last stage is where the last quiz will be taken. This quiz will be the same unbiased quiz from the beginning. Have any answers changed? Do individual choices get influenced by outside sources such as a personality quiz? [Questions will be on another survey which will follow the same survey outline as the previous test: from strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree.]