Science Versus the Stars: A Double-Blind Test of the Validity of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory and Computer-Generated Astrological Natal Charts
Abstract
The authors asked 52 college students (38 women, 14 men, M age = 19.3 years, SD = 1.3 years) to identify their personality summaries by using a computer-generated astrological natal chart when presented with 1 true summary and 1 bogus one. Similarly, the authors asked participants to identify their true personality profile from real and bogus summaries that the authors derived from the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI; P. T. Costa Jr. & R. R. McCrae, 1985). Participants identified their real NEO-FFI profiles at a greater-than-chance level but were unable to identify their real astrological summaries. The authors observed a P. T. Barnum effect in the accuracy ratings of both psychological and astrological measures but did not find differences between the odd-numbered (i.e., favorable) signs and the even-numbered (i.e., unfavorable) signs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Illusion and well‐being: A social psychological perspective on mental health
Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193 · Cited by 7,814 · see citing works
The structure of phenotypic personality traits.
Goldberg, L. R. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.48.1.26 · Cited by 4,816 · see citing works
Four ways five factors are basic
Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1992) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-i · Cited by 3,269 · see citing works
The fallacy of personal validation: a classroom demonstration of gullibility.
Forer, B. R. (1949) · Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0059240 · Cited by 413 · see citing works
Meehl, P. E. (1956) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0044164 · Cited by 338 · see citing works
A double-blind test of astrology
Carlson, S. (1985) · Nature · doi:10.1038/318419a0 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
The ‘Barnum Effect’ in Personality Assessment: A Review of the Literature
Dickson, D. H., & Kelly, I. W. (1985) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1985.57.2.367 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
The acceptability of "fake" versus "bona fide" personality test interpretations.
Sundberg, N. D. (1955) · Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0044374 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
P. T. Barnum explores the computer.
O’Dell, J. W. (1972) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0032619 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Glick, P., Gottesman, D., & Jolton, J. A. (1989) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167289154010 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Personal validation: Some empirical and ethical considerations.
Collins, R. W., Dmitruk, V. M., & Ranney, J. T. (1977) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-006x.45.1.70 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Introversion-extraversion: astrology versus psychology
van Rooij, J. J. F. (1994) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)90243-7 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Guastello, S. J., & Rieke, M. L. (1990) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037//1040-3590.2.2.186 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Hamilton, M. (2001) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00191-4 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Accuracy in self‐perception: The ‘fallacy of personal validation’
Hampson, S. E., Gilmour, R., & Harris, P. L. (1978) · British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1978.tb00271.x · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Incorporation of astrology-based personality information into long-term self-concept.
Hamilton, M. (1995) · Journal of social behavior and personality · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Another Look at Personal Validation
Greene, R. L., Harris, M. E., & Macon, R. S. (1979) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4304_16 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Wunder, E. (2003) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(03)00002-3 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
.5 or - .5: Continuity and change in personal dispositions.
Brody, N. (1994) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10143-004 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Test-Taker and Close-Other Selection of Personality Inventory Feedback
Word, S. (1996) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6602_17 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Still being checked.
- Authors
- Wyman, A. J., & Vyse, S.
- Affiliations
- Connecticut College (US)
- ORCID
- Vyse, Stuart
- Venue
- The Journal of General Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 135
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 287-300
- ISSN
- 0022-1309 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-0888
- OpenAlex
- W1991419564
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of General Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- astrology, personality assessment, NEO-FFI, Barnum effect, pseudoscience, zodiac signs
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Astrology, Awareness, Character, Culture, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Judgment, Male, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Software, Reproducibility of Results
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
