Why do people believe in astrology? What kind of people are prone to such trust? Can the Barnum effect be used for good purposes?

People perceive generalized descriptions of their personality in specific ways. When some people read astrological portraits, they are inclined to trust them, convinced that these characteristics are absolutely suitable for them. However, these statements are general, vague and therefore suitable for everyone, since they do not actually describe anyone. Psychologists call such features of perception the Barnum effect - in honor of the famous former American entrepreneur.

The Forer effect is named after the psychologist who studied this effect experimentally. This effect is also called the Barnum effect - in honor of the famous American circus swindler Phineas Barnum, known for his penchant for deception and unscrupulousness in his means. This term - the Barnum effect - was proposed by an outstanding psychologist, one of the creators of the famous MMPI test, and a consistent critic of clinical predictions - Paul Meehl in his article "Wanted - A Good Cookbook."

So, in 1948, Bertram R. Forer conducted the following experiment.

A group of people were asked to take a psychological test. People passed this test. The experimenter collected the completed tests and released the people for processing. In fact, no processing was done. After time had passed (supposedly spent processing the tests), Forer distributed to all participants in the experiment the same personality description, obtained, according to the experimenter, from the test results (in fact, the text was taken from an astrological magazine). Here is the text:

You have a strong need for love and respect from other people. You tend to be critical of yourself. You have great unrealized potential that you have not used to your advantage. Although you have some personality weaknesses, you generally compensate for them successfully. You have difficulty having regular sex life. While you demonstrate outward composure and self-control, you tend to experience inner anxiety and insecurity. Sometimes you are tormented by doubts about whether the decision you made was the right one or whether you did everything that was necessary. You are attracted to certain changes and variety, and you feel dissatisfied when they try to constrain or impose restrictions on you. You value your independence of thought and do not accept other people's statements unless they have sufficient solid evidence. You consider it unwise to reveal your soul too deeply to other people. At times you can be sociable, friendly, and sociable, while in other situations you may find yourself self-absorbed, distrustful, and withdrawn. Some of your claims seem quite unrealistic. Safety is one of your main goals in life.

Forer then asked each participant to rate on a five-point scale the degree to which the descriptive text was similar to their personality (“5” being the most similar). The average score was 4.26.

As we can see, the participants in the experiment believed that the description correctly described their personalities.

Please note: the above text consists of descriptions of personality and behavior that would suit every person. By the way, the circus performer and swindler Barnum liked to repeat: “we have something for everyone.”

Forer's experiment has been carried out many times since it was first conducted: by different researchers and in different variations. This experiment is often used to demonstrate the Forer effect and, in general, a person’s gullibility, the imperfections of his social-perceptual processes, in particular during trainings. Interesting fact: Forer's experiment, used as a demonstration, was reproduced in the film "Red Lights", in this film, instead of a personality test, a natal horoscope was drawn up for the participants in the experiment.

Later it became clear that a person will almost always consider a description of his personality to be reliable and correct, regardless of the truth of this description, if:

This description was obtained by a method, technique, method that, in the opinion of the subject, allows one to obtain reliable data about his personality, i.e. comes from a source authoritative for the person.
This description contains general, abstract, vague language.
This description contains characteristics that will suit most people.
This description generally characterizes a person’s personality positively.

By the way, in the latter case we are talking about an independent phenomenon called the “Pollyanna principle”, according to which a person tends to accept positive descriptions of his own personality and consider them true.

It should be noted that the Barnum effect (Forer effect), of course, can manifest itself not only in a situation when a person reads this or that description of a personality. The Barnum (Forer) effect can also occur if this kind of description is presented to a person orally. For example, if you came to a psychic, astrologer, socionicist or some other similar “specialist”, this subject observed you, asked you tricky questions, made some notes in his notebook, and then began to describe your personality to you. And (oh, miracle!) You hear in his words correct assessments, correct conclusions and even deep penetration into those parts of your “I”, the existence of which you yourself were not aware of before meeting this “specialist”.

It is characteristic that the Barnum effect works only on positive statements.

Here is an example of a study of this effect. Australian professor and psychology teacher Robert Treven annually asks first-year students to write down their dreams or describe their vision of the famous “Rorschach blots.” After this, the professor, in great secrecy, hands each student the same “psychological analysis of personality” of 13 phrases, which Stagner used, and asks them to evaluate how successful the characterization was.

When students in front of the entire audience declare that each individual analysis made by the professor is correct, Treven allows them to look at each other's papers. According to the professor, such research is a good start to studying psychology courses.

An interesting point is that the strength of the Barnum effect is not influenced by the prestige of the astrologer or psychologist, and gullibility is inherent equally in both men and women.

R. Snyder studied satisfaction with the horoscope he compiled (one content for everyone). More satisfied were those whose astrologer asked the year, month, day and time of birth before drawing up a horoscope. Snyder also found that the results of an astrological personality analysis were considered very reliable by the subjects when there were five times more positive judgments than negative ones. If the description contained twice as many negative judgments as positive ones, then the subjects did not consider it reliable.

People who are worried, upset, anxious, not very happy, who are looking for an opportunity to get some support, want to get rid of depressing experiences and uncertainty are more likely to perceive descriptions as reliable.

Thus, the Forer (Barnum) effect is based on a person’s acceptance of a description of his personality in the following pseudoscientific areas and situations:

astrology (character description by zodiac sign or natal horoscope)
Chinese calendar (character description by year of birth)
palmistry (character description based on the lines of the palm)
physiognomy (character description based on facial features)
determining character by name (books by B. Khigir)
determining character by eye color
determination of character by blood group
Vedic descriptions of personality (e.g. based on predominant guna)
socionics (description of the type of information metabolism, socionic tests)
psycheyoga, (favorite of some socionics adherents)
popular (vulgarized) personality typologies based on character accentuations.
fortune telling with cards (including Tarot cards)
description of personality based on false tests (magazine, entertainment or, for example, J. Kellogg's mandala test)
description of a person by a non-professional, illiterate psychologist
description of personality by psychics (so-called “cold reading”)
description of personality based on so-called “representational systems” and “meta-programs” in NLP

Of course, this is not a complete list, and the Forer (Barnum) effect extends not only to personality descriptions.

In conclusion, I would like to note that the Forer (Barnum) effect is a special case of such a cognitive bias as subjective validation. In addition, the Forer (Barnum) effect corresponds to a phenomenon called “hypochondriasis of medical students,” in which a medical student begins to see obvious signs of the disease that he is currently studying. Also, the Forer (Barnum) effect is somewhat reminiscent of egocentric thinking, when activated, a person, for example, entering a transport and hearing the laughter of passengers at that moment, thinks that they are laughing at him.

Barnum effect, aka Forer effect, is an interesting phenomenon in psychology that reveals some of the features of how we perceive information and evaluate its reliability. It is also curious where this phenomenon manifests itself: in cold reading, horoscopes, characteristics given by fortune tellers, astrologers, etc. Let's see what the Barnum effect is and how it works.

What is the Barnum effect

The Barnum effect is when a person perceives a very accurate description of his personality and character, which in fact is so general and statistically probable that it simply cannot be wrong. For the Forer effect to work, two main conditions must be met:

characteristics in the description must be positive;
the person must be sure that this description is made especially for him. In some cases, the accuracy of characteristics is also highly rated for the group to which the person belongs (for example, for a certain zodiac sign).

In addition, an important role is played the authority of the one giving the description: the higher it is, the more accurate the characteristic seems. But whether it was obtained “scientifically” (for example, as a “result of psychological testing” - see the description of Forer’s experiment below) or completely unscientific (fortune telling by coffee grounds, prediction by a crystal ball, etc.) practically does not matter . If the fortune teller is authoritative for the “experimental person,” the Barnum effect will work.

Origin of the name and a little history

Two names for this effect are associated with the following names:

The text of the description that Forer distributed to the students is presented below under the spoiler. Would you agree with it if you thought it was written especially for you? (Click on the picture to enlarge it.)

Why does the Barnum effect work?

This effect can be explained by several reasons.

Firstly, when we read a description that was supposedly made especially for us, then We compare how suitable it is for us and not for anyone else. This is very logical, isn't it?
Secondly, let us remember: an authoritative person for us says that this description was compiled for us - and on the basis of certain techniques that we obviously trust. Often like this a combination of factors clouds critical thinking and does not allow one to analyze the banality of the formulations.
Thirdly, a person in principle tend to agree with positive characteristics about oneself- anyone likes to appear in a favorable light in their eyes.

The Forer Effect partially lifts the lid on why some people believe that characteristics received from astrologers, clairvoyants, mediums, etc. are accurate. However, this phenomenon mainly covers only the description of a person, while the work of the “specialists” listed above is often also associated with predicting the future. And when it comes to predicting the future, it is of interest

The Forer effect is named after the psychologist who studied this effect experimentally. This effect is also called the Barnum effect - in honor of the famous American circus swindler Phineas Barnum, known for his penchant for deception and unscrupulousness in his means. This term - the Barnum effect - was proposed by an outstanding psychologist, one of the creators of the famous MMPI test, a consistent critic of clinical predictions - Paul Meehl in his article "Wanted - A Good Cookbook".

So, in 1948, Bertram R. Forer conducted the following experiment.

Forer then asked each participant to rate on a five-point scale the degree to which the descriptive text was similar to their personality (“5” being the most similar). The average score was 4.26.

As we can see, the participants in the experiment believed that the description correctly described their personalities.

Please note: the above text consists of descriptions of personality, behavior that would fit to each to a person. By the way, the circus performer and swindler Barnum liked to repeat: “we have got something for everyone.”

Forer's experiment has been carried out many times since it was first conducted: by different researchers and in different variations. This experiment is often used to demonstrate the Forer effect and, in general, a person’s gullibility, the imperfections of his social-perceptual processes, in particular, during trainings (at mine, for example). Interesting fact: Forer's experiment, used as a demonstration, was reproduced in the film "Red Lights", in this film, instead of a personality test, a natal horoscope was compiled for the participants in the experiment.

Later it became clear that a person will almost always consider a description of his personality to be reliable and correct, regardless of the truth of this description, if:

This description was obtained by a method, technique, method that, in the opinion of the subject, allows one to obtain reliable data about his personality, i.e. comes from a source authoritative for the person.
This description contains general, abstract, vague language.
This description contains characteristics that will suit most people.
This description generally characterizes a person’s personality positively.

It should be noted that the Barnum effect (Forer effect), of course, can manifest itself not only in a situation where a person is reading one or another description of a person. The Barnum (Forer) effect can also occur if this kind of description is presented to a person orally. For example, if you came to a psychic, astrologer, socionicist or some other similar “specialist”, this subject observed you, asked you tricky questions, made some notes in his notebook, and then began to describe your personality to you. And (oh, miracle!) You hear in his words correct assessments, correct conclusions and even deep penetration into those parts of your “I”, the existence of which you yourself were not aware of before meeting this “specialist”.

Thus, the Forer (Barnum) effect is based on a person’s acceptance of a description of his personality in the following pseudoscientific areas and situations:

astrology (character description by zodiac sign or natal horoscope)
Chinese calendar (character description by year of birth)
palmistry (character description based on the lines of the palm)
physiognomy (character description based on facial features)
determining character by name (books by B. Khigir)
determining character by eye color
determination of character by blood group
Vedic descriptions of personality (e.g. based on predominant guna)
socionics(description of the type of information metabolism, socionic tests)
psycheyoga (the pseudoscientific brainchild of A. Afanasyev (by the way, a 4th-class prop master!), loved by some adepts of socionics)
popular (vulgarized) personality typologies based on character accentuations (books by A. Egides (by the way, this is the teacher of N. Kozlov, the founder of the Sinton sect), who honors his student)
fortune telling with cards (including Tarot cards)
description of personality based on false tests (magazine, entertainment or, for example, J. Kellogg's mandala test)
description of a person by a non-professional, illiterate psychologist
description of personality by psychics (so-called)
description of personality based on so-called “representative systems” and “metaprograms” in

Of course, this is not a complete list, and the Forer (Barnum) effect extends not only to personality descriptions. If you come across some “personality research method” that, in your opinion, works on the Forer (Barnum) effect, be sure to send me information about it: ab@site

In conclusion, I would like to note that the Forer (Barnum) effect is a special case of such a cognitive bias as (subjective validation). In addition, the Forer (Barnum) effect corresponds to a phenomenon called “hypochondriasis of medical students,” in which a medical student begins to see obvious signs of the disease that he is currently studying. Also, the Forer (Barnum) effect is somewhat reminiscent of egocentric thinking, when activated, a person, for example, entering a transport and hearing the laughter of passengers at that moment, thinks that they are laughing at him.

LITERATURE

Forer B.R. The fallacy of personal validation: A classroom demonstration of gullibility // Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (American Psychological Association). - 1949. - 44 (1). - Pp. 118-123.
Meehl P. Wanted - A Good Cookbook // The American Psychologist. - 1956. - 11. - Pp. 263-267.

The Barnum effect lies in the ability of a person to perceive as completely reliable descriptions of his personality and assessments of a general nature, the method of occurrence of which is presented as scientific or ritual, magical. People specifically perceive generalized descriptions of their personality. When some people read astrological portraits, they are inclined to trust them, convinced that these characteristics are absolutely suitable for them. However, these statements are general, vague and therefore suitable for everyone, since they do not actually describe anyone. Psychologists call such features of perception the Barnum effect - in honor of a famous American entrepreneur in the past. The term was proposed by the American psychologist A. Farn (some sources claim that its author is psychologist Paul Meehl). Psychologists define the Barnum effect as the tendency (readiness) of people to perceive uncritically, as an accurate description of their personality, general, vague, vague, rather banal statements, even if it is not very clear how these statements were obtained. This effect is also called the Forer effect, since it was Bertram Forer in 1948 he first conducted an experiment in which he demonstrated its effect. The students completed the test, and the researcher assured that based on the results, he would conduct a psychological analysis of their personalities. However, instead of real analysis, he gave everyone the same text from the horoscope. Forer then asked each student to rate the appropriateness of their personality description on a scale of five. The average rating he received was 4.26. Here is a text proposed by B. Barnum, which has been used more than once by other researchers in similar studies: “You need other people to love and respect you, and at the same time you quite self-critical. Although you have some personal shortcomings, you are able to compensate for them. You have significant potential that you have not yet taken advantage of. You appear to be a disciplined and confident person on the outside, but inside you are worried and insecure. Sometimes you are overwhelmed by doubts about whether you made the right decision or did the right thing. You prefer variety and change, and are dissatisfied when you are limited by strict rules. You are proud of yourself as an independent, intelligent person; you do not take other people's opinions for granted without sufficient evidence. However, you think that you should not be too open and sincere with others. Sometimes you are an extrovert, friendly and sociable, and at other times you are introverted, cautious, reserved. Some of your aspirations are unrealistic.” Barnum's ingenious experiment was repeated hundreds of times, and the effect was always repeated consistently. One French psychologist placed an advertisement in newspapers offering the services of an astrologer. Having received hundreds of orders, the psychologist sent out the same horoscope to his clients, consisting of general abstract judgments. More than 200 people sent letters to the psychologist, full of gratitude for the extremely accurate forecast. It can be explained Barnum effect great interest in one's own personality. Psychologists have been studying this effect for about 40 years. To some extent, they found out under what conditions a person tends to react this way to generalized descriptions of his personality, when people tend to believe exactly this, and what properties of those judgments most stimulate this effect. Psychologist Ross Stagner conducted an experiment according to B. Barnum’s scheme with more experienced people. He asked 68 workers to fill out a psychological questionnaire, on the basis of which it was possible to create a fairly detailed description of their personality. He also compiled one characteristic (“fake”), in which he used 13 phrases from different horoscopes. The researcher read out the characteristics of the respondents, claiming that this description was made on the basis of a psychological test. He also asked to determine to what extent each phrase corresponds to reality, to what extent it reflects the character of the person being studied. More than 30% of participants believed that their psychological portraits were written surprisingly accurately, 40% - quite accurately, no one identified their description as completely false. It is significant that rather critical people who had extensive experience in assessing people took part in the experiment. Most participants considered the following phrases to be the most accurate: “You prefer variety in life, and you begin to get bored if you are limited by strict rules,” “Although you have there are some personal shortcomings, you, as a rule, know how to cope with them”; the most inappropriate: “There are still minor problems in your sex life,” “Your hopes are sometimes quite unrealistic.” Characteristically, the Barnum effect works only on positive statements. Here is another example of research on this effect. Australian professor and psychology teacher Robert Treven annually asks first-year students to write down their dreams or describe their vision of the famous “Rorschach blots.” After this, the professor, in great secrecy, hands each student the same “psychological analysis of personality” of 13 phrases, which Stagner also used, and asks them to evaluate how successful he was in the characterization. When students, in front of the entire audience, declare that each one separately, made by the professor the analysis is correct, Treven allows you to look at each other's papers. According to the professor, such research is a good start to studying psychological courses. An interesting point is that the strength of the Barnum effect is not influenced by the prestige of an astrologer or psychologist, and gullibility is inherent equally in both men and women. R. Snyder studied satisfaction with the horoscope he compiled (one content for everyone). More satisfied were those whose astrologer asked the year, month, day and time of birth before drawing up a horoscope. Snyder also found that the results of an astrological personality analysis were considered very reliable by the subjects when there were five times more positive judgments than negative ones. If the description contained twice as many negative judgments as positive ones, then the subjects did not consider it reliable. People who are worried, upset, anxious, not very happy, who are looking for an opportunity to get some support, want to get rid of depressing experiences are more likely to perceive the descriptions as reliable. and uncertainty. Study participants may also produce artifacts depending on their behavior. “Helpful” people try to please the experimenter; they are ready to do boring, lengthy, meaningless work. “Cautious” people avoid mistakes and present themselves in the best light. “Open” ones follow the experimenter’s whims to demonstrate their trust. “Transparent” people love cooperation and flaunt their own experiences. “Egoists” strive to confirm their own self-esteem. “Suspicious” people try to hide their true reactions. The course of the study can be influenced by certain uncontrolled conditions that change the effect of the experimental factor, violate internal validity and cause artifacts:

Background, those specific events that occur between the first and second dimensions simultaneously with the experimental influence.
Natural development, that is, those changes that arise as a result of the natural course of things, for example, fatigue that occurs over time, the maturation of the subjects.
The testing effect, the influence of performing test tasks on the results of a repeated study.
Instability of instrumental measurement (instrumental errors), which manifest themselves in changes in the “calibration” of the instrument, in the states of the observer or evaluative approaches, due to which specific unexpected measurement results arise.
Statistical regression that occurs when groups are selected based on extreme scores and scores.
Selection of subjects, non-equivalence of groups in composition, which leads to systematic error in the results.
Attrition during a study is when participants drop out unevenly from comparison groups.
The interaction of selection factors with natural development, taken as the effect of an experimental variable.

Factors that violate external validity:

Reactive effect, or testing interaction effect. It is possible to reduce or increase the sensitivity of participants to experimental effects through pretesting. The results of those who completed the pretest will not be representative of those who did not take the pretest.
Effects of interaction between selection and experimental influence.
The conditions of the organization of the study, which determine the reaction of participants to the experiment, do not subsequently allow the data obtained to be extended to individuals who were influenced by the same factors in a non-experimental situation.
Mutual interference of experimental influences, which occurs when the subjects under study are under successive influences that begin to accumulate.

People tend to have a specific perception of a fairly general description of their personality. That is why many people trust astrological forecasts so much and are convinced that the zodiac characteristics are absolutely suitable for them. In fact, such descriptions are quite general, vague, even vague and therefore suitable for everyone, since they actually do not describe anyone in particular.

Psychologists call such features of our perception the Barnum effect - in honor of the famous former American entrepreneur and showman.

This term was proposed by the American psychologist A. Farn.

What is the Barnum effect?

The Barnum effect is the tendency or psychological readiness of people to uncritically accept general, vague, vague, rather banal characteristics as an accurate description of their personality.

The Barnum effect is also called the subjective confirmation effect or the Forer effect, since it was Bertram R. Forer who first conducted an experiment in 1948 in which he demonstrated its effect.

This experiment consisted of Bertram Forer asking students to answer a series of test questions and assuring that based on the results he would compile a psychological analysis of the personal characteristics of each test participant.

However, instead of an individual psychological portrait, the experimenter gave everyone the same text of a regular horoscope. Forer then asked each student to rate the resulting characteristic on a five-point scale to determine whether the description corresponded to their actual personality characteristics. The average score he received as a result of the calculations was 4.26 points.

Barnum effect. Experiment text

Here is a text proposed by B. Barnum, which has been used more than once by other researchers in similar studies: “You need other people to love and respect you, and at the same time you are quite self-critical. Although you have some personal shortcomings, you are able to compensate for them. You have significant potential that you have not yet taken advantage of. You appear to be a disciplined and confident person on the outside, but inside you are worried and insecure. Sometimes you are overwhelmed by doubts about whether you made the right decision or did the right thing. You prefer variety and change, and are dissatisfied when you are limited by strict rules. You are proud of yourself as an independent, intelligent person; you do not take other people's opinions for granted without sufficient evidence. However, you think that you should not be too open and sincere with others. Sometimes you are an extrovert, friendly and sociable, and at other times you are introverted, cautious, reserved. Some of your aspirations are unrealistic."

Barnum effect paradox

The Barnum effect can also be explained by people's great interest in themselves. Psychologists have been studying this effect for about 40 years. In part, they found out under what conditions a person tends to react this way to generalized descriptions of his personality, when people tend to believe this, and what properties of those judgments most stimulate this effect.

Factors influencing the Barnum effect:

1. The subject is convinced that the description suits only him.
2. The vagueness of the characteristic makes it applicable to almost any person, and this makes the subject think about its validity.
3. The subject is convinced of the authority of the one who formulated the description.
4. The description mainly contains positive characteristics.

Confirmation of the Barnum effect

Barnum's ingenious experiment was repeated more than once, and the effect was always consistently repeated.

For example, one French psychologist placed an advertisement in newspapers offering the services of an astrologer. Having received hundreds of orders, the psychologist sent out the same horoscope to his clients, consisting of general abstract judgments. As a result, more than 200 people sent letters to the psychologist, full of gratitude for the incredibly accurate astrological forecast.

Another psychologist, Ross Stagner, conducted an experiment using B. Barnum's design with people who had experience in critically evaluating other people in their job responsibilities. He asked 68 workers to fill out a psychological questionnaire, on the basis of which it was possible to create a fairly detailed description of their personality.

He also compiled one false description, in which he used 13 generalized phrases from different horoscopes. The researcher read out the characteristics of the respondents, claiming that this description was made on the basis of a psychological test. He also asked to determine to what extent each phrase corresponds to reality, to what extent it reflects the character of the person being studied. More than 30% of the participants thought that their psychological portraits were written surprisingly accurately, 40% - quite accurately, and none of the respondents identified their description as completely false.

The significant thing in this experiment was that rather critical people who had extensive experience in assessing people took part in the experiment.

The majority of participants considered the following descriptions to be the most accurate: “You prefer variety in life, and begin to get bored if you are limited by strict rules”, “Although you have some personal shortcomings, you usually know how to cope with them”, “Your hopes sometimes can be quite unrealistic."

Australian professor and psychology teacher Robert Treven annually asks first-year students to record their dreams for a month. After this, the professor, in great secrecy, gives each student the same psychological characteristics of their personality, consisting of 13 fairly positive phrases, which Stagner also used, and asks them to evaluate how well it corresponds to them.

When students in front of the whole audience declare that each individual analysis of their personality made by the professor is correct, Treven allows them to look at each other's characteristics. According to the professor, such a stunning result is a good start to studying psychology.

Features of the Barnum effect

An interesting point is that the strength of the Barnum effect is not influenced by the prestige of an astrologer or psychologist, and gullibility is inherent equally in all people, both men and women.

It is characteristic that the Barnum effect works only on positive statements.

This feature of the Barnum effect was established by R. Snyder. He found that the results of an astrological description of a personality were considered very reliable by the subjects when it contained five times more positive judgments than negative ones. If the description contains twice as many negative judgments as positive ones, then the subjects considered it unreliable.

Moreover, people who are upset, anxious, not very happy, who are looking for an opportunity to receive external support, and want to get rid of any worries or uncertainty are more likely to perceive descriptions as reliable.

Today, many scientists partially explain the phenomenon of the widespread popularity of astrological horoscopes, palmistry, socionics and other pseudosciences with the Barnum Effect.