Will Individuals Rate a Description of Themselves as Being More Accurate If They Believe It Was Written Specifically for Their Star Sign
Barnum Effect: Will individuals rate a description of themselves as being more accurate if they believe it was written specifically for their star sign
Abstract
This study is a partial replication of the work carried out by Snyder (1974) on the Barnum effect. Two groups were used, one were told that their description had been specifically written for their star sign, whilst the other group was told that they had received a general personality description. Both groups were then asked to rate the description on a scale of 1-5 for being accurate, as expected the group who thought the personality description was for their star sign on average gave the description a higher rating of being accurate. This was consistent with both the work of Forer and Snyder. However, it should be noted that this study was carried out on psychology students and so we must question the ecological validity of such a study and various other issues that are raised within the discussion
Introduction
The Barnum effect is named such because of P.T. Barnum, who was known for the sound bite of "we 've got something for everyone". Today when we talk of the Barnum effect we are referring to the observation of when individuals are given a personality description of themselves, they will give it a high accuracy rating if they believe the description has been personalized specifically for them. However, the description is vague and general enough to be applied to the vast majority of the population. This is what will be looked at in the study.
The Barnum effect has been replicated by Forer (1948); he stated that individuals tend to accept generalised, vague personality descriptions as being true. Forer gave personality tests to his students and told them they were each going to be receiving a tailored personality analysis that had been based on their own test results and to rate their personality analysis between 1-5 (1 being poor and 5 excellent) on how close to their personality the analysis
Abstract
This study is a partial replication of the work carried out by Snyder (1974) on the Barnum effect. Two groups were used, one were told that their description had been specifically written for their star sign, whilst the other group was told that they had received a general personality description. Both groups were then asked to rate the description on a scale of 1-5 for being accurate, as expected the group who thought the personality description was for their star sign on average gave the description a higher rating of being accurate. This was consistent with both the work of Forer and Snyder. However, it should be noted that this study was carried out on psychology students and so we must question the ecological validity of such a study and various other issues that are raised within the discussion
Introduction
The Barnum effect is named such because of P.T. Barnum, who was known for the sound bite of "we 've got something for everyone". Today when we talk of the Barnum effect we are referring to the observation of when individuals are given a personality description of themselves, they will give it a high accuracy rating if they believe the description has been personalized specifically for them. However, the description is vague and general enough to be applied to the vast majority of the population. This is what will be looked at in the study.
The Barnum effect has been replicated by Forer (1948); he stated that individuals tend to accept generalised, vague personality descriptions as being true. Forer gave personality tests to his students and told them they were each going to be receiving a tailored personality analysis that had been based on their own test results and to rate their personality analysis between 1-5 (1 being poor and 5 excellent) on how close to their personality the analysis
References: Snyder, C. R., Shenkel, R. J., & Lowery, C. R. (1977). Acceptance of personality interpretations: The "Barnum effect" and beyond. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45(1), 104-114. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.45.1.104 Dickson, D.H Furnham, A. and Schofield, S. (1987). Accepting Personality Test Feedback: A Review of the Barnum Effect, Current Psychological Research & Reviews Snyder, C.R Anastase, A. & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological Testing (7th Ed.). Prentice Hall. Fichten, C.S. & Sunerton, B. (1983). Popular horoscopes and the "Barnum Effect", Journal of Psychology, 114, 123-134. Forer, B.R. (1949). The fallacy of personal validation: a classroom demonstration of gullibility Meehl, P.E. (1956). Wanted - a good cookbook. American Psychologist Pervin, L.A.& John, O.P