FYF 101

Saturday, December 04, 2010

astrology vs. Myers-Briggs inital data

n=20

ratings on 1 (low) to 5 (high) scale.

sorted by ave rating

3.98  Astrological Sign
3.8   Forer Universal
3.63  Myers-Briggs
3.5   Random Astrological Sign
2.98  Inverse Myers-Briggs
2.95  Random Myers-Briggs


For Discussion: Statistical analysis is coming, but for now, what does this mean?

posted by Anthony at 10:03 AM

29 Comments:

  • Given a "3" value as having a neutral connotation, I believe that this data shows that (using the averages) everyone involved could have found something or some personality trait that may apply to them and judge the whole test by that one point. I would like to see the individual scores, because if I can see the range of scores, I could judge it more accurately. But in conclusion, the averages show that something is in common and that maybe the tests are more generalized than originally thought.

    By Blogger bkohler, at Sat Dec 04, 12:28:00 PM 2010  

  • I agree. I think that the reason many of these have a rating higher than or nearly equal to 3 is because of the vagueness involved. Some aspects of these tests may work for people, but as a whole I wouldn't consider them something dependable or super scientific.

    By Blogger Unknown, at Sun Dec 05, 02:22:00 PM 2010  

  • The different sets of data all range between 2.95 and 3.98 which isn't really that far apart. There is no particular source that is completely accurate or completely inacurrate. I personally have done a Myers-Briggs test and didn't find it to be that accurate which can explain why the Astrological Sign is ranked higher in the ratings.

    By Blogger ninasorbelli, at Mon Dec 06, 10:08:00 AM 2010  

  • It is possible that the astrological sign is more general so people see more of themselves in it, from what I remember. The Myers-Briggs may be too specific for its own good.

    By Blogger Mitchell "this is my 9 profile" Yamrus, at Mon Dec 06, 10:10:00 AM 2010  

  • I do not find it surprising that the results fall in a relatively close range because the predictions are general. I do find it interesting that the Myers-Briggs ended up being ranked below the astrological signs because that test is supposed to be more accurate then the astrological signs.

    By Blogger egreen, at Mon Dec 06, 11:01:00 AM 2010  

  • I think that these values prove that there's some basic explanation for people's personalities. I wasn't surprised that astrological sign was the highest value because a description of an astrological sign is very general and can be applied to people even if those people have differing personalities.

    By Blogger Cynthia Kiesling, at Mon Dec 06, 11:23:00 AM 2010  

  • I would have thought the Myers-Briggs test would have gotten higher ratings being it is a specific personality test and your Astrological sign is just based on your birthday which many people share the same one.

    By Blogger Jaclyn Dicarlo, at Mon Dec 06, 05:17:00 PM 2010  

  • I think it is normal to see all of the tests within the same range. I believe this since the tests given are interpretations of information. One's interpretation may be different from another person's thought of the same events. Therefore, i believe that the numbers likely will all be close to the neutral standpoint due to the possibility of application of parts of each test to life's events.

    By Blogger dudeck20, at Mon Dec 06, 05:50:00 PM 2010  

  • i think that having a score of almost four must mean something on a scale of 1-5. Also,, an almost 3 isn't bad either! I know some people think that it's because it is so general that it has such a high rating, but don't just put the blame on vagueness, what else is there to make it be so high? did you ever consider that it is actually working? and thats why its so high?

    By Blogger Unknown, at Mon Dec 06, 06:00:00 PM 2010  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger orane churchill, at Mon Dec 06, 10:32:00 PM 2010  

  • these test numbers ranges from 2.9 to approximately 4. It proves they are test that can explain that individuals act a certain way and these numbers shows that you can group a bunch of people together and they will have similar traits. But on the other hand, i dont think that these things are very accurate anyways.

    By Blogger orane churchill, at Mon Dec 06, 10:35:00 PM 2010  

  • i agree with cynthia because of the fact that these test honestly pose as a possible answer to explain people's behavior.

    By Blogger orane churchill, at Mon Dec 06, 10:36:00 PM 2010  

  • I think a lot of these are just by chance really... I agree with Mitch Yamrus that astrology is generalized just so people can relate themselves with it.

    By Blogger ColtonMiller, at Tue Dec 07, 03:10:00 PM 2010  

  • I also agree with Colton. I feel that astrology is generalized so that everyone can find something that has something to do with them. It also is not very specific, again so that people can find something that fits them

    By Blogger kregensburg, at Tue Dec 07, 04:39:00 PM 2010  

  • I agree with Erica. I think it is interesting that the Myers Briggs falls below the astrological signs. But I think in this study since we just based it off birthdays/signs and nothing specific, such as more details with birth charts, it was very generalized so more people probably felt it related to them.

    By Blogger samanthatellip, at Tue Dec 07, 07:49:00 PM 2010  

  • Each of these tests are how to find one's personality traits and seem to be all close in range. I agree that the astrological sign is just another way that people can relate themselves to. It is weird that it is the highest ranked, because the other tests seem to be more of a reliable source. I wouldn't consider these tests reliable in the fact that people depend on them too much, and all personalities are different.

    By Blogger NatalieSmirne, at Wed Dec 08, 08:19:00 AM 2010  

  • i think that it makes sense that the astrolgoical signs are rated so high. they've been around longer than the myers briggs test. they have most likely been perfected to the most minute detail. if we can find patterns almsot everywhere in nature, is it so hard to say that maybe after years of analyzing people, astrologers found a way to find the pattern between birthdate and personality.

    By Blogger Unknown, at Wed Dec 08, 01:21:00 PM 2010  

  • I think we can all agree that there is a statistical vagueness that places all of these near or above three, but that isn’t really the surprising data. The real things to note are that the actual Myers Briggs scored above its random and inverse, the universal was second, and the most confusing, astrological signs beat out the bunch. The Myers Briggs data to me makes sense; it is a tuned scientific personality chart that isn’t perfect. The Forer universal displays how vague results can convince people that a construct is all about them. The close nature of the astrological signs, to me, suggests that the astrological signs carry a vague nature about them as well. I feel it is either that the signs are vaguer, or it is random statistical chance that it is .18 higher than the universal. This data can also lead me to assume that the more specific and tailored Myers-Briggs test was shot down by the crowd, for the very fact that it was tailored and specific.

    Mark Attilio

    By Blogger Vader, at Wed Dec 08, 06:01:00 PM 2010  

  • I also agree with Colton that this was all by chance. If you ran it again, the numbers wouldn't be that similar to the first results; grant it they would be close considering it is a 1-5 scale but realistically it wouldn't be near this again. I also agree that astrology is very generaliazed so it can fit to anyone anywhere.

    By Blogger tyler.young, at Wed Dec 08, 08:49:00 PM 2010  

  • I think that it is not out of the ordinary to see results that are mostly similar. Since that value "3" for the test would be neutral, I would believe that almost everybody who took the test would have felt that something in the description describes them. I also think that the scores that were voted a five are commmon only because the description is so generic.

    By Blogger Unknown, at Thu Dec 09, 02:51:00 PM 2010  

  • I agree with Mark that the data is not surprising, in that the Myers-Brigg test was shot down because it was "specific and tailored." This means that people just do not have faith in the Myers-Brigg testing.

    By Blogger Unknown, at Thu Dec 09, 03:14:00 PM 2010  

  • I thought it was strange to see that the myers briggs test did not do better then the astrological. I thought the myers briggs test would have gotten a better score then it did because it actually bases itself off of questions that the person asks unlike the the astrological sign. I guesss we can say that these types of predictive tools are really made to be general so they can work for any person in any situation.

    By Blogger mttshaver, at Thu Dec 09, 11:15:00 PM 2010  

  • I agree with Mitchell that the data may show that the astrological signs may be more vague and therefore people believe that the description fits them better than the other descriptions. Since the Myers-Brigg descriptions had the lower averages out of the tests, this is strong evidence towards the fact that the astrological descriptions are more vague than the Myers-Briggs descriptions.

    By Blogger Amy.Davies, at Thu Dec 09, 11:19:00 PM 2010  

  • It really is difficult to draw any sort of conclusion from such a small sample size. I wouldn't trust any of the data, but based on what is seen so far, I see no reason to believe astrological signs are better than the Myers-Briggs Test, even though I still see this as a good sign for astrology, as the score of 3.98 is strong, even with only 20 respondents. One more thing, I'm hesitant to trust the Myers-Briggs results, since I'm not sure how honest the people were being on those tests.

    By Blogger RyanHabib, at Sat Dec 11, 09:43:00 PM 2010  

  • I think that since the astrological signs are so vague, people tend to see more of themselves in it

    By Blogger BrianZ, at Sun Dec 12, 07:26:00 PM 2010  

  • I agree with the ratings that each of these items recieved and for one specific point. I think that because astrological signs were framed to describe the group of people born within that time period that is what makes them the number one rated connection of personality to being. People know that they are supposed to be described a certain way, or they truely believe they are how the sign is described and they voted for that as their highest rated.

    By Blogger Amber Nicole Konopka, at Mon Dec 13, 08:22:00 AM 2010  

  • I feel that these results are random. I believe that astrology has so many parts to it, so that everyone can somehow see a little connection between the astrological sign and themselves.

    By Blogger Emily Christian, at Mon Dec 13, 04:34:00 PM 2010  

  • The more vague a description if a personality is, the easier it is for someone to agree with it. The more specific a description is the easier it is for someone to either say yes this fits me or no it doesn't. Also, when all the description in a survey are positive, the more people will agree that that description fits them. When a survey includes more negative characteristics the more people will tend to not want to agree that a negative characteristic fits the,.

    By Blogger Nick Patricia, at Mon Dec 13, 09:41:00 PM 2010  

  • People may not take the test as honestly as they think they are. I think that these personality tests may not be the best way to define a person since people usually perceive themselves differently than their peers and friends view them. I don't know what exactly is asked in a Myers-Briggs test but if a person is asked to rank themselves on personal qualities, the person may be harder on themself or vice versa.

    By Blogger Amy.Davies, at Tue Dec 14, 05:40:00 AM 2010  



<< Home