• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Astrology test protocol in progress..

From what I recall Vedic astrology takes stellar drift in to account. Kuko - can you confirm what "school" of astrology the guy studies?
 
Suggestion for marking:

Have a third party count the number of predictions or descriptions, and label or identify them somehow (i.e. list them on a seperate marking sheet)

For each item each volunteer will mark it either "yes", "no", or "could apply to anyone"

Or is the last one redundant?
 
My fiancee, who is alas a complete lover of all things woo, has pointed out a flaw in the protocol - people are often really lousy judges of their own personality. They'll agree with anything positive you say about them!

She suggests, and I agree, that a better protocol may be for the subjects to nominate a number of people who know them well, and *those* people judge how well the essays match.
 
How about matching Astrology results to established personality tests, such as the Meyer-Briggs?

Alternatively, matching Astrology results to major health or life events. Example questions:

Which of the following three people (all of whom are are similar in age!) had a health issue in the last three years?

Which of the following people is a triathlete? A woodworker? A musician? A stockbroker?

Which of the following is married/single/divorced? Again, similar ages are important here...

I can also run statistics for you if you'd like!
 
icerat said:
My fiancee, who is alas a complete lover of all things woo, has pointed out a flaw in the protocol - people are often really lousy judges of their own personality. They'll agree with anything positive you say about them!

She suggests, and I agree, that a better protocol may be for the subjects to nominate a number of people who know them well, and *those* people judge how well the essays match.
Click to expand...

I think this is why everyone gets a copy of all the readings. If the statements are sufficiently precise and accurate, then everyone should instantly pick theirs out, and be able to say "these others don't match me at all"...

If everyone can't pick their test out, then the test has failed. (In this case you should also get 6 people saying "none of these is me")

PS - has the testee agreed to what would constitute a failure? (Maybe get something in writing?)
 
vIQleS said:
If everyone can't pick their test out, then the test has failed. (In this case you should also get 6 people saying "none of these is me")
Click to expand...

Yes, but it would be an unfair test, since one would predict given the protocol that even if the astrologist was accurate people will not be able to discriminate.

So they need a chance to fail fairly not unfairly. :)
 
vIQleS said:
If everyone can't pick their test out, then the test has failed. (In this case you should also get 6 people saying "none of these is me")
Click to expand...
I've run a couple of these tests, and "none of these is me" is by far the most common response. Many of the subjects said they ended up asking their 'significant other' to help pick one out, and most found it equally difficult.
 
icerat said:
Yes, but it would be an unfair test, since one would predict given the protocol that even if the astrologist was accurate people will not be able to discriminate.

So they need a chance to fail fairly not unfairly. :)
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you're saying here...

If the astologer was accurate, then each 'profile' should relate to only one person (maybe with a few overlaps here and there - e.g. "you work with children").

So we would expect that the people who are not chosen as the 4 profiles will hand back all 4 having given them a very low score for accuracy. And the 4 that are chosen will be able to rate 1 of the 4 much higher than the rest.

How is the test unfair?

icerat said:
...that even if the astrologist was accurate people will not be able to discriminate.
Click to expand...

???

Isn't that the assumption of the test? Accurate means that each profile realtes to one person and one person only.
 
vIQleS said:
For each item each volunteer will mark it either "yes", "no", or "could apply to anyone"

Or is the last one redundant?
Click to expand...
No. If astrology is valid then it should "perform". If it "could apply to anyone" then astrology hasn't "performed".
 
ynot said:
No. If astrology is valid then it should "perform". If it "could apply to anyone" then astrology hasn't "performed".
Click to expand...

I was thinking it might be redundant in the sense that, if it could apply to anyone, then everyone will tick yes and therefore that point has failed...
 
vIQleS said:
I was thinking it might be redundant in the sense that, if it could apply to anyone, then everyone will tick yes and therefore that point has failed...
Click to expand...
Sorry, my misunderstanding.

The trouble with astrology tests is that astrology is cook-booked to a great degree and particular birth details are ingredients that bake a particular cake. If the test subjects are very knowledgeable about astrology they may recognise whether the reading is their own cake or not. I would recommend using people that don't have a good knowledge of astrology.
 
Last edited:
icerat said:
My fiancee, who is alas a complete lover of all things woo, has pointed out a flaw in the protocol - people are often really lousy judges of their own personality. They'll agree with anything positive you say about them!

She suggests, and I agree, that a better protocol may be for the subjects to nominate a number of people who know them well, and *those* people judge how well the essays match.
Click to expand...
I understand what she is saying in respect to a test, but does she understand what she is saying in regard to practice?

When astrologers give readings for believers, do the astrologers discount the believers' agreements and tell them not to take it seriously until they have had friends conduct double-blind assessments first?

This is another version of what we see in so many proposed tests--the claimant describes or implies abilities that are incredibly obvious and irrefutable but in protocol discussions makes it clear that such obviousness won't be apparent in the test.
 
FTR: I like most of the traits assigned to me, especially those that are hard to pin down.
FTR: I blush and demur the negative traits, but don't consciously reject them.
FTR: I recognize but deflect the negative traits.

June 8, 1954. Take it from there and try to impress me.
 
ynot said:
No. If astrology is valid then it should "perform". If it "could apply to anyone" then astrology hasn't "performed".
Click to expand...

This depends completely on the claim. I don't think the guy Kuko is talking about is claiming 100 % accuracy...
 
Garrette said:
When astrologers give readings for believers, do the astrologers discount the believers' agreements and tell them not to take it seriously until they have had friends conduct double-blind assessments first?
Click to expand...
No-one would ever have believed in astrology if people had not perceived their astrological readings to be more accurate descriptions of them than would be expected by chance. Everyone I've ever known who gave any credence to astrology did so for that reason.

It's only when blinded tests show that that perception is erroneous and due entirely to the Forer Effect that astrologers suddenly decide that people can't reliably rate their own readings for accuracy.
 
Pixel42 said:
No-one would ever have believed in astrology if people had not perceived their astrological readings to be more accurate descriptions of them than would be expected by chance. Everyone I've ever known who gave any credence to astrology did so for that reason.

It's only when blinded tests show that that perception is erroneous and due entirely to the Forer Effect that astrologers suddenly decide that people can't reliably rate their own readings for accuracy.
Click to expand...
I think that's my point, or at least part of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom