The Barnum effect

The Barnum emergenceAbstractThe Barnum do is a theory that originated from psychologist capital of Minnesota Meehl. The Barnum effect represents a type of exposedive validation in which an idiosyncratic finds individualal meaning in a distinguishment that could apply to umteen state (Cardwell, M. and Flanagan, C. 2012). In 1949, Forer went on to postulate this effect by big(a) his schoolchilds an extract form an astrology column, finding that some(prenominal) students endorsed the extract and mat it was trailered to them.I whence propose an prove which pull up stakes explore whether their ar different resolutions in genders to a standardize spirit exposition. The military issues participating atomic number 18 for each one college students shortly canvas history. The surmise in that respectfore be, women go protrude burst a significantly high verity rating than men on the standardised personality verbal description. The null hypothesis is therefore, t here leave behind non be a significant difference between men and fair sex then asked to position a standard personality description. The Mann-Whitney test pass on be utilize to help interpret the findings.Despite there being a minimal difference in the slays with females scoring high than males, the audition showed that the results where non significant thus the null hypothesis is support. originThe Barnum effect is a theory that originated from psychologist Paul Meehl, in reference to to P. T. Barnum, an American showman with a reputation as a master manipulator. The Barnum effect represents a type of subjective validation in which a person finds personal meaning in a pedagogy that could apply to many people (Cardwell, M. and Flanagan, C. 2012). If a subject is given statements that appear to cast been specifically prep bed for them, they often will validate its accuracy, thus giving validly to the means characterd to create the statement.In 1949 Bertram, R. Forer wa nted to study this effect and devised a study use his students to give some incite into the orison of pseudo-science. Students completed a personality test that he has simply copied come in of a newspaper column, and that the results would produce a unique personality analysis. by and by this the students were asked to rate the analysis form 0 (poor) to 5 (excellent) in foothold of how immaculate they felt it reflected their own personality. Most of the students endorsed this statement with the average progress to being 4.26 (Cardwell, M. and Flanagan, C. 2012).This gives us an insight into the popularity of pseudo-science. Many people put outstanding faith in horoscopes and personality tests the truth is that predictions like these only run low because we like to hear information about our selves.Another study into gullibility carried out by N.D. Sunberg (1955) asked students to complete a standardised test employ by psychologists to rate an individuals personality. The y were then given results, either written by two experienced psychologists, or a false champion. When asked which result was much than accurate, 50% of participants identified the fake results as much accurate (C billet, A. 2014). This test identified the fallacy of personal validation, whereby an individual cannot be relied on to validate their own character or personality.The outcome of the Barnum effect can save be effected by variables such(prenominal)(prenominal) as education and gender. A study into pseudo-science and peoples beliefs was necessitateed by Keeports and Morier (1994). Their study looked at a group of students who were studying science and pseudo-science presenting them with a suspicionnaire at the beginning of the course about their beliefs. afterward the course the same questionnaire was given to the students and found a significant reducing in their belief of the paranormal. This shows how education can clearly have an contact on peoples belief in the paranormal.It has been generally accepted that there atomic number 18 no gender differences in the Barnum effect phenomenon. However, research carried out by Piper-Terry and Downey (1998) found that under certain conditions, gender could effect the results (Layne, C. 1998). They had their friends administer a personality test to psychology students then preceded to claim that they had interpreted their response based on what they were learning in class. The students rated the interpretations highly in line with the Barnum effect, however women rated these more accurately than men did. Piper-Terry and Downey concluded that woman gave high accuracy ratings because they wanted to help out their friends whereas men where less be to help. Another interpretation could be that women atomic number 18 more open and therefore expect their friends interpretations to be more accurate.Furthermore, an argument can be make for women to be more susceptible of the Barnum effect. Studies have fo und 65% of church building congregations in the UK are made up of women (Thackray, J. 2013). An argument that is used to rationalize this could be that women are seen to be more emotional, which could lead to greater ghostlike openness, and a willingness to accept faith without the need of evidence. However, some simply state that because of the ageing population of the church the number of women in the congregation will increase simply because of their longer life spans.It is therefore the aim of this experiment to compare the susceptibility of men and woman. When asked by a neutral society to rate a standardised personalty description according to its accuracy.The hypothesis therefore being women will give a significantly higher accuracy rating than men on the standardised personality descriptionThe null hypothesis is therefore, there will not be a significant difference between men and woman then asked to rate a standard personality description.MethodDesignThis experiment will be a laboratory experiment carried out in a class room with as much d cardinal as realizable to help limit extraneous variables that may effect the result such as noise distractions or demand characteristics. The experiment will use an independent measure and involve a group of individuals that will conduct the experiment once.The independent variable will be the participants genderThe subordinate variable will be the participants response to the standardized personalty description.ParticipantsThe participants that will be used in this experiment will be students, currently studying history, aged between 19 and 31. The sample will constitute of 12 females and 8 males and they will not be known the experamtor. mechanism1 set of standardised book of instructions.20 personalty assessment question sheets20 standardised personalty descriptions.1 classroomProcedure.The participants were scratch line asked if they would comply to take part in an experiment. carried out by a sham un iversity into a new type of personality assessment that could give accurate information about an individuals personality.The participants then pass on out a standardised questionnaire and instructed to answer each question on the paper. Once all the questionnaires were salt away I told them I would return in one week with a personality description for each individual.On my return I handed out the standardised personality description informing them that it was personal and should not be shared with anyone else. I then asked them to rate the description out of 10 with 1 been not at all relevant and 10 been extremely relevant. Once these had been collected in I debriefed the participants and explained the deception.ResultsDescriptive Statistics illative StatisticsMann-Whitney U testDiscussionThe results of the study showed through analysis that using the Mann-Whitney U test it was found that the null hypothesis is shown to be correct. The data-based hypothesis that females will give a significantly higher tot up than males to a standardised personality description is rejected. However, by looking at the mean results from the two groups we can see that females did give a marginally higher score on the personality description.Although the null hypothesis was supported the Barnum effect was clearly evident in this experiment. A large legal age of the participants showed a score of 5 or higher with only one scoring below, as such we can say that the deception requisite to conduct the experiment was a success. Moreover, among female participants two gave a score as high as 10 indicating how firmly they believed that the personality description had been trailered to them as individuals. This experiment therefore mirrors the results of the study carried out by Bertram, R. Foster, as the group of students he used also gave relatively high make headway to a, after being told it was tailored to the individual. Furthermore, comparisons can be drawn from the experimen t carried out by N.D. Sunberg (1995) in which standardised tests, real and fake, were used to evaluate personalities. Both experiments can reinforce the fallacy of personal validation, clearly wake that people cannot be trusted to validate their own personality.There are several reasons why the hypotheses was not significantly supported. One of these could have been that the participants used share many similarities, such as studying the same subject which could be an indicator of a certain personality type. Furthermore, the fact that they are students could indicate a certain level of intelligence. Both of these factors would make it unassailable to generalise the study to the rest of the population and as such dismantle the ecological rigourousness of the experiment. This problem is shared by others who have been researching the subject including that of Piper-Terry and Downey (1994), who used psychology students for there experiments.One of the factors that could have affecte d the results is that their were more female than male participants. This could have effected the statistical conclusion that was drawn. The experiment was carried out under laboratory conditions in a college classroom which could have effected the outcome of the experiment. Although this setting allowed for many extraneous variables to be controlled, such as the tiredness of a student or their willingness to give the study their full attention could not be. Furthermore, the placement of the participants sitting around tables sooner of individually could have allowed them to see each others question answers or personality description, possibly leading them to alter their answers. Both of these criticisms could lower the internal validity of the experiment.A major strength of this study is the standardised set of instructions that were given to each student. By doing this we can ensure that each of the participants richly understand what they are expected to do as well as leading to the ability to easy recreate the experiment. Furthermore, standardised instructions leads to all the participants being treated the same and so lowers the risk of experimenter effects.With regard to ethics, one of the main concerns was the creation a deception in order for the experiment to be effective. The British Psychology Society state in their guidelines that learned deception should be avoided whenever achievable (Hayes, N. 1993). As a deception was required steps were taken to ensure participants were deceived as little as possible and that the true nature of the experiment was clearly communicated to them after it was complete . This was through by fully debriefing the participants after the study had been concluded. This involved fully informing them about the nature of the research and reassuring them about their execution within the study, as well as answering any questions that they skill have about the experiment. (Lawton, J et al, 2011).Appendix 1 Personal sta tementWhile disciplined on the outside you tend to be meagrely insecure at measures and you have need for other people to like and admire you. You prefer a certain amount of channelise and variety however you become unhappy when you experience hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. Over the years you have learnt that us wise not to be to frank while revealing yourself to others and that it is best to hold onto your views until you feel that the time is right to express them. At times your outgoing, pleasant to talk to and sociable. However, there are time when when faced with a new situation that you feel slightly cautious and reserved. While some of your future plans may come along out of reach you nevertheless are willing to put in the work to try and make them a reality.Please score the accuracy of this personal statement0 = very poor 1 = extremely accurateAppendix 2 QuestionnaireInstructionsIn the table below, for each statement 1-50 mark how much you agree with on the scale 1-10, where 1=disagree, 10 extremely accurate.ReferencesCardwell, M. and Flanagan, C. (2012) Psychology AS the complete companion student book for AQA A. 3rd edn. Oxford Oxford University Press.Christopher Layne (1998) GENDER AND THE BARNUM EFFECT A REINTERPRETATION OF PIPER-TERRY AND DOWNEYS RESULTS. Psychological Reports hatful 83Cline, A. (2014) Flaws in Reasoning and Arguments Barnum Effect GullibilityAvailable at URL http//atheism.about.com/od/logicalflawsinreasoning/a/barnum.htm(Accessed on 09 December 2014)Hayes, N. (1993) A first course in psycholog. London HarrapLAWTON, J., GROSS, R. and ROLLS, G. (2011) Psychology A2 for AQA (A). Abingdon Hodder Education.Thackray, J. (2013) Why do more women flock to the Church?Available at URL http//www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10035155/Why-do-more-women-flock-to-the-Church.html(Accessed on 10 December 2014)