The relation between paranormal beliefs and psychological traits: The case of Astrology –
Brief report
Antonis Koutsoumpis
Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Author Note
Antonis Koutsoumpis ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9242-4959
OSF data: https://osf.io/62yfj/?view_only=c6bf948a5f3e4f5a89ab9bdd8976a1e2
I have no conflicts of interest to disclose
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: De Boelelaan 1105,
1081HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]
The present manuscript briefly reports and makes public data collected in the spring of
2016 as part of my b-thesis at the University of Crete, Greece. The raw data, syntax, and the
Greek translation of scales and tasks are publicly available at the OSF page of the project. An extended version of the manuscript (in Greek), is available upon request. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first public dataset on the astrological and paranormal beliefs in Greek population. Introduction
The main goal of this work was to test the relation between Astrological Belief (AB) to a plethora of psychological constructs. To avoid a very long task, the study was divided into three separate studies independently (but simultaneously) released. Study 1 explored the relation between AB, Locus of Control, Optimism, and Openness to Experience. Study 2 tested two astrological hypotheses (the sun-sign and water-sign effects), and explored the relation between personality, AB, and zodiac signs. Study 3 explored the relation between AB and paranormal beliefs. Recruitment followed both a snowball procedure and it was also posted in social media groups of various Greek university departments. The completion of the study took place online and participation was anonymous and voluntary. The samples across the three studies were not independent. Participants were presented with all the three studies and they were invited to complete any number of them (one, two, or three). The number of participants varied from 511
(Study 2) to 217 (Study 3). After data collection, participants were matched across the three studies using the key variables of birthdate, age, gender, and birthplace. The number of participants who participated in all three studies and their data were successfully matched across the three datasets was 156. In the following pages the results are reported separately per study, but the merged dataset can be found at the OSF page of the project. Study 1 – Belief in Astrology, Locus of Control, and Optimism
Locus of Control (LoC; Rotter, 1966) is a psychological construct describing the degree to which one attributes the control of their life events to internal or external forces. When an event “is perceived as the result of luck, chance, fate, or under the control of powerful others
[…] we have labelled this a belief in external control” (pp. 1 ; Rotter, 1966. On the contrary, when “the person perceives that the event is contingent upon his own behavior or his own relatively permanent characteristics, we have termed this a belief in internal control” (pp. 1;
Rotter, 1966). Since Astrology asserts that external forces (e.g., the sun, planets, moon) affect personal traits, it was expected that participants who believe in Astrology will tend to have external LoC (Hypothesis 1). For exploratory reasons, the relation between astrological belief and Optimism was also tested without making any specific prediction.
Method
The recruitment method is described in the Introduction. The sample size was 273 (44 men), and the mean age of participants was 25.44 years (SD = 7.37).
Measures
Belief in Astrology. Astrological belief was measured in two ways. First, using the Belief in Astrology Inventory (BAI; Chico & Lorenzo-Seva, 2006), which consists of 24 items (e.g.,
“You can predict what a person is like if you know his zodiac sign”). The scale was translated to
Greek by the author. Responses were given in a 5-point scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree), with higher scores indicating higher belief in Astrology. The Cronbach’s alpha of the scale was .96. The second measure was a single item Astrology Belief (AB) scale
(“Do you believe in zodiac signs?”), and responses were given in a 3-point scale (1 = No/Rather no, 2 = Neither no nor yes, 3 = Yes/Rather yes). Due to a mistake in data collection, 126 participants didn’t indicate their astrological belief in the AB measure.
Locus of control. The Greek version of Rotter’s (1966) scale was used to measure Locus of Control (LoC; Fakinos, 1979), which measures the degree to which one believes they have control over the outcomes of their lives (internal locus) or that external forces, beyond their powers, have control over their lives (external locus). The scale consists of 29 forced-choice situations (including 6 filler items), one of which represents internal and the other external LoC
(e.g., “Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to bad luck” – external locus;
“People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make” – internal locus). Scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating external LoC. Cronbach’s alpha was .72.
Optimism. Optimism was measured with the Life Orientation Test (Scheier, Carver, &
Bridges, 1994), which consists of 10 items (e.g., “In uncertain times I usually expect the best”), four of which are filler items. The scale was translated to Greek by the author. Responses were given in a 5-point scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree), and the Cronbach’s alpha was .81.
Openness to Experience. Openness was measured using the items from the Traits
Personality Questionnaire 5 (TPQue5; Tsaousis & Kerpelis, 2004), a personality inventory developed to measure the Big-5 personality model in the Greek language. The domain of
Openness to Experience consists of 15 items (e.g., “I’m interested in all forms of art”).
Responses were given in a 5-point scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree), and the
Cronbach’s alpha was .45.
Results and Discussion Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics and intercorrelations across all variables of
Study 1. The BAI scale correlated strongly with the AB single item scale (r = .85, p < .01). BAI
(r = .30, p < .01) and AB (r = .27, p < .01) correlated positively with external LoC, suggesting that people who believed that external forces have control over their life, scored higher in astrological belief. Furthermore, BAI correlated positively with gender (r = .24, p < .01). Women scored significantly higher than men both in BAI (mmen 2.03 = , mwomen = 2.60; t270 = -4.12, p
< .001) and AB (mmen = 1.70, mwomen = 2.03; t145 = -1.91, p = .058). Finally, external LoC was negatively correlated with Optimism (r = -.36, p < .01), suggesting that people who scored higher in Optimism were more internally locus oriented.
Table 1
Descriptive statistics and correlations between measures of Study 1
Mean SD BAI AB LoC Optimism Openness BAI 2.50 0.87 .96 AB 1.97 0.86 .85** - LoC 0.50 0.17 .30** .27** .72 Optimism 3.24 0.77 .05 .06 -.36** .81 Openness 2.65 0.39 .04 .11 .00 .06 .45 Gender 1.84 0.37 .24** .16 .09 .02 -.12* Age 25.44 7.37 -.01 -.09 -.01 .11 .10 *p<.05 **p<.01
Notes. BAI = Belief in Astrology; AB = astrological belief (single item); LoC = Locus of
Control; for gender: 1 = men, 2 = women; Cronbach’s alpha boldfaced in diagonal. Study 2 – Sun-sign and Water-sign effect
In a controversial study, Mayo, White, and Eysenck (1978) provided empirical support to the “sun-sign effect” – western Astrology’s assertion that people born under odd zodiac signs are more extraverted than those born under even zodiac signs. The study of Mayo and colleagues
(1978) was limited in that all participants were clients of the first author, a well-known astrologer, thus all participants probably had some level of belief in Astrology. In a later replication of the study (Van Rooij, Brak, & Commandeur 1988), when knowledge of Astrology was controlled for, the sun-sign effect was observed only for those with high astrological knowledge. The present study tested whether the sun-sign effect holds when belief in Astrology was controlled for. It was hypothesized that zodiac signs and belief in Astrology will interact and affect Extraversion, such that participants born under odd (vs. even) zodiac signs will score higher on Extraversion, but this effect will be significant only for those believing in Astrology
(Hypothesis 2).
Along with the sun-sign effect, the “water sign effect” was also tested – western
Astrology’s assertion that people born under water signs (Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces) are less emotionally stable. It was hypothesized that zodiac signs and belief in Astrology will interact and affect Neuroticism, such that participants born under water (vs. non-water) zodiac signs will score higher in Neuroticism, but this effect will be significant only for those believing in
Astrology (Hypothesis 3).
Method
Recruitment method is described in the Introduction. The sample size was 511 (94 men; 4 didn’t indicate gender), and the mean age of participants was 25.14 years (SD = 7.53). Measures:
Belief in Astrology. Astrological belief was measured using the single AB item from
Study 1. Due to a mistake in data collection, 159 participants didn’t indicate their astrological belief.
Zodiac sign. Participants reported their birthdate, birthplace, and birthtime. This information was used to manually calculate participants’ zodiac sign and ascendant (ascendant was not used in the present analysis). Participants were assigned to odd-even and water-non- water zodiac sign according to their sun sign.
Personality. Extraversion and Neuroticism was measured using the Traits Personality
Questionnaire 5 (TPQue5; Tsaousis & Kerpelis, 2004), which measures the Big-5 personality model in the Greek language. For exploratory reasons, the domains of Openness to Experience,
Conscientiousness and Agreeableness were also measured. Each domain scale consists of 15 items. Responses were given in a 5-point scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree), and the Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .73 - .85 (see Table 2). For Neuroticism, higher scores represent higher levels of emotional instability (i.e., lower emotional stability). One item (item
66; Neuroticism) was accidentally omitted, thus Neuroticism was calculated without item 66.
Results and Discussion
Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics and intercorrelation matrix across all variables of Study 2. Amongst the most notable results, Extraversion was negatively correlated with Odd zodiac sign (r = -.17, p < .001; df = 511), suggesting that individuals who score higher on
Extraversion tend to have odd zodiac sign. When AB was controlled for, the partial correlation between Extraversion and Odd zodiac sign was still significant (r = -.20, p < .001; df = 349). Extraversion was also positively correlated with AB (r = .14, p < .01), suggesting that
participants who scored higher in Extraversion believed more in Astrology. Neuroticism was
positively correlated with AB (r =.16, p < .01), suggesting that neurotic participants believed
more in Astrology. However Neuroticism was not significantly correlated with water zodiac
signs (r = -.05, p = .27).
Table 2
Descriptive statistics and correlations between measures of Study 2
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. Openness 3.64 .54 .73 2. Conscientiousness 3.24 .63 -.05 .83 3. Extraversion 3.34 .62 .09* .25** .83 4. Agreeableness 3.44 .52 .05 .14** .21** .77 5. Neuroticism 3.01 .71 -.09 -.26** -.30** -.13** .85 6. AB 1.95 .81 -.04 -.02 .14** .05 .16* - 7. Odd zodiac sign 1.51 .50 .00 .00 -.17** -.03 .07 -.04 - 8. Water zodiac sign 1.77 .42 .06 .02 .08 .03 -.05 .01 -.54** - 9. Gender 1.81 .39 .11* .00 .04 .01 .15** .18** -.04 .01 10. Age 25.14 7.53 -.04 .13** .09* .23** -.10* .07 .07 -.0 2 *p<.05 **p<.01
Notes. AB = Astrology belief (single item); Odd zodiac sign: odd sign = 1, even sign = 2; Water
zodiac sign: water sign = 1, non-water sign = 2; Gender: 1 = men, 2 = women; Higher
Neuroticism scores indicate higher trait neuroticism; Neuroticism was calculated without item
66; N = 511. The relation between AB and all other variables was based on df = 349. Cronbach’s
alpha boldfaced in diagonal.
Sun-sign effect
To replicate the original work of Mayo and colleagues (1978), the analysis first tested the
effect of odd-even zodiac sings on Extraversion, without taking into account the AB. An independent t-test revealed that participants with odd zodiac sign (modd = 3.45, SD = 0.61) scored significantly higher in Extraversion than participants with even zodiac signs (meven = 3.23, SD =
0.62; t509 = 3.93, p < .001), according to the sun-sign effect.
Second, the effect of odd-even zodiac sign on Extraversion was tested taking into account participants’ AB. The interaction between odd-even zodiac sign and AB on Extraversion was not
2 significant (F2,346 = 1.21, p = .30, ηρ = .01, 1-β = .26), suggesting that the effect of odd-even zodiac sign on Extraversion was not different for different levels of AB – note however that the statistical power was low to capture the interaction effect. The main effect of odd-even zodiac
2 sign was significant (F1,346 = 15.49, p < .001, ηρ = .04, 1-β = .98), suggesting that participants with odd zodiac signs scored higher in Extraversion than participants with even zodiac sign, as
2 presented above. The main effect of AB was also significant (F1,346 = 3.69, p = 0 .03 ηρ = .02, 1-β
= .68), suggesting that as astrological belief increased, Extraversion increased as well (mno/ratherno =
3.23, SD = 0.06; mneutral = 3.28, SD = 0.06; myes/ratheryes = 3.44, SD = 0.06; see also Table 2).
Figure 1. Extraversion scores for Odd-Even zodiac signs per level of Astrology belief. To test the assumption that the effect of odd-even zodiac sign on Extraversion is affected by participants’ AB, multiple mean comparisons were conducted. Figure 1 illustrates the
Extraversion scores per zodiac sign and AB, and Table 3 summarizes the statistical differences across all comparison conditions. In all comparison conditions, participants with odd zodiac sign scored higher in Extraversion compared to participants with even zodiac sign, but this difference was significant only for participants who believed in Astrology or held neutral beliefs, but not for participants who didn’t believe in Astrology. The present results failed to replicate Mayo and colleagues’ (1978) findings, and suggest that the sun-sign effect applies when participants believe in Astrology but not when they don’t.
Table 3
Multiple comparisons between odd-even zodiac signs and AB on Extraversion (sun-sign effect)
Belief in Astrology Extraversion Mean difference Sig. Odd zodiac Even zodiac No/Rather no 3.31 3.16 .15 .18 Neutral 3.39 3.16 .23 .04 Yes/Rather yes 3.64 3.25 .40 .001
Water-sign effect
To replicate the original work of Mayo and colleagues (1978), the analysis first tested the effect of water-non-water zodiac sings on Neuroticism, without taking into account participants’
AB. A t-test revealed that participants with water zodiac sign (modd = 3.07, SD = 0.71) didn’t score significantly different in Neuroticism than participants with non-water zodiac sign (meven =
2.99, SD = 0.71; t509 = 1.10, p = .27), failing to replicate the water-sign effect. The analysis was repeated employing a one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), using four levels of zodiac signs
(fire, earth, air, water) as independent variable. The effect of zodiac sign on Neuroticism was not
2 significant (F3,510 = 2.04, p = .11, ηρ = .01, 1-β = .52). Second, the effect of water zodiac sign on Neuroticism was tested taking into account participants’ AB. The interaction between water zodiac sign and AB on Neuroticism was not
2 significant (F2,346 = 1.77, p = .17, ηρ = .01, 1-β = .37), suggesting that the effect of water zodiac sign was not different for different levels of AB. The main effect of water zodiac sign was non-
2 significant (F1,346 = 2.62, p = .11, ηρ = .01, 1-β = .37), suggesting that participants with water zodiac sign didn’t score differently in Neuroticism than participants with non-water zodiac sign,
2 as presented above. The main effect of AB was significant (F2,346 = 2.89, p = 0 .002 ηρ = .04, 1-β
= .89), suggesting that as astrological belief increased, Neuroticism increased as well (mno/ratherno =
2.92, SD = 0.07; mneutral = 3.00, SD = 0.08; myes/ratheryes = 3.28, SD = 0.08; see also Table 2).
To test the assumption that the effect of water zodiac sign on Neuroticism is affected by participants’ AB, multiple mean comparisons were conducted. Table 4 summarizes the statistical differences across all comparison conditions. No comparison condition was statistically significant, failing to support the water-sign effect for any level of zodiac sign and AB.
Table 4
Multiple comparisons between water zodiac signs and AB on Neuroticism (water-sign effect)
Belief in Astrology Neuroticism Mean difference Sig. Water zodiac Non-water zodiac No/Rather no 2.88 2.98 -0.08 .56 Neutral 3.13 2.86 0.28 .07 Yes/Rather yes 3.39 3.16 0.23 .14
Study 3 – Belief in Astrology and Paranormal Beliefs
The goal of Study 3 was to explore the relation between AB and paranormal beliefs. It was expected that AB will positively correlate with paranormal beliefs but no prediction was made as to the strength on the seven subscales of the paranormal beliefs questionnaire.
Method Recruitment method is described in the Introduction. The sample size was 217 (45 men; 1 didn’t indicate gender), and the mean age of participants was 25.64 years (SD = 8.08).
Participants reported the area (humanities = 83, natural sciences = 72, non-students = 62), and year of their studies (m = 3.10, SD = 1.14).
Measures:
Belief in Astrology. Astrological belief was measured using the Belief in Astrology
Inventory (BAI; Chico & Lorenzo-Seva, 2006), similar to Study 1. Cronbach’s alpha was .96.
Paranormal beliefs. The revised Paranormal Belief scale (Tobacyk, 2004) was used to measure paranormal beliefs. The scale consists of 26 items, unequally distributed across 7 subscales: Traditional Religious Belief (e.g., “I believe in God”), Psi (e.g., “Some individuals are able to levitate (lift) objects through mental forces”), Witchcraft (e.g., “Black magic really exists”), Superstition (e.g., “If you break a mirror, you will have bad luck”), Spiritualism (e.g.,
“During altered states, such as sleep or trances, the spirit can leave the body”), Extraordinary life forms (e.g., “The Loch Ness monster of Scotland exists”), and Precognition (e.g., “Astrology is a way to accurately predict the future”). The scale produces a total score for the full scale, and separate scores per subscale. Prior to administration, the questionnaire was translated to Greek by the author. Responses were given in a 7-point scale (1 = Strongly disagree, 7 = Strongly
Agree), and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .48-.92 (see Table 5).
Results and Discussion
Table 5 presents the descriptive statistics and intercorrelation matrix between all variables of Study 3. BAI was strongly correlated with all paranormal belief subscales, ranging from r
= .31 (Psi) up to r = .73 (Precognition). As expected, most Paranormal subscales were strongly intercorrelated. Gender was positively correlated with BAI (r = .31, p < .001), the full
Paranormal Beliefs scale (r = .16, p = .02) and three subscales (Traditional Religious Beliefs,
Spiritualism, and Precognition), with women holding stronger astrological and paranormal beliefs. Age was also positively correlated with the full Paranormal Beliefs scale (r = .14, p
= .04) and three sub-scales (Psi, Witchcraft, Precognition), suggesting that older participants held more paranormal beliefs.
Table 5
Descriptive statistics and correlations between measures of Study 3
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. BAI 2.40 .88 .96 2. Paranormal full 2.95 1.01 .60** .92 3. Religious 3.85 1.76 .31** .70** .87 4. Psi 3.13 1.12 .30** .67** .28** .59 5. Witchcraft 3.07 1.80 .43** .88** .65** .49** .92 6. Superstition 1.67 0.97 .45** .49** .25** .12 .36** .76 7. Spiritualism 3.11 1.50 .58** .84** .41** .57** .63** .33** .82 8. Extraordinary 3.13 1.07 .16* .41** -.04 .33** .25** .20** .40** .48 9. Precognition 2.42 1.22 .73** .83** .43** .49** .66** .47** .72** .31** .81 10. Gender 1.79 0.41 .31** .16* .14* .02 .12 .12 .19* -.03 .19* 11. Age 25.64 8.08 -.01 .14* .13 .24** .16* -.05 .04 -.08 .14* 12. Department 1.90 0.81 -.09 .01 .05 .10 .03 -.04 -.07 -.04 -.04 13. Year of studies 3.10 1.14 .00 .11 .00 .04 .14 -.05 .17* .08 .10 *p<.05 **p<.01
Notes. BAI = Belief in Astrology; Gender: 1 = men, 2 = women; Department: 1 = Humanities, 2
= Natural Sciences, 3 = non-student; BAI was measured in a 5-point and Paranormal beliefs in a
7-point scale. Cronbach’s alpha boldfaced in diagonal.
References
Chico, E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2006). Belief in astrology inventory: Development and
validation. Psychological Reports, 99, 851-863. https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.99.3.851-
863
Fakinos, M. (1979). Cultural mobility and internal-external locus of control. Master’s Abstracts,
17, 278.
Mayo, J., Eysenck, H. J., & White, O. (1978). An empirical study of the relation between
astrological factors and personality. Journal of Social Psychology, 105(2), 229-236.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1978.9924119
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of
reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1-28.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976
Scheier, M.F., Carver, C.S., & Bridges, M.W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism
(and trait anxiety, self-mastery and self-esteem): A reevaluation of the Life Orientation
Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1063-1078.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1063
Tobacyk, J. J. (2004). Tobacyk, J. J. (2004). A revised paranormal belief scale. The International
Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 23(1), 94–98.
https://doi.org/10.24972/ijts.2004.23.1.94
Tsaousis, I. & Kerpelis, P. (2004). The traits personality questionnaire 5 (TPQue5). European
Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20(3), 180-191. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-
5759.20.3.180 Van Rooij, J. J., Brak, M. A., & Commandeur, J. J. (1988). Introversion-extraversion and sun-
sign. Journal Of Psychology, 122(3), 275-278.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1988.9915515