

Scientists dump cold water on astrology Discovery News







The study adds to the growing body of evidence that there is no scientific basis for star signs, like Aries and Taurus, signs that are based on the place of the Sun in relation to someone's date of birth.



But the researchers leave open the question as to whether other, more detailed and personal forms of astrology hold any validity.



"When considering the current scientific standing with respect to Sun signs, it becomes clear that there is little or no truth in [them]," says Dr Peter Hartmann, who led the study in the May issue of the journal



"This does not necessarily mean that all astrology is without truth, but only that the independent effect of Sun signs is most likely to be irrelevant," says Hartmann, a researcher in the Department of Psychology at Denmark's



"As for the weekly horoscope based on mere Sun signs, then according to the current scientific standing, there is probably more truth in the comic strips."



Hartmann and his colleagues used computer analysis and statistical methods to study possible astrological connections between over 15,000 individuals. Their test subjects came from two sources.



The first was the Vietnam Experience Study, which gathered information about intelligence, personality and date of birth for male military veterans.



The second was the 1979 National Longitudinal Study of Youth, which included intelligence and date of birth information for males and females aged between 15 and 24 years.



If connections existed over a rate of 5%, they were considered valid and not the result of random links.



No link in Vietnam



The scientists could find no relationship between the time and date of a person's birth and their personality traits, which the Vietnam study categorised using terms such as psychoticism, extraversion, neuroticism and social desirability.



The researchers, however, did determine that individuals from the Vietnam test who were born between the months of July and December were slightly more intelligent, by less than one IQ point, than those who were born between January to June.



That finding was reversed for the 1979 youth study. In that case, people who were born January to June had the minute intellectual edge.



And in the real world?



Hartmann says that although the information about intelligence passed the non-random restriction, he views the connection as irrelevant.



"Assuming that you could buy a pill that would increase your IQ with one point, but it would cost you $10,000, would you do it? Probably not, but if you could buy a pill that would increase your IQ by 15 points that would be something else, simply because you get more value for your money," he says.



"The essence here is that there is a difference in determining whether a result is significant, hence whether it is a true effect, or just random occurrence, and then whether this significant effect is relevant and of any interest."



The Australian connection



Geoffrey Dean, a former astrologist based in Australia who researches the possible scientific validity of astrology, tracked over 2000 people who were born within minutes of each other.



The study, which spanned several decades, covered over 100 different characteristics, like marital status, IQ, anxiety and temperament was published in 2003 in the



Dean came to a similar conclusion as Hartmann and his team, that date of birth does not affect an individual's personality. One of the largest studies of the possible link between human traits and astrology has found little, if any, connection between the traditional Sun signs of the zodiac and people's characteristics.The study adds to the growing body of evidence that there is no scientific basis for star signs, like Aries and Taurus, signs that are based on the place of the Sun in relation to someone's date of birth.But the researchers leave open the question as to whether other, more detailed and personal forms of astrology hold any validity."When considering the current scientific standing with respect to Sun signs, it becomes clear that there is little or no truth in [them]," says Dr Peter Hartmann, who led the study in the May issue of the journal Personality and Individual Differences "This does not necessarily mean that all astrology is without truth, but only that the independent effect of Sun signs is most likely to be irrelevant," says Hartmann, a researcher in the Department of Psychology at Denmark's University of Aarhus "As for the weekly horoscope based on mere Sun signs, then according to the current scientific standing, there is probably more truth in the comic strips."Hartmann and his colleagues used computer analysis and statistical methods to study possible astrological connections between over 15,000 individuals. Their test subjects came from two sources.The first was the Vietnam Experience Study, which gathered information about intelligence, personality and date of birth for male military veterans.The second was the 1979 National Longitudinal Study of Youth, which included intelligence and date of birth information for males and females aged between 15 and 24 years.If connections existed over a rate of 5%, they were considered valid and not the result of random links.The scientists could find no relationship between the time and date of a person's birth and their personality traits, which the Vietnam study categorised using terms such as psychoticism, extraversion, neuroticism and social desirability.The researchers, however, did determine that individuals from the Vietnam test who were born between the months of July and December were slightly more intelligent, by less than one IQ point, than those who were born between January to June.That finding was reversed for the 1979 youth study. In that case, people who were born January to June had the minute intellectual edge.Hartmann says that although the information about intelligence passed the non-random restriction, he views the connection as irrelevant."Assuming that you could buy a pill that would increase your IQ with one point, but it would cost you $10,000, would you do it? Probably not, but if you could buy a pill that would increase your IQ by 15 points that would be something else, simply because you get more value for your money," he says."The essence here is that there is a difference in determining whether a result is significant, hence whether it is a true effect, or just random occurrence, and then whether this significant effect is relevant and of any interest."Geoffrey Dean, a former astrologist based in Australia who researches the possible scientific validity of astrology, tracked over 2000 people who were born within minutes of each other.The study, which spanned several decades, covered over 100 different characteristics, like marital status, IQ, anxiety and temperament was published in 2003 in the Journal of Consciousness Studies Dean came to a similar conclusion as Hartmann and his team, that date of birth does not affect an individual's personality.



Related Stories Astrology or star struck? Great Moments in Science ABC Science Online 16 Dec 2004 400-year-old Kepler horoscope found, News in Science 3 Mar 1999 Astronomical astrology, The Correx Files ABC Science Online 1998

More News Health & Medical • Environment & Nature • Space & Astronomy • Being Human • Ancient Worlds • Innovation & Technology • Science News Archives

