Cultural Background And Belief In Astrology - Research Paper Example

? The Significance of Cross-Cultural Background on Belief in Astrology s s Astrology is a deep-seated cultural phenomenon of global significance. Although astrology lacks a solid foundation in scientific evidence, and numerous controversies surround the superstitious concept, astrology is still widely popular among several world cultures. Over the past few decades, astrology has managed to render itself as a subject of empirical research. Of particular concern have been the way culture impacts on belief in astrology. Although psychological researchers continue to conduct numerous studies in this regard, the conclusions remain widely contentious. The purpose of this paper is to explore the cross-cultural impacts on astrology, and determine whether culture has any significant impact on a person’s belief in astrology. CULTURAL BACKGROUND AND BELIEF IN ASTROLOGY Introduction Background Numerous studies claim that the existence of scientific validity to back the form of astrology common in the West is conspicuously absent. Moreover, sources purporting that there is empirical evidence to support the authenticity of astrology in the West lacks scientific verification. Because of this, the question as to why people still belief in astrology while reality indicates that there is no truth to it arouses enormous scientific curiosity. A possible approach to unraveling the enigma would be to examine the interplay of factors that define social inclinations that weigh on belief in astrology. In particular, there has been a considerably level of controversy with regard to belief in astrology and cultural backgrounds. Some previous studies have studied astrology and culture and reached intriguing conclusions. For example, Dambrun (2004) claimed a strong positive correlation between belief astrology and racial bigotry, sexism, and negative attitudes towards marginalized societal groupings. The cross-cultural research suggested that strong believers in astrology consequently had stronger ascriptions to societal stereotypes and social tagging. Other studies have put their focus in finding the interrelation between faith in superstition and cultural inclinations. This project seeks to study cultural effects on astrology using the Chinese and the Western culture. Earlier Studies on Astrology According to a study by Beck and Forstmeier (2007), superstition deserves treatment as an interesting subject of science. The observation was born of the realization that regardless of the little empirical basis for its validity, many people harbor strong beliefs in astrology, and continue to read their astrology profiles. For instance, a large proportion of people knows their astrological signs and read them on a regular basis (Rogers & Glendon, 2010). In the past, studies have successfully demonstrated that the belief is attributable to the fact that the astrology sign profiles appear believable to most people when they most echo their personalities. The phenomenon now also known as ‘the Barnum effect’, and has been validated in numerous interdisciplinary studies touching on the military, occupational, educational, and clinical aspects of psychology (Rogers & Soule, 2009). The belief in Barnum’s effect has won support of many researchers. For instance, the effect was also noticeable by studies by Hamilton (2000), which demonstrated greater acceptance of astrology when the descriptions had higher favorableness. The choice of profile, negative or positive, affects to some extent the way the respondents feel towards astrology in general. However, the relationship is yet to undergo comprehensive empirical research, and further validates ‘the Barnum effect’. Ever since, the effect has been an inspiration in the context of cross-cultural studies on its claims for its worldwide applicability. Cross-Cultural differences and Belief in Astrology Overwhelming evidence implies that ‘the Barnum effect’ is a global phenomenon. Studies comparing the acceptance of astrological profiles for Mexicans and US found the psychological effect to be common between the two cultural groups (Rogers & Soule, 2009). In further studies between widely accepted US astrological profiles in a Japanese cultural setting arrived at a similar conclusion. However, there have been glaring omissions in the study of cross-cultural effects of astrology and cultures that act as sources of astrological profiles, such as the Chinese. Over the past few years, there have been persistent claims for heightened belief in astrology for the Chinese in comparison to other cultural groups (Rogers & Soule, 2009). Many social scientists hold the opinion that Chinese people have stronger belief in astrology than in Western culture. However, scientific evidence suggests that the claims are unfounded and debatable, and may researches have so far cast doubts on the former presumptions on cross-cultural implications of belief in astrology. For instance, Huang and Teng (2009) conducted a highly generalized study, which covered many elements in superstitious beliefs in culture, including astrology. According to the study, ‘Chinese superstitions differ from Western superstitions’, and the Chinese have a stronger belief in astrology than Westerners (Rogers & Soule, 2009). The claims face many counterarguments, and call for a deeper and more focuses empirical inquiry. This research tries to explore the question of culture and faith in astrology further. Aims and Hypothesis The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there are any significant differences between belief in astrology and Chinese and Western culture. Through examination past literature on the study of astrology, this report seeks to investigate the claims that ‘the Barnum effect’ varies between the Chinese and Western cultures. Currently, the evidence of existence of these differences is highly ambiguous, generalized and scientifically unproven. Therefore, the overarching aim of this study is to show whether statistically significant variations are present between the Chinese and Westerners with regard to astrological belief. The overarching aims of the study are to establish the relationship between cultural inclinations and astrological belief. To achieve this aim, the research makes use of ANOVA analysis to determine whether cultural inclinations are significant with regard to faith in astrology. The null hypothesis of this research, therefore, is to establish whether the belief in astrology is similar in Chinese and Western cultures at 95% level of confidence. As such, the alternative hypothesis is that belief in astrology for the Chinese and Western cultures is different at 95% level of confidence. Method Respondents This study relies in primary data for collection of the information used in the analysis. Information on belief in astrology using Likert’s 7-point scale and a person’s cultural background are collected. A pool of 1,000 respondents took part in the research, all classified according to cultural inclinations: either Chinese or Australian. The respondents from China are 504 and those from Australia total 496. The respondents indicated their belief in astrology based on Roger’s and Soule’s (2009) scale, which range from 1 to 7. Practically all the Chinese in the study practiced English as their second language. The ages of all respondents were from 18 to 69 years. Materials Numerous questionnaires were made for the purposes of this study. For the Chinese respondents, it was necessary to engage the use of translation services to make sure the respondents understood the questions better. Part of the questionnaire’s mandate was to unveil the belief in astrology with regard to Rogers and Soule’s scale, which varies along a 7-point Likert scale. The scale has 11 items, which touch on various items, which give information on a person’s life such as personality, career, and relationships. This design has been used in previous researches in astrological profile analysis, and has a far-reaching acceptance in the social research community. The research design also made use of mock-up astrological profiles. The profiles were all positive, to minimize the impact of variations in response due to alleged differences in the way respondents respond to positive or negative effects. Results The analysis of data for the sake of this research was with the use of SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) statistical software. With SPSS statistical software, it was possible to conduct various statistical tests to help us make a conclusion on the hypothesis formulated earlier. From the analysis of the ANOVA, the data shows whether there are any significant differences between the belief in astrology between the Chinese and the Western culture. The ANOVA table shows that such a difference does not exist. The computed p value (33.067) is greater than the table value (insignificant) for the same sample. If culture had any implications on the belief in astrology, the table value of F value would have been greater than the computed value of 33.067 at 99% level of confidence. Table 1: ANOVA table for Belief in Astrology and Culture Sum of Squares Degrees of freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 46.156 1 46.156 33.067 .000 Within Groups 1393.028 998 1.396 Total 1439.184 999 The analysis of the information on the 1,000 respondents established how the factors of belief in astrology and cultural inclinations correlate. The intention of the statistical analysis using correlation was to reveal whether there exists a significant difference between the respondents’ understanding of the Likert scale based on the Barnum effect. The table below generated using SPSS shows how the country (Chinese and Western) respond to the categorization scale. A negative correlation exists between culture and astrology for culture and belief in astrology. The value -0.179 shows how culture correlates with belief in astrology for given Barnum's acceptance levels. The one-tailed test for this level of correlation indicates significance at a 99% confidence interval. Table 2: Correlation between Belief in Astrology and Culture give Barnum’s effect BELIEF COUNTRY BELIEF Pearson Correlation 1 -.179(**) COUNTRY Pearson Correlation -.179(**) 1 limitations of the study The impact of respondent’s understanding of the Barnum’s scale may create additional errors in the study. From our correlation analysis, it is apparent that the respondents have differing understanding of the scale. Some researchers have put to question the impact of Barnum’s effect on the validity of a study. Wyman (2008) points out that the use of the accuracy ratings to some extent distorts the results and sways the respondent’s views on their personalities with regard to the astrological profiles presented to them. This study rides primarily on the same theory, and therefore suffers the same risks, which may create errors in the results. Discussion Despite many documented sources attesting to the existence of cultural differences with regard to belief in astrology, this research proves otherwise. The ANOVA suggests that no statistically valid differences exist in belief in astrology between cultures. The Chinese and Western cultures have similar faith in astrology. Therefore, the notion that cultural differences exist with regard to belief in astrology are unfounded. The correlation behavior between culture and belief in astrology is relatable to observations made by Rogers and Soule (2004) in their study on cross-cultural psychology with regard to astrology. The correlations illustrate the acceptance of the Barnum effect by the respondents on the 7-point Likert scale. From the results, it is easy to conclude that statistical differences abound in the way the Chinese and the Western people view astrology. However, the significance is just an indication of the way respondents differ in their faith in scale used for the research. Conclusion From the analysis conducted under this study, it is apparent that negligible differences are attributable to cross-cultural differences. According to Barnum scale, whose use is evident in other studies on astrology, proves that there was no clear distinction between a Chinese’s and Westerners strength of belief in astrology. The results suggest that earlier claims that culture and faith in astrology had a strong correlation are highly unfounded. The use of fake astrological profile makes irresolute the respondents’ belief in the accuracy of the astrological profiles. Therefore, the results of this research conclusively prove that no cross-cultural variations occur for belief in astrology. This observation lends credence to theory on causal thinking, which suggests belief in superstition, and by extension astrology, varies on a human evolutionary dimension more than any other adaptive factor (Beck & Forstmeier, 2007). FURTHER RESEARCH Further research should try to explain additional elements in the scientific study of astrology. For instance, the drafting of the astrological profiles could affect respondent response favorable response to astrological validity on a multilevel basis. According to a research by Wunder (2002), variance within the astrological signs with regard to a negative or positive tonality of the profile had greater pronouncement than was variance between signs. Consequently, the impact of the difference of using positive or negative astrological profiles cannot be understated. While most studies done to date deal with astrology in general, future studies should try to understand the implications that arise from both negative and positive superstitious beliefs. A research by Wiseman and Watt (2004) led to the presumption that superstition was reinforced by its promotion of positive personal attributes, and that the implications of negative astrological belief was still a mystery. The ANOVA table clearly illustrates that no significant difference exists between the Chinese and Western culture with regard to belief in astrology. In addition, it is paramount that future research tries to explain the relationship between astrological belief and personality (Tyson, 1981), as some studies hint at the possibility of superstition having a close relationship with social attitudes and people’s value systems. References Beck, J and Forstmeier, W. (2007). Superstition and Belief as Inevitable By-Products of an Adaptive Leaning strategy. Human Nature. 18(1) 35-46 Dambrun, M. (2004). Belief in paranormal determinism as a source of prejudice toward Disadvantaged groups: ‘The dark side of Stars’. Social Behavior and Personality. 32(7), 662-636 Hamilton, M. (2000). Who believes in astrology? Effects of favorableness of astrologically Derived personality descriptions on acceptance of astrology. Personality and Individual Differences. 31, 895-902 Huang, L, and Teng, C. (2009). Development of a Chinese Superstitious belief Scale. Psychological Reports. 104, 807-819 Rogers, M and Glendon, A, 2010, Personality and birthdate: Taurus, year of the ox, or complete Bull? In R. E, Hicks (Ed.). Personality and Individual Differences: current directions. Pp.39-49 Rogers, P, and Soule J. (2009). Cross-cultural differences in the acceptance of Barnum Profiles Supposedly derived from western versus Chinese Astrology. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 40(301), 381-400 Tyson, G, (1983). An empirical test of the astrological theory of personality. Personality and Individual Differences. 5(2) 247-50 Tyson, G. (1981). People who consult astrologers: a profile. Personality and Individual Differences. 3, Pp. 119-126 Tyson, G. (1982). Why people perceive horoscopes as being true: a review. The British Psychological Society. 35, 186-188 Wiseman, R, and Watt, C. (2004). Measuring superstitious belief: why lucky charms matter. Personality and Individual Differences. Pp 1-9 Wunder, E. (2002). Self-attribution, sun-sign traits, and the alleged role of favorableness as a Moderator variable: long-term effect or artefact? Personality and Individual Differences. Pp 1-7 Wyman, A and Vyse, S. (2008). Science versus the stars: a double-blind test of the validity of the NEO five-factor inventory and computer-generated astrological natal charts. Journal of General Psychology. Pp. 1-15 Appendix A copy of the SPSS output for statistics shown in the report Data Frequency Percent China 504 50.4 Australia 496 49.6 Total 1000 100.0 ANOVA table Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 46.156 1 46.156 33.067 .000 Within Groups 1393.028 998 1.396 Total 1439.184 999 Pearson Correlations for the Data BELIEF COUNTRY BELIEF Pearson Correlation 1 -.179(**) COUNTRY Pearson Correlation -.179(**) 1 Read More