• 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..

Hokulele said:
I would recommend using the questionnaire method mentioned earlier. Try to find people as close together in age as possible. Ask very specific questions that have to do with personality, but about specific events rather than traits.
Click to expand...
It might be a good idea to get the astrologer to suggest specific questions, based on those events or traits he is most confident can be predicted using his particular brand of astrology.
 
Tapio said:
I also know the guy you're talking about. I admit everything might be possible, but I have to say I'd be absolutely shocked if I found out he's trying to intentionally deceive someone. Definitely not the type.

I believe this guy to be the perfect example of a person who simply hasn't crirically evaluated the way he perceives the world. Not once. Or if he has, the pain of admitting to his own insecurities has just been too overwhelming and so he's had to shut down the voice of reason before it even begun to rise.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the clarification. I retract the comment about deception.
 
Kuko 4000 said:
I'm starting to lean towards raising the minimum age to 50 or if that proves too problematic maybe to a five year sweet spot from all the volunteers so far.
Click to expand...


I think raising the age or finding a five-year sweet spot is important. Predicting, say, two divorces isn't exactly rocket science if you have two sitters in their mid 20s and one in his/her late 50s.
 
Is it too late to participate in this test?:confused:

Note that the birthdate in my profile is fake
 
Last edited:
It's definitely not too late, but I would advice anyone to PM about it. This will help with the quality of the test. I might need to start from scratch with the protocol.

I'm starting to warm up for the idea that the volunteers write up a personality profile and the astrologer tries to connect the profiles with the dates. This would mean a little bit of extra work from the volunteers, but hopefully not too much for the astrologer.

I will ask what kind of specific things are the easiest to spot from the birth dates and will ask the volunteers to concentrate on these.
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
My point was that the Vedic charts do not use the sun signs the way Western astrology does. For example, references to being "stubborn as a bull" in Vedic astrology does not mean you are a Taurus in the Western system. In fact, references to the zodiac could very well work against the astrologer in this type of test, where most of the participants ae used to Western categories.
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but I don't think you're getting mine. It doesn't matter what system or school of astrology the astrologer subscribes to. The fact that the subjects are aware of their Western zodiac sun signs (which is something that correlates with their birth info) means you have to be careful to remove anything that could be a hint to that as a source of information leakage. Basically, I'm saying whatever the astrologer purports to be doing is irrelevant, he could still cheat if he could slip through references to typical sun-sign things. Similarly, he could cheat if he were allowed to say "your family was preparing for Christmas when you were born" in a profile.


I would have agreed with you earlier, but since Kuko revealed that the astrologer is trying to use this as public proof, cheating has become a major problem.
Click to expand...
Yup. If it's only a self-test, then cheating isn't an issue. But if it's any kind of public test, I'm of the opinion that the question of a well-designed protocol is really an all or nothing thing. Either it is conclusive or it is not conclusive. If it's not conclusive, that means no one has to accept the results. If that's true, it's better not to do it at all.

After the most recent revelations, I basically agree. The only problem with the better personality tests is that they can be more work than the average volunteer may want to do. It may be better to focus the test even more down to something very specific. Rather than casting the entire chart, it may be better to focus on answers for all 10 volunteers to a narrow range of personality traits. For example, get the CV's or resumes of each of the 10 volunteers and strip out years and locations, just leave the basic job descriptions and lists of responsibilities. Have the astrologer match the resume to the birth date/location.
Click to expand...
I agree. I still think someone connected with a university psych department might be able to have access to already complete personality profile test data.

Otherwise, I'd be more inclined to get the astrologer to agree to a very specific claim, like the ability to match a current occupation with birth info. (And try to get all the subjects in a fairly similar "stage of life" age.)

I just don't much like the idea of trying to evaluate all the Forer effect type of "profiles" the astrologer provides. For one, there's always the chance of information leakage. Also, you end up awarding hits that are based on retrofitting and cherry picking. I remember in that one Campbell film, the astrologer said of one person that he thinks they are either a dancer or a martial artist. The subject claimed both as a hit because, she said, "I like to dance" and she once took some sort of karate-type of class. I think it would be rare to find a subject that couldn't retrofit a hit that way.

(Additionally, if the gestalt of the profile is an obvious miss, how can it be meaningful to claim even one or two minor "hits"? This is my issue on Sylvia Browne supporters claiming she had a "hit" in naming Shawn Horbeck's abductor as "Mike" when her overall reading was wrong since she claimed he was dead, and that the abductor was a murderer. You can't claim she was even 2% accurate. On that case, she was zero for 1.)
 
Tapio said:
I also know the guy you're talking about. I admit everything might be possible, but I have to say I'd be absolutely shocked if I found out he's trying to intentionally deceive someone. Definitely not the type.
Click to expand...
That may be so, but that's why I prefer the term "information leakage" to "cheating". It doesn't have to be intentional. (In fact, I think many cold-readers aren't intentionally using cold reading techniques. They honestly believe in their paranormal powers. That's why testing their abilities in a way that eliminates the possibility of cold reading techniques can be enlightening even to them.) Better to eliminate the possibility altogether.
 
Last edited:
JoeTheJuggler said:
I understand your point, but I don't think you're getting mine. It doesn't matter what system or school of astrology the astrologer subscribes to. The fact that the subjects are aware of their Western zodiac sun signs (which is something that correlates with their birth info) means you have to be careful to remove anything that could be a hint to that as a source of information leakage. Basically, I'm saying whatever the astrologer purports to be doing is irrelevant, he could still cheat if he could slip through references to typical sun-sign things. Similarly, he could cheat if he were allowed to say "your family was preparing for Christmas when you were born" in a profile.
Click to expand...


I do see your point in terms of the astrologer trying to sneak in extra hits, but I have some concern the other way, i.e. making it fair to the astrologer. To use the Taurus example, if the Vedic chart predicts something along the lines of having only one job (resistance to change and predictability), would it be fair to exclude this prediction due to a similarity with that person's sun sign? I can see how this could be used to claim bias on the part of the skeptic. Unless the references were particularly obvious hot reading, I would be inclined to leave them in. It would be helpful in those cases to have another person verify that the prediction makes sense in relation to the Vedic chart and isn't simply a hit fishing expedition.

Yup. If it's only a self-test, then cheating isn't an issue. But if it's any kind of public test, I'm of the opinion that the question of a well-designed protocol is really an all or nothing thing. Either it is conclusive or it is not conclusive. If it's not conclusive, that means no one has to accept the results. If that's true, it's better not to do it at all.
Click to expand...


Absolutely.

I agree. I still think someone connected with a university psych department might be able to have access to already complete personality profile test data.

Otherwise, I'd be more inclined to get the astrologer to agree to a very specific claim, like the ability to match a current occupation with birth info. (And try to get all the subjects in a fairly similar "stage of life" age.)
Click to expand...


I agree, but based on Kuko's previous posts, it sounds like this is the sort of thing the astronomer doesn't claim to be able to do. Frustrating, but there you have it. Yet another indicator that astrology is bunk.

I just don't much like the idea of trying to evaluate all the Forer effect type of "profiles" the astrologer provides. For one, there's always the chance of information leakage. Also, you end up awarding hits that are based on retrofitting and cherry picking. I remember in that one Campbell film, the astrologer said of one person that he thinks they are either a dancer or a martial artist. The subject claimed both as a hit because, she said, "I like to dance" and she once took some sort of karate-type of class. I think it would be rare to find a subject that couldn't retrofit a hit that way.
Click to expand...


This sounds exactly like the type of thing the astrologer has done in the past, via face-to-face interviews no less. Grr.

(Additionally, if the gestalt of the profile is an obvious miss, how can it be meaningful to claim even one or two minor "hits"? This is my issue on Sylvia Browne supporters claiming she had a "hit" in naming Shawn Horbeck's abductor as "Mike" when her overall reading was wrong since she claimed he was dead, and that the abductor was a murderer. You can't claim she was even 2% accurate. On that case, she was zero for 1.)
Click to expand...


Yup. Yet another reason to insist on a focused, precise claim.
 
What if we started with a specific and quantifiable claim, that might really help the process.
For instance, what if we simply listed our current professions? The astrologer gets a list of professions and a list of birth info, and is simply asked to match the two.
Easy to score, easy to distinguish real hits from random chance, etc. Plus, where a profile isn't required, the astrologer should be able to tackle 10 or 20 rather than 4.
 
AvalonXQ said:
What if we started with a specific and quantifiable claim, that might really help the process.
For instance, what if we simply listed our current professions? The astrologer gets a list of professions and a list of birth info, and is simply asked to match the two.
Easy to score, easy to distinguish real hits from random chance, etc. Plus, where a profile isn't required, the astrologer should be able to tackle 10 or 20 rather than 4.
Click to expand...

If the astrologer agrees to that, I like it. I would just add that the ages of the subjects should all be similar to avoid any stage of life clues. Preferably, the socio-economic and nationality backgrounds should be similar too. (I'm not sure if it's so, but it could be that birth location might make some careers more or less likely. So if all subjects came from the U.S., for example, or all from the U.K., it would be better.)

I also like having more subjects involved rather than just a few. If you deal with only 4, whatever you do, you'd pretty much have to make the standard of success 100% and nothing less.
 
Hokulele said:
I do see your point in terms of the astrologer trying to sneak in extra hits, but I have some concern the other way, i.e. making it fair to the astrologer. To use the Taurus example, if the Vedic chart predicts something along the lines of having only one job (resistance to change and predictability), would it be fair to exclude this prediction due to a similarity with that person's sun sign? I can see how this could be used to claim bias on the part of the skeptic.
Click to expand...

I agree, it works both ways. That's why I'd prefer to avoid that altogether. It gets mighty subjective, too, deciding what is legit and what might be a give-away. And it assumes the administrator can spot all the give-aways. (As I recall, someone did an on-line version of this very protocol here within the last year. Someone went ahead and did it against the consensus advice, and the guy who did it let an obvious give-away slip through. The protocol didn't specify what to do in that case--and, really, finding problems after the fact is exactly what a conclusive test avoids--so he just threw out that subject, which of course messes up everything.)

I agree, but based on Kuko's previous posts, it sounds like this is the sort of thing the astronomer doesn't claim to be able to do. Frustrating, but there you have it. Yet another indicator that astrology is bunk.
Click to expand...
Yup. In testing, the claims get very narrow. In the real world, where people charge money for astrological readings, those exact claims are definitely made.

Anyway, I still say not testing is better than doing a test that's not conclusive.

ETA: The fact is, the general claims that birth information correlates with personality or marital compatibility etc. have been disproven through analysis of large databases already. So we already know the claim of this particular astrologer is false.
 
Last edited:
I like the idea of matching the professions to the birth dates. However, a popular "out" for astrologers is to say that "yeah, that's your job now, but deep inside you REALLY want to be a fireman". Anyways, I like this idea. The astrologer might agree to something like this. I just got an e-mail from him and I think I will call him later today.

[thoughts] Just an idea, maybe the volunteers could write down their dream profession? Something like a basketball player, astronaut, actress, etc. On the other hand, this would probably be too open for interpretation. And the astrologer could always say that "you just don't know yourself well enough yet". [/thoughts]


Hokulele said:
I agree, but based on Kuko's previous posts, it sounds like this is the sort of thing the astronomer doesn't claim to be able to do. Frustrating, but there you have it. Yet another indicator that astrology is bunk.
Click to expand...


Careful!
 
Last edited:
Kuko 4000 said:
I like the idea of matching the professions to the birth dates. However, a popular "out" for astrologers is to say that "yeah, that's your job now, but deep inside you REALLY want to be a fireman". Anyways, I like this idea. The astrologer might agree to something like this. I just got an e-mail from him and I think I will call him later today.

[thoughts] Just an idea, maybe the volunteers could write down their dream profession? Something like a basketball player, astronaut, actress, etc. On the other hand, this would probably be too open for interpretation. And the astrologer could always say that "you just don't know yourself well enough yet". [/thoughts]




Careful!
Click to expand...
After all this time you`re still discussing all that?!
Kuko i have PMd you already.tell what you need
 
pseudobeliever said:
After all this time you`re still discussing all that?!
Kuko i have PMd you already.tell what you need
Click to expand...


I'm sorry pseudo, I welcome your suggestions for a good protocol.

This is what it says in the OP:

First of all:

If you want to participate in this test please do NOT post your birth details here or even that you would like to participate, instead contact me via PM when the protocol is ready-ish.
Click to expand...
 
Kuko 4000 said:
I like the idea of matching the professions to the birth dates. However, a popular "out" for astrologers is to say that "yeah, that's your job now, but deep inside you REALLY want to be a fireman". Anyways, I like this idea. The astrologer might agree to something like this. I just got an e-mail from him and I think I will call him later today.

[thoughts] Just an idea, maybe the volunteers could write down their dream profession? Something like a basketball player, astronaut, actress, etc. On the other hand, this would probably be too open for interpretation. And the astrologer could always say that "you just don't know yourself well enough yet". [/thoughts]
Click to expand...

Or, if the astrologer doesn't claim the ability to give readings on career, but only on a personality profile, back to my idea that the subjects just write a paragraph or two describing themselves. (Again, the same idea as a questionnaire or standardized personality profile, but just in prose which might give the astrologer more of a "feel" for the personality.) As long as the subjects were instructed not to put in any information that could tie them with their birth information (which is a tricky business again).

I still say a personality profile test with a strong and known history of scientific validity and reliability testing should be acceptable. You're dealing with standardized results, so no accidental leakage.

Heck, another possibility is one or another kind of IQ test, if people are uncomfortable with the validity of personality profile constructs. (I doubt very much the construct of "intelligence" has a great deal more validity, though.) The advantage of most well-studied intelligence tests are that they are age-adjusted, so we wouldn't have to worry about that.

Would the astrologer be willing to try to match birth information with results of one or another standardized intelligence test? (Again, depending on the test, we might be able to find existing data rather than have people take tests for this demonstration.)
 
Last edited:
pseudobeliever said:
thats what I did, but I wasnt getting any reply
Click to expand...


You sent the PM: Today, 03:02 PM

You wrote: "Is it too late to participate in this test?" Today 04:44 PM

Unfortunately I am not a full time JREF employee. Anyways, I hope you will be able to participate next time.


ETA: I want to take this opportunity to thank all the volunteers who have contacted me so far. There's still time to PM me if you are interested in participating. As you can see, we're starting the protocol pretty much from scratch now.
 
Last edited:
BTW, specifically what birth information is required by the astrologer? If it's just date and location to a city, I can try a friend who is involved in managing databases of standardized tests (and other stuff) who might be able to provide what we need. I doubt very much time of birth is available that way (but, I also suspect time of birth is only available accurate to within an hour or so from most people anyway).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom