Acceptance of general personality interpretations prior to and after receipt of diagnostic feedback supposedly based on psychological, graphological, and astrological assessment procedures

Abstract

There was no difference in the acceptance of a general personality interpretation supposedly based on psychological, graphological, or astrological assessment procedures. Ss told that their general personality interpretation was based on one of the three assessment procedures, however, accepted the interpretation to a greater degree than did Ss told the interpretation was "generally true of people." S faith in all assessment procedures and perceived diagnostician skill increased significantly from before to after receipt of the diagnostic feedback. Ss elicited a halo response after they had received the interpretation, such that they generated a highly consistent positive (or negative) view of the assessment procedures and diagnostician skills. Implications of results from this acceptance paradigm were discussed for diagnosticians and therapists.

Schizotypy, self-referential thinking and the Barnum effect

“…Subsequent studies have suggested that the relative proportion of positive to negative traits in the description and its perceived source seem important, as well as when they believe that it has been obtained uniquely for themselves (eg. Snyder, Larson, & Bloom, 1976).…”

Interpreting the accuracy of offender profiles

“…If this is the case, then such 'creative interpretation' of ambiguous information is reminiscent of the 'Barnum' Effect in which people tend to accept vague and general personality descriptions as being specific to themselves (Forer, 1949;Furnham and Schofield, 1987;Meehl, 1956). Previous research has examined the role of the Barnum Effect in how individuals interpret feedback from psychometric tests, horoscopes, as well as handwriting analysis (Dickson and Kelly, 1985;Fichter and Sunerton, 1983;Synder, Larsen, and Bloom, 1976). However, no previous research has explored the possible role of the Barnum Effect in how offender profiles are interpreted.…”

The Criminal Profiling Illusion

“…Some researchers attribute the considerable acceptance rate of high base-rate feedback to human gullibility, whereas others note the importance of factors such as social desirability, situational insecurity, and interpreter prestige (PiperTerry & Downey, 1998). Furthermore, Snyder, Larsen, and Bloom's (1976) results suggested that people are more inclined to accept a bogus personality description when it is believed to be based on a psychological assessment procedure rather than an alternate technique such as astrology, although in that study, differences in the degrees of acceptance were marginal.…”