Barnum effect (forer effect, subjective confirmation effect)

The effect of Barnum (the effect of the Forare , the effect of subjective confirmation ) is a general observation, according to which people highly appreciate the accuracy of such descriptions of their personality, which they assume are created individually for them, but which are in fact indefinite and sufficiently generalized for them it was equally well applied to many other people. The effect of Barnum can partially explain ^{[1] [2] [3] the} phenomenon of the wide popularity of astrological horoscopes, palmistry, homeopathy and other pseudosciences. Also noted is his influence in socionics ^[4] . The effect of the effect is also present in some psychological tests, the results of which do not distinguish people from each other ^[3] .

The effect is named after the famous American showman Phineas Barnum, who was known for his psychological manipulations and is credited with the phrase "We have something for everyone." Presumably, psychologist Paul Meehl gave this name to the effect.

Forer experiment

This effect is also called the Forer effect , named after the psychologist Bertram Forer (Bertram R. Forer), who in 1948 conducted a psychological experiment in which he showed the effect of this effect. He gave his students a special test to analyze their personalities. However, instead of presenting an individual characteristic, he gave everyone the same vague text taken from the horoscope. Then he asked each student on a five-point scale to assess the correspondence of their personality description to reality — the average was 4.26. The assessment of the accuracy of the description of the students was also influenced by the authority of the teacher. Subsequently, the experiment was repeated hundreds of times by independent researchers.

In one of the studies that studied the effect of this effect, students received an assessment of their personality by MMPI and researchers rated their responses. The researchers made accurate assessments of the students' personalities, but gave the students both an accurate assessment and an assessment using fake generalized descriptions. Then the students were asked to choose which grade they considered theirs. More than half of the students (59%) chose a fake assessment ^[5]

Description, which gave students Forer

“You really need other people to love and admire you. You are pretty self-critical. You have many hidden features that you never used to your advantage. Although you have some personal weaknesses, you are generally able to level them. Disciplined and confident in appearance, you are in fact prone to worry and to feel insecure. At times serious doubts cover you, whether you made the right decision or did the right thing. You prefer some variety, frame and restrictions make you dissatisfied. Also, you are proud to think independently; you do not take other people's statements on faith without sufficient evidence. You realized that being too frank with other people is not too wise. Sometimes you are extroverted, affable and sociable, sometimes - introverted, cautious and restrained. Some of your aspirations are pretty unrealistic. One of your main life goals is stability. ” (Forer, 1949)

Effect factors

• The subject is convinced that the description applies only to him.
• The subject is convinced of the authoritativeness of the articulated description.
• In the description there are mostly positive characteristics.

Moreover, the type of preliminary procedure - scientific or parascientific does not affect the perception of personal descriptions by the subjects: regardless of the preceding procedures, trivial descriptions are accepted by the subjects very well. ^[3]

Effect application

Thus, man’s acceptance of the description of his personality in the following pseudoscientific fields and situations is based on the Forer (Barnum) effect:

astrology (character description by zodiac sign or natal horoscope)
Chinese calendar (character description by year of birth)
palmistry (character description on the palm lines)
physiognomy (character description of facial features)
character definition by name (B.Higir’s books)
character determination by eye color
character determination by blood type
Vedic personality descriptions (for example, based on the prevailing guna)
socionics (description of informational metabolism type, socionic tests)
psycheographer (pseudo-scientific offspring of A.Afanasyev (by the way, a 4th grade prostitute!), beloved by some socionic adepts)
popular (vulgarized) personality typologies based on character accentuations (books by A. Egides (by the way, this is N. Kozlov's teacher - the founder of the “Sinton” sect), who honors his student)
fortune telling on the cards (including the Tarot cards)
personality description based on false stories (magazine, entertainment, or, for example, mandala-test J. Kallog)
personality description by a non-professional, illiterate psychologist
personality description by psychics (so-called " cold reading ")
personality description based on the so-called "representative systems" and " metaprograms " in NLP

see also

• Cold reading (Cold reading (English))
• Sequence effect
• Rosenthal Effect (Pygmalion)
• Hawthorne effect
• Placebo effect
• Audience effect
• The effect of Dr. Fox
• First impression effect
• List of cognitive distortions
• Commission to combat pseudoscience