3 ms·
In the 1970s many straight guys were “into” (natal) astrology, as evidenced by the classic pickup line “Hey babe, what’s your sign?” Any less scientific than “
by onecommentman 3y ago
In the 1970s many straight guys were “into” (natal) astrology, as evidenced by the classic pickup line “Hey babe, what’s your sign?” Any less scientific than “Hey babe, what’s your Meyers-Briggs type?”?
Astrology got me out of an intro to stats final. You could write a paper using stats in lieu of the final, if your grades were high enough. I got a list of DOB and declared majors for each UGs from the University, hypothesized the most likely sun sign for each major, and tested whether the number of students with the characteristic Sun sign was significantly higher. Pre-VisiCalc, IBM360 era. Huge ream of 17”x12” pin-fed green and white computer paper, sharpened pencil.
Twelve hypotheses, three significant at the .05 level. There may have been a wee bit of what the kids today call p-hacking but it would have passed the social science standards at the time.
The most significant result was 7 out of 12 International Studies majors were in the Sun sign of Libra (roughly p=1/12), and the expected correlation between diplomacy and Libra was commonly cited by their literature. That was unexpectedly strong. People have gotten funded on less.
- YurgenJurgensen 3y agoIf all your sample came from the same country (and to a lesser extent, hemisphere), what you're really measuring with "star sign" is "age upon entry into the school system".
- everybodyknows 3y agoThat's good. Another physically plausible correlation would be effects of weather upon early development. Babies born in the springtime being likely to get more sensory stimulation during months of prime brain growth: sunshine, outdoor hours crawling around among the bugs and such.