Factors of the Barnum effect: analysis and prospects

Occupation: Lecturer at the Department of General Psychological Disciplines
Affiliation: Pacific State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia
Address: Vladivostok, Ostryakova ave, 2

Journal name

Psikhologicheskii zhurnal

Edition

Volume 42 issue 2

Pages

61-70

Abstract

This article is devoted to a review of the literature on the Barnum effect, that is, recognizing oneself in generalized descriptions. The studies of such types of determinants as: personal characteristics of the subjects, characteristics of the psychological portrait and those related to the specifics of the research situation are considered. The relevance of this review is due to the absence in the literature of a description of promising directions for further studies of the Barnum effect. At the same time, the empirical data available in the scientific literature was sufficient to indicate such paths. A model of the determinants of the Barnum effect is also proposed, summarizing the main achievements in this area.

Keywords

psychological portrait, Barnum effect, self-relevance effect, determinants of the Barnum effect, personal validation, relevance of personality interpretation, favorability of feedback

Received

21.03.2021

Publication date

04.04.2021

Number of characters

27688

Cite

GOST	Gaidai A. Factors of the Barnum effect: analysis and prospects // Psikhologicheskii zhurnal – 2021. – V. 42. – issue 2 C. 61-70 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://psy.jes.su/S020595920014245-5-1 (circulation date: 24.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S020595920014245-5
MLA	Gaidai, A. "Factors of the Barnum effect: analysis and prospects." Psikhologicheskii zhurnal 42.2 (2021):61-70. DOI: 10.31857/S020595920014245-5
APA	Gaidai A. (2021). Factors of the Barnum effect: analysis and prospects. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal 42(2), pp.61-70 DOI: 10.31857/S020595920014245-5

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 2641

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Kalita V.V., Gajdaj A.S. Relevantnost' psihologicheskogo portreta kak determinanta effekta Barnuma. Vestnik KemGU. 2018. №1 (73). P. 133–138. (in Russian)

2. Naumenko A.S. Vlijanie formy testovyh interpretacij na prinjatie reshenij specialistami po podboru personala. Psihologija. Zhurnal Vysshej shkoly jekonomiki. 2007. № 3 (4). P. 127−140. (in Russian)

3. Panteleev A.F. Problema dostovernosti rezul'tatov social'no-psihologicheskogo issledovanija. Izvestija Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaja serija. Serija: Filosofija. Psihologija. Pedagogika. 2019. № 2 (19). P. 176−182. (in Russian)

4. Sevost'janov O.V. Medicinskij okkul'tizm: rasprostranennost' i vlijanie na klinicheskuju psihiatricheskuju praktiku. Nauchnye rezul'taty biomedicinskih issledovanij. 2020. № 2 (6). P. 273−288. (in Russian)

5. Sugonjaev K.V. Mozhno li ocenit' lichnostnye harakteristiki s pomoshh'ju testa Ljushera?. Psihologija. Psihofiziologija. 2019. № 2 (12). P. 41−59. (in Russian)

6. Bachrach A.K., Pattishall E.G. An experiment inuniversal, personal validation. Psychiatry. 1960. № 23. P. 267–270.

7. Baucom D.H., Greene R.L. The universality of generalized personality statements. Journ. of Personality Assessment. 1979. № 43. P. 497–500.

8. Carrier N.A. Need correlates of “gullibility”. Journ. of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1963. № 66. P. 84–86.

9. Claridge G., Clark K., Powney E., Hassan E. Schizotypy and the Barnum Effect. Personality, Individual Differences. 2008. № 44(2). P. 436–444.

10. Collins R.W., Dmitruk V.M., Ranney J.J. Personal validation: Some empirical, ethical considerations. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1977. № 45. P. 70–77.

11. Dmitruk V.M., Collins R.W., Clinger D.I. The “Barnum Effect”, acceptance of negative personal evaluation. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1973. № 41. P. 192–194.

12. Forer B.R. The fallacy of personal validation: A classroom demonstration of gullibility. Journ. of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1949. № 44. P. 118–123.

13. Greene R.L. Student acceptance of generalized personality interpretations: A reexamination. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1977. № 45. P. 965.

14. Greene R.L. Can clients provide valuable feedback to clinicians about their personality interpretations? Greene replies. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1978. № 46. P. 1496–1497.

15. Greene, R.L., Harris, M.E., & Macon, R.S. Another look at personal validation. Journal of Personality Assessment. 1979. № 43(4). P. 419–423.

16. Halperin K., Snyder C., Shenkel R., Houston B. Effects of source status, message favorability on acceptance of personality feedback. Journ. of Applied Psychology. 1976. № 61. P. 85–88.

17. Lattal K.A., Lattal A.D. Students' “gullibility”: A systematic replication. Journ. of Psychology, 67. 1967. P. 319–322.

18. Layne C. Relationship between the Barnum Effect, personality inventory responses. Journ. of Clinical Psychology. 1978. № 34. P. 94-97.

19. Layne C. The Barnum Effect: Rationality versus gullibility. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1979. № 47. P. 219–221.

20. Layne C., Ally G. How and why people accept personality feedback. Journ. of Personality Assessment. 1980. № 44. P. 541–546.

21. Layne C., Michels P.Y. Inventory responding as a model of people's acceptance of personality interpretations. Journ. of Personality Assessment. 1979. № 43. P. 509–513.

22. Manning E.J. “Personal validation”: Replication of Forer's study. Psychological Reports. 1968. № 23. P. 181-182.

23. Marks D., Kammann R. The psychology of the “psychic”. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1980.

24. Merrens M.R., Richards W.S. Acceptance of generalized versus bona fide personality interpretations. Psychological Reports. 1970. № 27. P. 691–694.

25. Mosher D.L. Approval motive, acceptance of “fake” personality test interpretations which differ in favorability. Psychological Reports. 1965. № 17. P. 395–402.

26. Mason O.J., Budge K. Schizotypy, self-referential thinking, the Barnum effect. Journ. of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry. 2011. V.42. № 2. P. 145–148.

27. Orpen R.B., Jamotte A. The acceptance of generalized personality interpretations. Journ. of Social Psychology. 1975. № 96. P. 147–148.

28. Rosen G.M. Effects of source prestige on subjects' acceptance of the Barnum Effect: Psychologist versus astrologer. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1975. № 43. P. 95.

29. Snyder C.R., Clair M.S. Does insecurity breed acceptance? Effects of trait, situational insecurity on acceptance of positive, negative diagnostic feedback. Journ. of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1977. № 45. P. 843–850.

30. Snyder C.R., Shenkel R.J. Effects of favorability, modality, relevance upon acceptance of general personality interpretations prior to, after receiving diagnostic feedback. Journ. of Consulting, Clinical Psychology. 1976. № 44. P. 34–41.

31. Ulrich, R. E., Stachnik, T. J., & Stainton, N. R. Student acceptance of generalized personality interpretations. Psychological Reports. 1963. № 13(3). P. 831–834.

32. Weisberg P. Student acceptance of bogus personality interpretations differing in level of social desirability. Psychological Reports. 1970. № 27. P. 743–746.