Slashdot Mirror
NSF Report Flawed; Americans Do Not Believe Astrology Is Scientific
RichDiesal writes "A new report (PDF) from the National Science Foundation, which we discussed a few days ago, states that roughly 40% of Americans believe astrology to be scientific. This turns out to be false; most of those apparently astrology-loving Americans have actually confused astrology with astronomy. In a 100-person Mechanical Turk study with a $5 research budget, I tested this by actually asking people to define astrology. Among those that correctly defined astrology, only 10% believe it to be scientific; among those that confused astrology for astronomy, 92% believe 'astrology' to be scientific."
I searched/skimmed the NSF paper, and it wasn't obvious that they took any pains to define astrology for their interviewees. So you very well may be right; good job.
How many who could correctly define astronomy still believe that it can be used to predict your future. Because that's astrophysics.
Even more of them will confuse cosmetology with cosmology. Someone trying to weigh a poll to make Americans look uneducated could have done much better.
I absolutely believe that ... astro... something science to be scientific!
It probably has electrolytes too!
thegodmovie.com - watch it
The problem is not that we are mystical idiots, just that we are can not spell and are not sure of the correct pronunciation of words.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
I'm not sure if it's worse that these people believe that astrology is a science. Or that they were too stupid to not know the difference between astrology and astronomy. It's one thing if a few people got confused. But for so many to not know the difference is a little frightening.
Given the state of education, what else would you expect? We're talking about a nation that doesn't even know it's own geography, much less that of neighbours in the world. If they think Toronto or Vancouver are the capital of Canada, how can you expect them to know something like astrology vs. astronomy?
Regardless of whether the majority of the population believes astrology is "scientific" or not, one thing is clear: the population as a whole has a shitty education.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
99% of Americans are idiots; 1.0% run the Country. Much like the UK.
It is easy for surveys to give very misleading results if the questions are not well thought out, or if they have intentionally been designed to produce some result. The media tends to pick up on the more surprising results from surveys so that magnifies the effect in the public perception.
"do you believe in evolution" "do you believe the current theory of evolution is correct" "Do you believe that god was involved in the creation of life" "should students be taught to question scientific theories like evolution". "do you think evolution likely is a correct description of the species we see on earth now" These may seem to be asking the same question, but are really quite different.
40% of Americans can't differentiate astrology from astronomy.
When you don't know one of those from the other, what does it matter how you think about their scientific merits?
They are, if you think about it, poorly-chosen words. After all they both start with "astro" - meaning star. Then "ology" meaning study, versus "onomy" meaning naming of. Logically it might well be the other way around. On the other hand I agree with the conclusions. I'm an astronomer, but I notice that more and more of my colleagues are calling themselves astrophysicists rather than astronomers. They may simply be choosing what they think of as a higher-status term, or perhaps to avoid the confusion between astrology and astronomy, which (in my experience) is more common in the USA than in the UK.
A friend of mine in 7th grade signed up for a cosmetology class thinking it was cosmology, and boy was he surprised. At least it was only one of those 1 hours per week deals to fill in a gap with our weird rotating schedule (7 classes for 6 periods).
Adam Corrolla and Jimmy Kimmel (and many, many other pranksters) have proven that people really don't know the language, but will gladly treat a misconception with confidence when given just a little nudge.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
So you're saying that it's not that Americans are prone to believe in pseudo-science, but that they lack basic English comprehension skills? Even if I were to believe that this unscientific internet study with a small sample size somehow trumps the observations of the National Science Foundation's wide ranging academic study, the conclusions derived are equally troubling. It's not that they're scientific illiterate - they're simply illiterate! Either conclusion indicates a serious deficit in US education standards, and rather than trying to justify the survey results away, we should be looking at ways to improving American education standards. If they can't distinguish between astronomy and astrology I'd be worried about their English vocabulary.
So instead of being scientifically illiterate, USians are just vanilla illiterate?
This $5 study does NOT support that conclusion since the overwhelming majority of Mechanical Turkers are NOT Americans.
Although there there plenty of stupid Americans, America does not have a monopoly on stupidity. There's plenty of competition from the rest of the world.
Friend of mine use to get these Fan boy catalogs for Star Trek/Star Wars trinkets. (ie. Stuff people made in their basement)
One of the ads was for "Official Star Trek Badges". Engineering, Command, Medical, Security, and Astrology.... and it took us 10 mins to explain to him.
Sig. Sig. Sputnik
Please stop trying to spoil a fun narrative that gave the rest of the world a chance to reaffirm their feelings of superiority. If they ever stop believing Americans are stupid, they might start making it harder for us to tap their phone lines and "secure" communications.
By the way, we have a picture of you and that Buttercup All Grown Up doll, dated last February 17.
Thank you,
Your friends at the NSA
#DeleteChrome
'Astrology' means 'the study of stars'. When real scientists began to study stars, this term had already been taken over by crackpots.
So, they adopted 'Astronomy' which is the NAMING of stars, because the more correct term now meant something else.
So, really, astronomy should be called astrology, and astrology should be called bunk.
False, citation is not needed. Just open your eyes.
People have actually looked at overall scientific literacy in the US, and it compares favorably to the EU (and the rest of the world):
https://www.sciencenews.org/bl...
Of course, it would be nice if scientific literacy were higher everywhere, including the US.
This $5 study does NOT support that conclusion since the overwhelming majority of Mechanical Turkers are NOT Americans.
Not that you have provided any source for that assertion, but it's irrelevant anyway. You can set the qualifications for the job requiring them to be American. Studies have shown that while using the Mechanical Turk for social science research is not perfect, it is not wildly inaccurate either. In fact it works best for exactly this sort of study, a random sampling of the population with no other strict qualifiers.
Even if this were conclusive, it just means Americans are fucking morons instead of fucking morons... oh wait.
...these people are confusing astrology with astronomy, then it indicates that they are as stupid as they would be if they thought astrology was scientific.
worldmobilenet.com -- World Prepaid Wireless Internet plans
posting because mistakenly marked as flamebait....stupid laptop mouse
www.RacquetUp.org - Helping Detroit Youth
Ya know, other, better scientists figured out long ago there was co.fusion between astrology and astronomy, not jist that some may not k.ow the difference, but that plenty who do may get briefly confused by the question, thinking the questioner *must* mean the one with telescopes.
Ever since every time this comes up, I wonder if the latest study is done by terrible scientists who don't research past studies and analysis.
This isn't the only thing. Face symmetry relating to beauty is another, as it ignores an equally important study that the most beautiful are also those with the most average dimensions of features and placement. For that matter, scientists this week announceed they got more energy out of fusion than they put in "for the first time"...for at least the fourth time.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Thank heavens!
that they don't know the difference isn't much better
You can actually restrict Mechanical Turk users to a specific country. It's harder to get Americans to actually answer for a low wages, but they do respond. If you want it done in 3 hours you better not restrict it to the US.
At the risk of receiving flames of /. hellfire, I'll admit that I am a professional astrologer. Any astrologer that actually understands the art knows that it's not a science in the conventional definition of the term. It is something between science and art, as it contains elements of both. Observation and correlation play a major part, then so does the harmonization of conceptual understandings, since it is impossible to empirically verify every possible combination of planet, sign, house. The number of variables is too great.
Astrology is not a hard predictive tool either. The astrological symbols indicate tendencies and potentials, but free will is the factor that determines how those potentials manifest. In my own practice I veer away from prediction and instead focus on the astrological chart as a symbolic reflection of the conditioning of the psyche of the person I'm working with. Synchronistic reflection is the key term here -- the planets do not influence us in any direct physical sense. Thus, 'scientific' is not the right term for astrology, but it's not completely not-science either.
Side note: I came into astrology quite skeptical, but found it interesting enough to study. Over time, through my own experience of seeing it validated again and again, I've come to understand the principles that make it work. And in the right hands and mind, it does work, quite surprisingly well. Again, direct experience is the arbiter here, nothing to do with blind faith or illusory thinking.
"Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
- Deep Thought
Of course it's scientific! Astro is the Jetson's dog, and they are from the future where we will have flying cars and buildings floating in the sky with treadmills perched dangerously outside...
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
If the NSF Report actually stated "that roughly 40% of Americans believe astrology to be scientific," this would be an interesting use of five bucks. But that's not what the report says.
Here's what the NSF report acually writes—and it's actually interesting:
Page 7-6 of the report gives actual details about the survey—speciically, the Science and Technology portion of the General Social Survey". You can search the GSS survey for the word 'astrology' to see the actual question:
The whole point is that they're asking Americans if they know what the word 'astrology' means.
If there was a mass epidemic of amnesia between 2010 and 2012, I don't remember it. So what caused the reversal in a steady trend that lasted from 1983 to 2010? Why did the number of Americans who know the definition of the word 'astrology' make a sudden and very large negative drop from 2010 to 2012?
This is an interesting result, and to their credit the authors of the NSF report do a good job of accurately reporting their finding without resorting to hyperbole or finger-pointing.
Building Better Software
The National Science Foundation got it wrong?
How is that possible? They're scientists! They're infallible masters of logic and fact. How could they possibly be wrong?
No, it is better. "I used the wrong Greek-derived word" is a lot better than "I think that the movement of planets influences my destiny". One denotes ignorance of language, one denotes ignorance of basic scientific principles; give me the first any day.
Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
It's just like one of those meme fads going round where they ask (perhaps gullible) people about non existent super bowl plays & players.
Or like the classic Dihydrogen Monoxide 'prank'
Ignorance and intelligence is not linear. It is not worthwhile or fair to measure either outside of a properly executed experiment.
A member from an Amazonian Tribe may well find life in NYC a little daunting, perhaps as daunting as you would find life naked in the middle of South America.
People trying to fit in, especially young people trying to fit in WILL answer a question for fear of ridicule if they do not full understand the question. And people do tend to TRY TO FIT IN.
If a word they have never heard of sounds scientific they WILL treat it as such. and trust it for the word.
The US and the UK are rife with people screwing with words to take advantage of people.
We have protected titles, for example. Anybody can call themselves a Nutritionist. But you need to be licensed to call yourself a Dietitian
A Chiropractor fucked my back because I thought he was a type of Physiotherapist. He had xRay machines and everything. But not a licenced or recognised medical practitioner.
Somebody asks you if Astro this or astro that is important - if they don't KNOW the word, they will make a MEAN guess.
What if one of the problems with all previous poll data, was no verification was actually occurring to see if the questioned understood the questions, or even understood the information they thought they knew about the given subject?
Lets say you do a political poll to ask if people think the NSA surveillance program is necessary or if they are for or against it, .. how many of those people even really know what it is, or bothered to look into before answering, or got their information from statements made by Barack Obama or the NSA who blatantly lie, saying its' not occurring, or being done for the security of our nation?
Lets just assume that all polls are flawed, and that the insiders know the flaws exist and use the polls merely to push through certain agendas, even thought they don't represent anything with any sort of accuracy. They do have an impact on public opinion and knowledge, and lead people down a path of misunderstanding, which might be the purpose; to deceive and sway peoples opinions.
When I was an undergraduate, the telescope a few miles away was listed in the phone book (remember those?) as the National Radio Astrology Observatory. Nobody really felt like correcting it.
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Keep in mind that studies have shown that we only read the beginning and end of the words to save time, particularly when we are in a rush. Therefore astr - onom - y and astro - log - y can be interchangeable depending on how quickly you are reading. In the context of a survey that is predominantly concerned with science, your brain is most likely to spit out the definition for astronomy if it only receives astro **** y as input. The US has its fair share of idiots, but I'll bet that a significant amount of the 40 percent that "confused" the two actually know the difference.
P.S. I am too lazy to provide a citation because my psych 101 textbook has been in a landfill for 10 years and google did not immediately return the result I wanted.
In a similar move tell people they are wearing garments and see how offended they get. I would argue that garments is further from garbage than astrology from astronomy, but people are still insulted. The simple fact is we as a species fill in the blanks with what we expect over what we actually see and hear, often without knowing we've done so. Sometimes it is useful, as with being able to ignore or instantly comprehend misspelled words. Sometimes it hurts us, like when we replace the word in our minds, but the initial word was intentional.
With some exceptions, the nationality derives from the last part of the country's full name, not from the continent their country is on (Australia excepted of course). Just as a few examples, we have:
Peoples' Republic of China - Chinese
Estados Unidos Mexicanos - Mexican
(Although an archaic designation) Dominion of Canada - Canadian
State of Japan - Japanese
Federated Republic of Brazil - Brazilian
United States of America - American
As far as I can recall, there is only one nation with "of America" as part of its name.
This space unintentionally left blank.
Words are used to express concepts and convey information. The name of the country is the "The United States of America". If any other country used the word "America" in its name you might have something approaching a valid point. As it is now there is zero confusion over the term and in the exceptionally rare cases you might want to refer to all of the people of the Americas it is quite easy to unambiguously do so (see, I just did it?). The term "USians" is used by pseudo-intellectual jerkoffs like you with some sort of bizarre chip on their shoulder and no intellectual capacity to express it so you revert to temper tantrums on the internet to avoid feeling totally impotent.
It is much more revealing to see how many people (Americans, whatever,) find that any field of endeavor can be, "sort of scientific." Why not ask Americans how many people are, "sort of pregnant?" I usually believe in a world of grey, and I do understand that some disciplines can use elements of the scientific method without being "science," maybe. While I'm on that track, for those who responded, "sort of scientific," did they attempt to find out what that person's concept of "sort of" entails? Utilizing elements of it, or simply resembling being scientific? Anyway, design a survey which is false to fact, one cannot expect truthful results. Garbage in, garbage out applies to survey design as well as the scientific method.
This isn't about English literacy, either, unless you think that most people regard "debt" and "deficit" as abstract coinages passed down from Cleopatra's personal mentat.
Here's how the lizard brain encodes language in people with an aspy deficit:
jackpot = pussy
debt/deficit = no pussy
astronomy/astrology = preoccupations of pointy hats who get no pussy
There's simply no need in this model to discriminate words from the second cluster. Here's a truly horrible capsule summary of what we're up against:
Secret Formula For Persuasive Writing Techniques
This is designed to influence exactly the kind of person who fails to conceptually discriminate astronomy from astrology. Advertising is not a universal technique. It's merely a universal technique for the shaking the trees most easily shaken: small cognition, big lizard.
The core element is the appeal which answers "What's in it for me?" and the answer either needs to be "more pussy" or something from the first list of things regarded as being directly associated with more pussy, or the proximity of more pussy, or the vain fantasy of the proximity of more pussy.
The bottom brain works on a system of warm, warmer, warmest. I know of a person who has made at least three trips to China thinking he's going to score himself a docile second wife; he has no clue whatsoever that these Chinese women he meets can decode his demeanour as an OCD control freak by the second interaction—if, in fact, there was any legitimacy to their desire to score a comfortable N.A. lifestyle in the first place. In his own culture, most women decode his personality style in a single glace. In his mind all these women have be ruined by a culture which turns them into snooty princesses. Who knows how much money this guy has poured in this project, where 60 seconds of input from a properly functioning top brain could have informed him that "warmer" amounts to a snowball's chance in hell on day where hell's barometer is falling.
Judging from how long he's had his top brain stored in the garage under a dusty tarpaulin, he long ago gave up on welcoming any input from this part of his brain. Either the input is faulty (unlikely), or it conflicts with his cherished lizard-brain fantasy self-image (likely). He's plenty functional in an ordered environment where he has far fewer options to make his own choices.
The problem with this study is that a large slice of the population—in one or more major spheres of living—fails to curate their "beliefs" into consistent/inconsistent, but merely partitions into warmer and colder, using an internal vocabulary where there's only a single word for snow.
These scientists who conducted this study without comprehension of this are living in a similarly tiny mental closet. s/pussy/p-value This is the lizard brain of successful careers built upon bad science.
Scientific method: Statistical errors
I guess it accords with a cherished lizard-brain fantasy of someday scoring tenure. For three decades, at least, tenure has become practically synonymous with barometer rising. Engaging in this kind of research project is an awfully indirect way to confront their own delusions.
> a random sampling of the population with no other strict qualifiers.
Except that they all participate in the Mechanical Turk, which I would suspect self-selects for at least some personality traits if nothing else.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Only one nation, yes, but we went and confused the issue by naming our country after the continent.
Someone from the continent of Asia is Asian. Someone from the continent of Europe is European. Someone from the continent of Africa is African, and somebody from "The New World" a.k.a The Americas, is American.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Said most of the respondents.
Aside from your too politically correct attitude, I'm sure you would find similar numbers anywhere else in the world. Miss Teen South Carolina said it better than I can if you want a more complete explanation.
http://science.slashdot.org/co...
OK the NEWS is pretty sad. But that implication that, for once, I'm right, is pretty refreshing!
-Styopa
Someone from the continent of Asia is Asian. Someone from the continent of Europe is European. Someone from the continent of Africa is African, and somebody from "The New World" a.k.a The Americas, is American.
This may be news to more than a few Mexicans and Canadians.
Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
No, no,no. You're misinterpreting the findings, just more evidence I suppose.
People are stupid and crazy.
Also sometimes stupid-crazy or crazy-stupid. It's a wide and varied spectrum.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
You have to be careful with those in the UK. The UK and Britain are not the same thing, and the Scottish have a lot of pride in their national identity. Using the wrong term can upset people.
However, those from the continent of North America (whether Canada, the U.S.A., or Mexico) would be North Americans. Those from the continent of South America would be known as South Americans. Those on the isthmus would be Central Americans.
This space unintentionally left blank.
Even better title with the current comment rating:
Faith in Humanity (Score:0)
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
... how will we know who to mock? And for what?
you know your own examples. astro-whatever is whatever-spoon.
How many who could correctly define astronomy still believe that it can be used to predict your future. Because that's astrophysics.
Surely that's more the area of cosmetology? It can answer fascinating questions like will the universe end in heat death due to hair dryer misuse.
Well if that was their goal, then it would've been FAR better to ask them to define "astrology", and count up the results manually. Otherwise there is definitely an issue where the results are contaminated with people who DO know what 'astrology' means, but ALSO think it's a science too.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
At first, I read that as NSA. And I asked myself, "Why would they be discrediting astronomy? Perhaps they don't want us looking up, staring at their satellites."
Have gnu, will travel.
is a lot better than "I think that the movement of planets influences my destiny".
Which is just as bad as "God created humans pretty much in the present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so" Which is the belief of 48% of the respondents in a 2007 Newsweek poll. http://www.pollingreport.com/s...
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
If you go to college and pick cosmology classes expecting cosmetology classes, you will be in for a big surprise first day of class. And if you pick them vice-versa as well. I don't know which situation would be more interesting -- maybe there's a TV sitcom in the concept somewhere. A young Howard Wolowitz-type mistakenly goes to cosmetology class, decides to stay with it what with all the girls there and all, and is vastly rewarded for doing so.
Now we know that this 40% is functionally illiterate. Somehow that seems worse to me than just having absurd beliefs about the stars.
Citation not needed at all, just look how many believe there are gods and miracles and creationists
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Not for long...
Impetuous! Homeric!
People aren't superstitious idiots. They're just idiots.
Yeah but people who belong to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland are not normally called Irelandish. That might be taken as provocation.
(Even calling them "British" is inaccurate, given that the Northern Irish do not, in fact, live in Great Britain. If they did it would be the United Kingdom of Great Britain.)
Just because so many people didn't know what astrology was doesn't change the fact that they believed "astrology" (whatever they thought it was) to be scientific. :)
Of course when reporting the results, then, you *should* put "astrology" in quotes.
Bit harsh on the Welsh, that. They also have a lot of pride in their national identity.
(Actually in all seriousness I slightly threw my American PhD supervisor when he first came to Britain and I told him about the differences between English, British and the UK. It's not that he didn't know the differences, but he didn't know the depth of feeling caused by calling a Scot or a Welshman "English".)
I find it hard to believe there are creationists. I mean, if god created perfect brains for them, why don't they use them?
sigo ergo sum
Yes, but they don't like to be reminded of it.
South Koreans watch CBS on Thursdays?
False, citation is not needed. Just open your eyes.
Citation needed. Does he have eyes to open?
. . . in the same sense that alchemy was chemistry. Galileo was actually an astrologer, in the parlance of the day; so was everyone else who looked at the stars and tried to derive reason from them. As modern science developed, those who applied it to astrology became known as astronomers whereas those who applied it to frivolous nonsense such as horoscopes remained known as astrologers. In the modern English-speaking world, astronomy is a science and astrology is a pseudoscience, but it is important to remember that was not always true. I think it is fair to call Galileo an astronomer, because his methods were close enough to the modern scientific philosophy applied to astronomy today, just as it is fair to call Newton a physicist, despite the fact that, back in his day, he would have been known as a natural philosopher. But it is important for people to understand the history of how modern science developed and the meanings of these words.
Perhaps explains the confusion of Australia with Austria.
Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.
Economics is "sort of scientific". It makes testable predictions - change the price by X, consumption changes by Y - but it's not as precise as physics. Medicine is also "sort of scientific"; it's not a given that malady M can be cured by treatment T. You could say a similar thing about engineering.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I told you... http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
As an astronomy educator in New Zealand I encounter this almost daily - it's certainly not limited to America. Almost half the people I meet confuse astronomy with astrology. I'm often introduced as an astrologer. I even have friends who pause when they introduce me as they mentally make sure they're saying the right thing (they know from experience not to get it wrong). I think one possible cause could be the number of times people see the word "astrology" in daily life, vs the word "astronomy". "Astrology" is the more familiar brand and people instinctively lean towards the familiar word as correct.
Had they asked if they believe in horoscope, the poll results would have been much better.
Funny poll:
* do you belive hroroscopes are scientific?
* do you believe astrology is scientific?
Rather an IQ test, to see who knows that astrology produces horoscopes.
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.