As it has been shaped by improvements in its tools and methods, and by its discourse with critics, I describe how the astrological research program has advanced through three stages of modelling and design limitations. Single-factor tests (for example, the many Sun-sign–only experiments that have been published) are typically underdeterministic. Multi-factor tests, unless they are very well designed, can easily become overdeterministic. Chart-matching tests have been vulnerable to confirmation bias errors until the development of a machine-based, whole-chart matching protocol that (...) has objectively produced evidence of high effect-sizes. A meta-analysis of recent results shows the rapid advancement and how to further improve the results. The value of the program is not only to corroborate the taxonomic counterfactuals of astrological “cookbooks,” but to extend their explanatory reach by the comparison of astrological postulates and inferences with philosophies in other disciplines in terms of quantifiable processes and emergent effects. (shrink)

Background: Studies involving astrology and psychiatry have mostly found conflicting results, with astrology being criticized as unscientific and also, lack of an objective assessment method for scientifically testing astrology. The current study attempts to test the predictive ability of astrology using the Indian system for the first time in identifying mental illness. Methodology: The sample comprised of 150 subjects, with 75 having mental illness and 75 without mental illness. Keeping the subjects and astrologers blind to each other, a computer generated (...) birth chart data using the subject’s gender, date, time and place of birth was given for interpretation. Predictions were matched with the clinical condition at intake. Results: Kappa coefficient was used which found a moderate agreement in the prediction of life time mental illness (k=0.560, p=.001) and a substantial agreement in predicting current state of mental illness (k=0.626, p=.001). Viewed as a diagnostic test, astrology showed, a fairly good sensitivity (77.3%), specificity (78.7%), positive predictive value (78.4%) and negative predictive value (77.6%) in identifying the life-time and current presence or absence of mental illness. However, the study showed poor match while predicting symptom cluster (34.6% in mental illness, 42.6% in normal subjects) and onset of symptoms (28%). Conclusions: Overall, the evidence seems to point towards astrology, as practiced in this study, modestly predicting presence of mental illness. Caveats concerning the methodology, statistics including poor inter-astrologer agreement makes it difficult in reconciling conflicting findings. Hence the findings in this study are at best tentative and need more extensive enquiry. (shrink)

Two of the staunchest critics of astrology presented their case in an article published in this journal that has since become a standard reference. The authors argue that the astrological experience is more likely to work by 'hidden persuaders' than by either objective or psychic criteria, yet their argument provides no evidence of this. The authors demand careful testing yet their own examples and claims against astrology are not careful. The metaanalysis claim mixes studies with widely disparate data types. The (...) parental tampering argument against Michel Gauquelin's planetary eminence findings lacks supportive evidence. The 'definitive' time twins test fails to define the criteria of resemblance. The test of predicting psychological test profiles does not discriminate between permanent personality dimensions and psychological states as astrology requires. The blind chart matching studies evaluated skills on the wrong parties where they would not be expected by either astrology or psychology. The authors fail to mention the most interesting and promising peer-reviewed astrological research studies that were available to them. Improved discourse with astrological subject matter experts is recommended. (shrink)