"A quick, spookily accurate, impossible-to-resist personality test"

[CDNSushi]

My inner skeptic is unleashed! Mwahahahahahaha!!!!

But no, seriously. My undergrad degree was in Ψ...

The Forer Effect. (Sometimes known as the P.T. Barnum Effect: We've got something for everyone!).

So is it a parlor trick? Yeah, pretty much. By the time I got to the question showing me two IDENTICAL shapes and asking me which one was me, I pretty much knew it was bogus so I started clicking randomly.

Oh, and if you like, let me save you the trouble of clicking the above link to Wiki... Here is the most valuable excerpt.

Forer's demonstration

In 1948, psychologist Bertram R. Forer gave a personality test to his students. Afterward, he told his students they were each receiving a unique personality analysis that was based on the test's results and to rate their analysis on a scale of 0 (very poor) to 5 (excellent) on how well it applied to themselves. In reality, each received the same analysis:

“ You have a great need for other people to like and admire you. You have a tendency to be critical of yourself. You have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not turned to your advantage. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. Disciplined and self-controlled outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You pride yourself as an independent thinker and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. You have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be pretty unrealistic. Security is one of your major goals in life. ”

On average, the rating was 4.26, but only after the ratings were turned in was it revealed that each student had received identical copies assembled by Forer from various horoscopes. As can be seen from the profile, there are a number of statements that could apply equally to anyone. These statements later became known as Barnum statements, after P.T. Barnum.

[Brian K]

Hmm...my result was only about 10% accurate and I nearly choked when it said I seldom verbalize. Most of my friends would actually testify to the difficulty of shutting me up! It also went into flights of fancy concerning physical dexterity and athleticism....yeah, riiiight

[sydnie7]

I wondered, too, when I got to the question where the shapes were the same. Interesting, though, that based on results I received vs. some quoted here, not everybody is getting the same "analysis." Suppose there are a limited range of descriptions triggered by one or two of the more obviously different answer choices?

I'd read about similar college-class work with horoscopes (everybody receives the same one and reads their own meaning into it). At least this one wasn't as depressing as the handwriting analysis I had done at a party back in the 90s. THAT had me typing all my notes to co-workers for a month!

My inner skeptic is unleashed! Mwahahahahahaha!!!!

But no, seriously. My undergrad degree was in Ψ...

The Forer Effect. (Sometimes known as the P.T. Barnum Effect: We've got something for everyone!).

So is it a parlor trick? Yeah, pretty much. By the time I got to the question showing me two IDENTICAL shapes and asking me which one was me, I pretty much knew it was bogus so I started clicking randomly.

Oh, and if you like, let me save you the trouble of clicking the above link to Wiki... Here is the most valuable excerpt.

[MacSaorsa]

Is it just me or did those questions sound like they were developed by GLaDOS from Portal?

[Calico]

Ohiopiper and I got the exact same "analysis". You really have to stretch the results to fit them to me. I give it 10%. Pretty poor showing for random, where I would expect closer to 50%.

[Rob]

Disturbingly accurate.