Author: Ertel, Prof. Suitbert
Abstract: Gauquelin & Tracz (1991) rejected Ertel’s (1990) and Rodenbeck’s (1990) conclusion that the Gauquelin character trait hypothesis (CTH) does not hold. They repeated our former biographical trait counts and reported results supporting CTH. The contradiction was explained in terms of sloppy vs. careful trait extraction: our students’ extractions were deemed poor, whereas their students’ extractions were taken as reliable. A close look at procedures and output of extractions, however, indicates that our students had worked at least as carefully as theirs. Evidence shows, instead, that Gauquelin’s own care left something to be desired in that he selected duplicates of traits extracted by his helpers excluding from analysis all non-duplicates. Since he was generally aware of planetary positions he was liable to biased selections and deletions. Our conclusion is backed by results from three statistical comparison on Fresno/Gottingen data. Gauquelin & Tracz’s study therefore does not invalidate our contention that the character trait hypothesis is wrong. Since Gauquelin’s basic planetary effect has continuously gained support, failures with CTH are a challenge to find an explanation for the persistent main effect in entirely different terms.
Keywords: Character trait hypothesis (CTH), Gauquelin, planetary positions
Notes:
Publication: Correlation: Astrological Association Journal of Research Into Astrology
Issue: Volume 12 Issue 1
Dated: 1993
Pages: Pages 2 – 9
Why the Character Trait Hypothesis Still Fails: resolving the conflict between the Fresno and Gottingen Studies
Posted in Free Research Abstract