Sly Belief in Luck and the Revised Paranormal Belief Scale

Sly Belief in Luck and the Revised Paranormal Belief Scale

Belief in Luck and the Revised Paranormal Belief Scale
A Correlational Study
PROBLEM
Recent research has indicated that there is a conflation
between the terms “superstition” and “luck” in the research
literature (Lindeman & Svedholm, 2012; Sly & Kaiser, 2013)
leaving the contemporary researcher with a need for a
measurement scale to assess the specific belief in luck
superstition when performing experiments involving luck-based
superstitions. Wiseman and Watt (2004) indicate that many
prior researchers have used the Paranormal Belief Scale (PBS;
Tobacyk & Milford, 1983), or a newer version, the Revised
Paranormal Belief Scale (R-PBS; Tobacyk, 2004) to assess
belief in luck or superstition. However, Wiseman and Watt
mention limitations of the Paranormal Belief Scales and suggest
that future research into superstition and luck use a
measurement scale that includes good-luck superstitions in
addition to the bad-luck superstitions found in the Paranormal
Belief Scales.
There are a number of measurement scales used in research
on superstition and luck (for a review see Lindeman &
Svedholm, 2012). However, ambiguities and conflicting results
concerning the dimensionality structure of some of these
measures prompted Thompson and Prendergast (2013) to
create a new scale, the Belief in Luck and Luckiness Scale
(BILLS). While not addressing belief in good-luck superstitions
specifically, as Wiseman and Watt (2004) suggested, Thompson
and Prendergast propose that belief in luck encompasses both
belief in good and bad luck on a bipolar continuum. Specifically,
that a person either believes in luck (good and bad) or they do
not. The BILLS has two subscales, which measures individuals’
belief in luck as well as their belief in personal luckiness, and
has been shown to have “internal consistency reliability,
convergent validity, and temporal stability” in the non-U.S.
sample of participants used (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013, p.
505).
The primary purpose of the current study was to explore
correlations between items in the Belief in Luck and Luckiness
Scale (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013) and the Revised
Paranormal Belief Scale (R-PBS; Tobacyk, 2004), specifically
the Superstition subscale of the R-PBS. We hypothesized that
the Belief in Luck subscale of the BILLS would be positively
correlated with the R-PBS, specifically the Superstition
subscale, since both scales are supposed to measure irrational
beliefs. However, we hypothesized that the Belief in Luckiness
subscale of the BILLS would not be correlated with the
Superstition subscale of the R-PBS, since Thompson and
Prendergast found no correlation between Belief in Luck and
Belief in Personal Luckiness. Specifically, Thompson and
Prendergast found that some individuals who scored low on the
Belief in Luck (irrational belief) scored high on Belief in
Luckiness. To explain this, they hypothesized that these
individuals “take luckiness straightforwardly to mean
fortunateness.” (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013, p. 506).
However, before we could explore the primary purpose of the
current study, we first had to determine if the BILLS could
reliably be used with undergraduate research subjects as most
often found in U.S. research protocols. For reliable use with
undergraduate research subjects in the U.S. we would expect to
find comparable Cronbach’s alpha levels as Thompson and
Prendergast (2013) found for both subscales of the BILLS, as
well as concordant results when comparing correlations with the
BILLS and Levenson’s (1981) Internality, Powerful Others, and
Chance Scale (IPOCS).
James S. Sly, Alexis Raushel, Jennifer Kemp, and Melissa Duncan Fallone
Missouri State University
METHOD and RESULTS
In experiment 1 we administered the Belief in Luck and Luckiness Scale (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013), the Revised
Paranormal Belief Scale (Tobacyk, 2004), and the Internality, Powerful Others, and Chance Scale (Levenson, 1981) to 198
undergraduate participants in a laboratory setting.
In experiment 2 we administered the same three scales to 171 undergraduate participants via an online Qualtrics survey. To
control for any order effect the three scales were presented in a counter-balanced order.
In Thompson and Prendergast’s original study they found Belief in Luck alphas of .85 and .79 in their experiment 1 and 2,
respectively. We found concordant results in both experiment 1 (lab) and 2 (online) of our studies for the Belief in Luck subscale of
the BILLS (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013). Both delivery modalities resulted in very strong Cronbach’s alpha level of .90 and
.89, respectively. Thompson and Prendergast also found very strong Cronbach’s alphas for their Belief in Personal Luckiness
subscale with alphas of .88 and .89 in their experiments 1 and 2, respectively. We, on the other hand, found very low and
unacceptable alphas in our two experiments, with only an α = .58 in our experiment 1 (lab) and a mere α = .37 in our experiment 2
(online). Moreover, where Thompson and Prendergast found no correlation between the two subscales of the BILLS (r = .07, p =
.25 in experiment 1 and r = -.02, p = .72 in experiment 2), we did find significant positive correlations between the Belief in Luck
and Belief in Personal Luckiness subscales, r = .25, p < .001, and r = .23, p < .001, in our experiment 1 and 2, respectively.
Upon examination of the correlations between the Belief in Luck subscale of the BILLS with the Internality, Powerful Others, and
Chance Scale (Levenson, 1981), we found concordant results with Thompson and Prendergast’s original studies (2013).
Specifically, in experiment 1 (lab) we found that Belief in Luck was positively correlated with both the Powerful Others (r = .22, p <
.001) and the Chance (r = .58, p < .001) subscales of Levenson’s IPOCS, while not being correlated with the Internality subscale (r
= .04, n.s.). Moreover, we found similar results in our experiment 2 (online) with Belief in Luck being positively correlated with both
the Powerful Others (r = .17, p < .05) and the Chance (r = .47, p < .001) subscales of Levenson’s IPOCS, while not being
correlated with the Internality subscale (r = -.09, n.s.). However, Thompson and Prendergast also found significant positive
correlations between their Belief in Personal Luckiness subscale and the Internality subscale of Levenson’s IPOCS, and
significant negative correlations between the Powerful Others, and Chance subscales. We on the on other hand found only one
significant correlation between the BILLS’ Belief in Personal Luckiness subscale and Levenson’s IPOCS across both of our
experiments. Namely, in experiment 2 (online) we found Belief in Personal Luckiness to be positively correlated with Internality, r =
.23, p < .001, which is consistent with the findings of Thompson and Prendergast.
Finally, in both of our experiments we found that the Belief in Luck subscale of the BILLS (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013) was
positively correlated with every subscale of the Revised Paranormal Belief subscale: Experiment 1 (lab): Traditional Religious
Belief, r = .05, n.s.; PSI, r = .35, p < .001; Witchcraft, r = .27, p < .001; Superstition, r = .45, p < .001; Spiritualism, r = .42, p < .001;
Extraordinary Life Forms, r = .25, p = .001; Precognition, r = .56, p < .001. In Experiment 2 (online): Traditional Religious Belief, r =
.10, n.s.; PSI, r = .25, p < .001; Witchcraft, r = .15, n.s.;Superstition, r = .43, p < .001; Spiritualism, r = .33, p < .001; Extraordinary
Life Forms, r = .27, p = .001; Precognition, r = .39, p < .001. Due to unacceptable Cronbach’s alpha levels in the Belief in Personal
Luckiness subscale in our experiments we are unable to determine the accuracy of the correlations found between it and the
subscales of the R-PBS, see Table 1 for the full list of correlations.
Psychology
Department
CONCLUSIONS
In two experiments, one in a lab setting and one administered
online via a Qualtrics survey, we found that the Belief in Luck
subscale of the BILLS (Thompson & Prendergast, 2013)
produced similar internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha levels)
with our sample of U.S. undergraduates as Thompson and
Prendergast’s original studies. These results indicate that the
Belief in Luck subscale of the BILLS can be used as a valid
measure of Belief in Luck when researchers have an
undergraduate subject pool in the U.S. However, neither of our
two experiments found concordant internal reliability
(Cronbach’s alpha) levels for the Belief in Personal Luckiness
subscale of the BILLS when compared to Thompson and
Prendergast’s original studies. Future research should examine
cultural issues that may affect the validity and reliability of the
Belief in Personal Luckiness subscale. Likewise, both of our
experiments found that high Belief in Luck is associated with
poor personality functions as measured by Levenson’s (1981)
Internality, Powerful Others, and Chance Scale and high
degrees of various irrational beliefs as measured by the Revised
Paranormal Belief Scale (Tobacyk, 2004). These findings
indicate that the Belief in Luck subscale of the BILLS can
reliably be used by contemporary researchers across the globe
that might have a need for a measurement scale to assess the
specific belief in luck superstition when performing experiments
involving luck-based superstitions.
REFERENCES
Levenson, H. (1981). Differentiating among internality, powerful others, and
chance. In H. M. Lefcourt, Research with the locus of control construct
(Vol. 1, pp. 15–63). New York: Elsevier.
Lindeman, M., & Svedholm, A. M. (2012). What's in a term? Paranormal,
superstitious, magical and supernatural beliefs by any other name
would mean the same. Review of General Psychology, 16(3), 241–255.
doi:10.1037/a0027158
Sly, J. S., & Kaiser, D. L. (2013, April). What do you mean by
“superstition?”: Clarifying the definition. Poster Presentation at
Southwestern Psychological Association Annual Convention, Fort
Worth, Texas.
Thompson, E. R., & Prendergast, G. P. (2013). Belief in luck and luckiness:
Conceptual clarification and new measure validation. Personality and
Individual Differences, 54(4), 501–506. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.027
Tobacyk, J. J. (2004). A revised paranormal belief scale. The International
Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 23, 94–98.
Tobacyk, J. J., & Milford, G. (1983). Belief in paranormal phenomena:
Assessment instrument development and implications for personality
functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(5), 1029–
1037. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.5.1029
Wiseman, R., & Watt, C. (2004). Measuring superstitious belief: Why lucky
charms matter. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(8), 1533–
1541. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.02.009
CONTACT INFORMATION
James S. Sly: [email protected]
Alexis Raushel: [email protected]
Jennifer Kemp: [email protected]
Melissa Duncan Fallone: [email protected]
This poster can be downloaded from Open Science Framework at:
https://osf.io/pvunc/