• Does age affect belief in zodiacs?

• Does gender have an effect on belief in zodiac signs?

• Are the general zodiac descriptions accurate?

• If so, how accurate are they?

Our data analysis investigation project aims to explore the beliefs surrounding zodiac signs and their accuracy as perceived by individuals. The primary question investigates whether people identify with the descriptions of their horoscope signs. Additionally, the project seeks to determine if age and gender have an influence on belief in zodiac signs, thus examining potential demographic differences in astrological perceptions. Ultimately, the investigation will not only explore belief systems but also quantitatively assess the perceived accuracy of astrological descriptions, contributing valuable data to the understanding of zodiac beliefs in contemporary culture.

For our data analysis investigation project, each of us distributed the survey to 15 individuals, encompassing a diverse group that included family members, friends, colleagues, and acquaintances of friends. The survey consists of six carefully crafted questions designed to gather insights into participants' beliefs regarding zodiac signs.

The first two questions capture demographic information: gender and age. The next questions assess their belief in zodiac signs and their specific zodiac sign. Participants were also presented with a description of their zodiac sign and asked to evaluate whether they believe it accurately reflects their personality traits. To quantify this alignment, respondents rated the extent to which they agree with the listed traits on a scale from 1 to 5. An optional explanation box was provided for participants to elaborate on their experiences or thoughts regarding their zodiac sign, allowing for a richer understanding of their perspectives.

Age: The largest age group was 25–34 (47.8%), followed by 18–24 (37%). A smaller group were either under 18 or over 35. The responses mostly reflect young adults, particularly Millennials and Gen Z.

Leo was the most common sign among participants (15.2%), followed by Virgo (10.9%). The other signs were fairly evenly distributed, suggesting a broad range of birthdays and signs in the group.

For example, one participant who identified as a Capricorn said, "I don’t really believe in astrology, but I have to admit the Capricorn description fits me almost too well—focused, practical, and kind of reserved." Another Leo shared, "I love attention and being social, so it makes sense that I’m a Leo. It’s weirdly accurate."

Despite 8.7% of people saying none of the traits applied to them, 52.2% believed that 4 or all 5 zodiac traits matched their personality. This suggests that many people, whether believers or skeptics, find value or fun in exploring how their sign might align with who they are.

The majority of survey participants were young adults.This demographic detail aligns with broader trends that show younger age groups are more likely to be interested in astrology.

Overall, the results tell a story of curiosity, openness, and self-reflection. Astrology seems to serve not only as a belief system for some but also as a playful or meaningful way for others to think about identity and personality. Whether taken seriously or just for fun, zodiac signs clearly still spark conversation and personal insight.

Most respondents were women (55.6%) and young adults aged 18–34 (over 84% combined). This could skew results toward the interests and beliefs of younger women, especially since younger people tend to engage more with astrology online.

Confirmation Bias (in responses)

Someone might feel like their sign is accurate simply because they focus on the traits that align and ignore the ones that don’t.

These biases haven't invalidated our survey but it helps explain why our results lean a certain way.

1. Zodiac Beliefs Are Mixed but Not Irrelevant

   • About 55.6% of participants believe in zodiac signs, while 44.4% don’t. Even among non-believers, some admitted that their zodiac description fit them well.

   • This implies that even skeptical individuals may see elements of truth in astrological descriptions — possibly pointing to how general and relatable the descriptions can be (aka the Barnum effect).

2. Demographics May Drive Engagement

   • Since the majority of participants were young adults (18–34) and over half identified as female, the findings are most applicable to that demographic.

   • The implication is that younger people, especially women, are more likely to engage with astrology, aligning with broader cultural and online trends (e.g., zodiac memes, horoscope apps).

3. Accuracy Ratings Suggest Meaning or Enjoyment, Not Necessarily Belief

   • With 52.2% saying 4 or 5 traits matched them, but 26.1% saying none matched, there’s a significant divide.

   • This suggests that many participants enjoy exploring zodiac signs for fun or self-reflection, not always because they fully believe in astrology. It might be more about identity exploration than spiritual belief.

When further examining the data, a majority of the men 60% (9/15) in believed in zodiac signs compared to a majority of the women 54% (14/26), who didn't believe in zodiac signs. This goes against the perceived idea that women are more interested in astrology. This data presents the conclusion that men are more likely to believe in astrology than women are.

Also, looking further into the data, it appears as if late Gen Z to early millennials comprise the majority of individuals who believe in astrology. Out of the 25-34 age range, 67% (14/21) said they believed in astrology. The next largest age range, younger Gen Z (18-24), had the most individuals not believing in astrology, with 59% (10/17) replying no. This suggests that individuals between the ages of 25-34 are more likely to believe in astrology compared to people between 18-24.

Another method for improving the study is getting equal numbers of men and women to participate when comparing the effect gender has on a person's belief in zodiac signs. Due to the higher population of women surveyed in the data compared to men, it isn't accurate to compare the two values. 26 women and 13 men are not close enough to get a proper comparison of the two values.

A final suggestion for further improvement would be removing the 'personal' questions from the data. While these can be informative, people may lie or have skewed views on things that are opinion-based and not fact-based, like, for example, taking a survey on weight. Asking a person's weight and weighing them will yield different results. Collecting any data based on opinions results in the data being skewed or not being a proper representation.