Prof. Matsui's PapersFinally I obtained the papers of Mr. Matsui (Prof. of
Tsukuba University). They are really fantastic! The data showed consistent
results "as expected". Wow!!
However, Mr. Matsui thinks there is no relation between blood types and
personality. Please enjoy reading!
AbstractsI you are tired of numbers, please read the following abstracts.
Actually, data of opposing psychologists such as Mr.
Matsui showed the consistent trends (as Mr. Nomi had shown). However, small numbers of
samples and inappropriate questions kept out "significant differences"
--
statistically. Even c2-test
was not appropriate method for such data!
For example, statistical differences appeared only with two items out of twenty 20 items in
the first paper.
Table 2 Percentage of people that answered yes highest in red / lowest in blue
Expected
Blood TypeItems
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Result of c2-test A 4. I esteem rules, customs and orders
57.7 54.7 50.7 41.2 p<0.001 B 10. I am optimistic to the future 46.2 52.9 52.2 67.6 p<0.05
Item 4 and 10 showed significant difference. Yet Type-O people showed the highest rate in item 4 and Type-AB people showed the highest rate in item 10. Differences by blood types were seen in only two items of all the twenty. Also, the direction of the difference is entirely different from the description of Nomi (1984).
Only two items showed statistical differences out of twenty. Also, only one item did out of twenty-four items, although 10,000 or more people were analyzed in the second paper.
Table 8 Percentages of people that answered yes to Item 4: " I am not particular about things." highest in red / lowest in blue
O A B AB 1980
31.8 30.6 37.8 34.3 1982
39.1 33.0 35.6 36.1 1986
39.5 32.4 38.8 39.9 1988
42.9 35.9 45.1 37.1
Only item 4 showed the same difference (Table 8). But the highest blood type(s) differed by years. The result lacked the consistency that exceeded one year. Therefore, the conclusion that there is no blood-typical stereotypes in the data.
But, I think conditions like the following are necessary for stable results.
1. Homogeneous subjects (social positions, ages, regions etc.)
2. The number of subjects is more than several hundred (more than one thousand and ratio of each blood types are the same, if possible)
3. Choose the personality description of Mr. Nomi.
4. Results does not correspond to Mr. Nomi's description ("language" does not represent "personality") -- also affected by culture and country etc.
For example, the data of the first paper fulfilled all the
four conditions above. Therefore, two items out of twenty showed the statistical
difference. But the data of the second paper fulfilled only condition 1 and 3. So, it
showed only one statistical difference out of twenty-four items, although number of
samples increased substantially -- 10,000 or more people.
Taking the above four conditions into account, the following five in twenty four items show
the same trends as other data in the first paper.
1 I am ready to keep company with everyone.
4 I am not particular about things.
9 I am not worried by what I was told.
13 I am not good at getting along with others.
18 I am a good loser.
Personality tests were carried out simultaneously, which showed the clear differences, too. Also, the next six in twenty-four items showed the same trends in all of four times in the second paper.
2 I make an effort toward my goal.
4 I am not particular about things.
6 I am serious when I should be so.
9 I am not worried by what I was told.
15 I am careful when doing something.
22 I sometimes burst into a rage.
And, data of four-year averages suggest sixteen items out of twenty-four show relations between blood types and personality. Therefore, statistically, there are relations of blood types and personality, after all !
The First Paper: About Blood-typical StereotypesTakuma, T., & Matsui, Y. (1985). Ketsueki gata sureroetaipu ni tsuite [About blood type stereotype], Jinbungakuho (Tokyo metropolitan University), 44,15-30.
The distribution of the blood types of the subjects is written in Table 1. 613 students without no answer are chosen out of 640 students who belong to the public/private university of Tokyo Metropolis / Kanagawa Prefecture. Subjects consist of 345 men and 215 women. I think there may be no problem because it almost agrees with the average of Japanese.
Table 1 Distribution of ABO blood type of the subjects (%)
Items
N O A B AB Subjects
613 29.7 36.7 22.5 11.1 Average of Japanese
1,150 thousand 30.7 38.1 21.8 9.4
The percentage of people who answered "yes" are shown in Table 2. Mr. Matsui said "Items of the personality are carefully chosen by consulting Nomi' book (1984)".
Table 2 Percentage of people who answered "yes"
Expected
Blood TypeItems
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Result of c2-test A 1. I am particular with everything
55.5 53.3 47.1 55.9 2. I care about it to the person of the surroundings
57.1 63.1 58.7 61.8 3. I suppress my feeling and desire
54.4 61.8 57.2 63.2 4. I esteem rules, customs and orders
57.7 54.7 50.7 41.2 p<0.001 5. I am seeking my reason for living
84.6 84.4 84.1 82.4 B 6. I am not influenced by the surroundings
25.3 31.6 20.3 29.4 7. I do not like be controlled, constrained by person
86.8 86.2 92.0 88.2 8. I understand new things and flexible thought
56.6 70.2 67.4 69.1 9. I open heart to people
54.4 49.3 52.9 47.1 10. I am optimistic to the future 46.2 52.9 52.2 67.6 p<0.05 AB 11. I think straightly 44.0 45.8 39.9 41.2 12. I have clear two-facedness of emotionally stable and unstable 57.1 58.2 63.8 61.8 13. I am distant to people 33.5 40.4 41.3 45.6 14. I am not able to be absorbed to anything 28.0 22.7 23.2 23.5 15. I am a good analyst and critic 42.9 44.0 45.7 47.1 O 16. I treat people with smile and carefully 41.2 39.1 45.7 42.6 17. I am both romantic and realistic 80.8 80.4 81.2 94.1 18. I care human relations, especially esteem trust of people 84.6 84.9 79.7 80.9 19. I have vitality 35.2 38.2 37.0 52.9 20. I go straight with persistence and achieve when the purpose is decided 66.5 66.7 65.9 66.2
As a result (p. 20) :
Item 4 and 10 showed significant difference. Yet it is Type-O people that showed the highest rate in item 4 and Type-AB people that showed the highest rate in item 10. The difference by blood types was seen in only two items of all the twenty. Also, the direction of the difference is entirely different from the description of Nomi (1984).
In short, the two researchers thought Mr. Nomi is wrong. And, they seemed to think that even the difference caused "by chance", although not written clearly. If there is a real difference, there is a real relation, in his logic, which is his thought.
Table 2 (modified) Percentage of people who answered "yes" highest in red / lowest in blue / Bold more then 10 %
Expected
Blood TypeItems
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Max. - Min. A 1. I am particular with everything
55.5 53.3 47.1 55.9 8.8 2. I care about it to the person of the surroundings
57.1 63.1 58.7 61.8 6.0 3. I suppress my feeling and desire
54.4 61.8 57.2 63.2 8.8 4. I esteem rules, customs and orders
57.7 54.7 50.7 41.2 16.5 5. I am seeking my reason for living
84.6 84.4 84.1 82.4 2.2 B 6. I am not influenced by the surroundings
25.3 31.6 20.3 29.4 11.3 7. I do not like be controlled, constrained by person
86.8 86.2 92.0 88.2 5.8 8. I understand new things and flexible thought
56.6 70.2 67.4 69.1 13.6 9. I open heart to people
54.4 49.3 52.9 47.1 7.3 10. I am optimistic to the future 46.2 52.9 52.2 67.6 21.4 AB 11. I think straightly 44.0 45.8 39.9 41.2 5.9 12. I have clear two-facedness of emotionally stable and unstable 57.1 58.2 63.8 61.8 6.7 13. I am distant to people 33.5 40.4 41.3 45.6 12.1 14. I am not able to be absorbed to anything 28.0 22.7 23.2 23.5 5.3 15. I am a good analyst and critic 42.9 44.0 45.7 47.1 4.2 O 16. I treat people with smile and carefully 41.2 39.1 45.7 42.6 6.6 17. I am both romantic and realistic 80.8 80.4 81.2 94.1 13.7 18. I care human relations, especially esteem trust of people 84.6 84.9 79.7 80.9 5.2 19. I have vitality 35.2 38.2 37.0 52.9 14.7 20. I go straight with persistence and achieve when the purpose is decided 66.5 66.7 65.9 66.2 0.8
There are seven items with 10 percent or more differences. Don't you think these are somewhat large? Therefore, I will check a little more in detail. However, I cannot compare them, to my regret, because there is no similar question item with Mr. Nomi.
| No one points out, somehow, these question items have many problems. Mr. Matsui said "Items of the personality are carefully chosen by consulting Nomi's book (1984)". But I think "Items of the personality are directly chosen from Nomi's book (1984)" is better. Don't you think so, too? If trends differed entirely, Mr. Nomi was wrong! I tried to find such items -- in vain. I can't find the reason yet. Why? |
Luckyly enough, I found such data at last ...
Are There Consistent Data? -- No. 1Let's proof the order of group-dependence, which is O=A>B>AB (Valid only in Japan?).
The data (table 18, pp.71) from "Shin ketsueki-gata ningen-gaku" (New Blood Type Humanics) published in 1978. Results of a questionnaire to first-class Japanese athletes (exact dates were not specified). The ratios of athletes who choose "Do the best for Japan" in the international game.
Blood type Number of persons Ratio O 58 people 13.8% A 73 people 13.7% B 51 people 9.8% AB 22 people 0.0%
It is the order of O=A>B>AB as expected. To my surprise, the ratio of Type AB is 0! Type-AB people doesn't identify themselves with their country -- Japan.
The next data from the same book (table 24, pp.211). This question is "Which do you feel best when eating with people?" ratios of people who choose "Eat alone". Exact dates were not specified.
Blood type Number of persons Ratio O 636 people 20.1% A 739 people 19.6% B 600 people 23.2% AB 428 people 27.1%
It is the order of O=A<B<AB, too, as expected. It is clear that Type-AB people like to be alone.
Famous psychologist, Raymond B. Cattell's Study shows the clear relation of blood types to personality traits. Click here!
Results of The ABO System
Australians are the same trend for the most part, although a dangerous rate is a little bit high, because there are few Type-AB people.
The same trends showed by Japanese psychologists. Surprisingly, probability is below 0.1%. The ratio of the person that chose "Esteem rules, usual customs and order" (Taketoshi TAKUMA and Yutaka MATSUI, 1985, About blood type stereotype, Jinbungakuho,172,15-30.).
Blood type Number of persons Ratio O 29.7% 57.7% A 36.7% 54.7% B 22.5% 50.7% AB 11.1% 41.2% Total 613 people in all -
This order of O=A>B>AB is expected before.
The next data are presented by Prof. Masao Ohmura ("Chi no shonin" no ejiki ni naruna detarame buri wa jissho sareta [Do not become a prey of the "merchant of blood," mistakes were demonstrated], Asahi Journal, March 3, 1985, pp. 89-92).
Are there Type-O characteristics? (%)
Item
O(115) A(216) B(104) AB(45) 5. I am open with comrades
82.6 75.5 79.8 68.9
Type A showed lower percentage than Type B. This trend differs a little bit. because the question is not about "group-dependence". However, Type O is the highest and Type AB is the lowest in here, too, as the primary trail. I think this is because of the word "comrades", that Type A is low. Type-A people feel more sense of unity with "abstract" organization than people themselves: comrades.
Then, how is the data of Mr. Matsui ?
From Table 2 (modified) Percentage of people who answered "yes" highest in red / lowest in blue / Bold more then 10 %
Items
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Max. - Min. 9. I open my heart to people
54.4 49.3 52.9 47.1 7.3 13. I am distant to people 33.5 40.4 41.3 45.6 12.1 18. I care human relations, especially esteem trust of people 84.6 84.9 79.7 80.9 5.2
Wow!! I may say that almost the same trends are showen!
Are There Consistent Data? -- No. 2First of all, the data of this paper:
Table 2 (modified) Percentage of people who answered "yes" highest in red / lowest in blue / Bold more then 10 %
Items
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Max. - Min. 1. I am particular with everything
55.5 53.3 47.1 55.9 8.8
Secondly, the data of the second paper:
Percentage of people that answered "yes"
6. I am serious when I should be so. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
38.2 39.2 36.6 42.7 6.1 1982
41.6 41.2 37.0 44.9 7.9 1986
36.5 38.9 35.6 37.4 3.3 1988
39.3 39.5 35.0 39.0 4.5 Mean
38.9 39.7 36.1 41.0 4.9
Although the difference is a little bit small, percentages of Type B are consistently low. Congratulations !!
Are There Consistent Data? -- No. 3By the way, personality tests are done simultaneously in this paper (p. 18).
The following nine scales are chosen. Three scales: affiliation, defense and order from EPPS (Edwards Personality Preference Schedule). Six scales: Capricious (C), Nervous (N), Reactive (R), Aggressive (AG）, Socially extravert (S), Authoritative (A) from Yatabe-Guilford Personality Test.
The results are shown in Table 4 (p. 19).
Table 4 Average scale scores by blood types highest in red / lowest in blue
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsAffiliation
7.26 7.27 7.07 7.46 F<1 Defence
6.55 5.88 6.06 6.38 F=2.68 Order
7.16 7.48 6.96 7.28 F=1.14 C
5.16 5.11 5.68 5.74 F=2.33 N
5.47 5.69 5.65 5.66 F=<1 R
5.25 5.23 5.78 5.66 F=1.67 AG
5.48 5.41 5.51 5.53 F<1 S 7.04 7.16 7.05 7.60 F<1 A 4.72 4.64 4.64 4.60 F<1
Note 1) Each scale points distribute from 1 to 11 and express that the nature is strong as the point is high.
Note 2) the degree of freedom of the F value is (3,166). p<0.05 p<0.10
After all (pp. 19-20),
The result was shown in Table 4. Averages of the personality scale point in terms of each blood types and value of the F-tests. The difference was significant in only one out of all the scales. Even this defense demand, the difference between the highest (Type O: 6.55) and the lowest (Type A: 5.88) are as small as 0.67.
In short, there is difference although it was trifling. Additionally, Type-A's order demand is the highest and Type-B is most reactive. Don't you think difference is consistent?
The reason that the significant difference did not come
out is easy to explain. Look at Table 2 again and you find 20-percent difference. But you
can't find such large difference in Table 4, then questions must be inappropriate.
Anyway, these are very precious data for me.
Again, conditions like the following are necessary for stable results.
1. Homogeneous subjects (social positions, ages, regions etc.)
2. The number of subjects is more than several hundred (more than one thousand and ratios of each blood types are the same, if possible)
3. Choose the personality description of Mr. Nomi.
4. Results does not correspond to Mr. Nomi's description ("language" does not represent "personality") -- also affected by culture and country etc.
Don't you think they are applicable well?
The Second Paper: Statistical consideration on personality
difference of blood typesMatsui, Y. (1991). Ketsueki gata ni yoru seikaku no chigai ni kansuru toukeiteki kentou [Statistical consideration on personality difference of blood types], Bulletin of Tokyo metropolitan Tachikawa junior college, 124, 51-54.
JNN Data Bank (Japan News Network Data Bank, a department of TBS, which is one of the major TV stations in Tokyo) conducts a large annual survey. Its subjects are about 3,000 people annually, from age 13 to 59 using the random sampling method. Surveys of 1980, 1982, 1986, 1988 have items of blood type and 24 yes-no questions of personality. More than 10,000 people were analyzed.
Table 3 24 yes-no question items of personality
1 I am ready to keep company with everyone.
2 I make an effort toward my goal.
3 I like to be a leader.
4 I am not particular about things.
5 I do not know how to refresh myself.
6 I am serious when I should be so.
7 I often tell jokes to make others laugh.
8 I do not change my idea after I present it.
9 I am not worried by what I was told.
10 I have a lot of friends.
11 I am often worried about things.
12 I sometimes indulge in fancies.
13 I am not good at getting along with others.
14 I like to have parties in my home.
15 I am careful when doing something.
16 I am often moved to tears.
17 I often change my mind.
18 I am a good loser.
19 I am persevering.
20 I cannot be quiet and I make merry when I am delighted.
21 I am shy.
22 I sometimes burst into a rage.
23 I like to think deeply alone more than to talk with others.
24 I do not like to visit someone without presents.
Table 8 Percentages of people that answered yes to Item 4: " I am not particular about things." highest in red / lowest in blue
O A B AB 1980
31.8 30.6 37.8 34.3 1982
39.1 33.0 35.6 36.1 1986
39.5 32.4 38.8 39.9 1988
42.9 35.9 45.1 37.1 Only item 4 showed the same difference (Table 8). But the highest blood type(s) differed by year. The result lacked the consistency that exceeded one year. Therefore, the conclusion is that there is no blood-typical stereotypes in the data.
Re-analysis No. 1There is consistent differences although it was trifling! Let's go!
2 I make an effort toward my goal. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
26.7 27.1 23.8 30.4 6.6 1982
27.7 30.7 26.8 28.5 3.9 1986
28.3 26.8 23.7 29.0 5.3 1988
27.8 28.2 27.8 28.6 0.8 Mean
27.6 28.2 25.5 29.1 3.6 4 I am not particular about things. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
31.8 30.6 37.8 34.3 7.2 1982
39.1 33.0 35.6 36.1 6.1 1986
39.5 32.4 38.8 39.9 7.9 1988
42.9 35.9 45.1 37.1 9.2 Mean
38.3 33.0 39.3 36.7 6.3 6 I am serious when I should be so. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
38.2 39.2 36.6 42.7 6.1 1982
41.6 41.2 37.0 44.9 7.9 1986
36.5 38.9 35.6 37.4 3.3 1988
39.3 39.5 35.0 39.0 4.5 Mean
38.9 39.7 36.1 41.0 4.9 9 I am not worried by what I was told. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
23.5 22.2 26.7 23.3 4.5 1982
28.2 24.3 24.4 25.0 3.9 1986
25.6 23.7 26.1 26.9 3.2 1988
27.6 24.2 27.2 28.3 4.1 平均
26.2 23.6 26.1 25.9 3.6
15 I am careful when doing something. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
32.1 29.8 25.9 29.1 6.2 1982
32.7 32.3 29.8 31.6 2.9 1986
29.3 33.6 28.7 33.6 4.9 1988
28.3 32.3 26.4 30.1 5.9 Mean
30.6 32.0 27.7 31.1 4.3
22 I sometimes burst into a rage. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
33.4 35.2 30.8 34.0 4.4 1982
34.2 34.1 28.4 33.5 5.8 1986
36.1 35.9 30.1 35.0 6.0 1988
36.0 35.0 34.7 34.9 1.3 Mean
34.9 35.1 31.1 34.4 4.0
Needless to say anything (laugh). Probability that only the certain blood type becomes the least rate is cube of 0.25 (0.016). So these are not accidental, because there are six items that showed consistent trends. Also c2-tests are significant.
Re-analysis No. 2I think there is a following objection. Certainly, six items showed consistent trends, but the differences are very little. Weren't they meaningless? Please wait a moment. Let's try to compare data of the first paper and the second ones.
Data of the first paper highest in red / lowest in blue
Items
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Max. - Min. 1. I am particular with everything
55.5 53.3 47.1 55.9 8.8
Data of the second paper:
6. I am serious when I should be so. highest in red / lowest in blue
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
38.2 39.2 36.6 42.7 6.1 1982
41.6 41.2 37.0 44.9 7.9 1986
36.5 38.9 35.6 37.4 3.3 1988
39.3 39.5 35.0 39.0 4.5 Mean
38.9 39.7 36.1 41.0 4.9
The difference of the second paper is 3.9 percent less than that of the first paper. Look at subjects:
Again, conditions like the following are necessary for stable results.
1. Homogeneous subjects (social position, age, region etc.)
2. The number of subjects is more than several hundred (more than one thousand and ratio of each blood types are the same, if possible)
3. Choose the personality description of Mr. Nomi.
4. Results does not correspond to Mr. Nomi's description ("language" does not represent "personality") -- also affected by culture and country etc.
Don't you think they are applicable well?
Re-analysis No. 3The averages of all the twenty-four items are shown in the table below. I think that items whose difference are more than 1.5 percents showed the noticeable trends. Errors of data are about 1.5 percents, I found later. So trends may be correct.
Average of four years highest in red / lowest in blue / consistent trend in bold
Items
O A B AB Max. - Min. c2 Results N
3551 4548 2487 1180 - - - 1 42.4 40.9 41.8 42.8 1.9 2.53 2
27.6 28.2 25.5 29.1 3.6 7.63 p<0.10 3 13.6 12.5 11.6 11.9 2.0 6.20 p<0.20 4 38.3 33.0 39.3 36.9 6.3 37.24 p<0.0001 5 14.0 13.1 13.0 13.8 1.0 1.96 6 38.9 39.7 36.1 41.0 3.9 11.62 p<0.05 7 31.5 31.8 32.5 32.5 1.0 0.88 8 26.3 25.5 25.3 26.6 1.3 1.41 9 26.2 23.6 26.1 25.9 2.6 9.46 p<0.10 10 38.5 36.3 36.4 36.7 2.2 4.80 p<0.20 11 30.8 33.9 32.2 31.9 3.1 9.01 p<0.10 12 25.9 25.9 27.3 25.7 1.6 2.09 13 20.7 20.8 20.1 22.0 1.9 1.83 14 16.4 16.5 16.3 16.8 0.5 0.16 15 30.6 32.0 27.7 31.1 4.3 14.11 p<0.01 16 36.0 35.4 34.7 35.9 1.3 1.18 17 19.3 18.8 21.7 21.8 3.0 12.03 p<0.01 18 26.5 25.2 26.3 27.4 2.2 3.24 19 33.1 33.5 32.0 31.9 1.6 2.30 20 42.9 42.4 40.7 42.4 2.2 3.09 21 22.3 23.4 23.5 23.2 1.2 1.70 22 34.9 35.1 31.0 34.4 3.9 13.66 p<0.01 23
16.1 16.5 14.9 15.4 1.6 3.28 24
37.9 36.9 36.8 36.9 1.1 1.17
The Distribution ChartThe below is the distribution chart of O-AB vs A-B. You can easily see that O-AB range is small. Also, the data are concentrating to zero neighborhood.
The Original DataTable 4 Data in 1980 (%)
Items
O A B AB c2 N
861 1098 588 309 - 1 43.2 41.4 39.3 44.3 3.100 2 26.7 27.1 23.8 30.4 4.896 3
12.2 11.5 9.5 13.3 3.619 4 31.8 30.6 37.8 34.3 9.639 5 13.4 10.7 14.1 11.7 5.564 6 38.2 39.2 36.6 42.7 3.417 7 32.4 30.5 28.7 32.7 2.729 8 26.1 26.3 22.3 25.6 3.763 9 23.5 22.2 26.7 23.3 4.309 10 36.9 36.0 31.6 37.5 5.279 11 31.8 31.2 30.6 31.7 0.264 12 24.3 25.2 27.0 24.6 1.504 13 19.9 19.7 21.4 23.0 2.152 14 14.5 18.0 13.8 12.0 10.304 15 32.1 29.8 25.9 29.1 6.511 16 34.6 35.7 33.5 38.8 2.773 17 18.2 19.0 18.5 19.7 0.424 18 22.2 25.0 25.7 27.5 4.609 19 28.1 31.1 32.3 37.2 9.401 20 40.3 41.3 36.1 40.8 4.743 21 21.8 21.9 24.3 23.3 1.633 22 33.4 35.2 30.8 34.0 3.310 23
14.9 14.4 13.9 15.9 0.682 24
35.3 37.2 34.7 36.9 1.452
Note: P<0.05, P<0.01
Table 5 Data in 1982 (%)
Items
O A B AB c2 N 878 1109 627 316 - 1
38.6 41.4 41.9 42.1 2.458 2 27.7 30.7 26.8 28.5 3.839 3
12.4 11.0 12.0 10.8 1.254 4 39.1 33.0 35.6 36.1 7.873 5 13.6 12.4 12.4 12.7 6.276 6 41.6 41.2 37.0 44.9 8.050 7 28.8 32.4 35.6 30.7 8.050 8 24.1 25.7 25.5 31.3 6.333 9 28.2 24.3 24.4 25.0 4.675 10 39.9 37.0 38.9 35.4 2.881 11 29.3 32.4 33.3 33.5 3.880 12 24.7 26.1 28.5 25.6 2.853 13 21.1 22.2 20.3 23.1 1.453 14 17.9 16.2 17.9 19.0 1.845 15 32.7 32.3 29.8 31.6 1.569 16 38.7 36.0 32.7 36.7 5.817 17 17.9 18.2 20.9 19.6 2.666 18 26.1 25.6 24.1 24.1 1.091 19 36.9 34.8 32.1 33.2 4.120 20 41.0 40.5 40.5 40.2 0.089 21 22.3 22.9 23.1 25.9 7.185 22 34.2 34.1 28.4 33.5 7.185 23
17.8 16.5 15.2 17.7 2.065 24
37.8 34.7 37.8 37.7 2.793
Table 6 Data in 1986 (%)
Items
O A B AB c2 N
907 1162 624 286 - 1 44.4 39.2 43.1 46.9 8.987 2
28.3 26.8 23.7 29.0 4.828 3 15.1 13.2 13.0 13.6 2.049 4 39.5 32.4 38.8 39.9 14.456 5 15.2 12.3 9.8 15.7 12.062 6 36.5 38.9 35.6 37.4 2.313 7 33.7 30.6 30.8 36.7 5.537 8 26.4 24.6 27.9 23.8 3.027 9 25.6 23.7 26.1 26.9 2.234 10 38.6 35.1 38.1 39.5 3.806 11 31.9 35.8 33.5 29.0 6.428 12 26.7 24.3 25.8 25.9 1.645 13 20.9 20.7 17.9 19.9 2.499 14 15.7 15.8 16.8 19.6 2.831 15 29.3 33.6 28.7 33.6 7.290 16 32.9 34.5 36.9 36.0 2.880 17 20.1 17.6 22.4 22.0 7.356 18 29.4 24.8 27.1 29.0 6.197 19 32.2 34.0 30.4 28.7 4.220 20 44.8 42.4 41.7 50.7 7.916 21 24.3 26.2 25.2 23.4 1.581 22 36.1 35.9 30.1 35.0 7.221 23
14.9 17.9 15.2 15.0 4.360 24
40.5 35.8 37.8 38.1 4.175
Table 7 Data in 1988 (%)
Items
O A B AB c2 N
905 1179 648 269 - 1 43.5 41.5 42.7 37.9 2.806 2
27.8 28.2 27.8 28.6 0.109 3 14.7 14.2 11.7 10.0 6.073 4 42.9 35.9 45.1 37.2 19.249 5 13.9 16.8 15.7 15.2 3.249 6 39.3 39.5 35.0 39.0 4.116 7 31.0 33.8 34.9 29.7 4.157 8 28.5 25.8 25.3 25.7 2.756 9 27.6 24.2 27.2 28.3 4.347 10 38.5 37.0 37.0 34.2 1.676 11 30.3 36.0 31.2 33.5 8.722 12 28.0 27.8 27.9 26.8 0.160 13 20.9 20.6 20.8 21.9 0.233 14 17.5 15.8 16.8 16.4 1.093 15 28.3 32.3 26.4 30.1 8.156 16 37.6 36.3 35.5 32.0 2.958 17 21.1 20.2 25.0 25.7 8.064 18 28.2 25.4 28.1 29.0 3.143 19 35.1 34.2 33.3 28.6 4.085 20 45.3 45.3 44.6 37.9 5.258 21 20.9 22.5 21.5 20.1 1.186 22 36.0 35.0 34.7 34.9 0.351 23
16.7 17.0 15.1 13.0 3.353 24
38.1 39.9 36.9 34.9 3.202
Re-analysis of Personality TestsAs I have written before, personality tests were done the first paper (p. 18):
The following nine scales are chosen. Three scales: affiliation, difference and order from EPPS (Edwards Personality Preference Schedule). Six scales: Capricious (C), Nervous (N), Reactive (R), Aggressive (AG）, Socially extravert (S), Authoritative (A) from Yatabe-Guilford Personality Test.
The results are shown in Table 4 (p. 19).
Table 4 Average scale scores by blood types highest in red / lowest in blue
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsAffiliation
7.26 7.27 7.07 7.46 F<1 Defence
6.55 5.88 6.06 6.38 F=2.68 Order
7.16 7.48 6.96 7.28 F=1.14 C
5.16 5.11 5.68 5.74 F=2.33 N
5.47 5.69 5.65 5.66 F=<1 R
5.25 5.23 5.78 5.66 F=1.67 AG
5.48 5.41 5.51 5.53 F<1 S 7.04 7.16 7.05 7.60 F<1 A 4.72 4.64 4.64 4.60 F<1
Note 1) Each scale points distribute from 1 to 11 and express that the nature is strong as the point is high.
Note 2) the degree of freedom of the F value is (3,166). p<0.05 p<0.10
After all (pp. 19-20),
The result was shown in Table 4. Averages of the personality scale point in terms of each blood types and value of the F-tests. Differences were significant in only one out of all the nine scales. The difference between the highest (Type O: 6.55) and the lowest (Type A: 5.88) are as small as 0.67.
I can't check consistency of these data because items of personality tests are not disclosed. But recently I find the mook Bessatsu Takarajima No. 335 "Seikaku ga wakaru kaerareru" [You can understand and change your personality, Takarajima extra edition No. 335]. There are twenty-one personality tests with explanation and imitation tests in this mook. So, I'll pick up the same items.
EPPS (Edwards Personality Preference Schedule)From Bessatsu Takarajima No. 335
Affiliation: trend that tries to cooperate with friends
Defense: trend tries to comply with the opinion, expectation and customs of the others
Order: trend tries to plan ahead and put things in order
Then, let's try !
The first paper - Affiliation: trend that tries to cooperate with friends
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsAffiliation
7.26 7.27 7.07 7.46 F<1
The second paper - 1 I am ready to keep company with everyone.
Items
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1 42.4 40.9 41.8 42.8 1.9
It is common that Type AB is the highest. But, this may be accidental. Then, let's try to see the next.
The first paper - Defense: trend tries to comply with the opinion, expectation and customs of the others
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsDefense
6.55 5.88 6.06 6.38 F=2.68
I can't find the proper item. The next is ...
The first paper - Order: trend tries to plan ahead and put things in order
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsOrder
7.16 7.48 6.96 7.28 F=1.14
The second paper - 15 I am careful when doing something.
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
32.1 29.8 25.9 29.1 6.2 1982
32.7 32.3 29.8 31.6 2.9 1986
29.3 33.6 28.7 33.6 4.9 1988
28.3 32.3 26.4 30.1 5.9 Mean
30.6 32.0 27.7 31.1 4.3
This does a suited agreement !
YG Personality Tests (Yatabe-Guilford Personality Tests)Six scales: Capricious (C), Nervous (N), Reactive (R), Aggressive (AG）, Socially extravert (S), Authoritative (A) from Yatabe-Guilford Personality Test. Luckily enough, there are imitation tests in the book. Let's go!
The first paper - Capricious (C)
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsCapricious (C)
5.16 5.11 5.68 5.74 F=2.33
- I shed tears easily.
- When I get angry, I can't control myself.
- I am capricious.
The second paper - 17 I often change my mind.
Items
O A B AB Max. - Min. 17 19.3 18.8 21.7 21.8 3.0
This does a suited agreement ! Good !
The first paper - Nervous (N)
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsNervous (N)
5.47 5.69 5.65 5.66 F=<1
- I collect many relaxation goods.
- I am a perfectionist of the job.
- I can't forget even the minor mistakes.
The second paper - 9 I am not worried by what I was told.
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
23.5 22.2 26.7 23.3 4.5 1982
28.2 24.3 24.4 25.0 3.9 1986
25.6 23.7 26.1 26.9 3.2 1988
27.6 24.2 27.2 28.3 4.1 Mean
26.2 23.6 26.1 25.9 3.6 The second paper - 11 I am often worried about things.
Items
O A B AB Max. - Min. 11 30.8 33.9 32.2 31.9 3.1
Needless to say anything. The next is ...
The first paper - Reactive (R)
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsReactive (R)
5.25 5.23 5.78 5.66 F=1.67
- I am usually requested the role of the party general manager.
- I am not good at hearing the conversation of others and become silent.
- I do things before I think.
The second paper - 15 I am careful when doing something.
Year
O A B AB Max. - Min. 1980
32.1 29.8 25.9 29.1 6.2 1982
32.7 32.3 29.8 31.6 2.9 1986
29.3 33.6 28.7 33.6 4.9 1988
28.3 32.3 26.4 30.1 5.9 Mean
30.6 32.0 27.7 31.1 4.3
The second paper - 23 I like to think deeply alone more than to talk with others.
Items
O A B AB Max. - Min. 23
16.1 16.5 14.9 15.4 1.6
Wonderful !
The first paper - Aggressive (AG）
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsAggressive (AG） 5.48 5.41 5.51 5.53 F<1
- I do not choose means to achieve purpose.
- I sometimes hurt people's mind while attiring a humor.
- I get irritated to the person who does not say clear opinions.
I can't find the proper item. The next is ...
The first paper - Authoritative (A)
Scale
O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-testsAuthoritative (A) 4.72 4.64 4.64 4.60 F<1
- I am doing the role of a leader without knowing it.
- It is not a so pain to speak before people.
- I like to work for everybody.
The second paper - 3 I like to be a leader.
Items
O A B AB Max. - Min. 3 13.6 12.5 11.6 11.9 2.0
It is common that Type O is the highest.
Probably, question items of the second paper are picked up from certain personality tests (Yatabe-Guilford Personality Test?). You can see the consistency of the data. This is not "by chance".
The Distribution ChartThe below is the distribution chart of O-AB vs A-B.
The first paper - Table 2
The first paper - Table 4
The second paper - Average of four years
Last update: May 28, 1998. (Minor corrections on August 12, 2017)
E-mail: abofan@js2.so-net.ne.jp
