America.gif (6363 バイト)

Prof. Matsui


ABO FAN


28.gif (298 バイト)Prof. Matsui's Papers

Finally I obtained the papers of Mr. Matsui (Prof. of Sacred Heart Women's 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!

28.gif (298 バイト)Abstracts

I you are tired of numbers, please read the following abstracts.

Actually, the data of opponent 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 difference 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 Type

Items

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 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).

Only two items showed statistical differences out of twenty. Also, only one item did 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 year. The result lacked the consistency that exceeded one year. Therefore, the conclusion is 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 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.

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.

The pesonality tests that was carried out simultaneously, showed  the clear difference, too. Also, the next six in twenty-four items are showing the same trend 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 average suggest sixteen items out of twenty-four show relation between blood types and personality. Therefore, statistically, there is relation of blood types and personality, after all !

28.gif (298 バイト)The First Paper: About Blood-typical Stereotypes

Takuma, 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 Met./Kanagawa Pref. The sex distinction is 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 Type

Items

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, he thought Mr. Nomi is wrong. And, he seems to think that even the difference caused "by chance", although not written clearly. If there is real difference, there is real relation, in his logic, which is not his thought.

Table 2 (modified)  Percentage of people who answered "yes"  highest in red / lowest in blue / Bold more then 10 %

Expected
Blood Type

Items

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 a little bit many? Therefore, I will check a little more in detail. However, I can not compare them, regretfully, because there are not similar question items 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 the trend 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 ...

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)Are There Consistent Data? -- No. 1

Let's proof the order of group-dependence, which is O=A>B>AB (Valid only in Japan?).

Preliminary trial: questionnaire

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 Secondary trial: questionnaire

The next data from the same book (table 24, pp.211). The question is "Which do you feel best when eating with people?" The 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.

The Third trial: Raymond B. Cattell's Study

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 last trial: Japanese psychologist

The same trend showed by Japanese psychologists. Surprisingly, probability is below 0.1%. The ratio of the person that chose "Esteem rule, custom 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 -

Even, this is the order of O=A>B>AB as expected.

The next data are presented by Prof. Masao Ohmura ("Chi no shonin" no ejiki ni naruna detarame buri wa jissho sareta [Do not become the 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 in a comrade

82.6 75.5 79.8 68.9

Type A showed lower percentage than Type B. The 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 also in here. I think that it is because there is the word called "a comrade", that Type A is low. Type-A people have more stern reversion to 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 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 they showed almost the same trend!

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)Are There Consistent Data? -- No. 2

First 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 !!

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)Are There Consistent Data? -- No. 3

By 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-tests

Affiliation

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 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?

28.gif (298 バイト)The Second Paper: Statistical consideration on personality difference of blood types

Matsui, 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. The 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.

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)Re-analysis No. 1

There 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.

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)Re-analysis No. 2

I 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 little bit.  Let's try to compare the 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?

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)Re-analysis No. 3

The 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

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)The Distribution Chart

The 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.

sanpu1.gif (2748 バイト)

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)The Original Data

Table 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

32.gif (286 バイト)Re-analysis of Personality Tests

As I have written, 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-tests

Affiliation

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 nine 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.

I can't check consistency of the 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.

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)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-tests

Affiliation

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-tests

Defense

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-tests

Order

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 !

Red_Ball12.gif (916 バイト)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 begin !

The first paper - Capricious (C)

Scale

O(182) A(225) B(138) AB(68) Results of
F-tests

Capricious (C)

5.16 5.11 5.68 5.74 F=2.33

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-tests

Nervous (N)

5.47 5.69 5.65 5.66 F=<1

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-tests

Reactive (R)

5.25 5.23 5.78 5.66 F=1.67

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-tests
Aggressive (AG 5.48 5.41 5.51 5.53 F<1

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-tests
Authoritative (A) 4.72 4.64 4.64 4.60 F<1

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, the 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".

12.gif (321 バイト)The Distribution Chart

The below is the distribution chart of O-AB vs A-B. 

The first paper - Table 2

sanpu2.gif (2861 バイト)

The first paper - Table 4

sanpu3.gif (2612 バイト)

The second paper - Average of four years

sanpu1.gif (2748 バイト)


English Home Page


Last update: May 28, 1998.

E-mail: abofan@js2.so-net.ne.jp