5.1 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| When Prophecy Fails | 1/3 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T09:31:22.517812+00:00 | kb-cron |
When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World is a classic work of social psychology by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schachter, published in 1956, detailing a study of a small UFO religion in Chicago called the Seekers that believed in an imminent apocalypse. The authors took a particular interest in the members' coping mechanisms after the event did not occur, focusing on the cognitive dissonance between the members' beliefs and actual events, and the psychological consequences of these disconfirmed expectations. Later archival work has alleged that many of the book's core claims are based on fabrications or exaggerations.
== Overview == Festinger, Riecken, and Schachter were already studying the effects of prophecy disconfirmation on groups of believers when they read a story in a local newspaper headlined "Prophecy from Planet. Clarion Call to City: Flee That Flood. It'll Swamp us on Dec. 21". The prophecy came from Dorothy Martin (1900–1992), a Chicago housewife who practised automatic writing, and it outlined a catastrophe predicted for a specific date in their near future. Seeing an opportunity to test their theories with a contemporary case study, the research team infiltrated Martin's followers to collect data before, during, and after the time the prophecy would be refuted. Martin claimed to be receiving messages from superior beings from a planet she referred to as Clarion. A recently published book, Aboard a Flying Saucer by UFO contactee Truman Bethurum, had described his alleged interactions with beings from a planet also named Clarion. The messages received by Martin included a prophecy that Lake City and large portions of the United States, Canada, Central America, and Europe would be destroyed by a flood before dawn on December 21, 1954. Through the restrained recruitment activities of Charles Laughead (a college doctor in Michigan) and other acquaintances, Martin was supported in her mediumship by a small group of believers. Some of the believers took significant actions that indicated a high degree of commitment to the prophecy. Some left or lost their jobs, neglected or ended their studies, ended relationships and friendships with non-believers, gave away money, and/or disposed of possessions to prepare for their departure on a flying saucer, which they believed would rescue them and others before the flood. As anticipated by the research team, the prophesied date passed without any sign of the predicted flood, creating a dissonance between the group's commitment to the prophecy and the unfolding reality. Different members of the group reacted differently. Many of those with the highest levels of belief, commitment, and social support became more committed to their beliefs, began to court publicity in ways they had not before, and developed various rationalizations for the absence of the flood. Some others, with less prior conviction and commitment, and/or less access to ongoing group support, were less able to sustain or increase their previous levels of belief and involvement, and several left the group. The research team's findings were broadly in line with their initial hypothesis about how believers might react to a prophecy disconfirmation, depending on whether certain conditions were in place.
== Study ==
=== Hypothesis === Festinger, Riecken and Schachter used the study to test their theories on how people might be expected to behave when faced with a specific type of dissonance, arising from a failed prophecy. From historical examples, such as the Montanists, Anabaptists, Sabbateans, Millerites and the beginnings of Christianity, the team had seen that in some cases the failure of a prophecy, rather than causing a rejection of the original belief system, could lead believers to increase their personal commitment, and also increase their efforts to recruit others into the belief. They identified five conditions that they proposed could lead to this type of reaction:
In the case of all conditions being in place, their hypothesis was that believers would find it difficult to abandon their beliefs in the face of disconfirmation, would use their available social support to maintain their beliefs, and would try to increase consonance by recruitment through proselyting, on the grounds that "If more and more people can be persuaded that the system of belief is correct, then clearly it must after all be correct." The research team considered that all of the conditions were likely to be fulfilled in the case study involving Martin and her followers. In this case, if the group's leader could add consonant elements by converting others to the basic premise, then the magnitude of her dissonance following disconfirmation would be reduced. The research team predicted that the inevitable disconfirmation would be followed by an enthusiastic effort at proselyting to seek social support and lessen the pain of disconfirmation.