Note. Standard deviations are in parentheses. Highest scores that match with blood type characteristics, and p < 0.05 are highlighted in bold. * p < 0.05 after the Bonferroni’s correction.
On question item “Q2 Do you think blood type and personality are related?”, 8.3% of the respondents answered “strongly related”, 40.6% answered “somewhat related”, 24.6% answered “a little related”, 18.0% answered “not related at all” and 8.5% answered “I don’t know”. On question item “Q3 Do you know the characteristics and compatibility of blood types?”, 9.9% answered “I know well”, 54.6% answered “I know some”, 23.5% answered “I know a little” and 12.0% answered “I don’t know at all.”
In Survey 2’s ANOVA result (Table 7), 11 of the 12 items gave the respondents’ image of blood type and were statistically significant, or 9 items after the Bonferroni’s correction. The magnitude of the difference: η2 = 0.053 at the maximum and 0.019 at the average, thus, the effect sizes were intermediate between small and medium. All of the responses were consistent with the most common images of blood types that respondents expected, except “i Cheerful”, which was to be type B in academic studies, but type A got the highest score.
On question item “Q3 Do you think blood type and personality are related?”, 6.1% of the respondents answered “strongly related”, 35.7% answered “somewhat related”, 28.0% answered “a little related”, 20.1% answered “not related at all”, and 10.1% answered “I don’t know”. On question item “Q4 Do you know the characteristics and compatibility of blood types?”, 4.4% answered “I know well”, 41.4% answered “I know some”, 36.1% answered “I know a little”, and 17.5% answered “I don’t know at all.”

Analysis 2: ANOVA of Blood Type and Personality for “No-Knowledge Group”

We used the 520 “no-knowledge” participants of Survey 2, who were free of “self-fulfilling”, because they had no knowledge of blood type personality or did not believe in the relationship. We did not use the 218 “no-knowledge” ones of Survey 1, because the sample size was too small.