IntroductionExamining the lunar hypothesis that human behaviour is affected by the full phase of the moon takes one on an interesting journey through time. The earliest recorded account of this belief can be found during the Hippocratic period, circa 400 BC (Cooke & Coles, 1978). The belief that people become lunatics, or that unusual behaviour or events manifest more frequently when the moon is full, hereinafter referred to as the lunar hypothesis, has been the subject of some research, but much discussion. References to the moon affecting human behaviour are common in the worlds of popular culture, academia, as well as the arts. In the late-1960s, the American rock band Creedence Clearwater Revival warned of a bad moon rising (Fogarty, 1969). And, in the 1970s the Jackson Five advised, don't blame it on the moonlight (Jackson, 1978).While some researchers have disputed the validity of the effects of a full moon (Crowe & Miura, 1995; Owens & McGowan, 2006; Russell & Dua, 1983), there are others who have identified a link (Cohen-Mansfield, Marx, & Werna, 1989; Purpura, 1979; Tasso & Miller, 1976; Templer, Veleber, & Brooner, 1982; Thakur & Sharma, 1984). It would seem that there are no definitive answers. There is an organisational-based discourse within the respected professions of psychiatric nursing, policing, and emergency medicine, all supporting the lunar hypothesis (Calver, Stokes, & Isbister, 2009; Rotton & Kelly, 1985b) and the topic has held academic and public interest for a considerable period.In dismissing the beliefs of mental health professionals, police, and emergency workers, some researchers rationalise the anecdotal evidence as illusory correlation; the tendency to overestimate a relationship between two variables where, in fact, none exists (Gorvin & Roberts, 1994). Attributing beliefs of a lunar effect on human behaviour, is like grounding such a position in little more than the tapestry of folklore associated with the topic (Bickis, Kelly, & Byrnes, 1995, p. 701).TheoryIn respect of the lunar hypothesis, it is argued that there are two dominate theories; yet both are attenuated by a paucity of rigorous scientific investigation. The two theoretical positions this paper puts forward are termed gravity (i.e., human tide) and the other luminosity. Scholars appear to have been content to have examined the lunar hypothesis for close to a century (Cooke and Coles, 1978), more intent upon identifying or quantifying lunacy, than identifying causes associated with the phenomenon. By way of example, Barr (2000) lamented that a change to this situation was still some time away:Researchers do not agree on exactly what effect they are looking for or whether it is only likely to occur in certain individuals. These problems stem from the absence of a widely accepted theoretical base which could account for any supposed lunar effect on [subjects]. Unfortunately, there is little sign this situation will change in the ... future (Barr, 2000).With the two theories-gravity and luminosity-displaying varying degrees of scientific credibility sufficient enough to encourage an observer to reconsider or suspend immediate dismissal of the lunar hypothesis, there are other scientific facts that contradict these theories. Mathematical formulae are used to calculate and quantify the additional forces of gravity experienced by a person at the time of a full moon. Likewise, comparisons can be made between full moon luminosity and common events that make support for either theory problematic at best.Rotton and Kelly (1985, p. 289) brought science to bear on the lunar hypothesis by noting that the gravitational effect of the full moon upon a person is the equivalent of that exerted by a drop of sweat or a flea upon the person's skin. Additionally, they point out that the earth's gravitational pull upon a person is 5,012 times that exerted by the full moon, yet no behavioural phenomena are attributed to such a force (Rotton& Kelly, 1985: 289). …
Read full abstract