The Hans Eysenck affair: Time to correct the scientific record

J Health Psychol. 2019 Mar;24(4):409-420. doi: 10.1177/1359105318820931. Epub 2019 Feb 22.

Abstract

The Journal of Health Psychology publishes here Dr Anthony Pelosi's analysis of questionable science by one of the world's best-known psychologists, the late Professor Hans J Eysenck. The provenance of a huge body of data produced by Eysenck and Ronald Grossarth-Maticek is highly controversial. In Open letters to King's College London and the British Psychological Society, this editor is requesting a thorough investigation of the facts together with retraction or correction of 61 publications. Academic institutions have a conflict of interest concerning allegations of misconduct, which is why I believe that the only way forward is to have a National Research Integrity Ombudsperson to investigate allegations.

Keywords: CHD; Hans J Eysenck; cancer; correction; personality; psychotherapy; questionable science; research integrity; retraction; smoking.

Publication types

  • Editorial

MeSH terms

  • Conflict of Interest
  • Humans
  • Periodicals as Topic / standards
  • Psychology / standards*
  • Retraction of Publication as Topic*
  • Scientific Misconduct*