This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal).
This article has been retracted at the ...request of the Editor in Chief following a report by the institute of one of the co-authors, King's College London.
Following concerns raised by Dr A.J. Pelosi and Professor D.F. Marks, King's College London organized a committee to analyse data relevant to personality and physical health outcomes and to ascertain (as far as possible) whether this and related publications were safe in terms of presenting scientifically rigorous results relating personality factors with cancer, coronary heart disease, and other outcomes. The report stated that, “The committee did not have access to any data but have carried out an assessment based on the current literature which includes peer reviewed papers and reviews from critics as well as from collaborators. We also identified some attempted replications of the results either from data available on the jointly authored studies or new studies (for example, Amelang, SchmidtRathjens et al., 1996; Amelang 1997).” The Committee concluded that the results and conclusions of these studies are unsafe and recommended retraction. The report in full is available here: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/statements/docs/hans-eysenck-enquiry-final-may-2019.pdf.
Having reviewed the Committee's report, the Editor in Chief decided to retract the article.
The corresponding author is unfortunately deceased but has previously published a rebuttal to critics of his work with R. Grossarth-Maticek (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1449072?seq=1). The second author has objected to the retraction of the paper and has previously rebutted (https://www.krebs-chancen.de/referenzen-und-gutachten/denunziation-englisch) papers by Dr A. J. Pelosi (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359105318822045) and Professor D. F. Marks (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359105318820931) published in the Journal of Health Psychology outlining concerns and asking for an investigation into the data by H.J. Eysenck and R. Grossarth-Maticek.
This first book by German-born psychologist Hans Jürgen Eysenck's is considered a classic amongst scholars and professionals of psychology. It describes the pitfalls of psychology, and the remedies ...that can be applied. A strong dependence on statistics and the experimental method is emphasized as essential to good psychology.The book is divided into four sections: Intelligence Testing, Vocational Psychology, Abnormal Behaviour, and Social Attitudes. Can an intelligence test administered to an eight year old predict adult performance? Is interviewing a good way of selecting the best applicant for a job? Is there such a thing as 'normal' behaviour? Can surveys such as the Gallup poll be of assistance to psychologists? Eysenck answers these and other questions.A book not to be missed by anyone interested in psychology.
The factorial similarity of Psychoticism (P), Extraversion (E), Neuroticism (N), and Social Desirability (L), as measured by the EPQ, was assessed using gender-specific data collected from 34 ...countries. As in an earlier study using data from 24 countries, the Kaiser-Hunka-Bianchini (KHB) procedure was used as a measure of factorial similarity. 2 other coefficients were also used to make an assessment of factorial similarity: a congruence coefficient computed from the KHB maximally congruent orthogonalised factors, and a congruence coefficient computed from the oblique factor patterns of the UK target and foreign country matrices. Discusses results. The analysis conclusively demonstrates a significant degree of factorial similarity with the UK data, across the 34 comparison countries. (Original abstract - amended)
Hans Eysenck Hans, Eysenck
1986, 20121012, 2012-10-12, Volume:
2
eBook
During the last forty years, Hans Eysenck's brilliant contribution to knowledge has beenwell-known world-wide. From its early transmission, his work has not been without itscritics. Naturally, ...criticisms persist, although his work continues to be frequentlyacknowledged with great admiration in the channels of psychology. With such prolificwork, it would seem justified to consider the discrepancies, the omissions, together withthe various interpretations which have been and are currently being highlighted.
This reprinted article originally appeared in Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, & Practice, 1964(MONTH), 1(3), 97-100. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record ...1966-01631-001). Comments on the original article by H. H. Strupp (see record 1965-15636-001). In his recent article in this journal, Strupp (1963) has this to say in relation to the outcome problem in psychotherapy: "A brief review of Eysenck's (1952) widely quoted survey, which capitalized upon and added considerably to the existing confusion may be instructive." In reply I would like to suggest that Strupp's review is, in the lawyer's phrase, irrelevant, incompetent and immaterial. Fortunately, the points I wish to make are so simple that they will not take up much space.
PDF
