Journal retracts 30-year-old paper by controversial psychologist Hans Eysenck – Retraction Watch
The International Journal of Sport Psychology has retracted a paper by the late — and controversial — psychologist Hans Eysenck, whose work has confronted doubts because the early 1990s.
The paper, revealed in 1990, was one in all dozens by Eysenck and Ronald Grossarth-Maticek discovered to be “unsafe” by King’s College London, however seems to be the primary to be retracted.
Here’s the summary of “Psychological factors as determinants of success in football and boxing: The effects of behaviour therapy”:
Examined the significance of attitudes to achievement and whether or not such attitudes might be altered for the higher by a conduct remedy known as autonomy coaching (ATR). ATR was utilized to five groups of boxers and eight groups of soccer gamers, and the groups’ efficiency was in contrast with that of management groups. Questionnaire information recommend that attitudes did partly decide success in soccer and in boxing. It additionally seems that attitudes have been positively modified by ATR. Findings are in accord with rules of recent studying concept and with concepts underlying conduct remedy. The sport stock is appended.
The retraction discover, posted on the homepage of the journal, says:
The article was retracted on account of an inside overview of King’s College London. The overview committee discovered a insecurity.
Alberto Cei, the journal’s editorial supervisor, stated the retraction discover seems on the journal’s homepage moderately than on the paper’s summary as a result of the journal’s on-line archives solely return to 2008. “We can publish in the next issue, in the last page, this note,” Cei informed Retraction Watch.
The paper has been cited simply 4 instances since its publication, in response to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.
Eysenck’s biographer, Rod Buchanan, thinks that greater than 60 of Eysenck’s papers might find yourself being retracted as soon as the mud has settled. As we famous in October:
The analysis has been topic to query for many years, as a result of the findings — together with some that “bibliotherapy” might dramatically cut back the chance of dying from most cancers — appeared unbelievable.
Like Retraction Watch? You could make a tax-deductible contribution to assist our work, observe us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our each day digest. If you discover a retraction that’s not in our database, you’ll be able to tell us right here. For feedback or suggestions, electronic mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org.