, Volume 99, Issue 2–3, pp 145–151 | Cite as

What to do about fraud charges in science; or, will the Burt affair ever end?

  • Franz Samelson


Shortly after the death, in 1971, of Cyril Burt, a prominent British psychologist, the authenticity of his accounts of intelligence test results from the largest reported sample of MZA's (monozygotic twins reared apart) was challenged. Charges of fraud by Burt's critics and countercharges by his supporters started an acrimonious battle of words in journals, books, and the mass media that seesawed over the decades. It is still not resolved. The problematic ways in which the scientific community and its major organizations and journal editors have dealt or failed to deal with the problem are discussed.

Burt affair editorial responsibility intelligence IQ heritability scientificfraud 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Angell, M. & J.P. Kassirer, 1994. Setting the record straight in the breast-cancer trials. (Editorial). New England Journal of Medicine 330: 1448–1449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banks, C., 1983. Professor Sir Cyril Burt. Selected Reminiscences. Association of Educational Psychologists Journal 6: 21–42.Google Scholar
  3. Broad, W. & N. Wade, 1982. Betrayers of the Truth. Simon & Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 1980. Monthly Report 33: 71–72.Google Scholar
  5. Burt, C.L., 1958. The inheritance of mental ability (Bingham Memo-rial Lecture 1957). American Psychologist 13: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burt, C., 1972. Inheritance of general intelligence. American Psychologist 27: 175–190.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheney, D. (editor) 1993. Ethical Issues in Research. University Publishing Group, Frederick MD.Google Scholar
  8. Eysenck, H.J., 1977. Sir Cyril Burt. American Psychologist 32: 674–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eysenck, H.J., 1983. Sir Cyril Burt, Polymath and psychopath. Association of Educational Psychologists Journal 6: 57–63.Google Scholar
  10. Fletcher, R., 1991. Science, Ideology, and the Media: The Cyril Burt scandal. Transaction Publ., New Brunswick NJ.Google Scholar
  11. Friedlander, M.W., 1995. At the Fringes of Science. Westview Press, Boulder CO.Google Scholar
  12. Furnham, A., 1986. Popular interest in psychological findings: The TIMES correspondence over the Burt scandal. American Psychologist 41: 922–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Garfinkel, H., 1956. Conditions of successful degradation ceremonies. American Journal of Sociology 61: 420–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gieryn, T.F. & A.E. Figert, 1986. Scientists protect their cognitive authority: the status degradation ceremony of Sir Cyril Burt, pp. 67–86 in The Knowledge Society, edited by G. Boehme & N. Stehr. D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  15. Green, B.F., 1992. Exposé or smear? The Burt affair. Psychological Science 3: 328–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hearnshaw, L.S., 1979. Cyril Burt, Psychologist. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  17. Hearnshaw, L.S., 1990. The Burt Affair-a Rejoinder. The Psychologist 2: 61–64.Google Scholar
  18. Herrnstein, R. & C. Murray, 1994. The Bell Curve. Intelligence and class structure in American life. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Jensen, A.R., 1974. Kinship correlations reported by Sir Cyril Burt. Behavior Genetics 4: 1–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jensen, A.R., 1978. Sir Cyril Burt in perspective. American Psychologist 33: 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jensen, A.R., 1983. Sir Cyril Burt: A personal recollection. Association of Educational Psychologists Journal 6: 13–20.Google Scholar
  22. Jensen, A.R., 1992. Scientific fraud or false accusation?. The case of Cyril Burt, pp. 97–124 in Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences, edited by Miller, D.J. & M. Hersen. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Jensen, A.R., Fall 1992a. The Cyril Burt scandal, research taboos, and the media. The General Psychologist 28: 16–21. (Transcript of invited address, sponsored by Div. 1, at APA Convention, Washington, DC, August 14, 1992.)Google Scholar
  24. Joynson, R.B., 1989. The Burt affair. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  25. Joynson, R.B., 1990. The Burt affair-A reply. The Psychologist 2: 65–68.Google Scholar
  26. Joynson, R.B., 1992. The Burt business. (Commentary) Times Literary Supplement, Sept. 6.Google Scholar
  27. Kohn, A., 1986/1989. False Prophets. Blackwell, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Lovie, A.D. & P. Lovie, 1993. Charles Spearman, Cyril Burt, and the origins of factor analysis. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 29: 308–321.Google Scholar
  29. Mackintosh, N.J. (ed.), 1995. Cyril Burt: Fraud or Framed? Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  30. McAskie, M., 1978. Carelessness or fraud in Sir Cyril Burt's kinship data? A critique of Jensen's analysis. American Psychologist 33: 496–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McAskie, M., 1979. On 'Sir Cyril Burt in Perspective.' (Comment) American Psychologist 34: 92–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller, D.J., & M. Hersen (eds.), 1992. Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Neisser, U. (chair) et al. (Task Force Established by the American Psychological Association), 1996. Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist 51: 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rehabilitation for Burt? (Briefings). Science, 4 January 1991, 251: 27.Google Scholar
  35. Rushton, J.P., 1994. Victim of scientific hoax. Society 31: 40–44.Google Scholar
  36. Samelson, F., 1980. J.B. Watson's Little Albert, Cyril Burt's twins, and the need for a critical science. American Psychologist 35: 619–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Samelson, F., 1992. Rescuing the reputation of Sir Cyril [Burt]. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 28: 221–233.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Samelson, F., 1993. Whose 'Indifferent scholarship?' Psychological Science 4: 346–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Samelson, F., 1996. He didn't? Yes he did (probably)! (Book review). Contemporary Psychology 41: 1177–1179.Google Scholar
  40. Society, March/April 1994. Issue devoted to: Fraud in Research 31(3).Google Scholar
  41. The Late Sir Cyril Burt, 1992, April. The Psychologist 4: 147.Google Scholar
  42. TIME Magazine, 6 Dec. 1976. A taint of scholarly fraud, p. 66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Franz Samelson
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA

Personalised recommendations