Commentary

It might seem strange to open this collection – intended to span works produced over a long career – with a paper that was, at the time of this writing, my most recently published. The paper forms part of a journal special issue assessing the contribution to psychology of the late Hans Eysenck, commemorating the 100th anniversary of his birth. To some readers the choice might appear especially odd, even irritating, in perhaps signalling that the later pieces to be reproduced will merely constitute yet another eulogy of Eysenck. The assumption (and the annoyance), while understandable, are unfounded. But let me first clear up one or two facts about Eysenck. As those who lived through the period when he was active in psychology – or know its history – will realise, Eysenck was an extremely controversial figure. He was argumentative, challenging of received ideas, and often ready to espouse scientifically dubious or socially divisive causes. He has been the subject of at least one critical recent biography (Buchanan, 2010) and a caustic evaluation by his own psychologist son (Eysenck, M., 2013). There are some who would like to see him assigned to a dustbin of flawed geniuses who practised a form of psychological scientism that is best forgotten – as did the British Psychological Society which snubbed him throughout his lifetime and has largely done so since. This, despite efforts by some admirers to revive Eysenck’s work for a younger audience: notably Corr (2016) writing, pointedly, in the present tense!