Prediction of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease as a Function of Method of Questionnaire Administration1

We have tested the hypothesis in this study that different methods of administering a questionnaire produce differential approximations to truthful admission of undesirable personality traits and behaviours. Four different methods of administration produced different levels of trust and understanding, using the current prediction among healthy subjects of death by cancer or coronary heart disease 13 years later as the criterion. There were significant differences in the accuracy of the predictions, depending crucially on the method of administration of the questionnaires. Best predictions were achieved for subjects when both trust and understanding had been increased by interviewers’ suitable participation; worst results were achieved for subjects when no special effort was made to increase either. Intermediate results were found for procedures which increased either trust or understanding. It is argued that the success or failure of studies investigating the influence of personality and stress on diseases like cancer and coronary heart disease may depend crucially on the adopted method of interrogation.

Personality and fatal diseases: Revisiting a scientific scandal

During the 1980s and 1990s, Hans J Eysenck conducted a programme of research into the causes, prevention and treatment of fatal diseases in collaboration with one of his protégés, Ronald Grossarth-Maticek. This led to what must be the most astonishing series of findings ever published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature with effect sizes that have never otherwise been encounterered in biomedical research. This article outlines just some of these reported findings and signposts readers to extremely serious scientific and ethical criticisms that were published almost three decades ago. Confidential internal documents that have become available as a result of litigation against tobacco companies provide additional insights into this work. It is suggested that this research programme has led to one of the worst scientific scandals of all time. A call is made for a long overdue formal inquiry.

Prediction of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease as a Function of Method of Questionnaire Administration

We have tested the hypothesis in this study that different methods of administering a questionnaire produce differential approximations to truthful admission of undesirable personality traits and behaviours. Four different methods of administration produced different levels of trust and understanding, using the current prediction among healthy subjects of death by cancer or coronary heart disease 13 years later as the criterion. There were significant differences in the accuracy of the predictions, depending crucially on the method of administration of the questionnaires. Best predictions were achieved for subjects when both trust and understanding had been increased by interviewers’ suitable participation; worst results were achieved for subjects when no special effort was made to increase either. Intermediate results were found for procedures which increased either trust or understanding. It is argued that the success or failure of studies investigating the influence of personality and stress on diseases like cancer and coronary heart disease may depend crucially on the adopted method of interrogation.