Which of the following was a critique of Hans and Sybil Eysenck's work on traits?

• A. Their theory in traits was not replicable.
• B. Their theory is too simplistic and has too few dimensions.
• C. Their theory used factor analysis, which is not statistically rigorous.
• D. Their theory on secondary traits does not account for differences across the lifespan.

Answer: (B)

Verified step by step guidance

1. Understand the context: Hans and Sybil Eysenck's work on traits focused on personality dimensions, specifically extraversion-introversion and emotional stability-neuroticism. Their theory aimed to simplify personality into a few core dimensions.
2. Identify the critique options: The question provides four potential critiques of their work. Carefully analyze each option to determine which aligns with common criticisms of their theory.
3. Evaluate the first option: 'Their theory in traits was not replicable.' Consider whether Eysenck's work has been replicated in subsequent studies. Their use of factor analysis has been widely replicated, so this is unlikely to be the correct critique.
4. Evaluate the second option: 'Their theory is too simplistic and has too few dimensions.' This aligns with a common critique of Eysenck's work, as many psychologists argue that reducing personality to just two or three dimensions oversimplifies the complexity of human behavior.
5. Evaluate the remaining options: 'Their theory used factor analysis, which is not statistically rigorous' is incorrect because factor analysis is a widely accepted statistical method. 'Their theory on secondary traits does not account for differences across the lifespan' is also not a primary critique of their work. Conclude that the second option is the most accurate critique.