Faber Diana
Psychology Department of the University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
J Hist Behav Sci. 2003 Summer;39(3):289-97. doi: 10.1002/jhbs.10111.
Two recent archival items offer material for analysis of Alfred Binet's (1857-1911) and Cyril Burt's (1883-1971) relationship in the early twentieth century. Burt's letter to Binet's biographer Theta Wolf was an answer to her request for information about his contact with Binet. An analysis of Burt's account prompts more questions than it answers. His statements in the letter are compared with previous ones and are put into the context of the activities of the two men, but these do not enlighten us about his actual relations with Binet. The problem arises because of Burt's desciptive vagueness and lack of supporting evidence. Despite attacks against Burt's integrity made from 1976 onward, we found no conclusive evidence of false claims. The negative outcome of this analysis probably results from Burt's faulty memory, and herein lies the caveat that personal memories make unreliable material for historical accounts.
最近的两份档案资料为分析20世纪初阿尔弗雷德·比奈(1857 - 1911)和西里尔·伯特(1883 - 1971)之间的关系提供了素材。伯特写给比奈传记作者西塔·沃尔夫的信是对她索要伯特与比奈接触信息请求的回应。对伯特叙述的分析引发的问题比给出的答案还多。信中的陈述与之前的陈述进行了比较,并置于两人活动的背景中,但这些并未让我们了解到他与比奈的实际关系。问题的出现是因为伯特描述模糊且缺乏佐证。尽管自1976年起有人抨击伯特的诚信,但我们未找到虚假陈述的确凿证据。此次分析的负面结果可能源于伯特记忆有误,而这也警示我们个人记忆不宜作为历史记述的可靠素材。