Hm, the experiment took place before 1973 and involved 8 pseudo-patients, all anonymous. This person was able to deanonymize and locate 3 of the pseudo-patients. Because they didn't find all 8 they then claim the study was fraudulent and never involved 8 people. That seems an absurd conclusion. It's not reasonable to think one could find all the anonymous/identity cloaked participants in a nearly 50 year old study.
Given that the researcher was a participant directly, and that he lied about his actions (he in fact presented suicidal thoughts, etc), I believe the balance of evidence says we should reject the study.
I agree completely the study is useless and should be withdrawn. But the author did not prove or even reasonably establish at all that there were 3 and not 8 participants. Not finding 5 out of 8 anonymous participants in a half century old study is to be expected. Even decloaking 3 was remarkable. Look at how hard it is to deanonymize data even now with the computational power, combined with endemic surveillance and monitoring of the public. It's totally unreasonable to conclude the other 5 didn't exist.
Even without the anecdotal information that things were not presented as they were told, the study is still, and always has been, useless. If someone presents at an asylum begging to be admitted, and describing strange symptoms that they say are causing them distress, it is reasonable to admit them for observation.
