Which of the following is a common critique of neo-Freudian approaches?

• A. Lack of scientific evidence
• B. All of the above
• C. Incomplete accounts of personality
• D. Descriptive rather than scientific

Answer: (B)

The main idea here is to understand the common limitations critics point to in neo-Freudian theories. These approaches often extend Freud by emphasizing social and cultural factors, but they are frequently challenged on several fronts. First, they tend to lack solid scientific evidence because much of the work relies on clinical observations and subjective interpretation rather than controlled research or rigorous testing. Second, they are seen as providing incomplete accounts of personality, since they don’t fully explain how traits develop across diverse individuals and life contexts. Third, their methods are described as descriptive rather than scientific, focusing on narratives of patient experience rather than generating testable, falsifiable hypotheses. Because these multiple critiques address different dimensions—evidence, scope, and methodology—“All of the above” best captures the common view.