Atlas›Domain XVI · Historical, discredited & harmful›Guide 033
Guide XVI-033

Phrenology and physiognomy

Franz Joseph Gall, Johann Gaspar Spurzheim1796Vienna
A 26 · L 63 · M 1118 interventions in the Trinity explorer
Client cardCompare
[source: …] where a claim comes from[uncertain] not confirmed in a primary source[synthesis] the writer's reconstruction

1. Introduction

Version followed: the history of phrenology as John van Wyhe's chronology and biography of George Combe set it out (Victorian Web), with the Edinburgh University Library record of the Phrenological Society of Edinburgh; Pierre Flourens' critique in the 1846 English translation (by Charles de Lucena Meigs) of his second French edition (1845); the UK Biobank MRI test by Parker Jones, Alfaro-Almagro and Jbabdi (Cortex, 2018); Lavater in Thomas Holcroft's English translation (9th edition, 1855, Wellcome Collection); and present-day "physiognomic AI" as Stark and Hutson (2022) and Agüera y Arcas, Mitchell and Todorov (2017) describe it.

This guide concerns two discredited doctrines, not a therapy. It is written for the psychotherapist's own work: understanding the history, recognising the reasoning when it turns up today, and helping clients who are interested in it, who have been judged by it, or whose family history touches it. Nothing here is a way of reading heads or faces, and no part of this guide recommends doing so.

Phrenology. Franz Joseph Gall began lecturing on his system at his home in Vienna in 1796; an imperial decree of December 1801 banned his lectures and publications. With Johann Gaspar Spurzheim, his paid assistant, he toured Europe from 1805 to 1807, and their Anatomie et physiologie du système nerveux appeared between 1810 and 1819 [source: van Wyhe, Victorian Web chronology]. Flourens summed up Gall's doctrine in two propositions: that the understanding lives only in the brain, and that each particular faculty has its own organ in the brain [source: Flourens 1846]. Practitioners claimed these "organs" could be read from the shape of the skull, a practice called cranioscopy [source: Marcille and Carr, BJPsych]. Spurzheim's 1815 English book was titled The Physiognomical System of Drs. Gall and Spurzheim, and Thomas Forster gave the system the name "phrenology" the same year [source: van Wyhe, chronology].

Physiognomy. This is the older claim that character can be read from the face and body. Johann Caspar Lavater's Physiognomische Fragmente (published 1775-78 [uncertain: not verified]) reached English readers as Essays on Physiognomy: designed to promote the knowledge and the love of mankind in Holcroft's translation [source: Wellcome Collection record]. In psychiatry, Sir Alexander Morison (1779-1866), who worked at Bethlem and other asylums, published The Physiognomy of Mental Diseases (1838) with plates of his patients. He held that the face mirrors the mind and that features could separate mania, monomania, dementia and "idiocy" (the period terms) [source: Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh].

Core idea of change, as proponents stated it. George Combe's The Constitution of Man (1828) presented people as subject to natural laws. Van Wyhe reports that it sold about 350,000 copies between 1828 and 1900 [source: van Wyhe, Combe biography]. Phrenologists offered knowledge of one's own faculties as a guide to living, education and reform [uncertain: secondary, summarised from van Wyhe's account of Combe]. Flourens' work in the 1840s and a 2018 MRI study of 5,724 UK Biobank participants found no support for the doctrine. In that study, scalp curvature predicted none of 23 of Gall's faculties as matched to lifestyle measures [source: Parker Jones et al. 2018, bioRxiv version]. Its legacy today lies mainly in appearance-based judgement: AI systems that claim to read character, criminality or sexual orientation from faces, which critics call a "reanimation" of these doctrines [source: Stark and Hutson 2022].

2. Framework

The phases below are a framework for the psychotherapist's own work [synthesis]. The historical phases are given first so the clinician can place what a client brings.

Historical phases (outline) [source: van Wyhe, chronology; Edinburgh University Library record]

  • Origins, 1796-1813. Gall lectures in Vienna (1796), is banned (1801) and tours Europe with Spurzheim (1805-07). In 1808 the two submit a Mémoire to the Institut de France. They part company for good in 1813.
  • British expansion, 1815-1830s. The system is named "phrenology" in 1815. The Phrenological Society of Edinburgh is formed on 22 February 1820; the people at its first meeting included George and Andrew Combe, and Sir George Steuart Mackenzie was a driving force. Van Wyhe calls it the first phrenological society, with 120 members by 1826. The Phrenological Journal follows in 1823 and Combe's Constitution of Man in 1828, the year Gall dies.
  • American popularisation, from 1833. "The Fowlers" begin lecturing in New York in 1833. (Their names, usually given as the brothers Orson and Lorenzo Fowler, are [uncertain: not verified].) In the 1860s they revive phrenology in Britain, opening the Fowler Institute in London in 1863.
  • Scientific decline, 1840s-1870. Flourens' critique appears (2nd French edition 1845). Most societies have closed by the 1850s, and the Edinburgh society holds its last meeting in 1870.
  • Popular afterlife, 1881-1967. The British Phrenological Society exists from 1881 until it is disbanded in 1967. The Edinburgh society's skull casts and specimens went to the University's Anatomical Museum, and its papers are now in Edinburgh University Library (Coll-227).
  • Modern variants, 2010s onward. Machine-learning claims to infer criminality (Wu and Zhang 2016 preprint) or sexual orientation (Wang and Kosinski, accepted by Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) from faces drew public controversy [source: Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017; NBC News].

Phases of the psychotherapist's work [synthesis]

  1. Recognition and historical literacy. Goal: notice when a client's account, a colleague's reasoning or a tool rests on reading character from the head, face or body, and know the history well enough to name it calmly. Move on once the theme has been identified and its weight in the client's life is clear.
  2. Assessment. Goal: find out what the client brings. It may be curiosity, a belief they act on, harm from being judged by appearance (including automated screening), a family history, or a wish to practise or sell readings. Screen for risk, including appearance-related distress, discrimination, safety risks from being outed, and suicidal thinking. Move on once a shared formulation and any safety steps are agreed.
  3. Psychoeducation and meaning-making. Goal: give the evidence in proportion, and work with what the belief or the experience of being judged has meant to the client. Move on when the client can hold the facts without feeling shamed and has a supported alternative for any decision they had been basing on the belief.
  4. Repair and advocacy. Goal: address injuries from discrimination or misclassification, support complaints or challenges the client chooses to make, and deal with any colleague or institution that uses appearance-based inference. Follow up as needed; set the number of sessions by clinical need [synthesis].

3. Guiding principles

  1. Historical literacy without contempt. Know who Gall, Spurzheim, the Combes, Lavater and Morison were and what they claimed [source: van Wyhe; RCPE]. In practice: you can explain the history to a client in a few sentences without mocking them for being interested.
  2. Evidence stated as its sources state it. Flourens' ablation work and the 2018 MRI test found no support for the doctrine [source: Flourens 1846; Parker Jones et al. 2018]. In practice: cite these plainly; do not exaggerate, and do not invent other studies.
  3. Do not throw out localisation. Marcille and Carr credit phrenology with the general idea that mental functions map onto brain regions, while noting its reliance on correlation without established causation [source: Marcille and Carr]. In practice: separate "brain regions have specialised roles" (supported in general terms) from "skull bumps reveal character" (not supported).
  4. The psychotherapist never provides, endorses or refers to readings. This covers head-reading, face-reading or automated "character" inference for clinical, hiring or relationship decisions [synthesis]. In practice: refer only to validated assessment and supported services.
  5. Appearance is not character. Critics of AI physiognomy warn that such systems disguise human prejudice as objectivity [source: Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017]. In practice: question your own first impressions at intake, in risk assessment and in diagnosis.
  6. Name the legacy of harm without moralising. Agüera y Arcas and colleagues link physiognomic thinking to Lombroso's "born criminal" theory, to nineteenth-century racial hierarchies and to Nazi-era propaganda [source: Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017]. In practice: state the documented history, attributed, and let the client draw meaning.
  7. Safety comes first where inference can out or endanger someone. GLAAD and HRC warned that claims to read sexual orientation from faces could put at risk both people wrongly labelled and people for whom being out is dangerous [source: NBC News]. In practice: assess safety and confidentiality before anything else.
  8. Client autonomy and cultural humility. Face-reading and character-reading traditions exist in many cultures [uncertain: not verified]. In practice: explore what the practice means to the client before offering evidence, and do not attack a cultural or family tradition.
  9. Dignity in the archive. Morison's book includes plates of his patients [source: RCPE]. In practice: when a client finds an ancestor in asylum records or images, use role descriptions, respect privacy and attend to grief and shame.
  10. Clear professional boundaries. In practice: do not offer readings, coaching or other services to clients alongside therapy. See APA Ethics Code Standard 3.05 (Multiple Relationships) [source: APA Ethics Code].
  11. Supported alternatives over debunking. In practice: every challenge to a belief comes with a usable alternative, such as validated assessment, evidence-based careers guidance or legal advice [synthesis].

4. Intervention inventory

The interventions below are the psychotherapist's own work; steps not drawn from a cited source are marked [synthesis]. None is a way of reading heads or faces.

4.1 Building the clinician's own historical literacy

  • Purpose / when: Before working with the theme, so that you can answer questions accurately and briefly.
  • Steps: (1) Learn the outline: Gall's two propositions, the 1801 Vienna ban, Spurzheim, the 1815 naming, the 1820 Edinburgh society, Combe's 1828 book, the Fowlers, and the decline after the 1850s [source: van Wyhe chronology; Flourens 1846]. (2) Learn the two key refutations: Flourens' finding that intelligence was not localised in small separate organs, and the 2018 MRI null result [source: Flourens 1846; Parker Jones et al. 2018]. (3) Learn the physiognomy strand: Lavater, and Morison's asylum plates [source: Wellcome; RCPE]. (4) Learn the modern AI controversies [source: Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017; NBC News; Stark and Hutson 2022]. (5) Prepare a two-sentence plain summary for clients.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Phrenology was a nineteenth-century theory that skull shape shows character. It was very popular, but tests from the 1840s to a large brain-scan study in 2018 found nothing to support it."
  • Watch for: Overstatement ("it was all racism") or dismissiveness, either of which can alienate a curious client. It is working when you can answer without notes and without condescension.

4.2 Recognising appearance-to-character reasoning in a client's account

  • Purpose / when: When a client says they can "read" people's character from faces or heads, or that others have judged them that way.
  • Steps: (1) Listen for claims that link fixed physical features to fixed traits, such as honesty, intelligence, criminality or sexual orientation. (2) Note whether the client applies this to themselves, to others, or to decisions such as hiring, dating or trust. (3) Reflect it back neutrally. (4) Decide whether it is a passing remark or a working belief.
  • Example language (illustrative): "It sounds as if you decide quite quickly whether to trust someone from their face. Can we look at how that has worked for you?"
  • Watch for: Mislabelling ordinary reading of expressions (such as noticing someone is upset) as physiognomy. The concern is inference from fixed features to fixed character. It is working when the client can tell apart "what I see" from "what I conclude".

4.3 Exploring a client's interest in phrenology or physiognomy

  • Purpose / when: A client collects phrenology busts, reads Lavater or Combe, or follows face-reading content online.
  • Steps: (1) Ask what drew them to it: aesthetics, history, a wish for certainty about people, or self-knowledge. (2) Ask what it gives them. (3) Ask whether they act on it. (4) Respect a purely historical or collecting interest. (5) Offer the evidence only if they act on the belief or ask.
  • Example language (illustrative): "What is it about these old head charts that interests you? Is it the history, or does it feel like it tells you something true about people?"
  • Watch for: A wish for certainty about others that may come from past betrayal or anxiety; this is often the real clinical material. It is working when the client talks about the need underneath.

4.4 Assessing decisions and harms linked to the belief

  • Purpose / when: When the belief may be shaping choices about the client or about others.
  • Steps: (1) Map the decisions affected: relationships, hiring or firing staff, parenting, self-image, health. (2) Ask whether anyone has been excluded or hurt. (3) Check whether the client has paid for readings or courses, and how much. (4) Note any legal exposure, for example in hiring decisions [uncertain: law varies by country]. (5) Agree on priorities.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Has what you read in people's faces ever decided whether you hired, dated or trusted someone? How did those decisions turn out?"
  • Watch for: Defensiveness if this feels like an accusation. Where the client manages others, unfair treatment of third parties is possible. It is working when the client names concrete consequences.

4.5 Psychoeducation on the evidence

  • Purpose / when: When the client asks whether it works, or acts on it in ways that matter.
  • Steps: (1) Ask permission. (2) Explain Gall's claim in one sentence [source: Flourens 1846]. (3) Explain that in the 1840s Flourens found intelligence depended on the hemispheres working as a whole, not on small separate organs [source: Flourens 1846]. (4) Explain that a 2018 study of 5,724 adults' MRI scans found no meaningful link between scalp shape and 23 of Gall's faculties [source: Parker Jones et al. 2018]. (5) Invite reactions.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Researchers in Oxford measured head shape on thousands of brain scans and compared it with people's lives and abilities. They found no meaningful links. How does that sit with you?"
  • Watch for: Shame ("I was stupid to believe it"). Normalise it: Combe's book sold about 350,000 copies in the nineteenth century [source: van Wyhe]. It is working when the client can talk about the evidence without feeling attacked.

4.6 Separating modern brain science from phrenology

  • Purpose / when: When a client generalises from "phrenology was false" to "brain science is nonsense", or when a client equates brain-scan images in media with head-reading.
  • Steps: (1) Acknowledge that the idea that functions map onto brain regions has a long history [source: Marcille and Carr]. (2) Explain that skull shape tells little about the brain beneath: the 2018 study found brain folding explained very little of scalp curvature [source: Parker Jones et al. 2018]. (3) Keep claims about modern neuroscience general and avoid detail you cannot source [synthesis].
  • Example language (illustrative): "Brain regions do have different jobs. What failed was the idea that you can read those jobs, or someone's character, from the outside of the head."
  • Watch for: Being drawn into giving medical opinions. Route medical questions to the client's physician. It is working when the client holds both ideas.

4.7 Working with a client who has been judged by appearance

  • Purpose / when: A client reports being treated as untrustworthy, dangerous, less intelligent or "obviously" of a certain sexual orientation because of their face or body.
  • Steps: (1) Validate the experience; critics document that judgements based on faces can carry real consequences, including harsher treatment of people seen as "untrustworthy" [source: Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017]. (2) Explore the impact on self-image, mood and behaviour. (3) Separate the other person's inference from the client's identity. (4) Consider whether discrimination routes apply, such as workplace complaints or legal advice [uncertain: varies by jurisdiction]. (5) Build coping and assertiveness skills [synthesis].
  • Example language (illustrative): "Being sized up by how your face looks, not by what you do, is a real injury. What did that judgement leave you believing about yourself?"
  • Watch for: Internalised beliefs ("I look like a criminal"), avoidance, and social withdrawal. Screen for depression and suicidal thinking (see 4.15). It is working when the client places the judgement outside themselves.

4.8 Screening for appearance-related distress

  • Purpose / when: When a client believes a facial or head feature reveals a defect of character, and this causes marked distress or checking.
  • Steps: (1) Ask about time spent on the feature, checking, avoidance and impact. (2) Consider whether a body-image or body dysmorphic presentation may be present, and assess or refer for specialist assessment [synthesis]. (3) Do not argue about the feature itself. (4) Offer evidence-based treatment or referral as current guidelines recommend [synthesis].
  • Example language (illustrative): "You've said your forehead 'proves' something about you. How much of your day goes on thinking about it or checking it?"
  • Watch for: Requests for cosmetic procedures to "fix character", and suicidal thinking. It is working when distress and checking reduce.

4.9 Working with a client screened or classified by automated face or video analysis

  • Purpose / when: A client was rejected after an automated video interview, or tagged by a system that claims to infer traits from faces.
  • Steps: (1) Validate. (2) Share, if wanted, that scholars describe such systems as "physiognomic AI" and argue that they bring back discredited logics [source: Stark and Hutson 2022]. (3) Help the client separate the system's output from their worth. (4) Discuss routes the client may choose: asking the employer about the process, or seeking legal or consumer advice [uncertain: rights vary by jurisdiction]. (5) Support job-search resilience.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Some researchers argue these tools repeat the old mistake of reading character from faces. Their verdict is not a verdict on you."
  • Watch for: Hopelessness after repeated rejections, and self-blame. It is working when the client resumes applying and makes an informed choice about any challenge.

4.10 Safety work for a client who fears being outed by face-analysis claims

  • Purpose / when: An LGBTQ+ client, or a client wrongly labelled, fears that photos online could be used to infer their sexual orientation.
  • Steps: (1) Assess immediate safety at home, at work and, where relevant, in the country they live in or travel to. (2) Share, if wanted, that GLAAD and HRC rejected the 2017 Stanford claim and warned of risks to people wrongly outed and to people for whom coming out is dangerous [source: NBC News]. (3) Make a practical privacy plan with the client, such as reviewing photo visibility [synthesis]. (4) Explore shame or fear without pressing disclosure. (5) Link to LGBTQ+ support organisations the client chooses.
  • Example language (illustrative): "No photo can tell anyone who you are; LGBTQ+ organisations said so plainly when that study came out. Let's look at what would help you feel safer."
  • Watch for: Hypervigilance, isolation, and suicidal thinking (see 4.15). It is working when the client's sense of control and safety improves.

4.11 Family-history work: an ancestor in asylum records or phrenological collections

  • Purpose / when: A client finds a relative's portrait in an asylum casebook or a published plate (as in Morison's book [source: RCPE]), or a skull cast in a collection such as the one that went to Edinburgh's Anatomical Museum [source: Edinburgh University Library record].
  • Steps: (1) Invite the story and the feelings: grief, anger, shame, curiosity. (2) Put the labels in their period ("mania", "monomania", "idiocy" were 1830s categories [source: RCPE]). (3) Separate the relative's personhood from the label. (4) Discuss options the client may want, such as contacting the holding archive about access or context [synthesis]. (5) Consider a ritual of remembrance if it fits the client's values.
  • Example language (illustrative): "That picture was made to show a diagnosis, not a person. What do you know about who she was beyond that?"
  • Watch for: Fear of inheriting "madness"; offer accurate information or route to genetic counselling where relevant [synthesis]. It is working when the client can tell a fuller story of the relative.

4.12 Addressing the legacy of scientific racism in appearance-based judgement

  • Purpose / when: A client from a racialised group experiences, or has inherited stories of, being classed by skull or face shape, or meets this material in study or museums.
  • Steps: (1) Validate. (2) If wanted, state the history as it is documented: critics link physiognomic thinking to nineteenth-century racial hierarchies, to Lombroso's "born criminal" theory and to Nazi-era propaganda [source: Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017]. (3) Explore personal and intergenerational impact. (4) Use racial-trauma-informed approaches and consider racial identity, community and resistance as resources [synthesis]. (5) Support advocacy the client chooses.
  • Example language (illustrative): "Measuring skulls and faces was once used to rank people. Hearing that you've been on the receiving end of that thinking matters. What has it been like?"
  • Watch for: The clinician's own discomfort leading to minimising. It is working when the client feels heard and has agency.

4.13 Clinician self-audit of first-impression bias

  • Purpose / when: Routinely, and especially in intake, risk assessment and diagnosis.
  • Steps: (1) Note the first impression you formed from a client's face, build or dress. (2) Write down what behavioural evidence you actually have. (3) Check risk and diagnostic judgements against structured tools and history, not appearance [synthesis]. (4) Take patterns to supervision. Morison's belief that diagnoses could be read from faces is a historical reminder of this risk [source: RCPE].
  • Example language (self-prompt) (illustrative): "What have I seen this person do or say, as opposed to how they look?"
  • Watch for: Labels that pick up appearance descriptors ("looks shifty") in notes. It is working when your notes record behaviour and words, not looks.

4.14 Responding when a colleague or institution uses appearance-based inference

  • Purpose / when: A colleague infers diagnosis, risk or character from faces or heads, or a service adopts a tool that claims to do so.
  • Steps: (1) Raise it with the colleague directly and respectfully, with the evidence (4.5) [synthesis]. (2) If it continues, or clients are being affected, take it to supervision or line management. (3) For procurement of a tool, ask for its validation evidence and an equality or bias assessment [synthesis]. (4) Where clients are harmed, use the employer's and the regulator's or licensing board's complaint routes as they publish them [uncertain: routes vary by country and profession]. (5) Record what was done.
  • Example language (illustrative): "I'm worried that the note links her facial features to risk. Can we base the assessment on her history and what she's told us?"
  • Watch for: Retaliation risk and loss of team trust. Protect clients first. It is working when practice changes and the records reflect behaviour-based assessment.

4.15 Suicide-risk assessment where appearance-based judgement has caused harm

  • Purpose / when: Where misclassification, outing fears, discrimination or appearance distress bring hopelessness.
  • Steps: (1) Ask directly about suicidal thoughts, intent and plans, following current standard risk-assessment practice. (2) Build a safety plan, including people and places that help and lethal-means safety (storage and removal) [synthesis]. (3) Give crisis resources: 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline (US); Samaritans 116 123 (UK and Ireland). (4) Increase contact and involve supports with consent. (5) Follow your service's risk protocol.
  • Example language (illustrative): "When people feel judged and trapped like this, some think about ending their lives. Have you had thoughts like that?"
  • Watch for: Withdrawal, giving things away, statements of being a burden. It is working when the plan is agreed and the client uses it.

4.16 Working with a client drawn to practising or selling face-reading or character-reading

  • Purpose / when: A client plans to offer face-reading, head-reading or "AI personality" services, or already does.
  • Steps: (1) Explore their motives: helping people, income, identity. (2) Share the evidence if wanted (4.5). (3) Discuss consumer risks: Stark and Hutson argue that physiognomic AI should be treated as unfair and deceptive under consumer-protection law [source: Stark and Hutson 2022; current legal status uncertain]. (4) Explore supported routes to the same goals, such as accredited coaching, counselling training or validated assessment [synthesis]. (5) Never become their client, customer or business partner (APA Ethics Code, Standard 3.05).
  • Example language (illustrative): "You clearly want to help people understand themselves. Shall we look at ways of doing that which hold up to testing?"
  • Watch for: Financial investment in courses or kits, and conflict with family. It is working when the client makes an informed decision.

4.17 Referral to supported alternatives

  • Purpose / when: When a client wanted self-knowledge, career direction, a diagnosis or a judgement about another person's trustworthiness.
  • Steps: (1) Name the underlying goal. (2) Match it to a supported route: validated psychological assessment by a qualified assessor, evidence-based careers guidance, couples work, or a medical review for health concerns [synthesis]. (3) Never refer to readings of any kind. (4) Follow up.
  • Example language (illustrative): "What you wanted from the reading was a clearer sense of your strengths. A properly tested assessment can help with that. Would that interest you?"
  • Watch for: Rejecting all assessment as "just like phrenology"; explain how validation differs. It is working when the client takes up a supported route.

4.18 Supporting client-led challenge and advocacy

  • Purpose / when: A client wants to complain about, or challenge, an appearance-based decision, or to campaign.
  • Steps: (1) Clarify goals and costs. (2) Signpost legal, union, ombudsman or consumer-protection advice [uncertain: routes vary by jurisdiction]. (3) Help with emotional readiness and with drafting the account. (4) Support the client's choices about public advocacy, including privacy. (5) Review the impact on wellbeing.
  • Example language (illustrative): "You'd like the company to explain how its tool judged you. What would a good outcome look like, and what support would you need along the way?"
  • Watch for: Exhaustion and re-traumatisation during long processes. It is working when the client feels effective whatever the outcome.

5. Handling problems

Everything in this section is [synthesis] unless a source is given.

  • A client who is stuck in certainty ("I can always tell from a face"). Do not argue. Ask for examples in which the reading was wrong, and look at what the certainty protects against, such as fear of being deceived again. Offer the evidence (4.5) only with permission. Stay curious, and come back to it later.
  • Resistance to the evidence ("science has been wrong before"). Agree that science changes, and note that phrenology was itself tested and dropped by the same process [source: Flourens 1846; Parker Jones et al. 2018]. Move from belief to consequences: "Whatever its truth, how is relying on it working for you?"
  • Shame after learning it is discredited. Normalise it. It was among the most popular sciences of the nineteenth century, and Combe's book outsold Origin of Species in Britain by van Wyhe's figures [source: van Wyhe]. Reframe the interest as curiosity about people.
  • Overwhelm when a client confronts the racist or asylum history in their own family or group. Slow down and use grounding. Return to the material in small pieces, offer breaks and community resources, and do not push into archive material faster than the client wants.
  • Non-adherence to referral (for example, declining validated assessment). Explore what the reading offered that the referral does not, such as warmth, certainty or low cost. Address practical barriers. Keep the door open.
  • Ruptures. A client may feel mocked when the evidence is raised, or feel you have minimised discrimination. Name the rupture, take responsibility for your part, and ask what would help. Repair is itself therapeutic.
  • A client who sells or practises readings and wants your endorsement. Decline warmly and clearly. Do not attend, buy, refer to or promote the service, and keep a single professional role (APA Ethics Code, Standard 3.05). Continue the therapy work on their goals.
  • A client who uses face-reading to make decisions about children or employees. Explore the impact on those people. Where a child's welfare is at risk because of how they are treated, follow child-protection and mandatory-reporting routes as your jurisdiction sets them. Where employment discrimination may be happening, encourage the client to take HR or legal advice [uncertain: law varies].
  • Over-correction ("all brain science is phrenology"). Use 4.6: localisation of function in general terms survives, while character-reading from the skull does not [source: Marcille and Carr; Parker Jones et al. 2018].
  • A client wrongly classified by an automated system who is also at risk of being outed. Safety comes before advocacy (4.10, 4.15). Plan disclosures carefully. Do not encourage public challenges until the client has weighed the risks.
  • Your own bias surfaces in session (for example, a quick judgement from a client's appearance). Notice it, check it against the evidence (4.13), and take it to supervision. Where it has affected the client, name and repair it.
  • Heritage or decorative interest becomes a fixation. Look at the function: certainty, control, identity. Screen for obsessive or appearance-related difficulties (4.8) and refer where indicated.
  • Requests for medical opinions (for example, about skull shape). Do not give them; refer to the client's physician. Never present any reading as diagnosing or treating a physical or mental condition.

Sources

Web sources:

Books and works cited:

  • Combe, G. (1828). The Constitution of Man. Public domain (date and sales figures per van Wyhe).
  • Lavater, J. C. Physiognomische Fragmente (1775-78 [uncertain: not verified]); English translation by T. Holcroft, Essays on Physiognomy.
  • Morison, A. (1838). The Physiognomy of Mental Diseases.
  • Spurzheim, J. G. (1815). The Physiognomical System of Drs. Gall and Spurzheim (per van Wyhe).
  • Gall, F. J., & Spurzheim, J. G. (1810-1819). Anatomie et physiologie du système nerveux (per van Wyhe).
  • Wang, Y., & Kosinski, M. Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images, accepted by Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (per NBC News; year and volume [uncertain: not verified]).
  • Wu, X., & Zhang, X. (2016). Automated Inference on Criminality Using Face Images, arXiv preprint (per Agüera y Arcas et al. 2017).
← Previous · XVI-032Séguin's physiological educationNext · XVI-035 →Magnetic healing and animal magnetism as therapy