Authors of several published studies and important reviews have recommended that attempts to validate the lunar hypothesis be terminated. It is suggested in this reply to these critics that such recommendations are premature on the basis that the literature is replete with haphazard attempts at confirmation prior to demonstrating replicable findings. Several reasons are provided which may account for the failure to obtain reliable results in the literature on psychiatric admissions, regardless of whether the data supported the hypothesis. A more systematic approach to investigating the lunar-lunacy hypothesis is proposed.The lunar cycle and its possible effects on human behavior has long been a fascinating and intriguing topic in the literature. There has been much controversay regarding the validity of the lunar-lunacy relationship on the basis of empirical studies. Some reviewers (Campbell g: Beets, 1978; Rotton & Kelly, 1985) have recommended that attempts to validate the lunar hypothesis be terminated. It is our contention that such recommendations are premature, not on the basis of a literature which claims to support a lunarlunacy relationship, but rather on the fact that this literature is replete with poorly conceived attempts to confirm previous findings. Regardless of outcome, the methodologies of chese studies have been inconsistent, rendering them incomparable. Misconceptions about the meaning of replication and lagging procedures are prevalent in reviews of the licerature. These problems are addressed with respect to the literature which evaluates the lunar hypothesis based on psychiatric admission data specifically. Although these concerns are not limited to studies of psychiatric admissions, this licerature serves as a good illustration of why it is premature to condude that research endeavors to examine the lunar hypothesis be terminated on the basis of a lack of supportive research evidence.The variables in published studies are confounded at several levels (e.g., time of admission, type of behavior, geographic location, etc.). Such methodological chaos has made impossible any consistency in results in the evaluation of the lunar hypothesis. In light of chese confounds, reviewers have been stating the obvious. For example, one would have to expect the outcome of Campbell and Beet's (1978) review: "The studies of psychiatric hospital -.'Request reprints from J. J. Cyr, Psychology

All correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed to D. P. Bonato. Ph.D., Psychology Department, Whitby Psychiatric Hospital, Whitby, Ontario, Canada LlN 5S9. 867 AB AC AB,AC,BC AC AC AC 2 m 3 m b w 9 b a. 2 R 2 ? 03 -4 c-

A series of questions, generated by Rotton and Kelly in response to Cyr and Kalpin's refutation of literature reviews which recommended that attempts to validate the lunar hypothesis be terminated, are addressed. We maintain that it is preferable for researchers to question whether any hypothesis is deemed tenable only after the most advanced methodologies and statistical analyses have been applied rather than to stop all investigations in an area based on results generated by a series of methodologically inconsistent studies which were analyzed inappropriately.