Harman and Lorandos assert that they have produced a study analyzing custody cases involving alienation allegations, which “disconfirms” the findings from our study of family court out- comes in cases involving abuse and alienation. In addition to pointing out the authors’ misrepresentation and mis-reporting of some of their findings, this Response details a series of profound flaws in their study’s design, dataset construction and variable coding, interpretations and analytic approach, as well as a series of statistical errors. The statistical analyses demonstrate that Harman and Lorandos’s five findings of a gender bias in favor of fathers are not supported by their data; the only statistically significant findings that persist after re-analysis of the correct data are consistent with the Meier et al. study. These pervasive design and methodological errors undermine both the appearance and assertion of rigor in their approach; these problems and the foundational differences in their dataset from our own disqualify their study from serving as any kind of credible test or disconfirmation of our study
