Richard G. Buchanan, Ph.D. says in the com­ments:

I am a Diplo­mate Indus­tri­al Psy­chol­o­gist with a con­cen­tra­tion in Psy­cho­met­rics, a spe­cial­ty con­cerned with the mea­sure­ment of men­tal attrib­ut­es. With the excep­tion of Exper­i­men­tal Psy­chol­o­gy (and its relat­ed spe­cial­ties) there are no areas in Psy­chol­o­gy that is more sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly rig­or­ous. Most peo­ple’s impres­sion of Psy­chol­o­gy is that it is soley Clin­i­cal Psychology–concerned with diag­nos­ing and treat­ing those with per­son­al­i­ty dis­or­ders. I can assure you that doing psy­cho­me­t­ric research requires strict con­for­mance with the sci­en­tif­ic method–reporting the pre­ci­sion of the mea­sure­ment of the vari­ables we study, con­struct­ing exper­i­ments in accor­dance with hypothe­ses we have for­mu­lat­ed, sta­tis­ti­cal analy­ses of the results of our stud­ies, and report­ing the results in accor­dance with accept­ed prin­ci­ples. We don’t need some amat­uer dab­blers in our field to tell us to rethink our approach the learn­ing how men­tal process­es work.

While it’s worth not­ing that Magrud­er claims to be a retired Psych pro­fes­sor, I agree that IDol­a­tors tend not to be oper­at­ing in their field of exper­tise. I tried Google Schol­ar, bout could­n’t find any pub­lished research by Magrud­er. He also seems to refer to him­self as a stu­dent, though that may be a typo.

Dr. Buchanan, wel­come to the club of peo­ple whose dis­ci­pline is under attack by anti-sci­ence activists.