Forget the dodgy data, praise stays His name is Marcial Losada and his findings were the basis for a book by Prof Barbara Fredrickson called Positivity: Top-Notch Research Reveals the 3 to 1 Ratio That Will Change Your Life. The 3:1 ratio is the amount of positive to negative things we need to say to each other to flourish, or life will take a turn for the worse. The authors made this discovery using complex mathematics (non-linear dynamics, in case you're interested). You might be suspicious of such a specific finding but the thousands of people who bought copies weren't. The discovery has also been cited in 350 academic papers and praised by the godfather of positive psychology, Martin Seligman, as the "real thing." The only problem is that it isn't. The sums don't add up. Prof Frederickson has admitted: "I have neither the expertise nor the insight to defend the maths." She also confessed that Mr Losada is not returning her calls. Mr Losada is not returning anyone's calls. In a short email, he said: "I didn't have the time to prepare a proper response. I am not an academic, I am a consultant to business and I am fully booked for the rest of 2013. The demand for training in my model has taken all my available time. As Mr Losada watches his consulting fees ratchet up in his Santiago bank account, misanthropes are as close as they get to rejoicing. They always considered the "nicey nicey" stuff to be hogwash pushed by the self-help industry. Now, gone is the pressure to put in a kind word, let alone three. But, while Mr Losada's maths may have been suspect, his argument holds firm. One of the most accurate ways to predict divorce is the ratio of positive to negative or neutral things that partners say to each other, according to 30 years of research by Prof John Gottman, aka the Mozart of marriage. Formal performance reviews that focus on strengths typically produce 30pc better results than those which focus on weaknesses. With informal feedback, the difference is greater. The best way to get someone to repeat something is to describe what they did, what impact it had and what positive things this tells you about them. Professionals who present suspect findings tarnish a lot more than their reputations. Scientists should be judged like sports stars and, if found wanting, stripped of their academic titles. Peer reviewers should be as accountable as non-executive directors, with penalties for those who fail to undertake the proper scrutiny. Equally, jumping on one wrong finding to rubbish an argument is just as culpable. A single statistic does not prove nor destroy a thesis. The truth is that, despite the hurrahs and harrumphs from curmudgeons, the scientific case that being positive is life-enhancing, is as robust as ever. Praise stays. Octavius Black is founder of the Mind Gym. Follow him on Twitter @octaviusblack. He has been shortlisted in the Editorial Intelligence comment awards