The presumptions, terminology, psychometrics, statistical analyses, and ethics of the fourfold acculturation paradigm are criticized in detail. Illustrative data came from Iranian refugees in Norway (N=80) answering: 1) the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), 2) Zung’s Self–Rating Depression Scale (ZSRDS), 3) ipsative fourfold scales of Integration, Assimilation, Separation, and Marginalization, 4) orthogonal scales of attitudes towards Norwegian and Iranian cultures, measured independently and using balanced reverse–keying, and 5) ipsative forced–choice preferences for cultural practices of Norway, Iran, both, or from other societies as well. Iranians in Norway favored global multiculturalism and, as a group, did not show distress. The SWLS and ZSRDS were correlated, but the measures of acculturation failed to replicate one’another. As unconstrained ipsative measures, the fourfold scales showed acquiescence response bias contamination and doubtful operationalization of scale constructs. Recommendations are discussed for improving acculturation research.