Mixed evaluations of the book include those of the psychologist Frank Sulloway, the historian of science Roger Smith, the psychologist Louis Breger, and the psychiatrist E. James Lieberman and the consultant Robert Kramer. Sulloway described the book as "monumental", writing that it had "deservedly remained the definitive and indispensable" biographical source about Freud. Nevertheless, he distanced himself from Jones' understanding of Freud, criticizing Jones for failing to admit that psychoanalysis owes its fundamental theoretical inspirations to biological sources. He also described the book as the "fullest expression of the Freud legend". Smith wrote that it is an "official biography, replaced in detail but still of interest". Breger considered the book biased due to its status as an official biography, as well as its author's active role in the psychoanalytic movement and hostility to other analysts, including Rank and Ferenczi. He nevertheless saw the book as valuable because of its "wealth of detailed, firsthand material". Lieberman and Kramer wrote that the book is the most influential biography of Freud. They also observed that Jones knew Freud for decades and had access to letters of Freud that were only published in full after 1990. However, they believed that Jones had a partisan view of his rivals Ferenczi and Rank.
