The wealth of nations is mapped by their IQ

  • Thread starter Carlos Hernandez
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Iq
In summary, the study found a correlation between assessments of national mental ability and real gross domestic product, or GDP. The study also found that a country's IQ is largely hereditary and that it is more likely that a child's IQ will predict his future Socio-Economic-Status than the SES under which he is born.
  • #36
Originally posted by Vosh
That must be why the electorate chose a college cheerleader over someone who has dedicated his life to protecting the consumer (Ralph Nader) for U.S. President. [/B]

Thanks, that helps me to refrain from debating with you. This isn't a politics forum and if you think an avowed socialist (a neo-com) would make a good president then I have nothing to discuss with you.

If you would like to discuss IQ and it's importance (or non-importance) to human society then leave out the political comments.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
You should know that I don't speak your jargon
I keep giving you the benefit of the doubt. It's not "my jargon;" it's the science of psychology. I'm not going to give you the benefit of the doubt any more and will simply spell things out for you neatly:

High IQ predisposes a person towards individualism and away from groupthink.

THE AVERAGE IQ IN AFRICA IS 70.

Why do you think that?
Because multiple studies found it to be true.

Not when they are oppressed by those who are a little more clever.
They aren't oppressed. But they are unintelligent.

If you would like to discuss IQ and it's importance (or non-importance) to human society then leave out the political comments.
Vosh doesn't understand those things, Jerry. He understands politics.


--Mark
 
  • #38
Intelliegence determining the prosperity of a nation? That's a rich thought. It seems to me that that idea is out to badmouth our international neighbors.

Besides, that can't be true for every scenario. What is the average IQ in the United States, ranged in the 90's? And the U.S.'s wealth is one of the greatest in the world.
 
  • #39
Wait. Does this guy mean the people in charge or the average of the entire populace?
 
  • #40
Well, one person replied with a rhetorical (an assertion was made with zero supporting statements) political statement by way of telling me not to make political statement and another person suggested that the ppl. who live under thugocracies in Africa and the Middle East aren't oppressed. Some things one can say about the unintelligent come to mind: 1) They can't hear themselves. 2) Their feelings get hurt taking things personally and their egos get easily drawn into battles of will instead of constructive exchanges. 3) They see what they want to see (a life long consumer activist, someone who takes no contributions as a politician, trained in the law, self taught in chinese language, is the reason you can get into a minor auto accident and not get impaled on your steering column or torn to shreds by ordinary glass windshields, etc. etc. is probably just trying to turn America into the next Soviet Union but a self satisfied simian college cheerleader will save you and me from the baddies -- if only more ppl. would vote instead of just Homer Simpson and Fred Flintstone)
 
  • #41
And don't say, "this guy". It's a phrase "dumb guys" use when they're trying to engage in mean spirited psychological warfare.


*


I can't believe someone on a physics forum thinks ppl. in third world countries aren't oppressed. This is going to interrupt me in mid thought for a few days...
 
  • #42
Intelliegence determining the prosperity of a nation? That's a rich thought. It seems to me that that idea is out to badmouth our international neighbors.
What purpose would that serve?

Lynn and Vanhanen's research investigates the question of why some nations are rich and others poor. Since high IQ individuals usually do better economically than other individuals in the same society, we might expect the same pattern to emerge internationally comparing nations to one another. And, research verifies this - the average IQ is correlated with per capita GDP at around 40%.

Besides, that can't be true for every scenario.
It isn't; that's why the correlation is 40% rather than 100%. The authors of the study point out a variety of other factors which seem to influence national wealth, such as natural resources, communism, and so forth.

What is the average IQ in the United States, ranged in the 90's? And the U.S.'s wealth is one of the greatest in the world.
America's IQ is 98, compared to a British mean of 100. This is, sadly, eight points above the average IQ in the world, which is 90. And of course the United States is a highly capitalistic society with a wealth of natural resources.

Wait. Does this guy mean the people in charge or the average of the entire populace?
The book gives average IQs for the entire populace. It is worth noting that a high-IQ elite can do wonders for a nation, however.

_______

if only more ppl. would vote instead of just Homer Simpson and Fred Flintstone
In a democracy, the majority will rule. The majority is roughly 100 IQ throughout 1st world nations, and 100 IQ individuals are easily swayed by appeals to emotion and connect more readily with people in the 100-120 IQ range than in the 140 IQ range.

I can't believe someone on a physics forum thinks ppl. in third world countries aren't oppressed. This is going to interrupt me in mid thought for a few days...
Who thinks people in third world countries aren't oppressed? Of course they are oppressed. You're the one who won't admit to one of the causes of third world problems - namely, a lack of intelligence. Or hasn't it ever occurred to you to wonder why they are oppressed?


--Mark
 
  • #43
Originally posted by Nachtwolf
What purpose would that serve?

Lynn and Vanhanen's research investigates the question of why some nations are rich and others poor. Since high IQ individuals usually do better economically than other individuals in the same society, we might expect the same pattern to emerge internationally comparing nations to one another. And, research verifies this - the average IQ is correlated with per capita GDP at around 40%.



Intriguing. Have you ever read anything about how one group (whether a nation or just a neighborhood) will suffer because the smarter ones will leave and go to live with another group where life is nice and as a consequence leave the old group even worse off?


America's IQ is 98, compared to a British mean of 100.

A theory I've had about that is that Britain is simply less oriented toward the lowest common denominator -- it's simply a smaller place (economically). What do you think?

This is, sadly, eight points above the average IQ in the world, which is 90. And of course the United States is a highly capitalistic society with a wealth of natural resources.

Yeah.

In a democracy, the majority will rule. The majority is roughly 100 IQ throughout 1st world nations, and 100 IQ individuals are easily swayed by appeals to emotion and connect more readily with people in the 100-120 IQ range than in the 140 IQ range.

Unfortunately, that rings very true!

Who thinks people in third world countries aren't oppressed? Of course they are oppressed. You're the one who won't admit to one of the causes of third world problems - namely, a lack of intelligence. Or hasn't it ever occurred to you to wonder why they are oppressed?

Ok. I thought you said, "no they aren't". No worries. It occurred to me to wonder once if those in authority (right now called "the Bush administration"; giving the impression that Shrub is calling the shots -- of whiskey, perhaps!) realize that America didn't get started by setting up schools and business ventures and basically doing what we try to do now; setting up present day America wholesale, as 'twere: installing schools, restaurants, businesses, banks and all this and they also realize that these backward places in the world will never just start from scratch armed with the same principles as those given us (which we are thankfully still living off though some work around the clock to replace them with laissez faire capitalism...) and so they conclude, behind closed doors so that ppl. won't hear and become hysterical, that these places have to be forced out of their grinding backwardness. As a consequence, we have the difficult, controversial violent drama of the war in Iraq... Someone called that notion reactionary; but maybe it's what some folks in the right offices are thinking and thinking it's right and for the best even if they could never come right out and try to explain it to the masses. The flaw here as far as I can see is that after forcing things they're still clumsily going in and installing present day America thinking that this is how a thing like America was born in the first place. Anyway; just trying to imagine what they must be thinking making the decisions they seem to be making... It could be that I've been up too long... What do you think?
 
  • #44
The amount of money amassed has little to do with intelligence anywhere. Anyone who belives this is obviously a beliver and not a thinker since it is contrary to reality. One of you quoted something of the nature somewhere about a country of retarded people. Interesting. You have no clue of absolutes, and it is because you do not, that the unconscious battering ram of human motion will decimate the planet. I am a thinker, at times I am far beyond it. Human kind will pay by it's own hand. Mark my words. It's physics, even if you don't understand it quite yet. Merry christmas.
 
  • #45
Vosh, have a big glass of milk have a cookie and go to bed. Your idea of other countries being backward because of what they do not have is off the wall. Don't blame yourself, it is a belief used for a thousand years in order to extract riches from other countries with some attempt of a morality overlay for the general public. Most of these countries were far better off without us. China had zero percent overwieght children, with the advent of western fast food in less than 10 years they are over 10% and growing fast. Just a pebble in a pile of pebbles. When your in school in and learning structured learning, there is sometimes not a lot of time to break down things and think of the conective nature of things.
 
  • #46
Have you ever read anything about how one group (whether a nation or just a neighborhood) will suffer because the smarter ones will leave and go to live with another group where life is nice and as a consequence leave the old group even worse off?
As a matter of fact, that's the common explanation for Ireland's IQ, which is under 95.

A theory I've had about that is that Britain is simply less oriented toward the lowest common denominator -- it's simply a smaller place (economically). What do you think?
I think that 2 IQ points isn't enough to write home about. Your idea may be true; I don't know much about England. I do know, however, that the 2 point disparity between America and England could just be a fluke.

"the Bush administration"... capitalism... war in Iraq... What do you think?
I think I am a dour individual who has learned that every possible problem or complaint which could be raised about society always ends with "because everyone is so stupid." There are other causes for the Iraq war which we could name, none of which truly justify it to my thinking, but in the end they probably come down to human stupidity as well.

The amount of money amassed has little to do with intelligence anywhere. Anyone who belives this is obviously a beliver and not a thinker since it is contrary to reality.
Yes, TenYears, tell us all how the findings of science are contrary to reality!

You have no clue of absolutes, and it is because you do not, that the unconscious battering ram of human motion will decimate the planet.
Hahaha tell us all how to think in black and white, TenYears!

I am a thinker, at times I am far beyond it.
Oh, indeed!

Human kind will pay by it's own hand. Mark my words. It's physics, even if you don't understand it quite yet.
Eerything is physics. And no, this doesn't support your statements.

Vosh, have a big glass of milk have a cookie and go to bed. Your idea
Hahaha! This isn't Vosh's idea; it isn't even Jerry's or mine. It's Lynn's and Vanhanen's idea, which they supported with - get this - evidence. But why am I telling you this? You're a "thinker."

Thank you for bringing joy to my existence! Merry Christmas to you too!


--Mark
 
  • #47
Originally posted by Nachtwolf
Hahaha! This isn't Vosh's idea; it isn't even Jerry's or mine. It's Lynn's and Vanhanen's idea, which they supported with - get this - evidence. But why am I telling you this? You're a "thinker."

--Mark

Why do you bother? There are always clowns on sauce or sumtin' to disrupt good discussions.

It seems the term "IQ" has acquired the PC definition of a "dirty word" and racist at that. Any hint of IQ relating to any racial (they call it "culture" now) group now is attacked as being un-scientific and subjective and being promulgated by neo-nazis.

You can post peer reviewed studies until your fingers bleed and you will not change these peoples opinion. I quit trying.

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a4c610569be.htm
 
  • #48
Originally posted by TENYEARS
Vosh, have a big glass of milk have a cookie and go to bed.


No, thanks. See www.milksucks.com.


Your idea of other countries being backward because of what they do not have is off the wall.


Never meant to give that impression. The Middle East, for example, sufferes from a stifling sense of backwardness and grinding poverty. Desperate people are easy to take advantage of. Rulers tend (heh) to want to perpetuate themselves and an unfortunate trap in the Middle East is that if you don't give (or promise) immediate results, which often translates to userping the current rulers, then you find yourself quickly out of a job. So what it takes to govern there is to behave like a thug. It's a job that attracts thugs and it's a vicious cycle. They don't like America because the only time the west comes around is to make shady deal with shady rulers. You won't hear that on the commercial news...

China had zero percent overwieght children, with the advent of western fast food in less than 10 years they are over 10% and growing fast.

Yeah, it's very easy to get and consume too much sugar. You're body craves it all the time so that in the wild you will get at least the minimum amount; but in civilization you can get all the sugar you want and humans naturally want it all the time. I'll bet sugar merchants watch their intake of sugar more than anyone else!

When your in school in and learning structured learning,

School isn't about learning. Learning is as natural as breathing; it can't be stopped, only perverted. School is a jobs creation project. It wasn't a thing to provide growth and learning that has gone wrong and needs reform. It was a bad idea from the get go. Simply; there is no reason for coerced instruction of any kind. Ponder that and then you'll begin to get an idea of why future generations will wonder how we could live like this the same way we look at the Middle Ages and think those ppl. had to be savages to live like that!


"As intelligence goes up, happiness often goes down." --Lisa Simpson
 
  • #49
Calling names does not fall under intelligent behaviour, please refrain from that in the future, OK?
 
  • #50
Did anyone already wonder about the validity of the IQ tests and whether people in some countries are 'conditioned' to do well on those tests?

So yeah, maybe developed countries perform more of those tests, and the people will thus become better at it and get higher scores, just by knowing the drill.
 
  • #51
Originally posted by Monique
Did anyone already wonder about the validity of the IQ tests and whether people in some countries are 'conditioned' to do well on those tests?

So yeah, maybe developed countries perform more of those tests, and the people will thus become better at it and get higher scores, just by knowing the drill.


I don't know anything about Lynn and Vanhanen (sp?) or their methods. I tend to agree that the only thing tests measure is your ability to take a test. Performance on a test can be significantly effected by a persons expectation of how they will score compared to someone else. In experiments, a black male of known superior IQ and a male Asian of known lesser IQ are put in a room where they take a test. Because the black male assumes that the Asian is terrific at Math etc. his performance on the test is very poor compared to the Asian subject who in turn scores very high because he expects himself to be smarter than his peer. I saw this on PBS once. Where else!? I forget what they named the phenomenon; but it's very interesting.

One thing I do believe is that smart ppl. tend to leave bad places to go and live in good places and that this causes a brain drain. I can believe it happens to entire countries and regions just as it happens in neighborhoods.

I once heard a black activist argue that while there may be something to research into whether blacks, on average, are less intelligent, society isn't ready to deal with it in a way that would be anything other than destructive. So books like the one in question tend to bolster, for example, white supremecists, even if that wasn't the intention.

Personally, I don't know why they bothered to write such a book. Psychologists, ppl. who run ad campaigns, captains of industry, politicians already understand that "most people are stupid". So who is the book for? The stupid ppl. won't get it, so it's not for them. Those who profit from the lowest common denominator already know, so it's not for them. I don't know who that leaves except the KKK.
 
  • #52
Did anyone already wonder about the validity of the IQ tests and whether people in some countries are 'conditioned' to do well on those tests?
Actually that's what just about everyone already wondered. The short answer is yes, the IQ tests are valid. The long answer is that Lynn and Vanhanen used Raven's Progrssive Matrices to test their hypothesis, which even with coaching for the testees give low scores for people living in third world nations. Part of administering an IQ test involves making sure the testee knows the drill.

It's possible (indeed almost certain) that environmental influces are partly responsible for low scores obtained in those countries, but it seems that the scores accurately reflect intelligence and thus it is intelligence itself which is being slightly depressed. A prime example of this is the fact that African blacks consistently score ~15 IQ points lower than American blacks. Nutrition and various other factors are probably partly responsible for the ~15 point gap (although it's also worth noting that American blacks are approximately 20% caucasian).

Vanhanen (sp?)
Haha! Yeah I can never get that name right. I think it's Vanhanen, but my connection is really bad right now so I can't conveniently check.

smart ppl. tend to leave bad places to go and live in good places and that this causes a brain drain
Yep; this is the standard GxE phenomenon. It turns out that smart people seek out cognitively stimulating environments which probably further their intellectual development.

I once heard a black activist argue that while there may be something to research into whether blacks, on average, are less intelligent, society isn't ready to deal with it in a way that would be anything other than destructive. So books like the one in question tend to bolster, for example, white supremecists, even if that wasn't the intention.
That black activist was a smart guy. The trouble is exactly that society isn't read for it - since the facts have been known for around 100 years (and pretty much became settled science 50 years ago) it's only the fact that this is unpopular that makes it generally disbelieved.

I don't know who that leaves except the KKK.
It leaves Eugenists. Lynn is a big time eugenist who wrote two books titled Eugenics and Dysgenics, and the book we're discussing here, IQ and the wealth of Nations does a great deal to support his position.


--Mark
 
  • #53
What to DO?

So, some research appears to show there is a correlation between 'the wealth of nations' and IQ (or similar). Other research shows that IQ (or similar) is primarily (or predominently) hereditary. Conclusion: since you can't change folks' IQ, most people living in Africa had just better get used to being poor?

Consider: some research has shown there is a correlation between economic growth and degree of openness to free international trade ... and universal primary education ... and sanitation and universal access to clean drinking water ... and stable government ... and corruption (negative correlation) ... and sound fiscal policies ... and good regulatory regimes ... and (it's a long list). These are all things which we can do something about, whether we live in the US, the UK, China, Brazil, Burma/Myanmar, or Benin. Further, there's plenty of good data to show that if you do something about reducing trade barriers, providing universal primary education, clamping down on corruption, (etc), the wealth of your nation does indeed increase.

Maybe this eugenics idea is a waste of time and energy, if what you want to do is increase the wealth of your nation?
 
  • #54
So, some research appears to show there is a correlation between 'the wealth of nations' and IQ (or similar). Other research shows that IQ (or similar) is primarily (or predominently) hereditary. Conclusion: since you can't change folks' IQ, most people living in Africa had just better get used to being poor?
Why put words into my posts which aren't there? Don't you find these preconceptions you have about my views to be encumbering?

1) The research doesn't appear to show a correlation. It does show a 40% correlation. Further research is in order to test whether this is accurate, and better understand where it comes from and how it "works."

2) The fact that IQ is heritable within a group does not by itself show that the IQ difference between two groups must be heritable to the same degree. Even pretending for the moment that the American B/W IQ gap were 100% genetic (something no one believes) some quick calculations would lead us to expect that the average IQ of native, fully black Africans should be 80, not 70. Thus, at bare minimum the IQ of these third-worlders is environmentally depressed by around 10 points.

3) Whether the low average IQ of any given group is caused by genetic or environmental factors, it is not irremediable. Since within-group heritabilities are high, eugenic efforts can fairly easily boost their intelligence in the long term. It is my wish to bring about such positive eugenic change throughout the globe.


Consider: some research has shown there is a correlation between economic growth and degree of openness to free international trade ... and universal primary education ... and sanitation and universal access to clean drinking water ... and stable government ... and corruption (negative correlation) ... and sound fiscal policies ... and good regulatory regimes ... and (it's a long list).
Lynn's research actually further demonstrates most of this. The trouble is that we can't say that these things themselves are independent of IQ - and, in fact, other findings suggest to contrary. More intelligent people (compared to their peers in the same society) are more educable and more productive workers. They are less crime prone, healther, and longer-lived. They are more likely to take an active interest in government and politics, and tend away from rigid, authoritarian views.


Maybe this eugenics idea is a waste of time and energy, if what you want to do is increase the wealth of your nation?
Hahahaha!


--Mark
 
  • #55
Nereid: "Conclusion: since you can't change folks' IQ, most people living in Africa had just better get used to being poor?" {note the question mark}
Nachtwolf: "Why put words into my posts which aren't there? Don't you find these preconceptions you have about my views to be encumbering?"
Nereid: (quoting Nachtwolf) Hahahaha!
1) The research doesn't appear to show a correlation. It does show a 40% correlation. Further research is in order to test whether this is accurate, and better understand where it comes from and how it "works."
Clearly I have to spend some more time analysing Lynn's work. However, as I noted in another thread, "Lynn seems to have merely collected studies done between 1952 and 2000, on subjects whose ages ranged from 3 to 'Adults', with sample sizes ranging from 88 to over 43,000, by a number of different authors." He did NOT do the work himself. (BTW, the other posters on that thread - including Nachtwolf - haven't yet given answers to very basic questions about the data).

Let's talk about the data which shows "IQ difference between groups" (i.e. Lynn)
hitssquad wrote: For other nations used in the final regression analysis, [Lynn's] national IQs were estimated by such methods as taking an average of neighboring nations, and using IQ data from racially similar populations (correcting for racial proportion in the latter case).
Again, I need to study the work done by Lynn. For now I merely note that repeated questions - to Nachtwolf and others - have yet to yield even a list of 'sub-Saharan' races (or east Asian ones for that matter).
 
  • #56
Lynn's methods

Originally posted by Nereid
"Lynn seems to have merely collected studies done between 1952 and 2000, on subjects whose ages ranged from 3 to 'Adults', with sample sizes ranging from 88 to over 43,000, by a number of different authors." He did NOT do the work himself.
If the authors had merely collected studies, in the final report there would have been no corrections for known bias, no regression analyses, no comparisons with other IQ-related factors, or the results of any of the other work the authors did.

In the digest version of his analysis posted online at his website in the form of the article Intelligence and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations, nine of the IQ-collection-article citations are of papers published by Lynn himself:
http://www.rlynn.co.uk/pages/article_intelligence/7-a1.htm [Broken]

Code:
Nation    ages test    N mean author            date

Ethiopia 15-16 SPM    250 67  Lynn,             1994
Hong Kong 3-13 SPM 13,822 103 Lynn et al.,      1988 
Hong Kong 6-15 SPM  4,500 110 Lynn et al.,      1988
Hong Kong    6 CPM  4,858 109 Chan & Lynn,      1989 
Israel    9-15 SPM    250 90  Lynn,             1994 
Japan        9 SPM    444 110 Shigehisa & Lynn, 1991 
Korea, South 9 SPM    107 106 Lynn & Song,      1994 
Singapore   13 SPM    147 103 Lynn,             1977 
Taiwan    9-12 SPM  2,496 105 Lynn,             1997

SPM and CPM stand for the Raven tests "Standard Progressive Matrices" and "Coloured Progressive Matrices". As you can see, the only test he used was Raven's Matrices, a family of non-verbal tests.


Here are the references:
http://www.rlynn.co.uk/pages/article_intelligence/9.htm [Broken]

Chan, J. and Lynn, R. (1989) The intelligence of six year olds in Hong Kong. Journal of Biosocial Science, 21, 461-464.

Lynn, R. (1977) The intelligence of the Chinese and Malays in Singapore. Mankind Quarterly, 18, 125-128.

Lynn, R. (1980) The social ecology of intelligence in France. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 325-331.

Lynn, R. (1981) The social ecology of intelligence in the British Isles, France and Spain. In M.P.Friedman, J.P.Das and N. O'Connor (eds) Intelligence and Learning. New York: Plenum.

Lynn, R. (1991) Race differences in intelligence: a global perspective. Mankind Quarterly, 31, 255-294.

Lynn, R. (1994) The intelligence of Ethiopian immigrant and Israeli adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 29, 55-56.

Lynn, R. (1997) Intelligence in Taiwan. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 585-586.

Lynn, R., Pagliari, C. and Chan, J. (1988) Intelligence in Hong Kong measured for Spearman's g and the visuospatial and verbal primaries. Intelligence, 12, 423-433.

Lynn, R. and Song, M.J. (1994) General intelligence, visuospatial and verbal abilities of Korean children. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 363-364.

Shigehisa, T. and Lynn, R. (1991) Reaction times and intelligence in Japanese children. International Journal of Psychology, 26, 195-202.



Additionally, in the book IQ and the Wealth of Nations, Lynn and Vanhanen cite several other of Lynn's primary-research nation-IQ-testing papers:

Lynn, R. 1997b. Intelligence in Taiwan. Personality and Individual Differences, 22: 585-586.

Lynn, R., and J. Dziobon. 1980. On the intelligence of the Japanese and other Mongoloid peoples. Personality and Individual Differences, 1: 95-96.

Lynn, R., and S. Hampson. 1986a. The structure of Japanese abilities: An analysis in terms of the hierarchical model of intelligence. Current Psychological Research and Reviews, 4: 309-322.

Lynn, R., and S. Hampson. 1986b. Intellectual abilities of Japanese Children: An assessment of 2-8 year olds derived from the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities. Intelligence, 10: 41-58.

Lynn, R., and S. Hampson. 1987. Further evidence on the cognitive abilities of the Japanese: Data from the WPPSI. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 10: 23-36.

Lynn, R., S. Hampson, and M. Lee. 1988. The intelligence of Chinese children in Hong Kong. School Psychology International, 9: 29-32.

Lynn, R., and M. Holmshaw. 1990. Black-white differences in reaction times and intelligence. Social Behavior and Personality, 18: 299-308.

Lynn, R., E. Paspalanova, D. Stetinsky, and B. Tzenova. 1998. Intelligence in Bulgaria. Psychological Reports, 82: 912-914.




-Chris
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #57
(BTW, the other posters on that thread - including Nachtwolf - haven't yet given answers to very basic questions about the data).
I think Hitsquad is smarter than I am. I know he has a better information database from his college. Most importantly, he's far more patient. And I just spotted a mistake (I accidentally typed that IQ and per capita GDP correlate near 40%, when it's actually around 75%) so I'm letting him take this one. He's not saying anything I wouldn't have said.

For now I merely note that repeated questions - to Nachtwolf and others - have yet to yield even a list of 'sub-Saharan' races (or east Asian ones for that matter).
Well, Hitsquad's already asked you (exactly I would have asked) what races are you referring to?


--Mark
 
  • #58
If the authors had merely collected studies, in the final report there would have been no corrections for known bias, no regression analyses, no comparisons with other IQ-related factors, or the results of any of the other work the authors did.

Of course there could. It's common, if bad statistics, to do regressions on miscellaneous data sources collected by others. And your evidence of Lynn's own papers shows that he only studied oriental nations plus Israel. Not Africa. And it's the attributed IQ of ~70 for the subsaharan African nations that's the big news, and that carries a lot of the "correlation".
 
  • #59
Apollo (emphasis added): "Average racial intelligences range from East Asians at about 106 ..."

Nacthwolf (emphasis added): "'East Asian' is a technical term referring to a specific group of Asians (also called "Pacific Rim Asians"). China does indeed have a mix of non "East Asian" ethnicities, and this may account for the fact that the average IQ in China is 100, while the average IQ in Japan (a far more homogeneous nation) is 105."

hitssquad (emphasis added): "For other nations used in the final regression analysis, [Lynn's] national IQs were estimated by such methods as taking an average of neighboring nations, and using IQ data from racially similar populations (correcting for racial proportion in the latter case)."

Nereid (emphasis added): "For now I merely note that repeated questions - to Nachtwolf and others - have yet to yield even a list of 'sub-Saharan' races (or east Asian ones for that matter)."

Nacthwolf (emphasis added): "Well, Hitsquad's already asked you (exactly I would have asked) what races are you referring to?"

Nereid, in answer to Nachtwolf's question: the ones you and hitssquad refer to in your own posts!

Hitssquad also copied pages and pages of material about race and races, but has yet to give a list of these; Apollo made some remarks about IQ (or similar) varying markedly by race, but every time I've asked for something as simple as a list, I get no response.

Note to Monique: at what point does the proposers' continued inability to answer basic questions about their proprosal constitute grounds for moving this thread to S&D?
 
  • #60
OK I can see this isn't going to go away on its own. Unfortunately my connection is too slow for me to locate Chris' quotation of Jensen's The g factor so I'll just answer you directly.

Racially speaking, Sub Saharan Africans are simply termed "Africans."

Race doesn't mean what lots of people think it means. Races aren't platonic categories, but instead they are large, mostly endogamous breeding populations, like giant families. How you want to split up humans by race is a matter largely of opinion. (The same goes for other creatures; dogs, wolves, and coyotes are called different "species" yet they can all interbreed!)

Sub Saharan Africa has a number of African populations. You'll hear names like Bantu and Bushman or West African and East African, but largely it's a bunch of fuzzy boundaries. Genes flow from east to west, north to south, and the entire country has a blending of ethnic characteristics. The same thing goes for populations in Eastern Europe; I recently saw a family of Russians with blond hair and epicanthic eyefolds (Asian eyes). And even Western Europe, which is generally considered "White" or "European" has racial differences - Northern Europeans tend towards Introversion and Field Independence while Southern Europeans tend towards Extroversion and Field Dependence. This difference seems to be racial, but Europeans are all classified as "European." (I personally think Northern and Southern Euros are different enough to be classified as such, but this is rarely ever done in the literature.)

When one group differs significantly from others on a given trait or traits (IQ for these discussions) then it is given a specific name; this is why East Asians and South Asians have different names. East Asians have 20 extra IQ points and a pronounced visuospatial/verbal disparity absent from South Asian IQ scores. To my understanding - and I don't have Lynn's book in front of me - the various African tribes differ radically on IQ but not for any racially identifiable reason. This is in stark contrast to the 15 point black/white IQ gap, which is so stable as to have been dubbed a "fundamental sociological constant." (See this page) This is probably possible only because the two groups are so distinct that they have maintained much of their integrity - they haven't blended yet.


--Mark
 
Last edited:
  • #61
Genetic cluster linkage trees

Originally posted by Nachtwolf
Sub Saharan Africa has a number of African populations. You'll hear names like Bantu and Bushman or West African and East African, but largely it's a bunch of fuzzy boundaries. Genes flow from east to west, north to south, and the entire country has a blending of ethnic characteristics.

Here are some graphics to go with the text:



http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/hitssquad/detail?.dir=/ee6c&.dnm=1e3e.jpg [Broken]
http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/hitssquad/detail?.dir=/ee6c&.dnm=7370.jpg [Broken]
Figure 12.1. The genetic linkage tree for forty-two populations. The genetic distance between any two groups is represented by the total length of the line separating them. (Cavalli-Sforza L. L., Menozzi P. & Piazza A., The history and geography of human genes. Copyright © 1994 by Princeton University Press.)




http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/hitssquad/detail?.dir=/ee6c&.dnm=25d6.jpg [Broken]
Figure 12.2. A linkage tree based on the average genetic distances between the major clusters among the groups shown in Figure 12.1 . (Cavalli-Sforza L. L., Menozzi P. & Piazza A., The history and geography of human genes. Copyright © 1994 by Princeton University Press.)



http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/hitssquad/detail?.dir=/ee6c&.dnm=6e0b.jpg [Broken]
Figure 12.3. A principal components (PC) analysis of the forty-two populations in the Cavalli-Sforza et al. study, showing the bivariate location of each with respect to the coordinates of the first two PCs. The orthogonal dashed lines indicate the mean of each PC. (Cavalli-Sforza L. L., Menozzi P. & Piazza A., The history and geography of human genes. Copyright © 1994 by Princeton University Press.)



Graphics and captions are from Chapter 12 of The g Factor, pp429-431.
http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24373874


*edit: fixed links*


-Chris
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #62
Lynn's own quoted data disproves his conclusion :O

I have done a short study of three of the key webpages of Lynn’s “Intelligence and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations”. Note that Lynn claims “If we adopt a one way causal model that national IQs are a determinant of national per capita incomes […] the results [of his research] show that national IQ explains 57 percent of the variance of real GDP per capita 1998

Here are some conclusions from my short study:
1) His study does not present “National IQ”; rather, average IQs from some tests done mostly on children; a study in China comes closest to a national average (ages of subjects “6 to 79”) ... the IQ stated is 98.

2) There are at least two quite obvious systematic trends in the data which Lynn does not appear to have considered. When a crude adjustment is made for these obvious trends, Lynn’s “strong correlation” becomes much weaker (~0.57 to ~0.22), and the standard deviation of “National IQs” dataset drops by ~30%.

3) There is good data in Lynn’s paper to contradict Apollo’s and Nachtwolf’s assertions about the fixed, inherent IQ of races.

4) Lynn seems to have made a very simple mistake – extrapolating the results of individual research work beyond the scope of the work’s validity; or perhaps he simply didn’t address potential sources of systematic error.

This is well illustrated in his own words: “There are two reasons why we consider that a causal effect of national IQ on per capita incomes and rates of economic growth is the most reasonable theory to explain the correlations. First, this theory is a corollary of an already established body of theory and data showing that IQ is a determinant of income among individuals, the evidence for which has been reviewed in the introduction. IQs measured in childhood are strong predictors of IQs in adolescence and these are predictors of earnings in adulthood. The most reasonable interpretation of these associations is that IQ is a determinant of earnings. From this it follows that groups with high IQs would have higher average incomes than groups with low IQs because groups are aggregates of individuals. This prediction has already been confirmed in the studies of the positive relationship between IQs and per capita incomes among the American states and among the regions of the British Isles, France and Spain, as noted in the introduction. The positive relation between IQ and income is so well established that it can be designated a law, of which the finding that national IQs are positively related to national per capita incomes is a further instance.” Note the leap from studies done in individual countries to the assumption that cross-country comparisons can be made without worrying about possible biases and systematic errors. As I said earlier in this post, there are at least two obvious trends in the data which point to possible sources of systematic error.

If you were already convinced that a nation’s wealth (or poverty) is largely due to how bright or dim the people in the country are, Lynn’s work will be comforting.

If you had doubts about the rigour of the scientific case for significant variation in IQ between economies, you will find plenty of observations on Lynn’s webpages to confirm your doubts.

Some other comments:
a) The five studies in Lynn’s dataset where the subjects’ ages are listed as “Adults” are all from sub-Saharan African counties; 4 of the 5 are among the 8 lowest mean IQs in Lynn’s entire dataset (and two others are Lynn’s own Ethiopian work, and a 1959 study). Curious that Lynn himself implicitly acknowledges that the inclusion of such data will distort the analysis (see point c below), yet he chooses to include all five data points.

b) Lynn states: “While we consider that a causal effect of national intelligence on per capita income and rates of economic growth is the most reasonable model for an explanation of the data, there are two other possible explanations that deserve consideration. The first of these is that there is no direct causal relation between national IQs and per capita incomes and growth rates and the correlation between them is due to some third factor affecting all three. Although this is a theoretical possibility and needs to be mentioned, we do not think it is possible to formulate a plausible theory of this kind.

Perhaps PF members and guests could help?

c) There is ample support for the hypothesis “that national per capita incomes are a cause of national differences in IQs” in Lynn’s own data. Yet Lynn writes: “[…] it might be argued that national per capita incomes are a cause of national differences in IQs. This argument would state that rich nations provide advantageous environments to nurture the intelligence of their children in so far as they are able to provide their children with better nutrition, health care, education and whatever other environmental factors have an impact on intelligence, the nature of which is discussed in Neisser (1998). Intelligence has increased considerably in many nations during the twentieth century and there is little doubt that these increases have been brought about by environmental improvements, which have themselves occurred largely as a result of increases in per capita incomes that have enabled people to give their children better nutrition, health care, education and the like. Such a theory has some plausibility but it cannot explain the totality of the data. Countries like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore had high IQs in the 1960s when they had quite low per capita incomes and the same is true of China today.

As to “Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore”, guess which researcher did the work to find the “high IQs”? (no prizes for the correct answer)

d) Lynn and Raven – either alone or as lead author - account for just under half the studies Lynn presents; can any PF members give an example of an active area of modern scientific research where just two principals so dominate? The period spans over 50 years.

e) Lynn’s own work stands out quite strongly – he is sole or lead author of 7 of the works reporting the top 10 mean IQs ranked by mean IQ (Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong (3), Singapore, Taiwan), … and of the second lowest (Ethiopia).

f) An elementary statistics question for hitssquad: here are the reported results from two studies, done using the same instrument, on samples purporting to be randomly drawn from the same population:
A: mean 103, sample size 43,825
B: mean 105, sample size 2,496

It is claimed that the difference in the population mean, inferred from these two studies, is not statistically significant. Do you agree? Explain your answer.

[Edit: fixed typo]
 
Last edited:
  • #63
hitssquad: there are no pictures on the links you posted.
 
  • #64
Nacthwolf wrote: When one group differs significantly from others on a given trait or traits (IQ for these discussions) then it is given a specific name; this is why East Asians and South Asians have different names. East Asians have 20 extra IQ points and a pronounced visuospatial/verbal disparity absent from South Asian IQ scores. To my understanding - and I don't have Lynn's book in front of me - the various African tribes differ radically on IQ but not for any racially identifiable reason.
So, let me see if I understand what you have written:

1) there are radical differences in reported IQ among the "African" race

2) there is a reported ~20 point IQ difference between two groups of "Asians"

In the former case, the radical difference leads you to call the groups who differ by IQ "tribes", but within one "race"; in the latter, you call the groups "races".

IMHO, inconsistent terminology is a sure sign of sloppy thinking; what did you say your IQ was?

BTW, when you do get your copy of Lynn, please present for us the "National IQ" data he uses, for China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. Considering that the total non-Han ("Chinese" to you, I guess) population of greater China accounts for ~6% of the total population, please use Lynn's data to give a consistent, statistically sound number for the IQ of the Han "race". Please draw our attention to any obvious, systematic trends in the data.
 
  • #65
Mainstream Science Statement On Intelligence

Since the publication of The Bell Curve, many commentators have offered
opinions about human intelligence that misstate current scientific
evidence. Some conclusions dismissed in the media as discredited are
actually firmly supported.

This statement outlines conclusions regarded as mainstream among
researchers on intelligence, in particular, on the nature, origins, and
practical consequences of individual and group differences in
intelligence. Its aim is to promote more reasoned discussion of the
vexing phenomenon that the research has revealed in recent decades. The
following conclusions are fully described in the major textbooks,
professional journals and encyclopedias in intelligence.

The Meaning and Measurement of Intelligence

1. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other
things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think
abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from
experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or
test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability
for comprehending our surroundings--"catching on," "making sense" of
things, or "figuring out" what to do.

2. Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests
measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms,
reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments. They do
not measure creativity, character personality, or other important
differences among individuals, nor are they intended to.

3. While there are different types of intelligence tests, they all
measure the same intelligence. Some use words or numbers and require
specific cultural knowledge (like vocabulary). Others do not, and
instead use shapes or designs and require knowledge of only simple,
universal concepts (many/few, open/closed, up/down).

4. The spread of people along the IQ continuum, from low to high, can
be represented well by the bell curve (in statistical jargon, the
"normal curve"). Most people cluster around the average (IQ 100). Few
are either very bright or very dull: About 3% of Americans score above
IQ 130 (often considered the threshold for "giftedness"), with about
the same percentage below IQ 70 (IQ 70-75 often being considered the
threshold for mental retardation).

5. Intelligence tests are not culturally biased against American blacks
or other native-born, English-speaking peoples in the U.S. Rather, IQ
scores predict equally accurately for all such Americans, regardless of
race and social class. Individuals who do not understand English well
can be given either a nonverbal test or one in their native language.

6. The brain processes underlying intelligence are still little
understood. Current research looks, for example, at speed of neural
transmission, glucose (energy) uptake, and electrical activity of the
brain, uptake, and electrical activity of the brain.

Group Differences

7. Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level.
The bell curves of different groups overlap considerably, but groups
often differ in where their members tend to cluster along the IQ line.
The bell curves for some groups (Jews and East Asians) are centered
somewhat higher than for whites in general. Other groups (blacks and
Hispanics) ale centered somewhat lower than non-Hispanic whites.

8. The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the
bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for
different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for
whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where
above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered.

Practical Importance

9. IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single
measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational,
economic, and social outcomes. Its relation to the welfare and
performance of individuals is very strong in some arenas in life
(education, military training), moderate but robust in others (social
competence), and modest but consistent in others (law-abidingness).
Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social
importance.

10. A high IQ is an advantage in life because virtually all activities
require some reasoning and decision-making. Conversely, a low IQ is
often a disadvantage, especially in disorganized environments. Of
course, a high IQ no more guarantees success than a low IQ guarantees
failure in life. There are many exceptions, but the odds for success in
our society greatly favor individuals with higher IQs.

11. The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life
settings become more complex (novel, ambiguous, changing,
unpredictable, or multifaceted). For example, a high IQ is generally
necessary to perform well in highly complex or fluid jobs (the
professions, management): it is a considerable advantage in moderately
complex jobs (crafts, clerical and police work); but it provides less
advantage in settings that require only routine decision making or
simple problem solving (unskilled work).

Con't...
 
  • #66
Con't...


12. Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor
affecting performance in education, training, and highly complex jobs
(no one claims they are), but intelligence is often the most important.
When individuals have already been selected for high (or low)
intelligence and so do not differ as much in IQ, as in graduate school
(or special education), other influences on performance loom larger in
comparison.

13. Certain personality traits, special talents, aptitudes, physical
capabilities, experience, and the like are important (sometimes
essential) for successful performance in many jobs, but they have
narrower (or unknown) applicability or "transferability" across tasks
and settings compared with general intelligence. Some scholars choose
to refer to these other human traits as other "intelligences."

Source and Stability of Within-Group Differences

14. Individuals differ in intelligence due to differences in both their
environments and genetic heritage. Heritability estimates range from
0.4 to 0.8 (on a scale from 0 to 1), most thereby indicating that
genetics plays a bigger role than does environment in creating IQ
differences among individuals. (Heritability is the squared correlation
of phenotype with genotype.) If all environments were to become equal
for everyone, heritability would rise to 100% because all remaining
differences in IQ would necessarily be genetic in origin.

15. Members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in
intelligence (by an average of about 12 IQ points) for both genetic and
environmental reasons. They differ genetically because biological
brothers and sisters share exactly half their genes with each parent
and, on the average, only half with each other. They also differ in IQ
because they experience different environments within the same family.

16. That IQ may be highly heritable does not mean that it is not
affected by the environment. Individuals are not born with fixed,
unchangeable levels of intelligence (no one claims they are). IQs do
gradually stabilize during childhood, however, and generally change
little thereafter.

17. Although the environment is important in creating IQ differences,
we do not know yet how to manipulate it to raise low IQs permanently.
Whether recent attempts show promise is still a matter of considerable
scientific debate.

18. Genetically caused differences are not necessarily irremediable
(consider diabetes, poor vision, and phenal keton uria), nor are
environmentally caused ones necessarily remediable (consider injuries,
poisons, severe neglect, and some diseases). Both may be preventable to
some extent.

Source and Stability of Between-Group Differences

19. There is no persuasive evidence that the IQ bell curves for
different racial-ethnic groups are converging. Surveys in some years
show that gaps in academic achievement have narrowed a bit for some
races, ages, school subjects and skill levels, but this picture seems
too mixed to reflect a general shift in IQ levels themselves.

20. Racial-ethnic differences in IQ bell curves are essentially the
same when youngsters leave high school as when they enter first grade.
However, because bright youngsters learn faster than slow learners,
these same IQ differences lead to growing disparities in amount learned
as youngsters progress from grades one to 12. As large national surveys
continue to show, black 17- year-olds perform, on the average, more
like white 13-year-olds in reading, math, and science, with Hispanics
in between.

21. The reasons that blacks differ among themselves in intelligence
appear to be basically the same as those for why whites (or Asians or
Hispanics) differ among themselves. Both environment and genetic
heredity are involved.

22. There is no definitive answer to why IQ bell curves differ across
racial-ethnic groups. The reasons for these IQ differences between
groups may be markedly different from the reasons for why individuals
differ among themselves within any particular group (whites or blacks
or Asians). In fact, it is wrong to assume, as many do, that the reason
why some individuals in a population have high IQs but others have low
IQs must be the same reason why some populations contain more such high
(or low) IQ individuals than others. Most experts believe that
environment is important in pushing the bell curves apart, but that
genetics could be involved too.

23. Racial-ethnic differences are somewhat smaller but still
substantial for individuals from the same socioeconomic backgrounds. To
illustrate, black students from prosperous families tend to score
higher in IQ than blacks from poor families, but they score no higher,
on average, than whites from poor families.

24. Almost all Americans who identify themselves as black have white
ancestors-the white admixture is about 20%, on average--and many
self-designated whites, Hispanics, and others likewise have mixed
ancestry. Because research on intelligence relies on self-
classification into distinct racial categories, as does most other
social-science research, its findings likewise relate to some unclear
mixture of social and biological distinctions among groups (no one
claims otherwise).

Implications for Social Policy

25. The research findings neither dictate nor preclude any particular
social policy, because they can never determine our goals. They can,
however, help us estimate the likely success and side-effects of
pursuing those goals via different means.

* * * * * * *

The following professors-all experts in intelligence an allied
fields-have signed this statement:


Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota
Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota
John B. Carroll, U.N.C. at Chapel Hill
Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii
David B. Cohen, U.T. at Austin
Rene W. Dawis, University of Minnesota
Douglas K. Detterman, Case Western Reserve U.
Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota
Hans Eysenck, University of London
Jack Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology
Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University
Grover C. Gilmore, Case Western Reserve U.
Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University
Linda S. Gottfredsen, University of Delaware
Richard J. Haier, U.C. Irvine
Garrett Hardin, U.C. Berkeley
Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa
Joseph M. Horn, U.T. at Austin
Lloyd G. Humphreys, U.Ill. at Champaign-Urbana
John E. Hunter, Michigan State University
Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College
Douglas N. Jackson, U. of Western Ontario
James J. Jenkins, U. of South Florida
Arthur R. Jensen, U.C. Berkeley
Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama
Nadeen L. Kaufman, Cal. School of Prof. Pshch., S.D.
Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University
Nadine Lambert, U.C. Berkeley
John C. Loehlin, U.T. at Austin
David Lubinski, Iowa State University
David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota
Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine
Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota
R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia
Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburg
Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London
Cecil R. Reynolds, Texas A&M University
David C. Rowe, University of Arizona
J. Philippe, Rushton U. of Western Ontario
Vincent Sarich, U.C. Berkeley
Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia
Frank L. Schmidt University of Iowa
Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A&M University
James C. Sharf, George Washington University
Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University
Del Theissen, U.T. at Austin
Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve U.
Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington University
Philip Anthony Vernon, U. of Western Ontario
Lee Willerman, U.T. at Austin
 
  • #67
questions - and apparent Lynn inconsistency

Jerry,

When was this statement made?

What is "The Bell Curve"? If it is a book, when was it published?

All but four of the signatories are (were?) in US universities - there are two from institutions in London, and two from the U of Western Ontario - why?

Is this statement intended to refer to "individual and group differences in intelligence" throughout the world, or just in the US?

- - - - - - - -
I note that Richard Lynn is a signatory.

Here is a quote from Lynn, from one of the links that hitssquad supplied: "Intelligence has increased considerably in many nations during the twentieth century and there is little doubt that these increases have been brought about by environmental improvements, which have themselves occurred largely as a result of increases in per capita incomes that have enabled people to give their children better nutrition, health care, education and the like."

The statements 14 through 24 seem to be mildly in conflict with the above quote; do you agree?
 
  • #68
strange patterns

Nereid wrote: d) Lynn and Raven – either alone or as lead author - account for just under half the studies Lynn presents; can any PF members give an example of an active area of modern scientific research where just two principals so dominate? The period spans over 50 years.
There are ~50 separate authors mentioned in the 81 studies quoted by Lynn. There are ~50 signatories to the document jerryel quoted. There are ONLY TWO names on both (and even one of those may be a coincidence) - Lynn and Gilmore. What is going on in this field?
 
  • #69


Originally posted by Nereid
When was this statement made?
The Wall Street Journal
December 13, 1994
http://www.google.com/search?q="Almost+all+Americans+who+identify+themselves+as+black+have+white"



What is "The Bell Curve"?
It is a "controversial" and very popular book by Harvard psychologist Richard Herrnstein (who died shortly before it was published) and American Enterprise Institute economist Charles Murray. Herrnstein had previously made himself famous by being one of the "Head Start Wars" academics in the early 1970s and for writing an article (later published as a fleshed-out book of the same name) called IQ in the Meritocracy. I personally consider The Bell Curve to be part II of IQ in the Meritocracy -- sort of like Sylvester Stallone's Rambo was to his earlier First Blood -- Bigger, flashier and much more famous.
http://images.google.com/images?q=rambo


The Bell Curve presents a case for "the relationship between low cognitive ability and many variables in the g nexus, including poverty, employment and unemployment, crime, welfare dependency, illegitimacy, low-birth-weight babies, deprived home environments, and developmental problems. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY), they present simple graphs which show the relationship of each of these variables to IQ," as Arthur Jensen wrote in his 1998 The g Factor (p580).



If it is a book, when was it published?
1994.
http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/People/Murray/bc-crit.html [Broken]



All but four of the signatories are (were?) in US universities - there are two from institutions in London,
In England, there is an abstract institution referred to as "the London school" of psychology, which in use generally implies the intellectual core group of the hereditarian school of psychology. It traces its roots back to Sir Francis Galton FRS, Charles Spearman, Sir Cyril Burt, and Hans Eysenck (the latest also signatory to the document we are discussing). Eysenck played mentor to Arthur Jensen (the world's most influencial hereditarian psychologist, one of the most prolific and frequently-cited scientists of all time, and also a signer to the document presently under discussion) when Jensen (an American) was doing his postdoctoral work overseas on a scholarship. Jensen kicked off the nature/nuture debate in 1969 with an article published in the Harvard Educational Review raising the heterodox question, "How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement?" Immediately thereafter, the word "Jensenism" was coined by the media to refer to the hereditarian position in the "nature/nurture" debate.

Jensen followed that up in 1973 with Educability and group differences; in 1980 with his massive -- and to this day critically bulletproof -- tome Bias in Mental Testing which concluded that there is no systematic bias in IQ testing in America; and in 1998 with his magnum opus The g Factor.
http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24373874

Signatory Robert Plomin, also located in London, was originally based in the United States but later moved his research operations to Britain reportedly to escape political persecution in the United States).



and two from the U of Western Ontario - why?
J. Philippe Rushton, of the U of Western Ontario, is a member -- along with Eysenck, Herrnstein (both of these first two posthumously), Rushton, Brand, Lynn, and Jensen -- of the g factor brat pack. He made himself famous in the late eighties with his work documenting consistent rank differences on over 60 variables from aboriginal sub-Saharan Africans on one end to East Asians on the other, and with Caucasians somewhere in between (though usually closer to the asians than the Africans). This work culminated in the 1996 publishing of the book Race, Evolution and Behavior.
http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/reb.html [Broken]



Is this statement intended to refer to "individual and group differences in intelligence" throughout the world, or just in the US?
As far as I know, Jensen, as a rule, limits his conclusions about g heritability strictly to the United States.


*edit: fixed url*


-Chris
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #70
more evidence of systematic inconsistencies

jerryel quoted: The spread of people along the IQ continuum, from low to high, can be represented well by the bell curve (in statistical jargon, the "normal curve"). Most people cluster around the average (IQ 100). Few are either very bright or very dull: About 3% of Americans score above IQ 130 (often considered the threshold for "giftedness"), with about the same percentage below IQ 70 (IQ 70-75 often being considered the threshold for mental retardation).
Here are two of the datapoints in Lynn's work ("National IQ" and sample size; note that he did not do the research in either case):
South Africa 72 3,993
Ghana 62 1,639

Assuming the same normal curve, with a standard deviation that scales according to the average, the low end tail of the above studies would look something like this:
IQ below 40: 6 (South Africa); 15 (Ghana)
IQ below 50: 83 (South Africa); 161 (Ghana).

If "IQ 70-75 [is] often [...] considered the threshold for mental retardation", I would guess that 40-50 would be the threshold for severe retardation. Would people with such low IQs be able to do CPM or SPM? Would the test protocol have to be changed to administer either test to such people? What sort of sampling technique was used to ensure that such severely retarded people (if indeed they were) could be included as test subjects?

Whatever the answers, these two items taken together further suggest that there are systematic errors in Lynn's work.
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top