On Indians: I have read Rushton`s article and I don`t agree.I don`t see any point in considering Ìndians`as a group when the country is an ethnic mess of hundreds of different communities and ethnic groups. I think what`s happening is that Chinese emigrants from SEA are being counted as SEAsians and boosting the score. Vietnamese have an almost uniformly poor achievement rate in any developed country they are present in. yet you have the unmitigated gall to attack the actual scientists in this space?įirst of all, to rec1man`s `vietnamese comment. Mutually contradictory garbage studies by nurturists are constantly published in Science and Nature, e.g. One day it's acting black, the next day "post-traumatic slavery disorder", and the third day it's self-esteem. And those public data sources would be a LOT better if idjits like you didn't simultaneously (1) demand incredibly advanced knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of human intelligence while (2) cutting off funding for such research! PS: I'll pit the MRIs, IQ tests, and heritability studies of the race realists any day against the constantly shifting nurturists. First, you do understand that the numbers quoted are for highly selected Indian immigrants to America, while Rushton's article is on Indians in India? That said, I'm not saying Rushton is the final word by any means - no one has done the large-scale survey of IQ in India - he's going on the best available public data. This isn't a "movement", it's about scientific research, which is a self correcting enterprise. Today their middle class descendants are at about 0.4 SDs below the white mean, according to a recent study of school children. In South Africa, impoverished and uneducated early Indian immigrants scored well below the white mean. Under Western economic and social conditions, I'd believe something like 95-100 for Indians. Studies that put Indian IQs in the low 80s don't take into account pervasive malnutrition. Shows you how far culture alone can take a group. Pretty impressive when you consider that they arrived as factory workers from Punjab back in the 1950s. UK Indians are also 2% of UK's population, but 12% of the medical school students. I don't know that much about UK Indians, but I'd bet that they push their kids hard at school and have a pro-education home culture. Their kids outperform whites quite substanially academically though, just as Asians (Japanese, Chinese) outperform white Americans even after IQ is controlled for. So their academic success probably reflects a combination of innate g, rigorous academic instruction, and innate studiousness. Philly GuyĪs an Indian-American, I can say that IA parents academically drill their kids really hard and push them to memorize at a pretty young age. Also, does he have any information on S Asian Muslim immigrants (e.g., Pakistanis) and Middle Easterners (Arabs, Iranians, Armenians, etc.) I would bet that some groups, like Iranians, Lebanese Christians, and Armenians would do considerably better than their co-ethnics back in their native countries due to differential selection. below white Americans on the Ravens Progressive Matrices, which is almost purely a measure of g. For example, Lynn (2005) reports that Vietnamese Americans score about 0.4 S.D. I was surprised by the high figure of IQ 104 this group. Also, does he have any breakdown in the SE Asian category for ethnic Chinese vs. 380) that on the WISC-R, for instance, blacks exceed whites on the short term memory factor by about 1/3 S.D. In "The g-factor" (1998), Jensen reports (p. Has Richwine taken into account ethnic differences in the short-term memory factor when calculating IQs from reverse digit span? Reverse digit span is highly g-loaded, but it also loads on short term memory. YOU know what stupid things shouldn't be done. Nice to have 145 but it would have been so much sharper and well-rounded had I made better decisions. That was always my dream IQ hah, but the online tests before my WAIS were actually very accurate so I'm not surprised anymore. Based on how I did online, after the fact, it looks like my Gf would be 127. So, who knows? Lmao.I wish I would have done Figure Weights so I could have received a Gf estimation I value that the most. My post history indicates why I'm not a great case study tho. But my Visual Puzzles (very fluid-loaded/novel) was 85 and my VIQ (most g-loaded but also most crystallized, yet Similarities is highly abstract concept manipulation) was 145. <- Unsurprisingly my digit span was, whatever percentile a 90 is on the normal dist. My FSIQ is 115 but GAI was what the psychologist told me I should expect out of myself, that being 122 or 124 lol.
0 kommentar(er)
