So there is a new Dunning-Kruger paper out by Gignac and Zajenkowski. It goes like this:
Dunning Kruger pattern is trivial given 1) people overestimate themselves, and 2) self-estimate x criterion value is r < 1.00. I agree, I wrote that years ago.
So they collect some new data, typical weird format students self-rating and Raven's test. Looks like the usual deal.
A nice twist is that they realize the DK claim is a test for heteroscedasticity (what? inconstant variance). Well, I recently spent a lot of time thinking about this and they posted their data on OSF, so all is good, time for re-analysis!
So downloading their data, scoring it by simple z-transform, and computing the 10/90th centiles, I get this plot which shows quite clearly there is HS like DK model says, on the low end.
This plot is made using the neat qgam() function, quantile generalized additive models, allowing us to capture nonlinear heteroscedasticity if such exists and visualize it easily.
But we are not lazy, so we apply some tests that give p values & effect sizes. Now, I also came up with some 'new tests' and metrics, so let's try them!
They confirm the visual results: there data have good evidence of HS, and it's somewhat nonlinear. 2/3 old tests agree.
Oh, by the way, for that point about writing it years, ago, I built a simulator that you can play around with!
So I talked with Gignac about this, and he pointed out that I plotted the data the wrong way around. Good point! If we do it the right now around, we get these.
So there is some upwards tick at the very low end, but these are just a few lizardmen out of 2400 people.
Here's the same but with the 10/90th quantiles. There's basically nothing to see here. It's very linear and homoscedastic.
So, this n=2400 replication (about 2.5x sample size) finds essentially the same result when done properly.
Main difference is that my cors are stronger.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Using public data on first names, one can figure out how fast the population replacement is happening in France despite the ban on informative statistics. Selected results.
As elsewhere, the foreign born are clustered in cities.
Foreign born is a decent proxy for where the Muslims and Africans are having children.
In economics of economic growth, it is often seen that countries have catch-up growth, called the advantage of backwardness. We can see this in OECD using GDPpcppp numbers.
However, looking at the world at large for the same period (2000-present), the picture is not so clear. R2 dropped from 52% to 9%. Looking at the plot, most of the dots that didn't grow as expected are Africans. It's another example of OECD fallacy, one can get substantially wrong ideas about how the world works by only looking at a subset of mostly European, above average countries.
We can see the role of national intelligence here. A simple way is just splitting the data into some groups. Higher IQ countries show much stronger convergence, and the low IQ countries grow quite slowly. This is essentially the story of how Asian tigers had strong economic growth starting poor, including China.
Who does hate speech law protect? Well, in Denmark the prosecutor's office has an overview, a summary of every case since 2001 or so. The targets of the utterances that led to guilty verdicts are shown below.
Thus, only 1 case of 142 protected Danes, and it was kinda incidental because the guy was insulting Danes and Jews combined, apparently because he was angry about Gaza getting rekt by Israel.
I expect results would be similar for other western countries. These laws are pernicious, only protect minorities, despite ostensibly being neutrally formulated. You can basically smear Danes in Denmark as much as you want as long as you don't do it because they are gay.
Our new meta-analysis of American race gaps in IQ/intelligence is out! The main results didn't change that much, with 2 exceptions:
First, there appears to be reverse publication bias for Black IQs, smaller studies find _larger_ values. This is a prediction from leftism bias model, since social scientists hack in the preferred direction, which is usually positive, but sometimes negative. Adjusting for this gives a Black IQ estimate 82 instead of 85.
The formal meta-analysis models did not find any changes over time, but if one looks at the plot, there is some trend, p > 5%.
Happy to release our newest and largest admixture project. 🧵 Thread with the main findings.
First, we compiled data from 100s of sources to estimate genetic ancestry for over 400 units in the Americas. These are countries and subnational divisions of the larger countries, such as US states, Canadian provinces, various Caribbean islands. Results can be seen in these 4 maps.
It was a real pain in the ass to merge the spatial data to produce the maps!
Next up, we gathered cognitive ability data from international datasets, and various regional and subnational scholastic tests, and any other source of standardized testing we could find. These were then converted to British international norms (Greenwich mean IQ) as best we could. It gives this map.