There's a lot to debunk about supposed IQ differences between races. Consider a related scenario: the differential performance between men & women on math tasks. When women's attention is brought to gender gaps, they perform more poorly on tasks compared to controls
Again, there are several layers of bullshit when it comes to "race gaps in IQ." Stereotype threat is just one piece. And when is stereotype threat activated for Black students? At every level of education. "You're Black. You're different. You won't do as well."
When I worked in public schools, I had very young Black children tell me they weren't allowed to speak "their language" at school. This is just one example of a constant stereotypical monitoring of Black children than can have snowballing effects on performance
Whenever I'd come into a new classroom, I'd meet Black kids who seemed to cringe when they told me their names, fearing I'd react poorly/mispronounce/etc. Imagine these same kiddos having to do an IQ test for a stranger. They know what many white people are thinking
Black kids *know*, often intuitively, that they are being judged as "less than." This isn't the only thing that's going on w/ IQ tests, but it is important for people to recognize. Just knowledge of judgment can correlate w/ decreased performance.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Mangy Jay

Mangy Jay Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @magi_jay

14 Jun
It's concerning that so many white liberal/progressive commentators are buying into the conservative straw man that people who advance social justice are pitchfork-wielding radicals intent on "canceling" fellow citizens for perceived thought crimes
A few weeks back, I wrote about how conservatives are sneaking in pejorative feelings about social justice by using language that is both vague & charged w/ negative valence. Unfortunately, some in general commentariat are lending this tactic legitimacy salon.com/2021/05/05/how… Image
These negative perceptions of social justice would not stick as much in the minds of older white liberals if not for the support they're getting from some prestigious writers. In these perceptions, social justice is not just oppressive, but also frivolous theatlantic.com/magazine/archi… Image
Read 10 tweets
13 Jun
I keep seeing this trend where researchers overstate their conclusions & then journalists will render these conclusions even *stronger*. Then, if someone comes in & says, "Well, if we look at the statistical tests. . . .," we look nitpicky, when, in fact, it's pretty important!
An example of this I saw recently was a pre-print where the researchers kept saying they saw a "decrease" in a treatment effect w/ N=5000, when, in fact, most of the "decreases" were not significant. Journalists wrote up these "decreases" as meaningful!
Then, some come in & say, "those tests weren't significant in a sample of 5000, so that's something to consider," & no one cares, b/c the study has already gotten tons of attention. The reaction is almost, "why are you nitpicking this way?"

Because it changes the conclusions!
Read 5 tweets
13 Jun
I've been seeing commentary claiming Trump has been vindicated on Hydroxychloroquine (HQ). I was like, “what’s encouraging this new discourse?” Turns out it is this pre-print and, long story short: no, it does not vindicate Trump or “prove” anything about the effectiveness of HQ.
I’m not an expert in this field & I haven’t combed through this pre-print with a fine tooth comb. However, I can make a few general observations
-1 non-peer reviewed pre-print will never “prove” anything. Nor would a peer-reviewed study! All evidence has to be considered together
-This particular study was observational. Observational research is valuable, but it’s also messy, which makes it even more important to consider *all* the data. This study could be garbage or it could be elegant. But even if it's the latter, it would be far from the final word!
Read 10 tweets
12 Jun
I hope everyone is clear: the absolute earliest you can find out if you're pregnant is at 4 weeks. Even then, there are false negatives. So, in a state with a post-6 week ban, people have maximum 2 weeks to schedule an abortion. That's not gonna happen for a lot of people.
It's especially not going to happen for teenagers who are victims of rape or incest. You have to miss your period, be tracking your period, psychologically gather yourself, get access to a test, & then schedule an appointment. All w/in a 2 week period. You can't know sooner.
And, again, that 2 week period depends on that first test actually picking up enough HCG to register as positive. How many teens--or people more generally--understand that they could get a false negative?

Usually only people who are trying to get pregnant know this.
Read 10 tweets
11 Jun
Again, public health is about the community, not individuals. Each one of us is a possible vector for a deadly disease that, if uncontrolled, has the capacity to destroy hospital systems. With highly transmissible new variants & ~50% vaccinated, masks are still necessary
This continues to be something people do not understand: one of the main goals is to prevent hospital collapse. That has always been the case. It's not like, "Oh, people choose to not get vaccinated, sucks for them." It will suck for the entire community
Another related goal is to stop transmission in order to mitigate mutations. So far, our vaccines are strong against the variants. That won't necessarily always be the case. And each new transmission creates a new opportunity for mutation.
Read 4 tweets
11 Jun
You absolutely never have to hand it to the Red Army
Here's the thing w/ saying "The Soviets ended the Holocaust:" it implies some kind of intent, perhaps even a valorous one. Did the Soviets liberate many camps? Yes. Was their intent a humanitarian one, such that they cared about ending the Holocaust? No.
There's also the issue of this framing eliding all kinds of Soviet behavior/motivations during the earlier years of the war. There's the problem of Poland, for example. Also the issue of the Soviet Union initially supporting the German economy in a manner that empowered the Nazis
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(