Some of you may have noticed how little I've tweeted over the past two months. There's a reason for this.
I became aware back in April that a "freelance writer" was planning on doing an "expose" on me that would disclose my identity and professional affiliations.
For what it's worth, I don't think this person actually is a freelance writer, but rather someone who threatens and attacks and publicly discloses the identity of people who are interested in intelligence research.
People who have followed me know that I never inject politics or my personal views into my tweets.
99 percent of my tweets consist of nothing more than brief descriptions of (and links to) studies published in the scientific literature.
"Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any ethnic group for which there are reliable data. They score 0.75 to 1.0 standard deviations above the general European average, corresponding to an IQ 112 – 115."
"Ashkenazi Jews are just as successful as their tested IQ would predict, and they are hugely overrepresented in occupations and fields with the highest cognitive demands."
"During the 20th century, they made up about 3% of the US population but won 27% of the US Nobel science prizes and 25% of the Turing Awards [in computer science]. They account for more than half of world chess champions."
Study finds male-female brain differences and is able to predict "individual IQ scores for males and females separately using whole-brain functional connectivity."
"Robust predictions of intellectual capabilities were achieved across three independent data sets (680 subjects) and two intelligence measurements (IQ and fluid intelligence) using the same model within each gender."
"Interestingly, we found that intelligence of males and females were underpinned by different neurobiological correlates, which are consistent with their respective superiority in cognitive domains (visuospatial vs verbal ability)."
IQ is the most robust major effect in all of psychology, endlessly replicable and with effect sizes unheard in the discipline, up to and beyond 0.90. Its predictive validity across dozens of outcomes is supported in 1000s of published peer-reviewed studies.
The percentage of published intelligence scientists who question its validity and utility as a measure of general intelligence is probably in the single digits. Criticism of the construct within the field appears to be mostly limited to activist scientists.
I'm suspending my normal prohibition against tweeting links outside published scientific literature to link you to this excellent blog post from psychologist Russell Warne.
"Although it does not take much education for humans to start classifying objects abstractly, many people in the world do not have that level of education, or the education is very low quality."
"Their thinking probably remains grounded in their everyday experience. When these people take a test that solely measures abstract thinking, they perform poorly. This does not make them stupid, nor does it indicate an intellectual disability."
"Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any ethnic group for which there are reliable data. They score 0.75 to 1.0 standard deviations above the general European average, corresponding to an IQ 112 – 115."
"This fact has social significance because IQ (as measured by IQ tests) is the best predictor we have of success in academic subjects and most jobs."
"Ashkenazi Jews are just as successful as their tested IQ would predict, and they are hugely overrepresented in occupations and fields with the highest cognitive demands."