Some other posters (Emil Kirkegaard and Razib Khan) have also tried to do this with SAT and GRE scores. There are also some graphs floating around on the internet, though it's uncertain whether those are accurate.
Some people are skeptical about the causality of these scores - given that the project talent IQ tests were given to teenagers, this suggests some sort of longitudinal association (therefore, probably causality)
I also calculated averages of other variables and plotted them:
I also did some other analysis: parental SES and IQ correlate at .45, which is the (exact) same correlation that was found in me and Emil's study on race and honesty. Self-reported verbal ability and verbal ability correlate at .4.
Given that extraversion by major and IQ by major were negatively correlated, I also tested whether my extraversion measurement was biased (against) high IQ individuals. Oddly enough, the opposite was true (?)
Extraversion and IQ do not correlate in most datasets, suggesting the measurement is probably contaminated. psyarxiv.com/ar6g3/
The first, obvious thing to check is whether this is due to changes in the number of conservatives and liberals over time. It's not.
The second thing to check is if this is due to right wing views becoming increasingly correlated with low intelligence or "human capital". There are several reasons not to think this is the case...
The appeal of IQ among researchers/proeugenic types is not because it's the be-all and end-all, but that it's simple (more is always better) and easy to measure.
This makes it easy to measure its value: the correlation between IQ and another well measured trait on a computer will be pretty close to the correlation in the real world. For personality traits, that will not be the case.
The ease of measure also makes testing popular theories of intelligence easy. It turns out that most of them are true: intelligent people tend to be good at their jobs, high earners, and highly educated. sci-hub.se/10.1007/978-1-…
We've been over this: that chart sucks. The rise is largely due to a sampling fluke. So Trent Sullivan analyzed three large American datasets to conclude whether sexual inequality and virginity are on the rise.
Results from the YRBS. Turns out the answer is yes.
New preprint by @KirkegaardEmil and I on national IQs 🧵
National IQs have been criticized in the literature for several reasons, with the most recent attack coming from Sear. In her piece, she claims that national IQ datasets are biased because many of the sources are based on assessments of children, and intelligence depends on age.
Well, the problem with this argument is that IQ scores are normed based on age. Becker normed the raw means from the samples based on ages. This is extremely basic knowledge, I have no idea how Sear didn't know this.
Made a compilation of IQ scores and scholastic test scores across countries harmonized to an IQ scale. Only major country that is missing is Turkmenistan.
Some of my earlier followers might find the fact that I oppose pronatalism to be confusing because I used to be a strong pronatalist. Allow me to explain myself shortly - the reason mainly has to do with AI developments.
As of now, LLMs can do many tasks: create simple programs, write letters and responses, summarize texts, and whatnot. This drastically reduces the dependence of societies on low tier White collar work.
This will not create widespread unemployment - AI still struggles to drive if my knowledge is up to date. But it will propel the same trend that has been occuring for a long time: middle class jobs gradually hollowing out. slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/19/tec…