I notice some people are confused by the term "mentally retarded". I'm using it in the common, incorrect way in the OP. Having an IQ <=70 is not mental retardation on its own.
And yes, there are datasets with PhDs who have clocked 70.
A new meta-analysis of group differences in measured IQs in Britain has been published.
Here are the results:
Here's a condensed version that just uses major groups and has 95% CIs.
Whites were the baseline (mean = 100, SD = 15) and equal variances were assumed. Splitting Whites into British (-0.01 d), Irish (0.02 d) and "White Other" (0.04) wouldn't change much.
One study estimated that being exposed to Ramadan in utero reduced the test scores of six-year-old Muslims by up to about 1 IQ point.
Ramadan involves intermittent dry fasting during the daylight hours for 29-30 days.
Opinions vary, but most will accept that pregnant women are not required to fast, and even more will agree that they are allowed to drink water.
Nevertheless, many Muslim women strictly adhere.
Whether this sort of fasting is harmful to pregnant women is contentious, precisely because there are some who believe women ought to do it for religious reasons.
The Economist has a new article out today on boosting global IQ.
It starts off in error: stating that the Flynn effect means people today are smarter than people in previous generations.
So, I'm making an article that's been in my drafts for months available to subscribers🧵
The full post will come out pared down later, in a different publication. This long version is just for paid subscribers
It explains
1. Why the Flynn effect has not indicated rising intelligence 2. Why it is irrelevant for group differences 3. Why it's not easy to adjust for it
What, ultimately, explains the Flynn effect?
The most consistent thing is test bias. The next thing is nothing, because the Flynn effect is not one thing, it is many factors that principally cause the interpretations of rather than the constructs underlying tests to change.
Do women who get offers for engineering roles get offered lower salaries due to their sex?
Thanks to the hiring platform Hired, we might know the answer!
Hired was an online recruitment platform for full-time engineering jobs in the U.S. It had high average wages (low six figure) and its recruitment process looked like this:
The salaries candidates asked for were public. The salaries companies offered (bid salaries) were given based on said asks. About a third of those bids were the asks, and most of them were close.
Their high correlation means job candidates generally got ~what they asked for.
To start, note that multiple outlets have reported that this study provided evidence that the higher the ceiling of the test-taking environment, the lower the exam scores.
Thus, 'Your poor performance might not be your fault. It's the fault of the ceilings!'
Spoiler: if you download the data, you find that the correlation is -0.0423.
You could say "Oh, the effect is small, but it could matter."
Have you ever wondered why the east sides of many British cities are such awful places to live?🧵
It might be related to these guys:
Those are chimney sweeps. Not real chimney sweeps, mind you; they're from the movie Mary Poppins.
In the real world, chimney sweeps were often a bit dirtier, with good reason. Chimneys were dirty. They bellowed smoke and made the world around them look dreary.
The worst offenders were industrial chimneys.
When the Industrial Revolution came about, coal consumption skyrocketed, making British cities incredibly dirty, because its use was putting out tons and tons of smoke, pollution, and ash through said chimneys.