The Flynn effect in reverse does the rot start at the top?

The IQ gains of the 20th century have faltered. Losses in Nordic nations after 1995 average at 6.85 IQ points when projected over thirty years. On Piagetian tests, Britain shows decimation among high scorers on three tests and overall losses on one. The US sustained its historic gain (0.3 points per year) through 2014. The Netherlands shows no change in preschoolers, mild losses at high school, and possible gains by adults. Australia and France offer weak evidence of losses at school and by adults respectively. German speakers show verbal gains and spatial losses among adults. South Korea, a latecomer to industrialization, is gaining at twice the historic US rate.

When a later cohort is compared to an earlier cohort, IQ trends vary dramatically by age. Piagetian trends indicate that a decimation of top scores may be accompanied by gains in cognitive ability below the median. They also reveal the existence of factors that have an atypical impact at high levels of cognitive competence. Scandinavian data from conventional tests confirm the decimation of top scorers but not factors of atypical impact. Piagetian tests may be more sensitive to detecting this phenomenon.

That is newly published research from James R. Flynn and Michael Shayer, via Rolf Degen.

Comments

Well, Micheal Flynn, Obama DIA appointee and apparent willing Russian and Turkish stooge, certainly deserves some effect named after him, for utter stupidity. There should be no need to confuse two Flynn effects, after all.

He's only stupid for lying to the FBI for something legal, as opposed to Huma who lies to them about something illegal and get away with it.

Flynn may have the last laugh though. Seems like the third of Mueller's team has self destructed. How far until it's all gone?

This is the inevitable result of uncontrolled immigration from 3rd world countries to Western countries.

Da Comrade, Obama appointee Flynn is to blame

'Michael', not "Micheal". "Utter stupidity"?

Idiocracy is looking more and more like a documentary rather than fiction. There are two plausible causes - biological and cultural. As people have fewer children as they become more educated and wealthy, we would expect that if intelligence is caused by genes (and of course it must be to some extent as chimpanzees will not learn to play the violin no matter how rich the environment) IQ should be going down. If, on the other hand, IQ tests are learned behavior then the gradual collapse of the Western education systems through the imposition of politically correct leftist pap is slowly having an effect.

There is evidence for both. The Europeans are moving away from streamed education systems in favor of comprehensive (that is, worse than useless) alternatives. They are also importing millions of illiterate Third World peasants with an unfortunate tendency to marry their cousins. Europe has been wealthy and successful. It clearly doesn't want to be any more.

Well, you can make the point even without all the unnecessary polemic ("...marrying their cousins..."). If you are Europe and take in several million people within a year or two from countries where the Flynn effect did not happen (there are numerous country specific studies), i.e. countries with lower IQs, then your own national IQ is going down. That's just how averages work.

This is ridiculous. Everyone knows that when you move people from areas with tragic dirt, to areas with the magic dirt, those people get smarter and more civilized.

In t=0, right after they cross the border, they already get smarter? (Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that there is some sort of convergence. But that is a dynamic process with many variables and unknowns and a time component)

CO was being sarcastic.

Most of the Indian H1B software techies with relatively high IQ, in the US, are from the middle / low castes of Southern India - who are notorious for cousin marriage.

In contrast, among North Indians who do not marry their cousins at any cost, the IQ is lower and outcomes inferior.

They're thoroughbreds! Works for horses.

This is the common American reaction to the Indian H1Bs. Oh, these guys have no brains, but they are mere workhorses.

From my personal interaction, most of them are atleast some 20 points higher in IQ than the average white in US. Ofcourse they give a poor account of this, with the sub-par communication skills. But very few Indian H1Bs here in US would get an IQ score below 120.

This is the common American reaction to the Indian H1Bs. Oh, these guys have no brains, but they are mere workhorses.

You are not a skilled reader.

The 6th-8th century AD Mimamsaka Kumarila Bhatta while discussing shistachara ("conduct of the wise") as a source of Dharma notes as an example of regional differences in practices that the "Dakshinas" (southerners) allow a paternal uncle to marry his niece whereas "we" (northerners) do not.

However even in areas where such a thing is allowed, there are factors that mitigate severe inbreeding. Brahmanas and many other castes have gotra (descent from a particular sage.) Marrying someone of the same gotra is considered incest. Patels of Gujarat have a rule that you cannot marry someone of the same ancestral village. And so on.

Unfortunately or not, this would apply to positive as well as negative genetic traits.

Interesting.

Where can I get this book on Shishtachara? Available in the public domain?

In the south, brahmins for the most part, don't engage in cousin marriage. Not even if it is on maternal side and gotra is different. But it is quite common in Andhra Pradesh and Tami Nadu among the rest of the castes, to this day.

He didn't write specifically about shistachara but the topic is mentioned inter alia in the shlokavarttika, his commentary on the first pada of the Mimamsa Sutras. I'm sure like most Sanskrit books it is available at Digital Library of India or some such site but I can't give you the exact details.

Also I erroneously wrote "paternal" when I meant "maternal" uncle.

Thanks. These would be the Mimamsa Sutras by Jaimini? Are there several Mimamsa Sutras?

Just learnt that Kumarila Bhatta's commentary is actually a commentary on another commentary by Sabara on Jaimini's sutras.

It is and it isn't. Kumarila is mindful of Shabaraswamis bhashya but diverges from it in many aspects.

And yes there are only one set of Purva Mimamsa sutras.

Got it.

And I guess Uttara Mimamsa Sutras are essentially Badarayana's Vedanta Sutras. Correct?

You are exceptionally well read :) Tri-state area?

There's a hidden possibility that fewer children with lower mortality is removing the selection pressure in favour of IQ. But +1 to the other points.

The rich at a given level of education have more children: The Rich Have More Kids (http://www.overcomingbias.com/2011/06/the-rich-have-more-kids.html) but more educated women have fewer children.

One theory is that they just have less time: Scientists Discover Why More Educated Women Have Fewer Children (https://jezebel.com/5818399/scientists-discover-why-more-educated-women-have-fewer-children)

The trend may be changing: Highly educated women no longer have fewer kids (http://voxeu.org/article/highly-educated-women-no-longer-have-fewer-kids)

BTW an interesting question is are we spending more that optimal amounts of time in school. I think we are.

You do understand, Floccina, that any suggestion that girls might spend more time in school than is optimal given that most women eventually do want to have children and do want to rear them, as opposed to having it done by nannies or child-care workers, is reactionary patriarchal doubleplus ungood crimethink.

Therefore I shall understand you to say that boys might spend more time in school than is optimal. So the schools are doing nothing wrong in causing the boys to quit or fail at lower levels than the girls.

Correction: lower grades than the girls. Lower levels is ambiguous.

If IQ is so important, then why does no one use it for employment?

Illegal unless you spend a ton of money. On the other hand using college as a flawed proxy of IQ+conscientiousness is free, so everyone uses it.

Illegal? Show me the law.

Does India, China, Russia, Japan, etc. also have the same law against IQ tests?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.

1. Duke Power banned blacks from working in any but the lowest paid departments in the early 1950's, in 1955 (no doubt in response to the civil rights movement) the company instituted a HS graduation requirement for employment (again most likely because it was anticipating explicit 'no blacks allowed' policies would soon be outlawed). Problem, Duke Power could simply have demonstrated the HS degree was required to do the job or even do the job well. It could not. Granted a HS degree is not the same as having a high IQ, there is a correlation no doubt on some level.

2. "The Supreme Court ruled that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, if such tests disparately impact ethnic minority groups, businesses must demonstrate that such tests are "reasonably related" to the job for which the test is required." Very simple; "we took a sample of workers and sorted them between high performing and low performing. We then administered IQ tests blind to them (meaning the administrators did not know ahead of time how the workers were ranked). We show high performing workers are highly correlated with high IQ and vice versa". Produce the data and you can have your IQ test for employment, where the hell is it?

3. Again plenty of countries have nothing of the US's Civil Rights history. If IQ tests are positively correlated to performance where is the evidence of this in countries like India, China, etc. etc.

4. There does seem to be something deeply ignorant about economics in this unsupported theory that IQ is the path to high GDP. Are all of its advocates ignorant about returns to trade and diminishing marginal returns? In a world of Einsteins, Einsteins will clean toilets. Does that make GDP any higher because the guy cleaning toilets has 20 more IQ points? For a higher quality cultural reference, see the Rick and Morty episode "The Ricklantis Mixup" (http://rickandmorty.wikia.com/wiki/The_Ricklantis_Mixup).

College graduation rates neatly sort people into intelligence and application capability, so they are much more useful than a simple test that might last only a few minutes like most "IQ" tests. The problem with these tests is that they are noisy at an individual level, so dumb people can score above average purely by chance. The chance you can be dumb and lazy and graduate from a prestigious university in a STEM subject is pretty low however, so employees all the world around use this system. Perhaps there is some other less wasteful way to identify talent, but if so we haven't identified it.

There have been other, similar cases in the US as well. Can Boonton say, "chilling effect"?

I'm not impressed with 'chilling effect'. If business felt IQ correlated well with performance they would have done the work to establish that.

ChrisA

It sounds like you're saying IQ doesn't matter. Well actually you're saying IQ does matter but it can't be measured on the individual level so instead college is being used as a proxy?

Many jobs ask for SAT/GRE scores which is close enough. Testing is costly to companies, and given the variation on any one test it's best to let future employees do the sorting themselves via standardized test scores, gpa, and major.

Many jobs ask for SAT/GRE scores which is close enough. Testing is costly to companies, and given the variation on any one test it’s best to let future employees do the sorting themselves via standardized test scores, gpa, and major.

1. I have not encountered anyone whose ever been asked for their SAT scores ten years since they took them, I doubt it even comes up 5 years after college. To be honest I don't even remember my SAT scores and I believe they even changed the way they scored it so would it matter if I did?

2. Testing is very cheap, cheap enough that colleges can get away with demanding it so why can't employers? Do you want to try to research what it costs to take a certified test like the GRE versus what corporations pay headhunters and other recruiting expenses?

There is a rich history of litigation over this issue. No one is going to stick their neck out over this. The connection between IQ and job performance is very well established in the literature, but right now we have an equilibrium that works okay. Non one is going to engage in costly litigation and face a PR nightmare to slightly improve recruitment. No small business obviously can afford to do that or reasonably expect applicants to submit an IQ test in any case.

There is no rich history of either litigation or literature. If IQ was a good predictor of job performance then at the very least non-US companies would be using it on a regular basis and enjoying a clear competitive advantage. A small business wouldn't have to spend money to administer an IQ test anymore than it would have to create an in house college. If it was worth it, an employer could simply require applicants to submit their IQ score and a 3rd party could verify that they administered the test and this was the score. This is what happens when people apply to jobs and list their degree.

I come late to this discussion. There is no "Reply" button below below the posts to which reply; I am resorting to the button above; I hope but am not sure that this post will appear below.

Mr. Boonton demands to know by what law IQ tests may not be safely used by employers but college degrees may. Mr. Colt cites Griggs v. Duke Power, then Mr. Boonton tries to Interwebs-lawyer it away.

I shall not counter-Interwebs-lawyer. I merely observe what actual lawyers, who professionally observe what courts decide and write, think the law requires them to advise their client-employers: college degrees are a "safe harbor," but eschew IQ tests, though the latter are theoretically legal.

Of course, the information a college degree actually conveys about its holder may be no more than that he was admitted, a rough-and-ready race-normed IQ test. That's a fabulously expensive way to test IQ. But judges permit it without employers bearing the unbearable burden of proof in discrimination cases, so for employers it's net the cheapest way. This tax's economic incidence falls largely on the employment candidates and their parents. This way lies mandarinate.

You can say what you want about 'internet lawyers' but the fact is the case that was cited had nothing to do with IQ tests. It was about a power plant that had previous an explicit policy of banning the hiring of blacks suddenly declaring a HS Degree was required for all positions whereas before no such requirement was deemed essential. "Disparate impact" is applicable if you are talking about using metrics as proxies for race. It doesn't mean no variable that lacks some perfect idealized race representation is permitted. If you think about it almost all variables that are commonly used in the job market, recommendations, experience, work history, education, lack of criminal record, credit score, etc. can be said to have a disparate impact yet they are used all the time.

Here lack of evidence is pretty damming IMO. The reason you can't find actual cases or laws is not because lawyers are telling businesses don't bother with IQ tests, it's that almost no business thinks IQ testing would be a useful way to hire. In fact the only example that comes to my mind is an opposite one...a police department gave applicants IQ tests and rejected the top scores on the theory that since the job can be mind numbingly boring, a high-IQ person would get too bored too soon and lose focus (and even that's just speculation, I'm not aware of anyone whose has shown cops that goof off are more likely to be above rather than below average IQ).

Of course, the information a college degree actually conveys about its holder may be no more than that he was admitted, a rough-and-ready race-normed IQ test. That’s a fabulously expensive way to test IQ. But judges permit it without employers bearing the unbearable burden of proof in discrimination cases, so for employers it’s net the cheapest way. This tax’s economic incidence falls largely on the employment candidates and their parents. This way lies mandarinate.

So the college degree, in your view, is kind of like an imperfect filter. Sort of like a guy who watches thousands of potatoes running down a chute whose job it is to pluck out any rotten ones. He probably takes a few rotten ones out but that's hardly a guarantee everything that ends up on the other side is good to eat.

But if this was the case wouldn't the income differentials for having higher degrees diminish over time? Go 5 or 10 years out and a person has started building up a decent work history so you don't need to rely on the college degree to tell you if he is rotten or not. Yet I believe we see the opposite.

This whole convo is based on some false premises:

1) The Griggs v. Duke Power case does not ban aptitude tests. It does, however, place some onus on the company using them to be prepared to prove that the tests are strongly correlated to job performance, have been developed professionaly (as opposed to a presumably half-assed job done by non-experts), and are applied fairly.

2) These hurdles in practice mean that there is some expense and hassle on the part of the company in utilizing such tests. You want to insulate yourself from questions of bias and lack of professional supervision by using outside professionals to design it and possibly to administer it, you want to try and administer the test early in the application process, and the question of cutoff scores is a problem. (I.e. If you have an applicant that scored 105 and your hard cutoff is 106, is he really utterly incapable of doing the job?)

3) Despite all of that, tests are actually utilized frequently. They do tend to be more domain specific that an IQ test, for the reasons cited above, and they tend to include personality components because conscientiousness is a meaningful determinant of job performance but is not covered by traditional IQ tests. Also, given the hassle and expense, they tend to get utilized where there's more bang-for-the-buck, at higher echelons of management or technical positions.

It sounds like you are saying IQ may not be very good as a way to predict employee performance. If that is the case then the answer isn't so much desperate impact but simply that it doesn't work.

There's a knock on consequence to this, it doesn't work for economies either. If hiring by IQ so your average workforce IQ goes up 5% cannot be relied upon to increase a business's performance, that implies collectively increasing IQ 5% is unlikely to impact the national economy much. If, as you say, other things like testing behavior or domain specific knowledge works better, then economically if you had only one program to choose....IQ boosting or everything else boosting,...it makes sense to opt the everything else.

OK so this thread is dying but in the interest of securing real data, I posted this question on Quora: https://www.quora.com/unanswered/For-lawyers-how-important-is-your-score-the-bar-Do-employers-ask-your-score-Does-it-matter-even-5-10-15-years-or-more-after-initially-taking-and-passing-the-bar

1. Would any law firm fear litigation if they used scores on the bar in hiring decisions? I doubt it.

2. Does having a high IQ help you pass the bar with a higher rather than lower score? Probably

3. To the degree a high score on the bar signals anything other than IQ, it would be knowledge of law so if ever there was a case that IQ mattered and is useful in hiring decisions it would be here absent actually finding an industry that uses professionally administered IQ tests in the US or somewhere else.

I suspect the answers from lawyers are going to range from the score barely matters as long as you pass to it matters a bit when you're first starting as a lawyer and have no experience behind you.

But here's the thing, it should matter if IQ matters. If a firm is considering two equal lawyers with ten years experience then the bar exam score should be a tie-breaker if IQ really matters and if it matters in the long run.

Apparently, as Mr. Boonton says, I can say anything I want about Interwebs-lawyering (an intentional malapropism as a pejorative, so stet, dammit) and do it without it having any effect on Mr. Boonton, who is proof against evidence from the world around him. He is only open to what he regards as logical argument.

This is not altogether idiosyncratic blinkered stubbornness. His remote ancestor in this epistemological view is no less than David Hume, if not Plato. But it is blinkered stubbornness. As Dr. Johnson said, kicking a rock, of a similar argument of Bishop Berkeley, "I refute it thus."

If IQ is so important, then why does no one use it for employment?

I'm surprised that no one said, because educational attainment includes IQ and is much better than IQ because it also measures diligence and conformity. If you only measure IQ you end up those who have the ability to do well in school but did not because they are rebels. Rebels do not usually make good employees.

Rebels do not usually make good employees

Didn't Bill Gates drop out of Harvard?

I think this is a problem with harping on IQ, which I think many people do because they think doing so demonstrates they are smarter than 'political correctness'.

What you are saying is educational attainment is a combination of IQ and 'diligence'. So that means someone who lacks one may be able to offset by going above average with the other. Let's say attainment is 1.00, perhaps an average person achieves that through 0.50 IQ and 0.50 diligence. But someone with only 0.25 IQ might offset it by being 0.75 diligent. It's possible to go very far in academics with diligence. If you are willing to sit and memorize long lists, for example, that's a huge positive...especially in STEM fields. So let's take medicine.

Say 4 doctors are 50-50 in terms of achieving their degree via splitting IQ and diligence. Doctor 5 is .25/.75. The 'average IQ' of doctors drops from 0.5 to 0.45, a loss of 5%, by adding doctor 5 to the mix. But should you be concerned?

Off the top of my head, if I was running a hospital I'm not at all clear that adding doctor 5 will hurt output. In fact, I could imagine a positive synergy where the doctor who relies upon systematically following procedures offsets 'hot shot' doctors who go off on speculative tangents because of their high IQ resulting in better output than if you relied only one one type of doctor.

I agree that there are biological and cultural factors, but don't ignore the moral and spiritual factors. Consider these little noticed verses from Romans 1:

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
...
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

Strong's dictionary defines "without understanding" this way:

ajsuvnetoß Asunetos (as-oon'-ay-tos);
Word Origin: Greek, Adjective, Strong #: 801
unintelligent, without understanding, stupid
KJV Word Usage and Count
without understanding 3
foolish 2

The Progressive SJW's are nothing if not implacable and unmerciful, and that goes along with them being sofa king stupid, in my opinion.

The abstract is pretty poorly written and all the focus on country by country data and subsets of country by country data seems suspect. Flynn is in his 80s. Perhaps that is where the decline is?

I have no problem with words' meanings changing over time, but has the word "decimation" come to refer to any reduction, no matter how small? And is it such an apt word in this context that it needs to be used three times in the same abstract?

It's odd, isn't it? Why would Europeans execute one in ten of their clever-clogs? Why should I pay any attention to somebody who has such a tin ear for language?

Ha, I was just looking it up, I figured it meant something specific - beyond taking a tenth - to all you smart stats-speakers.

No?

Here's a word for you to study: hyperbole. Usage example: Hyperbole can be used for emphasis.

Simple bullshit in high heels and fishnet stockings. The "average" IQ of a country, even if it could be determined in reality, is meaningless. It can't be used to predict the supposed intelligence of any particular individual that's encountered in a coffee shop or super market. It can't predict the popularity of a television show or movie. Aspects of the culture itself might be more important in assessing the mental issues of a country. Does rap music indicate intellectual advancement? Are fans of Vin Diesel more likely to design a successful space vehicle than Sean Connery buffs?

There's obviously a difference in the mental capacities of individual humans but even defining the parameters of the differences is an impossible task. However, the obsession with collective intelligence here at MR is an indication that there's a unfulfilled desire for the classification of groups of individuals into hierarchies ranked according to perceived intelligence. That's racism by a different standard.

agree -- total BS. (luv that they can measure average IQ with 2 decimal point accuracy)

Why does TC post this junk with no disclaimer at all?
TC often caveats posts as "speculative", or indicates a specific posted reference is not his position. Thus, one might readily assume he nominally endorses all non-caveated posts. (or maybe it's just mindless blog fodder to fill space?)

That's for sure that you cannot predict any individual level story out of an aggregate number. But only a fool would claim that. The same with e.g. a countrywide literacy rate that the WB or the IMF reports. That does not imply the number is meaningless. In fact when it comes to how a society in its aggregate evolves over time and generations it matters quite a lot. So does the aggregate intellectual capacity.

The measurement is a different story, fair point. It is certainly more like guesstimates with a certain margin of error in both directions. But so is GDP for instance...

Is IQ used to predict the popularity of TV show or movie?? That show the IQ of the commenter. So IQ measure must be true.

There’s obviously a difference in the mental capacities of individual humans but even defining the parameters of the differences is an impossible task.

Impossible? One would think the obvious place to start would be actually testing people to see how they perform on different mental tasks. And then, after you've done that for dozens of different mental tasks over large numbers of people, you could use statistics to check the correlations between the tests to see what patterns emerge. And then you could develop hypotheses based on that, and sit down and do more testing to try to disprove those hypotheses, and reject the ones that don't survive the experiments. And, say, spend a century doing it.

Of course, after all that work was done, if someone felt the results that actually survived testing were ideologically uncongenial, he might refuse to accept reality, and post facto declare what people have already successfully done is somehow "impossible". But such willful fools would deserve no more respect than, say, Flat Earthers, Young Earth Creationists, or Lysenkoists.

Have you read "Hive Mind" by Garrett Smith?

It's troubling to me that anyone out there could have an opinion like this, let alone all these people giving "+1". How would you ever come to the conclusion that average IQ of a country doesn't matter? Hive Mind directly addresses this point and finds exactly the contrary, with plenty of supporting evidence. If you disagree with the literature for some reason, I would expect some explanation of why, otherwise the most obvious answer for your opinion is a state of ignorance, shared by those who agree and apparently can't recognize a poorly reasoned position and want to sign their names to it without further comment or improvement.

Whole lot of people here who don't know anything about basic statistics.

It strikes me that IQ and inequality are on divergent paths: global IQ is rising while national IQ is falling, and global inequality is falling while national inequality is rising. He say I know you, you know me. One thing I can tell you is you got to be free. Come together right now over me.

Good news, everyone!

IQ is malleable.

Now to get it going the other way again.

All human traits are malleable -- ask Procrustes.

But if this finding is true and the cause is biological, getting it going the other way will require killing or otherwise eliminating from reproduction all the low IQ people. Are you sure that's what you want to do?

If this finding is true and the cause is cultural, getting it going the other way will require suppressing the cultures of low IQ people. Are you sure that's what you want to do?

There are many more forms of "biological" than just "heritable."

https://twitter.com/drannehuang/status/939296957583028225

On cultures, I don't think any are fixed or original. All evolve, some positively.

Your link talks about poverty in America (and doesn't mention IQ.) The study Tyler mentions was done in Scandinavia. Is there an increase in poverty over there?

On culture, I agree some evolve positively. Some evolve negatively. What do you intend to do about them?

From the linked study,

"Conclusions and Relevance: The influence of poverty on children’s learning and achievement is mediated by structural brain development. To avoid long-term costs of impaired academic functioning, households below 150% of the federal poverty level should be targeted for additional resources aimed at remediating early childhood environments."

If that is not about IQ, then IQ has a problem.

On culture, I will scold the bad ones. I find this most effective. All change their bad ways in 6-10 years.

Look for a Trumpian in 10 years. I dare you.

It's not about IQ it's about academic achievement which is related but not the same thing. And I still want to know, is poverty increasing in Scandinavia? If not, why is the Flynn effect dropping over there?

Scolding the bad ones is Charles Murray's preferred tactic but he has been complaining that there is no national will to actually do that so he would applaud your efforts. I will note that the kind of cultures which are mired in poverty in the US have been so for more than 6-10 years so you have your work cut out for you.

(And this might be an inopportune moment to mention it, but I voted for Donald Trump ;-)

@Jaldhar

In general, if you ask about increased poverty in Scandinavia, google is your friend!

In specific, Oslo has clearly much more beggars than it used to,with my observations going back to 1980. When I do go back there, I notice increased prosperity and consumption.

Hmm. I don't know how anyone can see impacts on structural brain development which impact cognitive function and say "but that is not IQ." I would be more likely to see successful brain development as a necessary element.

And on your Trump vote and the culture you have wrought:

https://twitter.com/ByRosenberg/status/939365633266823168

Shame on you.

@Viking

FWIW these are the top 5 results for a google (well, Bing) search on "Increase in poverty in Scandinavia"

* Why There is Less Poverty in Scandinavia - BORGEN
* Denmark, Finland, and Sweden are proof that poverty in the US doesn't have to be this high
* Poverty on the Rise in Danish Welfare State - Sputnik
* America Has Less Poverty Than Sweden - Forbes
* Child poverty increases in Sweden: report - The Local

The furthest I got in Northern Europe was a one week conference in Helsinki and a layover at Copenhagen airport but in London I remember most of the beggars were Eastern European or African. Is this the case in Oslo too in your experience?

Bah MRs software destroyed my bullet list. Sorry here it is again.

* Why There is Less Poverty in Scandinavia – BORGEN

* Denmark, Finland, and Sweden are proof that poverty in the US doesn’t have to be this high

* Poverty on the Rise in Danish Welfare State – Sputnik

* America Has Less Poverty Than Sweden – Forbes

* Child poverty increases in Sweden: report – The Local

@ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ

Well whaddayouknow Bryan Caplan is deplorable too.

As for the difference between IQ or cognitive development in general and academic achievement. I dropped out of college (Columbia University) before it was cool during the dot-com era. Years later I did go on to complete a degree in CS from a state college in New Jersey but only because in my community it is socially unacceptable to not have a degree. What economic success I've had (and I'm far above the poverty line) has been due to my IQ not my woeful academic record.

Citing one random study is not persuasive to me. It could very well be correct or it could be methodologically flawed or otherwise unreplicable. I'm sure there is a rich literature to draw from on that topic. Haven't there been many studies of the effect of SES in childhood and generally the effect is little if any? Is this study able to separate genetic from environmental causes?

Could the aging of populations be having an effect?

Could it have to do with the fact that these countries are importing low IQ, third-world migrants en masse? Yes.

I’ll go with this too. Now it’s of course good for the new immigrants, and certainly for their children, but is it good for the “accepting” country? Here opinions diverge.

Keep in mind that a country isn’t designed to be a charity.

What would that have to do with the top IQ scores?

Different groups of humans have different mean IQs. This is shocking to many people but it is entirely scientifically uncontroversial. Everyone in the psychometric field agrees on this. In general in the US, from high to low, IQ is grouped Asian, whites, Hispanics, African Americans. This is average, individuals vary all across the IQ spectrum.

The US notion of races is varied and groups are way too large. Subgroups of these vary a lot also. Askenazi Jews have about the highest group mean IQ (115!) and I suspect the trading castes in various ethnicities (Han diaspora, Lebanese diaspora, trading castes of Indians) have similar mean IQs because of selection pressures.

Read Steve Sailer.

Yes yes we all know you want to pat yourself on the back for 'edgy' race theories and being open to a politically incorrect view of IQ and race. But that has nothing to do with what I asked. This story is about the *top* IQ scores going down. If a country was importing lower IQ people, that would impact the average but not require the top scores go down.

Look at it another way, the fact that the US is getting more obese and out of shape doesn't mean its Olympic teams are less athletic.

You have to ask yourself, what is the function of intelligence?

https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/939335414288211968

If
- Euro nations are declining in average IQ, especially in Scandinavia
- the decline is driven by lower IQs "at the top"
- the US is fine

I'm going to blame immigration of high-IQ Euros to the US.

That makes sense. Perhaps best comment in thread.

Only problem is that US's iq is not going up to compensate the fall of Euro's IQ.

The OECD PISA tests say the opposite. The US is falling behind, both on average and top scorer

Spin those wheels!

Based on rather more than 10% of comments above, IQ decimation is proceeding apace at MR.

To me this seems to suggest that IQ is simply not a very worthwhile metric, and that we don't really even know what it measures.

But you would say that regardless of the findings.

Go ahead, tell me what it measures, without resort to the tautology of "intelligence" or changing the subject to the SAT. And explain why the numbers increase over time -- after all, do you really think you're that much smarter than your Mom?

Numbers increase over time because people become better trained to perform tests on paper as years of schooling increase and paperwork increases as well. Same reason why Japan and South Korea's IQ is so high: they are the ones who spend the highest amount of time studying/working on paperwork.

IQ can be though as a measure of "paper work skills": how effectively people can master/reproduce a set of instructions written on paper. Since our modern society is mainly based around that type of skill for distinguishing high earning occupations from low earning occupations.

IQ's stopped improving after 1995 thanks to the internet as people now spend less time studying and working on paper and more time looking on facebook. Also, attention spans and capacity for concentration declined with smartphones.

"IQ can be though as a measure of “paper work skills”: how effectively people can master/reproduce a set of instructions written on paper. "

Where did you come up with this novel theory? Any empirical basis?

Oh, yeah, you know, totally worthless....apart from its massive predictive value about life outcomes, income, criminality etc....

The Sailer fallacy, measuring an individual's innate ability to attend a good school.

Of course studies control for education, otherwise they would be worthless

Best comment.

Not if you are familiar with the science.

This seems like a good place to leave (FWIW) Steve Sailers IQ FAQ - http://www.unz.com/isteve/my-iq-faq/

Already asked and answered.

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/05/why-steve-saile.html

The comments to that post are interesting.

BTW as we get richer doesn't it make sense that we should work less hard, including on learning?

Precisely. IQ measures how trained on paper work people are, so the world's richest countries are becoming rich enough to afford to be "dumb".

This is the application of r/K reproductive theory to humans.

If only for its comedic value. "If we cherry-pick the studies showing a high correlation between SAT and IQ, and we assume that other personality traits associated with life success are a result of IQ, and we adjust for the inexplicable drift of IQ scores over time, then we can make a few predictions about groups." It would be interesting to study belief in IQ and to measure correlation with conspiracy theory.

Should have been a reply to the Sailer FAQ entry. Low IQ on my part, I guess.

I think you might find quite a high correlation between "not believing in IQ" and belief in conspiracy theories, since that would in fact be a conspiracy theory akin to climate change denialism.

We are also running out of coal. Coal and IQ mean the demise of our civilization as we know it.

We're running out of coal?

What about a shift to higher carb and sugar diets? Plenty of evidence to suggest a vegan diet is problematic for the brain.

I am going with noisy measurements on smallish samples as the answer to this conundrum.

It's a good thing Mind has nothing to do with Brain and therefore the capacity for abstraction and complex thinking is safely independent of genetics. All we have to do is tweak the exogenous inputs and achieve equality of educational outcomes and ability to function in technologically advanced society. Really, it's all the same goop inside everybody's skull, right?

We could put everybody in the same room listening to the same material for six hours a day and voila, a whole society of Einsteins. We could even periodically measure these "students" with "grades" and use "tests," call them, say, the "Scholastic Aptitude Test" or the "Graduate Record Examination" and confirm the thesis. I'm surprised this hasn't already been done.

The Flynn effect is mostly bogus. In addition to intelligence, IQ tests measure the ability to take tests and to deal with abstract concepts. The result is a combination of all those factors. Longer years of schooling during the 20th century meant more people had additional experience with test taking and with abstractions. You don't learn those growing up on a farm feeding chickens and milking cows. You do sitting in a classroom.

Eventually the impact of that additional time spent sitting in schoolroom desks had to run out. It has. What we're seeing now is a reverse Flynn effect. More and more people have been credentialed to repeat back what they've been taught to such a great extent that they cannot think independently, as these tests deman. They have also been taught to value abstractions over than concrete realities to an extent that their actual intelligence is dropping.

It's perhaps to the credit of these IQ tests that they still measure intelligence well enough that they are measuring its decline—in a practical sense—due to deficiencies created by increased education.

A basic law of biology is that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

The correlation between brain size and IQ across 25 primate species is 0.77 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated).

Structural imaging of total brain gray and white matter volumes is perhaps the most obvious approach to correlate brain measures with general intelligence (Toga et al, 2005). Brain structure measured from MRI correlates with intelligence test scores as total brain volume (Gignac et al. 2003), as do the volumes of individual lobes and aggregate gray and white matter volumes (Posthuma et al. 2002).

www.loni.usc.edu/~thompson/PDF/TT_ARN05.pdf

Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average one cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average five cubic inches more than Blacks.

In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

Brain Weight by Race:

         •   Blacks   =   1261 g
         •   Whites   =   1387 g
         •   Asians   =   1374 g

Brain Size by Race:

         •   Blacks   =   1267 cm³
         •   Whites   =   1347 cm³
         •   Asians   =   1364 cm³

Whites' brains are faster, larger, denser, and more complex than Blacks' brains:

         •   7% larger
         •   126 grams heavier
         •   deeper fissuration in the frontal and occipital regions
         •   more complex convolutions
         •   larger frontal lobes
         •   more pyramidal neurons
         •   16% thicker supra-grandular layer
         •   one standard deviation more cerebrum
         •   react faster on mental chronometry tests
         •   600 million more neurons

Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians.

Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things.

Black babies spend the least time in the womb. 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children.

Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

MILESTONE: Being drawn up into a sitting position, able to prevent the head from falling backwards:

         Black: Nine hours
         White: Six weeks

MILESTONE: With head held firmly, looking at the face of the examiner:

         Black: Two days
         White: Eight weeks

MILESTONE: Supporting self in a sitting position and watching own reflection in a mirror:

         Black: Seven weeks
         White: Twenty weeks

MILESTONE: Holding self upright:

         Black: Five months
         White: Nine months

MILESTONE: Climbing the steps alone:

         Black: 11 months
         White: 15 months

Sources:

(Wilson, 1978). Also see (Levin, 1997; Freedman, 1969). "...the kinesthetic maturation rate of Black infants was two or three times that of White children." (Simpson, 2003). Faster maturation goes along with a shorter life span. In 2002, Black Americans had 40.5% more deaths than they would have had with the White mortality rate. (A 2005 report by former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher). The bodies of Blacks mature faster. (İşcan, 1987).

In 1959, the American Association on Mental Deficiency (AAMD) set the IQ threshold for retardation at 85. The civil rights movement of the next decade forced psychologists to rethink this boundary, because half of the Black population fell below it. In 1973, responding to this concern, AAMD (by then AAMR) changed the threshold from IQ 85 to IQ 70, a reduction of one standard deviation. The proportion of Blacks below the threshold instantly dropped from 50 percent to 12 percent.

Blacks score so poorly on intelligence tests that in a class-action lawsuit (Larry P. v. Riles, 1979), the court held that IQ tests were not valid for Blacks and banned California from using the tests for placing Black students in classes for the "educable mentally retarded" on the grounds that the tests were biased. After a series of appeals, the district court ruled that no education-related purposes exist for which IQ tests could be administered to Black pupils.

An analysis of 11,878 youths (including 3,022 Blacks) from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth found that most 17-year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test, regardless of ethnic background, went on to occupational success by their late 20s and early 30s, whereas those with low scores were more inclined to welfare dependency. The study also found that the average IQ for African Americans was lower as compared to those for other groups such as Latino, White, Asian, and Jewish Americans. Their scores ranged from 85 to 113. Individual scores were as follows: Black Americans-85, Latino-89, White-103, Asian-106, and Jewish Americans with 113. (Herrnstein & Murray 1994, pp. 273–278)

Currently, the 1.1 standard deviation difference (16 IQ points) in average IQ between American Blacks (average 24% White admixture) and Whites in the United States is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. A meta-analytic review by Roth, Bevier, Bobko, Switzer, and Tyler (2001) showed it also holds for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT; N=2.4 million) and the Graduate Record Examination (GRE; N=2.3 million), as well as for tests for job applicants in corporate settings (N=0.5 million) and in the military (N=0.4 million). Because test scores are the best predictor of economic success in Western society (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), these group differences have important societal outcomes (R. A. Gordon, 1997; Gottfredson, 1997).

Changes over time in the black–white difference on mental tests: Evidence from the children of the 1979 cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth

-Charles Murray, 2008

Data for three Peabody achievement tests and for the Peabody picture vocabulary test administered to children of women in the 1979 cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth show that the black–white difference did not diminish for this sample of children born from the mid 1970s through the mid 1990s. This finding persists after entering covariates for the child’s age and family background variables. It is robust across alternative samples and specifications of the model. The analysis supplements other evidence that shows no narrowing of the black–white difference in academic achievement tests since the late 1980s and is inconsistent with recent evidence that narrowing occurred in IQ standardizations during the same period.

It is worth noting that the actual black-white IQ gap is probably larger than 15 IQ points. Studies are based on school samples, thus omitting high school dropouts while there are more blacks than whites who drop out of high school. Studies also omit the prisoners since incarcerated offenders have lower IQ than the public at large (The Bell Curve, p. 242) while there are more blacks than whites incarcerated in prisons. Rushton made the assumption that educational researchers seldom get to examine the very lowest scoring segments of the Black population in inner cities and that the actual black-white IQ gap could be underestimated given that an IQ of 71 was found for the Black children in an entire school district from a rural county in Georgia in the U. S. Deep South; the White IQ in the same county was 101.

IQ and Immigration Policy:

http://delong.typepad.com/pdf-1.pdf

Not Sending Their Best:

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/not-sending-their-best/

IQ correlates strongly to job performance, wealth, income, economic growth, livability, cooperation, life expectancy, and infant mortality.

The average national IQ of the world is only 90. Fewer than one in five nations have National IQs of 100. Almost half have National IQs of 90 or less.

Google: National IQs

It is estimated that a National IQ of 90 is threshold for a technological economy:

African Black (IQ 67) + White (IQ 102) = American Black, 24% White admixture (IQ 85).

The more White a society is the more safe and prosperous it is.

National IQ correlates at 0.73 with living standard.

For each one-point increase in a country’s average IQ, the per capita GDP was $229 higher, and can go up to $468 higher for each additional point.

Each 10 point increase in IQ generally doubles economic growth, assuming the country has a market economy.

The following intelligence scores came from work carried out earlier this decade by Richard Lynn, a British psychologist, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish political scientist, who analysed IQ studies from 113 countries, and from subsequent work by Jelte Wicherts, a Dutch psychologist. The study was published in IQ and the Wealth of Nations and has nearly a a thousand cites. Lynn and Vanhanen benchmarked their IQ results so that Britain is 100. America scores 98 on this scale, and the world average is 90.

Do you observe a pattern?

          •   108      Singapore
          •   106      South Korea
          •   105      Japan
          •   105      China
          •   102      Italy
          •   101      Iceland
          •   101      Mongolia
          •   101      Switzerland
          •   100      Austria
          •   100      Luxembourg
          •   100      Netherlands
          •   100      Norway
          •   100      United Kingdom
          •   99        Belgium
          •   99        Canada
          •   99        Estonia
          •   99        Finland
          •   99        Germany
          •   99        New Zealand
          •   99        Poland
          •   99        Sweden
          •   98        Andorra
          •   98        Australia
          •   98        Czech Republic
          •   98        Denmark
          •   98        France
          •   98        Hungary
          •   98        Latvia
          •   98        Spain
          •   98        United States
          •   97        Belarus
          •   97        Malta
          •   97        Russia
          •   97        Ukraine
          •   96        Moldova
          •   96        Slovakia
          •   96        Slovenia
          •   96        Uruguay
          •   95        Israel
          •   95        Portugal
          •   94        Armenia
          •   94        Georgia
          •   94        Kazakhstan
          •   94        Romania
          •   94        Vietnam
          •   93        Argentina
          •   93        Bulgaria
          •   92        Greece
          •   92        Ireland
          •   92        Malaysia
          •   91        Brunei
          •   91        Cambodia
          •   91        Cyprus
          •   91        Lithuania
          •   91        Thailand
          •   90        Albania
          •   90        Bosnia
          •   90        Chile
          •   90        Croatia
          •   90        Kyrgyzstan
          •   90        Turkey
          •   89        Cook Islands
          •   89        Costa Rica
          •   89        Laos
          •   89        Mauritius
          •   89        Serbia
          •   89        Suriname
          •   88        Ecuador
          •   88        Mexico
          •   88        Samoa
          •   87        Azerbaijan
          •   87        Bolivia
          •   87        Brazil
          •   87        Guyana
          •   87        Indonesia
          •   87        Iraq
          •   87        Myanmar
          •   87        Tajikistan
          •   87        Turkmenistan
          •   87        Uzbekistan
          •   86        Kuwait
          •   86        Philippines
          •   86        Seychelles
          •   86        Tonga
          •   85        Cuba
          •   85        Eritrea
          •   85        Fiji
          •   85        Kiribati
          •   85        Peru
          •   85        Trinidad and Tobago
          •   85        Yemen
          •   84        Afghanistan
          •   84        Bahamas
          •   84        Belize
          •   84        Colombia
          •   84        Iran
          •   84        Jordan
          •   84        Marshall Islands
          •   84        Micronesia
          •   84        Morocco
          •   84        Nigeria
          •   84        Pakistan
          •   84        Panama
          •   84        Paraguay
          •   84        Saudi Arabia
          •   84        Solomon Islands
          •   84        Uganda
          •   84        United Arab Emirates
          •   84        Vanuatu
          •   84        Venezuela
          •   83        Algeria
          •   83        Bahrain
          •   83        Libya
          •   83        Oman
          •   83        New Guinea
          •   83        Syria
          •   83        Tunisia
          •   82        Bangladesh
          •   82        Dominican Republic
          •   82        India
          •   82        Lebanon
          •   82        Madagascar
          •   82        Zimbabwe
          •   81        Egypt
          •   81        Honduras
          •   81        Maldives
          •   81        Nicaragua
          •   80        Barbados
          •   80        Bhutan
          •   80        El Salvador
          •   80        Kenya
          •   79        Guatemala
          •   79        Sri Lanka
          •   79        Zambia
          •   78        Congo
          •   78        Nepal
          •   78        Qatar
          •   77        South Africa
          •   76        Cape Verde
          •   76        Congo
          •   76        Mauritania
          •   76        Senegal
          •   74        Mali
          •   74        Namibia
          •   73        Ghana
          •   72        Tanzania
          •   71        Central African Republic
          •   71        Grenada
          •   71        Jamaica
          •   71        St Vincent, Grenadines
          •   71        Sudan
          •   70        Antigua, Barbuda
          •   70        Benin
          •   70        Botswana
          •   70        Rwanda
          •   70        Togo
          •   69        Burundi
          •   69        Cote d'Ivoire
          •   69        Ethiopia
          •   69        Malawi
          •   69        Niger
          •   68        Angola
          •   68        Burkina Faso
          •   68        Chad
          •   68        Djibouti
          •   68        Somalia
          •   68        Swaziland
          •   67        Dominica
          •   67        Guinea
          •   67        Guinea-Bissau
          •   67        Haiti
          •   67        Lesotho
          •   67        Liberia
          •   67        Saint Kitts
          •   67        Sao Tome
          •   66        Gambia
          •   64        Cameroon
          •   64        Gabon
          •   64        Sierra Leone
          •   64        Mozambique
          •   62        Saint Lucia
          •   59        Equatorial Guinea

ACT Scores by Race:

       Year              White             Black               Asian
       2009              22.2               16.9                 23.2
       2010              22.3               16.9                 23.4
       2011              22.4               17.0                 23.6
       2012              22.4               17.0                 23.6
       2013              22.2               16.9                 23.5
       2014              22.3               17.0                 23.5
       2015              22.4               17.1                 23.9
      
Source: ACT, Inc.

~~~~~~~

Black-White SAT Score Gap by Year:

       Year              White             Black               Gap
       1985              1038               839                 199
       1990              1031               849                 185
       1996              1052               857                 195
       2000              1060               859                 201
       2005              1061               863                 197
       2010              1063               855                 208
       2015              1047               846                 201

(Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, 2016)

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

The SAT correlates with an IQ test at 0.86, almost the same as an IQ test correlates with itself. For this reason, we can very reliably take SAT scores and convert them to IQ scores.

In the 20 year period from 1994-2014 the Black-White difference increased on both the verbal and math SATs. On the reading test, it rose from .91 to .96 standard deviations. On the math test, it rose from .95 to 1.03 standard deviations.

In 2015 only 15% of Blacks scored 1550 or higher, the threshold the College Board calls the "college and career readiness" level.

In fact, the truncated nature of the SAT math score distribution suggests that these race gaps would be even larger given a harder exam with a bigger score variance. Note for example how the black score distribution is cut off at the bottom while the Asian score distribution is cut off at the top. That suggests that a redesigned exam might feature even more pronounced race gaps.

Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:

                 15% = Black
                 24% = Non-White Hispanic
                 35% = Native American
                 53% = White
                 56% = Asian

Source: The College Board, 2014

New York Times, 2003:

Large-scale meta-analyses by researchers at the University of Minnesota have found that SAT performance is as good of a predictor of overall college grade point average as it is of freshman grade point average, and Vanderbilt researchers David Lubinski and Camilla Benbow have documented that the SAT predicts life outcomes well beyond the college years, including income and occupational achievements.

Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching, or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section.

Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search scored in the top 1 percent on the SAT by the age of 13. Scores on the SAT correlate so highly with I.Q. that they are described as a "thinly disguised" intelligence test. The remarkable finding of their study is that, compared with the participants who were "only" in the 99.1 percentile for intellectual ability at age 12, those who were in the 99.9 percentile — the profoundly gifted — were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, secure a patent, publish an article in a scientific journal or publish a literary work. A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage.

The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test

"The racial scoring gap on the SAT test has now become wider than has been the case for the past two decades. Many believe that in the years to come the gap may grow smaller, not because blacks are catching up to whites in educational achievement, but rather because the test makers are adding a writing component to the test that may be manipulated to lessen racial differences and therefore reduce public criticisms of the test.

If we eliminate Asians and other minorities from the calculations and compare only Blacks and Whites, we find that 0.2 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above on the verbal SAT compared to 2.2 percent of all White test takers. Thus, Whites were 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Overall, there were 49 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored at or above the 750 level.

On the math SAT, only 0.16 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of White test takers. Thus, Whites were more than 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT. Overall, there were more than 61 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored 750 or above on the math section of the SAT.

In a race-neutral competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students at the nation's 25 top-ranked universities, high-scoring Blacks would be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-Black students. Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there are about 3,000 Black first-year students matriculating at these 25 high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top of the SAT scoring scale. As shown previously, Black students make up at best between 1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups."

http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

Blacks and Whites with Equal Educational Attainment Differ in Cognitive Ability

Black and White Americans with the same formal level of education differ significantly in their cognitive abilities. Specifically, within any given level of formal education Whites consistently outperform Blacks. Moreover, this effect is so strong that Blacks often underperform Whites who have lower levels of formal education than they do.

Consider the following data from the General Social Survey. This public data is frequently used in social science research and contains a test of verbal intelligence as well as measurements of participant’s self-identified race and highest educational degree obtained. Verbal intelligence tests correlate at around .75 with full-scale IQ and so this data can also be taken as a fair measure of intelligence in general (Lynn, 1998). If we set the White mean score on this test to 100 and the standard deviation to 15, we can come up with an "IQ" style scale.

As can be seen, using this method Blacks with a graduate degree have a level of verbal intelligence indistinguishable from that of Whites with a junior college degree. Blacks with a four-year degree are roughly on par with Whites who never went to college at all.

IQ BY RACE AND HIGHEST DEGREE EARNED (1972 - 2014):

Highest Degree                      White IQ               Black IQ               Gap
High School Drop-out:                 89                         82                      7
High School Diploma                   98                         90                      8
Junior College Degree               102                         95                      7
Bachelor's Degree                      108                       100                     8
Graduate Degree                        113                       102                    11
            
This data is consistent with evidence from the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) which administered tests of cognitive ability to 26,000 US adults in 1992. These tests were designed to measure how well people could take information and use it in a way which would help them function in modern society.

~~~~~~~

Blacks are such poor academic achievers that the National Achievement Scholarship Program was created with lower standards for Black candidates only, instead of the National Merit Scholarship Program which is open to everyone else.

THE SMARTEST STUDENTS: The National Merit Scholarship Program was founded to identify and honor scholastically talented American youth and to encourage them to develop their abilities to the fullest.

BLACK STUDENTS ONLY: The National Achievement Scholarship Program was initiated specifically to identify academically promising Black American youth and encourage their pursuit of higher education.

They are both measured on the PSAT.

Minimum score for National Achievement: 190
Minimum score for National Merit: 220

Roughly, PSAT x 10 = SAT (out of 2400)

Probably the basic issue here is:

The Flynn effect was mostly a function of environment and better schooling over the last century. Look at the difference of white and African- & Hispanic-Americans has gone from 100 to 85 minorities in 1990 to 100 white and 92/93 minorities today. That is only one generation and the difference closed by 50% without significant society changes the last 50 years. This leads me to believe that we are way underestimating the impact of environment on IQ scores and Nordic nations by 1995 exhausted the basic education and schooling improvements.

Comments for this post are closed