A LiveScience Article: IQ - men vs women

[xbox]

http://www.livescience.com/21647-men-women-iq-scores.html

 

[Teohrn]

Even though the trend might be that the IQs of women is increasing more rapidly than the IQs of men, I find it dubious to base cognitive testing research on participants that are mostly in the 15-18 year old range. The female brain develops earlier than the male brain by two to three years. It would therefore be testing the cognitive abilities of less developed males against more developed females. This gives females an advantage.

 

[NinjaSurfer]

could it be that men are just getting dumber?

 

[Fukyo]

Let the pissing contest commence!

 

[Meer]

Blrurughhh

 

[Hadoblado]

Let the pissing contest commence!

Men always win pissing contests... they have more developed weaponry for this type of encounter.

@Teohrn
I agree that this study may not be generalisable because of the age of the sample. It's still good grounds for further research using a larger age bracket.

It's nice to see Flynn in the headlines, the man's a legend.

I'm eager to hear the opinion of @snafupants: our resident IQ enthusiast.

I'm also excited to see if there is a reversal of roles in the sex-IQ debate. We may now see men arguing that IQ doesn't matter and women arguing that it does. Back-flips for the biased XD

 

[snafupants]

@Hadoblado

There are some subtests in which women score higher than men and vice versa. I remain skeptical as regards gender differences because this politically correct culture doesn't allow valid, highly g-loaded subtests which demonstrate strong gender differences to leave standardization; perhaps consistently lopsided performance on a relatively culture-fair and comprehensive fluid intelligence task would sway my viewpoint, but as is the waters are too muddy to discern much of anything. The overarching rub is that women show fewer members at either extreme of the Gaussian curve yet the possess a tighter, smaller standard deviation. I suppose women are like the US black population in two of three respects. Although women show fewer high scores and this constricted standard deviation as US blacks consistently do, unlike blacks, women do not show disproportionate numbers on the left hand side of the bell curve. To directly address the article, perhaps James Flynn became a little overexcited. If we take the use of "everyone" in the last paragraph to mean every individual, then Flynn's assertion is outright wrong. The real finding is that many people in recently industrialized society, who happened to find themselves in double digits according to an intelligence test taken over perhaps the last six decades, have seen their scores slightly bolstered thanks to factors like improved nutrition, increased stimulation, and compulsory education; this ecological verity gives the semblance that all individuals within industrialized society are enhancing their lot, which is erroneous; gifted scores haven't really changed because of the Flynn Effect. For those who think I like to pick on US blacks, I should add that (on average) certain cadres of Jews and East Asians (e.g., Japanese folk) have slightly higher IQ scores than US Whites. Now for an introverted intuition inspired note: that article was too dumb to warrant comment.

Edit: I responded to the subsequent post but my posting has been delayed. Because I cannot make amendments, I disavow everything that I wrote therein. Basically I stated that the point was valid and I meant to compare US non-black females, or the majority of the US female population, with the entire US black population.

@crippli

 

[crippli]

There are some subtests in which women score more highly than men and vice versa. I remain skeptical as regards gender differences because this politically correct culture doesn't allow valid, highly g-loaded subtests which demonstrate strong gender differences to leave standardization. The overarching rub is that women show fewer members at either extreme of the Gaussian curve yet the possess a tighter, smaller standard deviation. I suppose women are like the US black population in two of three respects. Although women show fewer high scores and this constricted standard deviation as US blacks consistently do, unlike blacks, women do not show disproportionate numbers on the left hand side of the bell curve. To directly address the article, perhaps James Flynn became a little overexcited. If we take the use of "everyone" in the last paragraph to mean every individual, then Flynn's assertion is outright wrong. The real finding is that many people in recently industrialized society who happened to find themselves in double digits according to an intelligence test have seen their scores slightly bolstered thanks to factors like improved nutrition, increased stimulation, and compulsory education. For those who think I like to pick on US blacks, I should add that (on average) certain cadres of Jews and East Asians have slightly high IQ scores than US Whites.

I didn't understand this sentence. Can you clarify? Aren't women and blacks sort of the same thing? I mean, you can be a woman and a black at the same time? If so, does it then make sense to separate the descriptions?

 

[snafupants]

I didn't understand this sentence. Can you clarify? Aren't women and blacks sort of the same thing? I mean, you can be a woman and a black at the same time? If so, does it then make sense to separate the descriptions?

See the edit portion of my last post.

 

[GYX_Kid]

xbox, will you piss on me?

 

[pjoa09]

the raven test wasn't being revised over the 10 years?

Women are supposed to lag behind on the IQ test because IQ tests are all traditionally spacial intelligence orientated. Women are better with linguistics more of the time.

There is then the blah blah accuracy.

I just want to urinate over this like a 10 tonne elephant.

 

[Teohrn]

Men always win pissing contests... they have more developed weaponry for this type of encounter.

And only men would partake in a pissing contest to begin with, due to the competition-wired brains of men. We can at least take pride in that we both have the equipment and the will, no matter the outcome of such studies.

Woman: Women have been found to be smarter than men.
Man: Yeah right. Thanks for the joke.
Woman: No, seriously, studies have found that women have higher IQs than men.
Man: Well, I bet I can beat you in a pissing contest.
Woman: ...
Man: No comeback? I didn't expect it. I win.

@Teohrn
I agree that this study may not be generalisable because of the age of the sample. It's still good grounds for further research using a larger age bracket.

I do believe that having a sample that is too young will give unfair advantages and will therefore make the results skewed. However, on the other hand, this study will still indicate a shift where women are catching up to men. That is if you have earlier studies with the same ages to compare with. If the women, or in this case I would rather say girls, had lower IQ scores on average than men, but have recently surpassed them, then that means that the female IQ has risen. Although as mentioned, it could be that the male IQ has dropped rather than that female IQs have risen. Meaning that women can't do anything on their own and need men to do it for them.

 

[xbox]

Let the pissing contest commence!

Your mom.



No i Kid, i kid.

Anyways I just posted the article just because I felt like it.

 

[xbox]

xbox, will you piss on me?

oh man I've always wanted to

 

[snafupants]

Your mom.



No i Kid, i kid.

Anyways I just posted the article just because I felt like it.

This thread should have been terminated in utero, perhaps with a probing coat hanger.

 

[Minuend]

Well, this study proves snaufu wrong in the other thread.

This just shows how fickle IQ tests are. You can't really use them to judge intellect.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Well, this study proves snaufu wrong in the other thread.

You could have double blind studies and the best you'd get
from Snafu is 'Doesn't matter, IQ tests are bunk anyway.'

:P

 

[Jah]

Sooo.... all of the sudden people give a shit about what the purported "Normal"/"Average" person of either gender "is" like ?


Us vs Them.

I'll say this to all who identify too strongly with my/any gender: Fuck you.



Test the kids for IQ compared to their levels of Testosteron and Estrogen.
Then lie to the kids about their results and test them again a day later to see whether that influences the results either way.

Tell them ahead of time that girls do better, and vice versa with another group.


Prime the little primates.
Make them write poetry before the IQ test.


Or give them Colour-blindness tests and tell them it's IQ-tests.

 

[snafupants]

Well, this study proves snaufu wrong in the other thread.

This just shows how fickle IQ tests are. You can't really use them to judge intellect.

@Minuend

OK, I will take the bait. How does that prove me wrong? I iterated the same spiel this time around as well: women have scores closer to the mean with a tighter standard deviation. This means there are fewer women geniuses but also fewer women retards. Another wrinkle, according to Kaufman et al., is that women score one to four points lower than men on typical composite measures. Please try to rise above the cognitive sophistication of a dunce Minuend. Couldn't Flynn have taken a different sample set? A more myopic one? Different tests? Different years? Does Flynn have anything to gain by subverting conventional wisdom? Since when is James Flynn god?

 

[snafupants]

You could have double blind studies and the best you'd get
from Snafu is 'Doesn't matter, IQ tests are bunk anyway.'

:P

@Adaire

My answer was far more nuanced than that but all right. Double blind studies? This isn't the Pepsi Challenge sweetheart. I'm surprised people take Flynn so seriously considering the dearth of evidence and scant specification coupled with the agenda.

 

[HDINTP]

They are not developed completely I think. I mean Brains of women develop faster don't they? Two or three years? I am not sure now...

 

[snafupants]

They are not developed completely I think. I mean Brains of women develop faster don't they? Two or three years? I am not sure now...

That's definitely another factor to consider: the age at which the kids were tested and any possible gender disparity therein. Ultimately these much ballyhooed reports suffer from a lack of detail. There isn't enough information to make an informed decision either way. For this reason, past data must be deferred to.

 

[Minuend]

Sooo.... all of the sudden people give a shit about what the purported "Normal"/"Average" person of either gender "is" like ?


Us vs Them.

I'll say this to all who identify too strongly with my/any gender: Fuck you.

But but, how am I supposed to feel superior if the trait is not automatically given to me by having a penis? )=

Since when is James Flynn god?