Hi Mike Yeah .... well, there is always a difference between (1) description of group differences and (2) explanation. Group differences in IQ (and/or g) exist. In one sense, what really matters is the effect size. In another sense, average performance differences do not matter; what _really_ matters is whether there is bias for or against groups; bias being whether the test "works" differently for different groups, whether in terms of the regression coefficient regressing criterion on the IQ/g test (there is no bias btw, except a slight bias against Orientals) or different patterns of construct validity for the groups etc etc etc. On the previous point, whether a Hispanic/white IQ difference matters vis-a-vis the immigration issue (I believe this was the issue that spurred the media coverage) is an issue of effect size.
As far as the Nisbett et al 2012 article, some of this has always been obvious. That heritability (h^2) estimates vary by social class simply restates the obvious that within-group h^2 estimates vary depending on what group is studied. People old enough will remember Donald Hebb's interesting example of kids raised in a barrel until age 16, who would emerge retarded on average because of the environment but their h^2 would be close to 1.0 as there is no environmental variation to work with. But Arthur Jensen made the same point, more academically, in his 1969 paper which ironically initiated the Hebb response .. this is the 1969 paper, like The Bell Curve, that everyone cites but fewer people read. Nisbett also mentions IQ jumps of 12 to 18 points in adoption studies .. there has always been correlations between children and adopting parents, though these correlations weaken with age. Anyway, my comments are not meant as an endorsement of the activities of the Heritage Foundation.Rather I am always amazed at how much press is generated whenever descriptive group differences in IQ/g are mentioned ... ========================== John W. Kulig, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Coordinator, Psychology Honors Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 ========================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Palij" <m...@nyu.edu> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> Cc: "Michael Palij" <m...@nyu.edu> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:13:28 PM Subject: [tips] What Is Wrong With Harvard? Given the media savvy bunch that Tipsters are, I am sure that most have heard of the Harvard Ph.D. who was fired from his job as Scholar/Researcher at the Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.) after claiming that Hispanics have lower intelligence (i.e., IQ scores) than White folks (he refers to them as "Native Whites" of the U.S. possibly implying that Whites elsewhere, such as Canada, Europe, Australia, etc., are also potentially less intelligence than "Native Whites" of the U.S. -- a belief, I think that most U.S. "Native Whites" probably subscribe to). For those who were too busy waiting for the new episodes of "Arrested Development" to arrive or seeing "Star Trek Into Darkness" several times or "Fast and Furious 6" or whatever, here is one media outlet's article that provides background on what happened: http://www.latintimes.com/articles/4307/20130522/jason-richwine-resigns-heritage-foundation-hispanic-iq.htm The basis for his claim that "Native Whites" have greater intelligence than Hispanics comes from a Ph.D. dissertation he wrote at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, department of Public Policy. This has not gone unnoticed by students at Harvard who appear to have responded with a collective "WTF?" and are demanding an investigation of how such a "Bemian event" could occur; for one source on this see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/05/20/harvard-students-seek-probe-of-controversial-phd-thesis-on-hispanics-iq/ A more detailed analysis of the person at the center of the controversy, his dissertation committee, the role that Charles Murray played (of "Bell Curve" fame and who is apparently salaried by the Heritage Foundation but doesn't have an office there -- Murray was also the "hero" of our Harvard Ph.D. and served as an advisor), and some information on how the dissertation got passed. See: http://www.alternet.org/print/inside-story-harvard-dissertation-too-racist-heritage-foundation Apparently, there are some aspects of the dissertation process that members of the committee don't care to discuss because of their personal nature but which leave a number of questions unanswered. Perhaps there will be an investigation by the admin at Harvard to better understand how this dissertation got through. One particularly useful thing that the last webpage provides is a link to the 2012 update of APA's position paper on intelligence (APA's paper was published in 1995). The reference to this paper is: Nisbett, R. E., Aronson, J., Blair, C., Dickens, W., Flynn, J., Halpern, D. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2012, January 2). Intelligence: New Findings and Theoretical Developments. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0026699 A copy can be obtained here: Http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Nisbett-et-al.-2012.pdf One wonders if Herrnstein were still alive when the dissertation was being done, whether he would have served on the committee but one might wonder in what role? -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: ku...@mail.plymouth.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=25786 or send a blank email to leave-25786-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=25791 or send a blank email to leave-25791-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
