Not only is TIPS back, David is back! And, of course, some of the regulars have shown up. How wonderful (and I do mean it). Now, if only a certain other multicultural TIPster were to show up .... Ok, I'll be quiet! :) But, how about that article in American Psychologist: "Cardeña, E. (2018). The experimental evidence for parapsychological phenomena: A review. American Psychologist, 73(5), 663-677. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-24699-001?
Miguel ________________________________________ From: David [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 7:21 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: Re: [tips] The Genetic Theory of Educational Achievement Is about 90% Horse Manure! More troublingly, I'm not seeing any indication that they investigators accounted for a Scarr-Rowe interaction. Rookie mistake. That interaction should've been the *first* thing they looked for. Otherwise, as Eric Turkheimer has argued, they might be better off not estimating "heritability" at all <http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-18633-009>. --David Epstein [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 15:29:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [tips] The Genetic Theory of Educational Achievement Is about 90% Horse Manure! Household income is incredibly highly skewed. Assuming they obliviously used a linear coefficient to obtain the 7% figure, it is probably a severe under-estimate of the true size of the effect. Chris ….. Christopher D Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 43.773897°, -79.503667° [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://www.yorku.ca/christo ………………………………... On Jul 25, 2018, at 1:58 PM, Michael Palij <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: At least for White Europeans. A masive study using genomic info as a predictor of educational achievement showed that genes accounted for only about 11% of the difference in years of education. The Scientist Mag has a layperson friendly description of the study published in the journal "Nature Genetics". See: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/genes-explain-about-11-percent-of-differences-in-years-of-education-64552 There are links in the article to additional sources. So, I guess this pretty much undermines "g" or single factor theories of intelligence (assuming intelligence drives educational achievement as certain theorists assert). In addition, household income accounts for only 7% of the variance in the differences which some might consider a unexpected low amount. I guess this all goes to show that your genetic ancestry (sorry Galton) nor wealth/poverty are the most important factors in academic acheivemnt, like getting a Ph.D. or other advanced degree. Now, I just hope the results are replicable. ;-) -Mike Palij New York University [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> P.S. To Miguel: don't worry about the tipos. ;-) --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=3343621.18283a1227eb73d1ce74b7f7163cf851&n=T&l=tips&o=52578 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-52578-3343621.18283a1227eb73d1ce74b7f7163cf...@fsulist.frostburg.edu<mailto:leave-52578-3343621.18283a1227eb73d1ce74b7f7163cf...@fsulist.frostburg.edu> --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=52580 or send a blank email to leave-52580-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
