3 ms·
Wikipedia is not a totally reliable reference when researching non-quantitative information, especially in area with active stakeholders that likely edit wikipe
by fsloth 8y ago
Wikipedia is not a totally reliable reference when researching non-quantitative information, especially in area with active stakeholders that likely edit wikipedia. And I would not trust "scientific consensus" in this instance given psychology's recent well documented reproducibility crisis.
- jrs95 8y agoThis article doesn't even seem contrary to scientific consensus as far as what factual information is presented. It's just about how it's packaged in order to form his argument. It's sort of a lawyer-y manipulation of terms with some added hyperbole and even appeals to fashion sense that are misrepresenting what IQ is and what the consensus actually is.
- toasterlovin 8y agoIQ research is not part of the reproducibility crisis.
- xyzzyz 8y agoPsychometry and IQ is the single most replicated field of psychology. There is no reproducibility crisis in psychometry.
- BurningFrog 8y agoIndividual anonymous comments on HN are even less reliable.