4 ms·

The actual title should include "in men" as it does in the study. > Results: No linear association between intelligence and childlessness was found. However, f

The actual title should include "in men" as it does in the study. > Results: No linear association between intelligence and childlessness was found. However, follow-up analyses showed that higher risk of childlessness was associated with the highest stanine intelligence score (two standard deviations above the normed average), and that this effect was mediated by whether participants had ever been in a relationship by their late twenties. No significant direct effect of the highest stanine intelligence score was found when the question of whether participants had ever been in a relationship by their late twenties was included.

filoleg 7y ago
>...and that this effect was mediated by whether participants had ever been in a relationship by their late twenties. No significant direct effect of the highest stanine intelligence score was found when the question of whether participants had ever been in a relationship by their late twenties was included. I don't know if it is just me, but I am struggling to parse the meaning of the part regarding the effect of "ever being in a relationship by their late twenties" on the premise of this study. The only way I see it now is it means "being in a relationship by their late twenties negates the whole phenomena of childlessness and intelligence score relationship that was observed in the study", but that doesn't feel right. If someone in the thread can offer a more readable/simplified version of that statement, it would be very appreciated.
- agravier 7y ago
  I think that more readable one may be "not having been in a relationship in late 20s is a stronger predictor of subsequent childlessness than scoring high in intelligence."
  - yborg 7y ago
    This seems correct to me, i.e. the current title here is clickbait. From the paper: "The results of the present study did not support my hypothesis that intelligence should be negatively associated with childlessness." In fairness, the somewhat confusing verbiage here is from I assume a Norwegian non-native English speaker.
    - filoleg 7y ago
      To their defense, a lot of academic papers even from native English speakers tend to have barely readable convoluted wording here and there. Either for the purpose of making it sound more complicated or to pad the length of the paper, I have no idea. But it is something I have been consciously noticing since a while ago.
  - filoleg 7y ago
    Ah, that makes perfect sense to me (both your wording and the conclusion itself), so thank you.
- didericis 7y ago
  I’m not a professional academic, but I’m reading that sentence the same way you are. It sounds like the conclusion here is that not ever being in a relationship by your late twenties AND having a high intelligence predicts childlessness. For that to be interesting/worth mentioning, I would assume not being in a relationship by your late twenties and having mid level intelligence does NOT predict childlessness, or at least not as strongly. I’m guilty of jumping straight to the comments after not reading the article, however, so there might be more details either supporting/refuting that conclusion that I’m missing, I’m just going off of your quote.

filoleg 7y ago

>...and that this effect was mediated by whether participants had ever been in a relationship by their late twenties. No significant direct effect of the highest stanine intelligence score was found when the question of whether participants had ever been in a relationship by their late twenties was included. I don't know if it is just me, but I am struggling to parse the meaning of the part regarding the effect of "ever being in a relationship by their late twenties" on the premise of this study. The only way I see it now is it means "being in a relationship by their late twenties negates the whole phenomena of childlessness and intelligence score relationship that was observed in the study", but that doesn't feel right. If someone in the thread can offer a more readable/simplified version of that statement, it would be very appreciated.

agravier 7y ago
I think that more readable one may be "not having been in a relationship in late 20s is a stronger predictor of subsequent childlessness than scoring high in intelligence."
- yborg 7y ago
  This seems correct to me, i.e. the current title here is clickbait. From the paper: "The results of the present study did not support my hypothesis that intelligence should be negatively associated with childlessness." In fairness, the somewhat confusing verbiage here is from I assume a Norwegian non-native English speaker.
  - filoleg 7y ago
    To their defense, a lot of academic papers even from native English speakers tend to have barely readable convoluted wording here and there. Either for the purpose of making it sound more complicated or to pad the length of the paper, I have no idea. But it is something I have been consciously noticing since a while ago.
- filoleg 7y ago
  Ah, that makes perfect sense to me (both your wording and the conclusion itself), so thank you.
didericis 7y ago
I’m not a professional academic, but I’m reading that sentence the same way you are. It sounds like the conclusion here is that not ever being in a relationship by your late twenties AND having a high intelligence predicts childlessness. For that to be interesting/worth mentioning, I would assume not being in a relationship by your late twenties and having mid level intelligence does NOT predict childlessness, or at least not as strongly. I’m guilty of jumping straight to the comments after not reading the article, however, so there might be more details either supporting/refuting that conclusion that I’m missing, I’m just going off of your quote.