2 ms·
That's not a genetic study. The authors specialize in organizational/management science. For the Wikipedia article, you should read it yourself. A ctrl-f for "n
by underlipton 4y ago
That's not a genetic study. The authors specialize in organizational/management science. For the Wikipedia article, you should read it yourself. A ctrl-f for "no evidence" would do you well.
- notsosec 4y agoIt appears to be a meta-analysis of literature in the field of psychology.
- mightyham 4y agoI fail to see how insulting the authors academic credentials brings more to this discussion than critiquing the methodology or providing a study to the contrary. I also have read the Wikipedia article and have no idea what you are talking about. Claiming there is "no evidence" to any of the sides of this very complex issue is utterly ridiculous.
- underlipton 4y agoIf the contention is that there is a genetic basis for differences in intelligence, a study that doesn't consider genetic evidence is a poor place to start. This is a methodological critique. From the article: >Mackintosh, Nisbett et al. and Flynn have all concluded that the slight correlation between g-loading and the test score gap offers no clue to the cause of the gap.[86][87][88] Further reviews of both adoption studies and racial admixture studies have also found no evidence for a genetic component behind group-level IQ differences.[89][90][91][92]
- mightyham 4y agoThe poster I originally responded to claimed there was "no scientific evidence" for differences in IQ being based on genetics. There is significant evidence for genetics being the largest reason for IQ differences between individuals. Regardless of the semantics of the quote you posted, a reading of the full article elucidates that there is an open debate as to what role genetics plays in group differences in IQ, with lots of varying opinions and evidence.