3 ms·

“To study ability, they matched a subset of their data on inventors with records of their math scores back when they were third graders.4 To study the role that

“To study ability, they matched a subset of their data on inventors with records of their math scores back when they were third graders.4 To study the role that circumstances play, the research team matched the inventor dataset with tax record data that allowed them to study the socio-economic situation they grew up in.” That is when the credibility of the study is lost on me. Maths scores and creativity/innovation are not necessarily related. To invent, you not only have to pay attention (also curiosity and a keen sense of observation), you also have to work diligently, systematically AND, more often than not, diffusely. I would argue that these combinations are rare and may be the stuff that makes an inventor. Do economic circumstances play an important role? I think they might contribute, but I doubt that their contribution is significant. So many great inventions have come from people with very modest economic backgrounds (Edison, Faraday, Nikola Tesla, Alfred Nobel, to name but a few).

fuzzfactor 3y ago
>the credibility of the study is lost on me. For me it's the pure survivorship bias. >“Who becomes an inventor in America?” is the title of a study by Alex Bell, Raj Chetty, Xavier Jaravel, Neviana Petkova, and John Van Reenen published in 2019. >It is based on an impressively comprehensive dataset. The authors studied the lives of 1.2 million inventors in the US from birth to adulthood. True to the title of the study, but it doesn't appear to speak about lost opportunities which were actually (not theoretically) hindering those who were not in the study. To get a more accurate picture you would need to more intensively study those who would have realized a significant invention, with only the lack of opportunity as a roadblock. You wouldn't be able to locate subjects like that nearly as easily as published inventors. They don't have any directory of non-published near-inventors ;) Talent is everywhere but it is quite rare. Still in excess compared to opportunity though.

fuzzfactor 3y ago

>the credibility of the study is lost on me. For me it's the pure survivorship bias. >“Who becomes an inventor in America?” is the title of a study by Alex Bell, Raj Chetty, Xavier Jaravel, Neviana Petkova, and John Van Reenen published in 2019. >It is based on an impressively comprehensive dataset. The authors studied the lives of 1.2 million inventors in the US from birth to adulthood. True to the title of the study, but it doesn't appear to speak about lost opportunities which were actually (not theoretically) hindering those who were not in the study. To get a more accurate picture you would need to more intensively study those who would have realized a significant invention, with only the lack of opportunity as a roadblock. You wouldn't be able to locate subjects like that nearly as easily as published inventors. They don't have any directory of non-published near-inventors ;) Talent is everywhere but it is quite rare. Still in excess compared to opportunity though.