3 ms·
Ugh, I hate it when science reporting makes you go on a massive hunt for primary sources. Does anyone have a reference to the original paper? Something is defi
by shalmanese 17y ago
Ugh, I hate it when science reporting makes you go on a massive hunt for primary sources. Does anyone have a reference to the original paper?
Something is definitely fishy about this article. Line testing has a R of 0.99 with intelligence tests but intelligence tests themselves have a poor correlation after 18 months. Does that mean line tests are still 0.99 correlated after 18 months? It's hard to see a plausible explanation that fits this data.
- tokenadult 17y agojibiki kindly shared the link in another reply: http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&uid=2008-12082-007 http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&... I see the abstract, but the full text is behind a pay wall for me. I'm very doubtful about the reported result being generalizable.