Longitudinal intelligence study, no meaningful sex differences

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289607001328

“Findings are inconsistent with developmental theory that suggests males should show an advantage on g in adulthood.”

They bias g with maths and science (applied maths), knowing 14yo boys have an advantage until the 20s.
Many studies deliberately cut off the ages between 10 and 14 to support the male-bias ‘theory’. Naturally, they consider the eldest age studied the ‘final’ result.

And then they wonder why they can’t replicate it.

Crooked methodologies, that’s why. The brain of either sex doesn’t stabilize, nor the male variance artificially increasing their mean during school support years, until the twenties.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222660770_Sex_differences_in_latent_cognitive_abilities_ages_6_to_59_Evidence_from_the_Woodcock-Johnson_III_tests_of_cognitive_abilities

Overall, the sexes are not the same, that would be a leading question, but they do even out over total lifespan (just studying school years is stupid) and you would expect evenness from genetically similar halves of the same species, differentiated only by a single chromosome.

If anything, women do have a slight advantage in cognitive ability, but this is group-level and explains medical outcomes  like later or lesser dementia.

Notes

  • G isn’t the only measure of intelligence.
  • There are so many measures of intelligence under the umbrella ‘IQ‘ that considering one type (except Binet for historical value) is rigging it.
  • Fluid intelligence, anyone?
  • Is memory really valuable?
  • ‘Genius’ or precociousness tends to burn out, many don’t live up to their academic potential IRL. Studying purely paper genius is risible, like taking only a paper theory for a driving test then trusting them on the M4 driving a school bus at rush hour. Real-world scores, or at least extra-collegiate scores, count for more.
  • Longitudinal or die. No artificial cutoffs to support confirmation biases. I’d go so far as to say, if you can’t find a study in its longitudinal form, they’re frauds hiding half the data. All developmental studies begin with longitudinal values due to known lifespan shifts.
  • Most intelligence studies focus on white people and especially white men, rendering the older findings studying ALL men quite useless in ascertaining female values. It’s not even wrong.
  • Truth > politics. I refuse to post lies to upset the feminists and cherrypicking for either sex is anti-science.
Advertisements

One response to “Longitudinal intelligence study, no meaningful sex differences

1. Be civil. 2. Be logical or fair. 3. Do not bore me.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s