‹ First  < 2 3 4
 
   
 

IQ tests are not culturally biased

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 13:20
 
burt - 17 February 2019 01:05 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

Whatever, the point is that external factors influenced student achievement.

Not really. One part of the minds of the teachers (ideology) impacted another part of the minds of the teachers (the grades they give the students). If we want to tease out the objective impact of the subtle cues (or whatever else) of these teachers, then we should be looking at student performance on multiple-choice tests, in which teachers absolutely can not award extra points for one race and fewer points for another race. Such tests don’t even need to be IQ tests. The study is garbage science, fitting for popular publication.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 13:35
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:20 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:05 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

Whatever, the point is that external factors influenced student achievement.

Not really. One part of the minds of the teachers (ideology) impacted another part of the minds of the teachers (the grades they give the students). If we want to tease out the objective impact of the subtle cues (or whatever else) of these teachers, then we should be looking at student performance on multiple-choice tests, in which teachers absolutely can not award extra points for one race and fewer points for another race. Such tests don’t even need to be IQ tests. The study is garbage science, fitting for popular publication.

No, not really. Obviously you have never been a teacher. Your ideas are garbage and you are not qualified to judge the value of the study other than to assume that all teachers are ideologically biased and grade students according to personal preferences rather than professional criteria. But then, that’s how you redpill folk react to anything that goes against your fixed beliefs.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 13:44
 
burt - 17 February 2019 01:35 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:20 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:05 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

Whatever, the point is that external factors influenced student achievement.

Not really. One part of the minds of the teachers (ideology) impacted another part of the minds of the teachers (the grades they give the students). If we want to tease out the objective impact of the subtle cues (or whatever else) of these teachers, then we should be looking at student performance on multiple-choice tests, in which teachers absolutely can not award extra points for one race and fewer points for another race. Such tests don’t even need to be IQ tests. The study is garbage science, fitting for popular publication.

No, not really. Obviously you have never been a teacher. Your ideas are garbage and you are not qualified to judge the value of the study other than to assume that all teachers are ideologically biased and grade students according to personal preferences rather than professional criteria. But then, that’s how you redpill folk react to anything that goes against your fixed beliefs.

I don’t need to assume anything about “all teachers.” I need only assume the possibility that a portion of teachers grade students according to personal preferences in addition to professional criteria, and that is no extraordinary claim. Teachers are human beings.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 14:01
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:44 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:35 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:20 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:05 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

Whatever, the point is that external factors influenced student achievement.

Not really. One part of the minds of the teachers (ideology) impacted another part of the minds of the teachers (the grades they give the students). If we want to tease out the objective impact of the subtle cues (or whatever else) of these teachers, then we should be looking at student performance on multiple-choice tests, in which teachers absolutely can not award extra points for one race and fewer points for another race. Such tests don’t even need to be IQ tests. The study is garbage science, fitting for popular publication.

No, not really. Obviously you have never been a teacher. Your ideas are garbage and you are not qualified to judge the value of the study other than to assume that all teachers are ideologically biased and grade students according to personal preferences rather than professional criteria. But then, that’s how you redpill folk react to anything that goes against your fixed beliefs.

I don’t need to assume anything about “all teachers.” I need only assume the possibility that a portion of teachers grade students according to personal preferences in addition to professional criteria, and that is no extraordinary claim. Teachers are human beings.

No, you need to assume that a portion of teachers from one particular ideological stance grade students that way. You bias your assumptions from the beginning. If grading following personal preference is random among different ideological positions then it washes out. So you are assuming a sampling bias on the basis of your own often stated anti-liberal bias.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 14:18
 
burt - 17 February 2019 02:01 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:44 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:35 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:20 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:05 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

Whatever, the point is that external factors influenced student achievement.

Not really. One part of the minds of the teachers (ideology) impacted another part of the minds of the teachers (the grades they give the students). If we want to tease out the objective impact of the subtle cues (or whatever else) of these teachers, then we should be looking at student performance on multiple-choice tests, in which teachers absolutely can not award extra points for one race and fewer points for another race. Such tests don’t even need to be IQ tests. The study is garbage science, fitting for popular publication.

No, not really. Obviously you have never been a teacher. Your ideas are garbage and you are not qualified to judge the value of the study other than to assume that all teachers are ideologically biased and grade students according to personal preferences rather than professional criteria. But then, that’s how you redpill folk react to anything that goes against your fixed beliefs.

I don’t need to assume anything about “all teachers.” I need only assume the possibility that a portion of teachers grade students according to personal preferences in addition to professional criteria, and that is no extraordinary claim. Teachers are human beings.

No, you need to assume that a portion of teachers from one particular ideological stance grade students that way. You bias your assumptions from the beginning. If grading following personal preference is random among different ideological positions then it washes out. So you are assuming a sampling bias on the basis of your own often stated anti-liberal bias.

I need not assume a sampling bias. The sampling can be perfectly random, but we would expect differences between the two subgroups. Three possibilities: (#1) the subgroup of teachers with a “fixed” mindset may be biased in favor of white students, (#2) the subgroup of teachers with a “growth” mindset may be biased in favor of disadvantaged minority students, or (#3) both. I would favor possibility #2, but I think possibility #1 would be broadly accepted as plausible among academics at large, and I find it strange that the author completely ignored it.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 14:41
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 02:18 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 02:01 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:44 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:35 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 01:20 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 01:05 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

Whatever, the point is that external factors influenced student achievement.

Not really. One part of the minds of the teachers (ideology) impacted another part of the minds of the teachers (the grades they give the students). If we want to tease out the objective impact of the subtle cues (or whatever else) of these teachers, then we should be looking at student performance on multiple-choice tests, in which teachers absolutely can not award extra points for one race and fewer points for another race. Such tests don’t even need to be IQ tests. The study is garbage science, fitting for popular publication.

No, not really. Obviously you have never been a teacher. Your ideas are garbage and you are not qualified to judge the value of the study other than to assume that all teachers are ideologically biased and grade students according to personal preferences rather than professional criteria. But then, that’s how you redpill folk react to anything that goes against your fixed beliefs.

I don’t need to assume anything about “all teachers.” I need only assume the possibility that a portion of teachers grade students according to personal preferences in addition to professional criteria, and that is no extraordinary claim. Teachers are human beings.

No, you need to assume that a portion of teachers from one particular ideological stance grade students that way. You bias your assumptions from the beginning. If grading following personal preference is random among different ideological positions then it washes out. So you are assuming a sampling bias on the basis of your own often stated anti-liberal bias.

I need not assume a sampling bias. The sampling can be perfectly random, but we would expect differences between the two subgroups. Three possibilities: (#1) the subgroup of teachers with a “fixed” mindset may be biased in favor of white students, (#2) the subgroup of teachers with a “growth” mindset may be biased in favor of disadvantaged minority students, or (#3) both. I would favor possibility #2, but I think possibility #1 would be broadly accepted as plausible among academics at large, and I find it strange that the author completely ignored it.

The cases in which the conclusions reached are problematic are #1 and #2. Both require an ideological bias on the part of the experimenters. So the default assumption is either no bias, or #3, neither of which alter the empirical results. Your distrust of academics is your problem, not theirs, and it is insulting to people who do their best to provide objective information.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 14:50
 
burt - 17 February 2019 02:41 PM

The cases in which the conclusions reached are problematic are #1 and #2. Both require an ideological bias on the part of the experimenters. So the default assumption is either no bias, or #3, neither of which alter the empirical results. Your distrust of academics is your problem, not theirs, and it is insulting to people who do their best to provide objective information.

It is insulting, but improbable hypotheses are the rule in the social sciences. I shouldn’t have called it, “garbage science,” because, while the hypothesis favored by the authors does not follow from their data, I do not doubt the data. Data can be salvaged from studies with improbable hypotheses to serve probable hypotheses.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 14:58
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 02:50 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 02:41 PM

The cases in which the conclusions reached are problematic are #1 and #2. Both require an ideological bias on the part of the experimenters. So the default assumption is either no bias, or #3, neither of which alter the empirical results. Your distrust of academics is your problem, not theirs, and it is insulting to people who do their best to provide objective information.

It is insulting, but improbable hypotheses are the rule in the social sciences. I shouldn’t have called it, “garbage science,” because, while the hypothesis favored by the authors does not follow from their data, I do not doubt the data. Data can be salvaged from studies with improbable hypotheses to serve probable hypotheses.

Waffling. The hypothesis does follow as an empirical inference from the data. You can only say it doesn’t because you assume that the subjects in the study had an ideological bias not accounted for. I.e., you are engaging in the usual practice of rejecting what you don’t like, hence violating Ockham’s razor. Because you don’t have the scientific background to judge, however, this is merely your opinion and it wouldn’t get past peer review.

 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6373
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
17 February 2019 15:57
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 16:00
 
Jb8989 - 17 February 2019 03:57 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

I am not sure what you mean, sorry.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 16:28
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:00 PM
Jb8989 - 17 February 2019 03:57 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

I am not sure what you mean, sorry.

He means that in the study the possibility of bias on the part of the teachers was controlled for by the experimenters, and yet you are assuming that it was not and distorts the results, because you don’t want to accept them.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 16:32
 
burt - 17 February 2019 04:28 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:00 PM
Jb8989 - 17 February 2019 03:57 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

I am not sure what you mean, sorry.

He means that in the study the possibility of bias on the part of the teachers was controlled for by the experimenters, and yet you are assuming that it was not and distorts the results, because you don’t want to accept them.

Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I meant a bias that directly affects the grades given by the teachers, not the bias affecting the performance of the students.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 18:40
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:32 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 04:28 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:00 PM
Jb8989 - 17 February 2019 03:57 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

I am not sure what you mean, sorry.

He means that in the study the possibility of bias on the part of the teachers was controlled for by the experimenters, and yet you are assuming that it was not and distorts the results, because you don’t want to accept them.

Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I meant a bias that directly affects the grades given by the teachers, not the bias affecting the performance of the students.

And that’s what Jb was referring to. I suggest that you carefully read the paper.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
17 February 2019 19:10
 
burt - 17 February 2019 06:40 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:32 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 04:28 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:00 PM
Jb8989 - 17 February 2019 03:57 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

I am not sure what you mean, sorry.

He means that in the study the possibility of bias on the part of the teachers was controlled for by the experimenters, and yet you are assuming that it was not and distorts the results, because you don’t want to accept them.

Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I meant a bias that directly affects the grades given by the teachers, not the bias affecting the performance of the students.

And that’s what Jb was referring to. I suggest that you carefully read the paper.

I read the whole paper carefully. I am a slow reader, so it seemed like a big waste of time after getting through the whole paper and finding no such hint of what you claimed was in it. Then I took another look at the list of controls, and I still found no such thing. I have these two requests for you:

(1) Please don’t speak for any other member of the forum. Each person can speak for himself or herself.
(2) Please don’t waste my time. If you can save me excessive time with a fast copy-and-paste quote, then please do so.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15837
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 February 2019 20:22
 
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 07:10 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 06:40 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:32 PM
burt - 17 February 2019 04:28 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 04:00 PM
Jb8989 - 17 February 2019 03:57 PM
Abel Dean - 17 February 2019 12:37 PM
burt - 15 February 2019 09:34 PM
Jb8989 - 15 February 2019 07:33 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 07:32 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 07:04 PM
Abel Dean - 13 February 2019 02:42 PM
Jb8989 - 13 February 2019 02:15 PM

If western society is culturally biased against minorities then the process of the IQ test would be biased regardless of whether the subject matter of it is. Further, the distinction between learning and testing seems like something we don’t know enough about.

Our expectations say one thing, and the numbers say another thing. The racial IQ gaps are no more and no less than we expect from from the racial gaps in educational success. If the whole society is racist and is depressing every metric and every correlate of intelligence among blacks, then the racist society is not merely depressing black scores but also black intelligence generally. If so, then it still means the scores accurately reflect racial intelligence differences. The claim that the IQ tests are racially biased would be the wrong claim to make.

I disagree. It means that your sample size is tainted.

I’m not talking about expectations as much as I am circumstances. Although if you’re raised expecting to go no further than high school and perform no educationally greater than mediocre, than you might be able to imagine how the psychology of expectations and how it affects intelligence and educational performances comes into play quite signicantly.

More generally I’m saying that racial intellectual inequality implies a biological predisposition. A predisposition that environment either bolsters or depresses significantly enough to reconsider whether a level playing field was ever level enough to create reliable data.

The distinction is relevant for that theory, too. Even if it is purely a matter of racial differences in social expectations that are causing the racial differences in every variable related to intelligence, then that still amounts to racial intelligence differences, and the IQ tests accurately reflect those differences. The problem is not unrepresentative samples or anything like that. The differences in scores emerge from representative samples. Supposing that we were to select only samples in which the social expectations were equal between whites and blacks, and suppose this produced equal IQ results between whites and blacks, then, great, maybe you just solved a big social problem, but you didn’t solve the problem of biased IQ tests. Instead, that would be imposing a bias. Supposing we were practical and we want to discover what the causes of the differences could be, whether it is differences in social expectations, genetics, or anything else, then the raw data needs to be representative. We would gather data not only on IQ but also social expectations. Then we would do a multivariate analysis. After controlling for social expectations, are IQs between the two groups equal? If so, then that would not be the end of it, but it would be a good start. The wrong approach would be to toss out the IQ data believing it is racially biased. It isn’t.

Rule number like three in research is that loaded variables defeat the purpose of cross referencing. That’s to say that intelligence is directly correlated with psychology, which is soft. Social expectations is code for causing motivation, which is impossible to conceptualize without relying heavily on environmental factors.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/huge-study-finds-professors-attitudes-affect-students-grades/

The lead researcher orients herself toward “subtle cues.” But, probable explanations tend to be no so subtle. In this case, the obvious explanation was overlooked by both the Arse Technica article and the original article (linked below): the differential ideological biases between the two sets of teachers.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau4734

You’re projecting a bias that was specifically controlled for.

I am not sure what you mean, sorry.

He means that in the study the possibility of bias on the part of the teachers was controlled for by the experimenters, and yet you are assuming that it was not and distorts the results, because you don’t want to accept them.

Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I meant a bias that directly affects the grades given by the teachers, not the bias affecting the performance of the students.

And that’s what Jb was referring to. I suggest that you carefully read the paper.

I read the whole paper carefully. I am a slow reader, so it seemed like a big waste of time after getting through the whole paper and finding no such hint of what you claimed was in it. Then I took another look at the list of controls, and I still found no such thing. I have these two requests for you:

(1) Please don’t speak for any other member of the forum. Each person can speak for himself or herself.
(2) Please don’t waste my time. If you can save me excessive time with a fast copy-and-paste quote, then please do so.

Please don’t be rigidly dogmatic regarding your beliefs and opinions.

 
‹ First  < 2 3 4