Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

[daveman]

Gee, I hope I didn't hurt too many feelings.

...says the guy pouting because no one's kissing his ass in the manner to which he feels entitled.

 

[GodSaveAmerica]

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

According to this absurd conclusion, the most conservative voting bloc in America should be blacks. They have the scientifically verified lowest average IQ (roughly 85) compared to a 100 white average. Yet they vote over 95% Democrat and of all of the demographic groups they are by far the most liberal. This engineered study does not withstand the evidence.

You really ought to get out more, and, maybe take a course in statistics. Middle class black Americans are generally socially conservative and as in any racial, ethnic, religious or political set will have a spread of measured IQ's peaking at 100. If they do not the test itself is either unreliable or invalid.

See: Reliability & Validity

I don't disagree that there is more conservatism among higher IQ blacks, which once again makes my point that the claim made by the study cited in the OP is contradicted by the evidence.

 

[IanC]

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

According to this absurd conclusion, the most conservative voting bloc in America should be blacks. They have the scientifically verified lowest average IQ (roughly 85) compared to a 100 white average. Yet they vote over 95% Democrat and of all of the demographic groups they are by far the most liberal. This engineered study does not withstand the evidence.

You really ought to get out more, and, maybe take a course in statistics. Middle class black Americans are generally socially conservative and as in any racial, ethnic, religious or political set will have a spread of measured IQ's peaking at 100. If they do not the test itself is either unreliable or invalid.

See: Reliability & Validity

what an odd statement to make. blacks do not have an intellegence level of 100 compared to whites, or even the general population.

are you making an information-free reference to only comparing blacks to other blacks? and then defining the average and standard deviation to that cohort? while it is possible to do that, if you then compared the white population to that standard it would be roughly 118, 1.3 standard deviations higher than the black mean.

setting average (white) IQ to 100 is only a nominal reference number, with which to compare other groups against.


or do you really think that blacks, or even 'middle class blacks', have an average IQ of 100? as it is typically defined of course.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know...........................there was a man in this country who because he was different from the others, was told his ideas would never work. As a matter of fact, because of the way he looked, people refused to follow his ideas about farming, and those that didn't, ended up with problems.

Those that followed his ideas? Well, they fared pretty well.

The man's name was George Washington Carver, and it was his ideas on crop rotation.

Does bigotry make you stupid? Yep. Because if you refuse new information and are not willing to give it a chance, how can you ever learn something new?

 

[IanC]

Even though I also dislike the people who you describe as dumb, I think people put too much stock into IQ tests and treat the scores as an absolute. IQ doesn't even factor (but ASSUMES) one's work ethic and discipline which are just as important as intelligence in life. They also devalue environmental factors and cultural or sub-cultural influences.

Also in IQ test statistics, When did they do the test? How often do they do tests? How big are the samples? where do they do get their subjects?

Nobody I have ever known has taken a legit (non-online) IQ test which are very expensive (for a test). I doubt anyone here has taken one either.

why do you think that intelligence, measured by proxies such as IQ tests, SATs, AFQT, etc, needs to describe anything else but intelligence?

if you really want to know more about IQ tests then go to the web homepages of the tests you are interested in. they will explain how they were designed and validated.


other personal characteristics and traits are important to success. they are more difficult to measure but would usually follow the same normal (bell curved) distribution found in most human traits. but intelligence is the most important factor because it is behind the speed and accuracy of the thousands of everyday decisions we make.

a two standard deviation advantage in intelligence can easily make up for a low work ethic. a two standard deviation advantage in work ethic seldom makes up for low intelligence. of course intelligence is also positively correlated to other postive social traits, and negatively correlated to negative social traits. smart people are better educated and earn more money and social status, while avoiding such things as criminal activity and out of wedlock children.


intelligence is there, whether we measure it or not. and it explains a large portion of success both within and between races and groups.

 

[IanC]

You know...........................there was a man in this country who because he was different from the others, was told his ideas would never work. As a matter of fact, because of the way he looked, people refused to follow his ideas about farming, and those that didn't, ended up with problems.

Those that followed his ideas? Well, they fared pretty well.

The man's name was George Washington Carver, and it was his ideas on crop rotation.

Does bigotry make you stupid? Yep. Because if you refuse new information and are not willing to give it a chance, how can you ever learn something new?

Im pretty sure the idea of crop rotation has been around longer than since Carver.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know...........................there was a man in this country who because he was different from the others, was told his ideas would never work. As a matter of fact, because of the way he looked, people refused to follow his ideas about farming, and those that didn't, ended up with problems.

Those that followed his ideas? Well, they fared pretty well.

The man's name was George Washington Carver, and it was his ideas on crop rotation.

Does bigotry make you stupid? Yep. Because if you refuse new information and are not willing to give it a chance, how can you ever learn something new?

Im pretty sure the idea of crop rotation has been around longer than since Carver.

He was the one who brought it to the mainstream of America.

Do some research.

He also did a lot of work with peanuts.

 

[Mortimer]

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature "structure and order" that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice," he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments.

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

most racists are dumb, there are a few who are very intelligent but they are sociopaths

 

[KR811]

Even though I also dislike the people who you describe as dumb, I think people put too much stock into IQ tests and treat the scores as an absolute. IQ doesn't even factor (but ASSUMES) one's work ethic and discipline which are just as important as intelligence in life. They also devalue environmental factors and cultural or sub-cultural influences.

Also in IQ test statistics, When did they do the test? How often do they do tests? How big are the samples? where do they do get their subjects?

Nobody I have ever known has taken a legit (non-online) IQ test which are very expensive (for a test). I doubt anyone here has taken one either.

why do you think that intelligence, measured by proxies such as IQ tests, SATs, AFQT, etc, needs to describe anything else but intelligence?

if you really want to know more about IQ tests then go to the web homepages of the tests you are interested in. they will explain how they were designed and validated.


other personal characteristics and traits are important to success. they are more difficult to measure but would usually follow the same normal (bell curved) distribution found in most human traits. but intelligence is the most important factor because it is behind the speed and accuracy of the thousands of everyday decisions we make.

a two standard deviation advantage in intelligence can easily make up for a low work ethic. a two standard deviation advantage in work ethic seldom makes up for low intelligence. of course intelligence is also positively correlated to other postive social traits, and negatively correlated to negative social traits. smart people are better educated and earn more money and social status, while avoiding such things as criminal activity and out of wedlock children.


intelligence is there, whether we measure it or not. and it explains a large portion of success both within and between races and groups.

In some scientific works such as "Race and Intelligence" (which is bullshit) their Racial and IQ curves also state what positions or careers in correlation to their IQ scores. They assumed IQ also means you also work hard. Even though that is likely, it doesn't mean that it's absolute, as many people treat IQ scores. There are smart people (by IQ standards) who who waste their potential either from partying, drugs, obsessive video gaming, etc as there are dumb people (by IQ standards) who bust their asses everyday. I've seen both instances personally.

Scientists can't even agree on the exact definition of intelligence. How could they treat IQ as if was an absolute?

 

[IanC]

The letter to the Wall Street Journal set out 25 conclusions:[2]

"Intelligence is a very general mental capability ... it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings ..."
"Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments."
"While there are different types of intelligence tests, they all measure the same intelligence."
"The spread of people along the IQ continuum ... can be represented well by the ... ‘normal curve'."
"Intelligence tests are not culturally biased"
"The brain processes underlying intelligence are still little understood"
"Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level"
"The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered"
"IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes ... Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance"
"A high IQ is an advantage because virtually all activities require some reasoning and decision-making"
"The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life’s settings become more complex"
"Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting performance in education, training, and complex jobs ... but intelligence is often the most important"
"Certain personality traits, special talents, [etc] are important ... in many jobs, but they have narrower (or unknown) applicability or ‘transferability’ across tasks and settings compared with general intelligence"
"Heritability estimates range from 0.4 to 0.8 ... indicating genetics plays a bigger role than environment in creating IQ differences"
"Members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in intelligence"
"That IQ may be highly heritable does not mean that it is not affected by the environment ... IQs do gradually stabilize during childhood, however, and generally change little thereafter"
"Although the environment is important in creating IQ differences, we do not know yet how to manipulate it"
"Genetically caused differences are not necessarily irremediable"
"There is no persuasive evidence that the IQ bell curves for different racial-ethnic groups are converging"
"Racial-ethnic differences in IQ bell curves are essentially the same when youngsters leave high school as when they enter first grade ... black 17-year-olds perform, on the average, more like white 13-year-olds"
"The reasons that blacks differ among themselves in intelligence appear to be the same as those for why whites ... differ among themselves"
"There is no definitive answer as to why bell curves differ across racial-ethnic groups. The reasons for these IQ differences between groups may be markedly different from the reasons for why individuals differ among themselves within any particular group"
"Racial-ethnic differences are somewhat smaller but still substantial for individuals from the same socio-economic backgrounds"
"Almost all Americans who identify themselves as black have white ancestors – the white admixture is about 20% ... research on intelligence relies on self-classification into distinct racial categories"
"The research findings neither dictate nor preclude any particular social policy, because they can never determine our goals. They can, however, help us estimate the likely success and side-effects of pursuing those goals via different means."

Mainstream Science on Intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

as far as careers go....do you know any IQ80 physicists? hahaha, you would spend a long time looking for one of those. there are fuzzy IQ threshholds for lots of things. I find one of the most interesting to be the IQ90 cutoff for military service.

 

[NoNukes]

It's funny the way you morons pretend there's no liberal racism.

Here is a fine example to support the OP.

Really? Find a post of mine that's racist. Degree of difficulty: You have to use the REAL definition of "racist", not the progressive definition that says "it's racist because I disagree with it!!"

Hop to it, kid.

No one called you a racist. Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Duped]

Blacks are the most racist group in America, and therefore the dumbest. Liberals blacks are the dumbest of the dumb, and too ignorant to realize it. Liberals in general come across as being stupid - they are replete with social justice ideas, but do not address their cost. The fact is they don't factor a cost analyst into any of their thinking. When you live in a capatalist society, the cost of any idea needs to be at the forefront.

They don't know what true racism is - they use the term capriciously to attack those who believe in personal responsibility, because they ( conservatives ) are opposed to their ideology. If you want to short circuit a liberals brain - just asks them to BUDGET their agenda!
Harry Reid is suppose to be a smart liberal - his dumb ass can't ponder a budget, because he will not accept the fact that his ideology is unaffordable

 

[daveman]

Here is a fine example to support the OP.

Really? Find a post of mine that's racist. Degree of difficulty: You have to use the REAL definition of "racist", not the progressive definition that says "it's racist because I disagree with it!!"

Hop to it, kid.

No one called you a racist. Thank you for proving my point.

Oh, horseshit, kid. I get called a racist all the time.

Drooling idiot leftists who claim I am are never able to point out a single post of mine expressing a racist view, which proves they're using the prog definition: "It's racist because I disagree with it!!"

Now you tell me if that proves that progressives are intelligent.

 

[NoNukes]

Really? Find a post of mine that's racist. Degree of difficulty: You have to use the REAL definition of "racist", not the progressive definition that says "it's racist because I disagree with it!!"

Hop to it, kid.

No one called you a racist. Thank you for proving my point.

Oh, horseshit, kid. I get called a racist all the time.

Drooling idiot leftists who claim I am are never able to point out a single post of mine expressing a racist view, which proves they're using the prog definition: "It's racist because I disagree with it!!"

Now you tell me if that proves that progressives are intelligent.

YOU prove that progressives are intelligent. And I did not call you a racist.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Unfortunately, facts don't uphold this.. who is it that clings to debunked AGW junk science? Liberals. Who is it that looks at failed nanny states worldwide then calls for more of it at home? Liberals. Who is it that in the face of crushing debt, global threats, failed social engineering schemes, etc. focuses their attention on gay marriage, condoms and imaginary wars on women? Liberals.

Yeah, conservatives are low IQ folks...

Whatthefuckever.

 

[KR811]

The letter to the Wall Street Journal set out 25 conclusions:[2]

"Intelligence is a very general mental capability ... it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings ..."
"Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments."
"While there are different types of intelligence tests, they all measure the same intelligence."
"The spread of people along the IQ continuum ... can be represented well by the ... ‘normal curve'."
"Intelligence tests are not culturally biased"
"The brain processes underlying intelligence are still little understood"
"Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level"
"The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered"
"IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes ... Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance"
"A high IQ is an advantage because virtually all activities require some reasoning and decision-making"
"The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life’s settings become more complex"
"Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting performance in education, training, and complex jobs ... but intelligence is often the most important"
"Certain personality traits, special talents, [etc] are important ... in many jobs, but they have narrower (or unknown) applicability or ‘transferability’ across tasks and settings compared with general intelligence"
"Heritability estimates range from 0.4 to 0.8 ... indicating genetics plays a bigger role than environment in creating IQ differences"
"Members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in intelligence"
"That IQ may be highly heritable does not mean that it is not affected by the environment ... IQs do gradually stabilize during childhood, however, and generally change little thereafter"
"Although the environment is important in creating IQ differences, we do not know yet how to manipulate it"
"Genetically caused differences are not necessarily irremediable"
"There is no persuasive evidence that the IQ bell curves for different racial-ethnic groups are converging"
"Racial-ethnic differences in IQ bell curves are essentially the same when youngsters leave high school as when they enter first grade ... black 17-year-olds perform, on the average, more like white 13-year-olds"
"The reasons that blacks differ among themselves in intelligence appear to be the same as those for why whites ... differ among themselves"
"There is no definitive answer as to why bell curves differ across racial-ethnic groups. The reasons for these IQ differences between groups may be markedly different from the reasons for why individuals differ among themselves within any particular group"
"Racial-ethnic differences are somewhat smaller but still substantial for individuals from the same socio-economic backgrounds"
"Almost all Americans who identify themselves as black have white ancestors – the white admixture is about 20% ... research on intelligence relies on self-classification into distinct racial categories"
"The research findings neither dictate nor preclude any particular social policy, because they can never determine our goals. They can, however, help us estimate the likely success and side-effects of pursuing those goals via different means."

Mainstream Science on Intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

as far as careers go....do you know any IQ80 physicists? hahaha, you would spend a long time looking for one of those. there are fuzzy IQ threshholds for lots of things. I find one of the most interesting to be the IQ90 cutoff for military service.

Here are some better questions. Do you anyone who has taken a legitimate IQ test, before? If IQ is purely genetic, why can there be vast differences in intelligence between offspring or siblings. Does IQ even consider people who are not good test takers? Why is IQ fixed and how do they know hard work and discipline can't increase IQ? For example, what if someone was struggling or aloof about school but then realizes he/she won't go anywhere in life and starts studying hard over the years and drastically improves his/her grades. Do you honestly think that his/her IQ score wouldn't increase?

Mainstream Science and Intelligence only tested Americans yet somehow it's used to define global IQ. Also when did they get their samples? How big were those samples? What kind of testing methods were utilized in those samples? From what I've heard, they got their data from WW1? Wouldn't you think another or more current test would be called for? Maybe they should give all children teenagers, and young adults IQ tests.

 

[IanC]

KR811- have you even thought about this subject? I cannot imagine how you could assemble more incorrect statements in one message even if you were trying.

no one is saying intelligence is 100% genetic. while intelligence is quite stable, no one is saying it is fixed. measurement data show siblings are closer in intelligence than unrelated people.

while anyone could purposely get a low score on an IQ test, no one can purposely get a high one without the prerequisite intelligence. a lower intelligence person working at full capacity can achieve more than a higher intelligence person not working hard but that is not really the point. with two individuals of the same work ethic, the more intelligent individual will accomplish more. what makes you think that smarter people work less diligently? the reality is that smart people are more likely to work hard because they can foresee the benefit. also, a smart person who wastes the first part of their youth is much more likely to be able to turn their life around because they are capable of being trained or educated.

again, intelligence is still there whether it is measured or not.

as far as IQ tests, go to the source and google some of the major tests. it is laughable that you think that the data is from WWI.

I had one child that was tested in school. he was not given a number but instead there were rankings in various areas. a ranking of 98-99 percentile would imply an IQ of ~130. because our school district has no viable gifted&talented programs I declined testing of my other children. if all children were tested it would certainly identify 'diamonds in the rough' but that would probably not be worth the overall expense. some or most teachers have the ability to judge mental acuity simply by interaction and that is sufficient information for the purpose.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature "structure and order" that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice," he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments.

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

Intelligent people know how to use the search function.

Just saying.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I will make the same offer I made the last time some idiot posted this study, anyone that actually wants to dig into this thing and defend it let me know so I can prove how stupid you are.

 

[Huey]

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature "structure and order" that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice," he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments.

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

most racists are dumb, there are a few who are very intelligent but they are sociopaths

Say "troot" you sound like you are running for president of the dumb racist group.