The source of the dataset did appear to take this into account:
"The authors took great care in assessing cultural explanations of Chinese age reporting preferences, such as assessing tiger year preferences, 4 avoidance, 8 preferences etc. As a result, Chinese age-heaping was not found to have been fundamentally different from rounding patterns in other parts of the world, although the Chinese cultural interest in the calendar and astrology had a positive effect on numeric abilities and numeric discipline."
Also, Taiwan was created by the migration of Han people into the Island in the 17th century, it's not a corrupt dictatorship like China and Becker gives them an IQ of around 106 based on several good studies which is in line with their results in international tests like PISA and it's a similar story for Singapore as well.
1. IQ by provinces from iodine study are valid. They predict performance of China on math section of PISA very well(predict 540 and 580 on 2015,2018 PISA math, in reality 531 and 591).
2. Chinese probably have quite strong visuo-spatial tilt, around 5-6 IQ points based on PISA results. So we have around 103-104 visuo-spatial IQ, around 98 verbal IQ and around 101 full scale IQ. Little bit smaller than 103 of American whites.
3. Dysgenic is probably far more stronger for China than US. Plotting regional IQ against regional tfr show no relationship for US, and pretty strong negative relationship in China(that 4 provinces of China that participated in PISA 2018, have one of the highest IQ and lowest tfr in the world). My calculations suggested that number of high IQ individuals would halve in China in comparison to US(without taking immigration of high IQ immigrants into account, which worsen situation for China even more).
4. East asian countries have per capita elite scientific research production only in 40% level of US.
I think it all makes strong case for another American century
Using elite scientific research production is misleading. As an example if one looks at the top ten ranked table tennis players in the world you will find several are non-Chinese, but this is because regardless of the population size of China as a country it can only send just a few players to compete in world ranked tournament. Top ranked non Chinese players do play in Chinese league and got beaten frequently by no name players, meaning they would not have reached top ten status if they were Chinese. The elite research most closely associate with top schools. US has a long history building many top schools, and don't forget these schools attracted top talents all over the world. Despite China's huge population, top research schools are still few, but grow at a very fast rate. Give it a few decades.
Given the decline of Whites in America and the rise of other races, I’d hesitate to predict “another American century”. Yeah, we import a lot of smarter folk, but that seems swamped by illegal immigration. Worker bees are important too. China did not get where it is today simply by having a cognitive elite.
There's also the "O-ring theory" of economic growth, which suggests that having a fairly high average IQ even at the lower levels of the production chain can have massive importance.
Never doubted the scores, I only doubted whether they are indicative of intelligence differences or not. For instance, given how consequential IQ-like tests are for many people in China (The civil service exams, for instance), and their general obsession with education, it would make sense to me if they had inflated IQ scores compared to their actual "g".
The same away a 125 IQ midwit who studies like hell may well get a better score on the SAT than a 140 IQ student that is not as well prepared.
At this point, China is roughly as rich as Thailand or Argentina -both with avg IQs of ~86. There is grave inequality of IQ within China itself, given that China is more a continent than a country -Zhejiang and Jiangsu are nothing like Hebei and Hunan, and Taiwan (scoring ~102 in recent PISA results) is certainly one of the most intellectually oriented parts of China. China is well known to be less intellectually oriented than Japan, which, by recent PISA scores, is around 103, with Britain at 100.
> China was among the 10 of 107 countries that engaged in the least age heaping in 1890.
Don't disagree with overall thesis, but this isn't great evidence. Chinese heap differently - by 12 year intervals of the Chinese calendar.
The source of the dataset did appear to take this into account:
"The authors took great care in assessing cultural explanations of Chinese age reporting preferences, such as assessing tiger year preferences, 4 avoidance, 8 preferences etc. As a result, Chinese age-heaping was not found to have been fundamentally different from rounding patterns in other parts of the world, although the Chinese cultural interest in the calendar and astrology had a positive effect on numeric abilities and numeric discipline."
https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/j.eeh.2009.05.004
Also, Taiwan was created by the migration of Han people into the Island in the 17th century, it's not a corrupt dictatorship like China and Becker gives them an IQ of around 106 based on several good studies which is in line with their results in international tests like PISA and it's a similar story for Singapore as well.
Debate krichard1212 on IQ
I generally don't do verbal debates - if he has responded to any of my posts/ideas I would be willing to comment, though.
I would add additional consideration:
1. IQ by provinces from iodine study are valid. They predict performance of China on math section of PISA very well(predict 540 and 580 on 2015,2018 PISA math, in reality 531 and 591).
2. Chinese probably have quite strong visuo-spatial tilt, around 5-6 IQ points based on PISA results. So we have around 103-104 visuo-spatial IQ, around 98 verbal IQ and around 101 full scale IQ. Little bit smaller than 103 of American whites.
3. Dysgenic is probably far more stronger for China than US. Plotting regional IQ against regional tfr show no relationship for US, and pretty strong negative relationship in China(that 4 provinces of China that participated in PISA 2018, have one of the highest IQ and lowest tfr in the world). My calculations suggested that number of high IQ individuals would halve in China in comparison to US(without taking immigration of high IQ immigrants into account, which worsen situation for China even more).
4. East asian countries have per capita elite scientific research production only in 40% level of US.
I think it all makes strong case for another American century
Have you looked at the illegal immigrants arriving in NYC lately? Do a simple google image search on it.
US is destined to become a Latin American country with a similar IQ.
Using elite scientific research production is misleading. As an example if one looks at the top ten ranked table tennis players in the world you will find several are non-Chinese, but this is because regardless of the population size of China as a country it can only send just a few players to compete in world ranked tournament. Top ranked non Chinese players do play in Chinese league and got beaten frequently by no name players, meaning they would not have reached top ten status if they were Chinese. The elite research most closely associate with top schools. US has a long history building many top schools, and don't forget these schools attracted top talents all over the world. Despite China's huge population, top research schools are still few, but grow at a very fast rate. Give it a few decades.
Given the decline of Whites in America and the rise of other races, I’d hesitate to predict “another American century”. Yeah, we import a lot of smarter folk, but that seems swamped by illegal immigration. Worker bees are important too. China did not get where it is today simply by having a cognitive elite.
There's also the "O-ring theory" of economic growth, which suggests that having a fairly high average IQ even at the lower levels of the production chain can have massive importance.
Thanks. I admit to never having heard of the “O-ring theory”. I shall endeavor to improve my understanding.
Never doubted the scores, I only doubted whether they are indicative of intelligence differences or not. For instance, given how consequential IQ-like tests are for many people in China (The civil service exams, for instance), and their general obsession with education, it would make sense to me if they had inflated IQ scores compared to their actual "g".
The same away a 125 IQ midwit who studies like hell may well get a better score on the SAT than a 140 IQ student that is not as well prepared.
Would you give any weight to this possibility?
No one mentions that Asians have a very small standard deviation and that is key. what is fashionable explains the historical lag
That's not true.
I have encountered this data several times, and it can clarify a lot of things amazingly.
https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/06/asian-white-iq-variance-from-pisa.html
I side with the lower IQ estimates -Malloy has pointed out there are studies in Chinese rural areas with average IQs with the 90s, 80s, and even 70s.
https://humanvarieties.org/2016/04/23/top-ten-human-varieties-posts/
At this point, China is roughly as rich as Thailand or Argentina -both with avg IQs of ~86. There is grave inequality of IQ within China itself, given that China is more a continent than a country -Zhejiang and Jiangsu are nothing like Hebei and Hunan, and Taiwan (scoring ~102 in recent PISA results) is certainly one of the most intellectually oriented parts of China. China is well known to be less intellectually oriented than Japan, which, by recent PISA scores, is around 103, with Britain at 100.
There's no reason to think Han Chinese in China are genetically different than the Taiwanese and Taiwan is just as rich as Japan or Korea nowadays.