I think it would be better to do that for the final estimates than to the sample means in the database to avoid the upward bias that results from winsorization.
People with IQs of 60 are usually within institutions, certainly within special ed in the US. When you deal with them you know they are dumb.
Traveling to Nicaragua and Nepal, working with the people, I experience them as normal. Shopkeepers could do arithmetic - this was in the days before calculators were ubiquitous. They managed to run small businesses.
This was even true, though to a lesser degree, than Haiti. You are right to question the administration and even the meaning of the tests.
"Consider that the average American Black scores an IQ of 80 in the largest, high quality datasets (e.g. NLS, ABCD, Project Talent) regardless of cohort year."
Is this relative to white Americans and if so what would it be on the same scale as NIQ is usually reported(I think UK=100?)?
European countries differ by as much as one SD. Assuming an average IQ of 75 for african countries I don't think it can be ruled out that there is an outlier with with sub 60 IQ.
Possible. IQ can be estimated by what people do for a living, per this chart by Linda Gottfredson. A friend recently noted - I haven't verified it - that there are no automobile manufacturers in Africa. Not enough skilled labor. We note how things have fallen apart in Zimbabwe and South Africa as the aboriginal people have replaced descendants of the colonialists.
Visitors to Africa, and I visiting Haiti, notice that there are frequently crowds of people doing essentially nothing. Just passing the time of day. One theory is that there is nobody with the wit and enterprise to found businesses that would occupy them.
> The creator of the dataset says as much and currently employs a policy of setting the absolute minimum of IQ estimates to 60.
This doesn't seem to be defensible. Implausible sure but how can you justify fiddling with raw data this way?
I think it would be better to do that for the final estimates than to the sample means in the database to avoid the upward bias that results from winsorization.
People with IQs of 60 are usually within institutions, certainly within special ed in the US. When you deal with them you know they are dumb.
Traveling to Nicaragua and Nepal, working with the people, I experience them as normal. Shopkeepers could do arithmetic - this was in the days before calculators were ubiquitous. They managed to run small businesses.
This was even true, though to a lesser degree, than Haiti. You are right to question the administration and even the meaning of the tests.
Truthseekism is the way
"Consider that the average American Black scores an IQ of 80 in the largest, high quality datasets (e.g. NLS, ABCD, Project Talent) regardless of cohort year."
Is this relative to white Americans and if so what would it be on the same scale as NIQ is usually reported(I think UK=100?)?
European countries differ by as much as one SD. Assuming an average IQ of 75 for african countries I don't think it can be ruled out that there is an outlier with with sub 60 IQ.
Possible. IQ can be estimated by what people do for a living, per this chart by Linda Gottfredson. A friend recently noted - I haven't verified it - that there are no automobile manufacturers in Africa. Not enough skilled labor. We note how things have fallen apart in Zimbabwe and South Africa as the aboriginal people have replaced descendants of the colonialists.
Visitors to Africa, and I visiting Haiti, notice that there are frequently crowds of people doing essentially nothing. Just passing the time of day. One theory is that there is nobody with the wit and enterprise to found businesses that would occupy them.
https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/occu-IQ-7.png
Deleted on accident (wanted to delete mine). The claim was that the largest source of heterogeneity is sampling error, which is correct.