IQ Rankings of Countries

1 Like

I think it’s right for the US to be first place.

I’ll copy here an answer I posted to a similar topic on our friend Iakovos Koukas’ profile, 2 weeks ago:

Unfortunately Lynn and Co. waste a lot of effort in attempts to show racial and xenophobic supremacy. The tests used in the Lynn’s meta-analysis were RSPM (all or almost all), which is supposed to be culture fair, however some civilizations have an important advantage training abstract thinking in many everyday situations, while others work almost exclusively with real-world practical problems. A question like Sigma Test item 34, for example, would perhaps be more likely to be correctly answered by an African +4sd than by a person from an industrialized country with +4sd or even +4.5sd. Our friend David Udbjorg, who spent many years living in Africa, for example, got this question almost completely right, while some people with scores 20 points higher than him did not get right.

In the late 1990’s it was widely reported that the gorilla Koko had an IQ~95 and a few years later Lynn began to say that in some African countries the average population IQ is below 70 and some below 60. Obviously something is very wrong in that. I would say that there is a certain placebo effect on Koko’s IQ, perhaps the person giving the test wanted to get a higher result and may have unconsciously forced this result. It should be a double-blind trial, to try to mitigate this effect. I believe that Koko’s correct IQ might be somewhere between 50 and 80, while the average IQ in the poorest countries and with the most deficient diet in nutrients relevant to physical and mental development might be close to 85 to 105 (I wouldn’t totally rule out the chance of being lightly above average, despite adversities and perhaps even because of adversities). I think there are small variations in average IQ across countries, just like there are between different people and just like there are variations in average height in different countries (and other variables like life expectancy etc.).

However Lynn’s studies are clearly biased, he has an a priori opinion when doing his studies and this certainly influences the results he would like to obtain. In my country he found 87-88 as an average IQ a few years ago and more recently he found 83. I think the average IQ in Brazil is actually a little lower than the world average, for cultural, genetic, nutritional reasons and other factors , including random factors, but I think the difference is unlikely to be as big as 12-13 points or 17 as his recent alleged results.

In the case of Africa, people go hungry in many countries and I find it difficult that under these conditions a person seriously strives to do well on a test without an attractive incentive, especially on a multiple choice test, where a person just needs to put “x” on any square and go back to home and live her hard life. If one get nothing for a higher score, so it’s obvious that the scores don’t reflect the full capabilities of these people.

I would like to see the raw data he used and learn more about how the tests were applied. In Brazil, in tests applied to people with a reasonable standard of living, but who did not voluntarily choose to take the test, there are many cases of people who kick all the alternatives, pushing the measured IQ very low, without the score reflecting the real ability. of those people. If Lynn did a more serious, impartial work and made an effort to filter these effects, the differences found would probably be much smaller. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if he simply tampered with data to find what he wanted, which is all too common in bad science (as Burt did) and even good science (as Mendel did).

In the image an example of a result with many people kicking all the alternatives. Obviously the “small mountain” on the left tail reflects the fraction of people who didn’t even try to get a question right, and if this is not filtered out in the evaluation of the results, the average will be artificially pushed down.