On 'g' .. I suspect rumors of its demise are premature. The bottom line, for me, is that "IQ" tests remain solid predictors of academic and employment success, and when the items on them (any multi-item test of general cognitive abilities) are factor analyzed, g is very difficult to avoid. Few people expect 'g' to be localized in a brain area any more than memory or perception are. Also, those items with heavy g loadings are also the most heritable (yikes, it would take time to find references, but we can). Also, even those theoretical approaches that have 'g' on top subdivide after that, e.g. the Cattell-Horn-Carroll then has Gfluid and Gcrystallized etc .. and most have working memory. When the day comes when a neurological item/s has better psychometric properties than existing items, we can say bye bye to g ....
========================== John W. Kulig, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Coordinator, University Honors Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 ========================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Clark" <j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:31:36 AM Subject: Re: [tips] Goodbye "g" -- We Hardly Knew Ya Hi My last brief comment: 1. No matter how odd an area of research might sound, one must be cautious in drawing simplistic conclusions about its theoretical or empirical utility. Otherwise, we are likely to hear more politicians making fun of science grants. Penis size, for example, is of importance to researchers and practitioners concerned with sexual health, one recent article by Grov et al (2010) being titled: "The association between penis size and sexual health among men who have sex with men." And why wouldn't an association between sexual orientation and penis size, if validated, contribute to our understanding of sexual orientation (e.g., role of androgens)? 2. Drawing an analogy between espousing ideas distasteful to many and the actions of mass murderers, no matter how loosely intended, is again a risky activity given the marked differences in how the two should be treated by society and by academics. Irrespective of whether you think of it in terms of free speech or academic freedom, the success of academia does hinge on an openness to ideas as long as they are supported by some rational and scientific process (note that does not mean the ideas are correct ... if it did, then science would be all too easy). In the case of Rushton, for example, the Premier of the Province of Ontario called for his firing, a committee of his peers at Western gave him an unsatisfactory evaluation (later over-turned on appeal), and there were other negative consequences, one important one perhaps being a stifling of the actual research that could resolve issues, whatever the outcome. Although the Premier is fully legitimate in espousing his views (which, it should be noted, are only neutered by protective mechanisms built into academia and society), I find the potential or actual negative consequences unwarranted and unpalatable in the treatment of Rushton, just as I do in other cases (e.g., Elizabeth Loftus) where people disagreed with the ideas being espoused. And there are sufficient examples in the history of science of ideas that were ridiculed turning out to be correct (Wegener and continental drift, anyone?) for us to be cautious, again keeping in mind that being ridiculed does not make an idea correct or incorrect and there certainly are cases where ideas can be discredited giving the overwhelming evidence against them (e.g., young-earth creationism). On that happy note, all the best for the holidays and the new year! Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor & Chair of Psychology j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca Room 4L41A 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax Dept of Psychology, U of Winnipeg 515 Portage Ave, Winnipeg, MB R3B 0R4 CANADA >>> "Mike Palij" <m...@nyu.edu> 20-Dec-12 7:53 AM >>> Now that's odd. In the early 2000s I received unsolicited in the mail a copy of Rushton's paperback "Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective" (2nd Special Abridged Edition). I just checked the index and there is no mention of altruism. In contrast, there are 14 entries for "Sexuality". I quote from one of these entries: |...Condom size can affect whether one is used, so agencies take note |of penis size when they give out condoms. The World Health |Organization Guidelines specify a 49-mm-width condom for Asia, |a 52-mm-width for North America and Europe, and a 53-mm-width |for Africa. China is now making its own condoms -- 49 mm. | | Race differences in testicle size have also been measures (Asians=9 |grams, Europeans=21 g). This is not just because Europeans have a |slightly larger body size. The difference is too large. A 1989 article |in Nature, the leading British science magazine, said that the difference |in testicle size could mean that Whites makes two times as many sperm |per day as do Orientals. So far, we have no information on the relative |size of Blacks. (p42). One gets the impression that, on the basis of Rushton's remarks, someone got busy measuring African-American and African male ball sacks. The prediction, I imagine, is that they would have the biggest ones of all, given Rushton's claim that there is a negative correlation between penis size and sexuality with intelligence. Which area of study by Rushton, his study of altruism or the relationship of the size of peoples' genitalia to intelligence will have the longest influence? Hard to say but one recent article might provide a clue: Richard Lynn, (2012) Rushton's r-K life history theory of race differences in penis length and circumference examined in 113 populations, Personality and Individual Differences, Available online 12 March 2012, ISSN 0191-8869, 10.1016/j.paid.2012.02.016. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912000852) Abstract: Rushton's (1985, 2000) r-K life history theory that Mongoloids are the most K evolved, Caucasoids somewhat less K evolved, and Negroids the least K evolved is examined and extended in an analysis of data for erect penis length and circumference in two new data sets. These new data extend Rushton's theory by presenting disaggregated data for penis size for European and North African/South Asian Caucasoids; for East Asian and Southeast Asian Mongoloids; for Inuit and Amerindians and Mestizos, and for thirteen mixed race samples. The results generally confirm and extend Rushton's r-K life history theory. Keywords: Race; Penis length; r-K Life theory; Intelligence Yes, Rushton should probably be remembered for than his interest in altruism, just like <insert name of your favorite dictator/mass murderer/etc> should be remembered for more than just their "indiscretions". -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu P.S. Anthony Bogart, another Canadian researcher and colleague of Rushton, has discovered that homosexual men have longer you-know-whats than straight men but don't take my word for it, see this popular media account: http://www.salon.com/1999/11/04/size/ and the original research report here: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1018780108597?LI=true What possible conclusions might one reach on the basis of such research? (1) This is consistent with the notion that gays are hypersexual, since having a longer thingamajig inevitably leads to being more sexually active or (2) Don't believe a guy when you ask him how long his Johnson is. Use reliable and valid measurement techniques even if you have to give some participants Viagara first. ------------ Original Message ------------- On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 21:34:47 -0800, Jim Clark wrote: Hi Sorry to hear about Phil Rushton having died. Despite his more notorious ideas and his appearing on Geraldo, he probably deserves to be remembered for more. Here's one summary of his research on Altruism, for example. https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/j-p-rushtons-contributions-to-the-study-of-altruism.pdf >>> "Lilienfeld, Scott O" <slil...@emory.edu> 19-Dec-12 3:40 PM >>> Actually, Rushton passed away fairly recently..Scott --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=22460 or send a blank email to leave-22460-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: ku...@mail.plymouth.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=22464 or send a blank email to leave-22464-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=22487 or send a blank email to leave-22487-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
