tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post7707516046902962772..comments2020-11-29T02:07:43.911-05:00Comments on Information Processing: Success, Ability, and all thatSteve Hsuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02428333897272913660noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-90308784882335373422014-08-06T16:43:17.777-04:002014-08-06T16:43:17.777-04:00Concur with you.
We all noticed that some kids wh...Concur with you. <br />We all noticed that some kids who were so smart in our grade school yet falled behind in high school years. Kids too young yield unreliable intellectual information. People might have very different mental maturation rate just like that of height.AGnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-6388523903923128272014-07-29T10:16:55.311-04:002014-07-29T10:16:55.311-04:00Interesting graph. I went looking for it and foun...Interesting graph. I went looking for it and found http://www.sibille.pitt.edu/Publications/2011_Glorioso_ProgressNeurobiology.pdf<br />which looks at nervous system aging and disease. Figure 3 emphasizes the heterogeneity of the population underlying the average curves.Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-91520430484795058052014-07-29T10:05:07.593-04:002014-07-29T10:05:07.593-04:00Can you elaborate on this? A reference expanding ...Can you elaborate on this? A reference expanding on this point would be appreciated.Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-55981368725150766962014-07-29T09:58:18.185-04:002014-07-29T09:58:18.185-04:00Agreed about the value of simple (here and usually...Agreed about the value of simple (here and usually, linear) models -- and well put in your last paragraph. Your calculations agree reasonably with my simulation, if anything they seem perhaps to give a higher estimate. With a 0.65 correlation I see the center of the X density a little over 2 SD for the best and about 3SD for the top 0.1%. I would expect a Nobel prize to fall between the two. Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-48020981675840656842014-07-29T05:20:33.636-04:002014-07-29T05:20:33.636-04:00V-IQ tends to increase somewhat with age:
http://...V-IQ tends to increase somewhat with age:<br /><br />http://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-fd832e64253819688a4eaaaf25eac62b?convert_to_webp=true<br /><br /><br />Let's take that graph at face value and assume the test was normalized in such a way that average 20-somethings would score 100 for V-IQ. At the same age, the theoretical physicists in the group would have scored about 164 V-IQ. That Corneliusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-31770497594163597512014-07-29T03:10:35.833-04:002014-07-29T03:10:35.833-04:00The average Termite did indeed score in the 150s, ...The average Termite did indeed score in the 150s, but ratio IQ's used at the time generally had SDs greater than 15 and were non-normally distributed at the extremes because some kids have cognitive growth spurts causing their mental age to leap to twice their chronological age, thus their NORMALIZED average IQ was likely well below the 3 SD levelPumpkinperson.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-22593427716968142302014-07-29T02:55:49.746-04:002014-07-29T02:55:49.746-04:00Oops, sorry I didn't realize the monograph mig...Oops, sorry I didn't realize the monograph might be different from the book. Might be worth looking into.<br /><br />I've read the Cambridge paper and it's not very enlightening. The scores seem very low to me.steve hsuhttp://duende.uoregon.edu/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-37219990505410607322014-07-29T01:58:34.377-04:002014-07-29T01:58:34.377-04:00Yes, there are many ways you can measure scholasti...Yes, there are many ways you can measure scholastic success. Elementary school grades in children and years of education among adults both correlate 0.65 with IQ so I use 0.65 as a good estimate for scholastic success in general (in the total population, correlations are much smaller in restricted samples like grad students). So if there were a perfect correlation between IQ and scholastic Pumpkinperson.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-60431233565400411462014-07-29T01:15:30.276-04:002014-07-29T01:15:30.276-04:00That's about, very roughly, where Michael Jord...That's about, very roughly, where Michael Jordan fell on the height distribution: about 2.5 to 3.0 standard deviations above the mean height. LeBron James is another s.d. out to the right.stevesailernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-82330827720478258452014-07-29T01:12:38.623-04:002014-07-29T01:12:38.623-04:00Reasoning statistically is just something that'...Reasoning statistically is just something that's culturally new to us. The concept of regression toward the mean wasn't worked out until 1885, 198 years after Newton's big book.stevesailernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-32334567790066622822014-07-28T22:40:40.695-04:002014-07-28T22:40:40.695-04:00Thanks for posting the numbers. Those seemed high...Thanks for posting the numbers. Those seemed high to me so I did a simulation of what a truncated normal distribution would look like. See http://rpubs.com/rseiter/24130<br />Truncating at 135 I got a mean of 140 and sd of 4.57 for the sample.<br /><br /><br />Any thoughts as to why there are would be such a dramatic difference? Are the tails of the IQ distribution that fat? Any ideas what Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-85706730482452731762014-07-28T21:59:45.640-04:002014-07-28T21:59:45.640-04:00Thanks! Google and Stack Overflow are a great com...Thanks! Google and Stack Overflow are a great combination for answering questions like that (I had to answer that question to do the simulation).<br />I updated the simulation to include a look at the top 0.1% of Y as well as the largest Y (and comparing the two). Interesting (though perhaps not surprising) to see how the curves shift. The way the top 0.1% density curve peaks near 2SD makes Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-76663306270738073912014-07-28T21:20:37.352-04:002014-07-28T21:20:37.352-04:00The average Termite was 152, sd=15.The average Termite was 152, sd=15.Emil Kirkegaardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-69361866681770630832014-07-28T21:19:07.366-04:002014-07-28T21:19:07.366-04:00Nice. I already wondered how to create two randoml...Nice. I already wondered how to create two randomly generated normal distributions that are correlated.Emil Kirkegaardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-14230497754008501462014-07-28T21:17:07.266-04:002014-07-28T21:17:07.266-04:00Regarding the low V scoring scientists, Roe makes ...Regarding the low V scoring scientists, Roe makes a statement (pp 162-163) which leads me to think two of the scores (a biologist and experimental physicist) should be treated as outliers (she says she noted something like that even before scoring the tests - "did not do justice to themselves").<br /><br /><br />It might be worth checking what "scholastic success" metric is Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-18149204789197328572014-07-28T20:58:53.292-04:002014-07-28T20:58:53.292-04:00Right. You might recall I was the reader who poin...Right. You might recall I was the reader who pointed you to the list of names (prompting the second of those posts ;-). My thought was the monograph https://www.worldcat.org/title/psychological-study-of-eminent-psychologists-and-anthropologists-and-a-comparison-with-biological-and-physical-scientists/oclc/1441032 is different (note the different page counts and titles) from the book https://Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-16865017352582742332014-07-28T19:34:37.020-04:002014-07-28T19:34:37.020-04:00I agree. The eminent scientists were way smarter ...I agree. The eminent scientists were way smarter than average scientists, and the test was probably properly normed, but the distribution was probably non-Gaussian at the high end, either because the item difficulty increased in a non-linear way or because high verbal ability itself departs from the Gaussian curve.Pumpkinperson.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-64350057909681331882014-07-28T18:19:25.133-04:002014-07-28T18:19:25.133-04:00I think what we can safely conclude from Roe is th...I think what we can safely conclude from Roe is that her top scientists were unusually smart compared to average scientists. <br /><br />In the book, she says she normed her high ceiling tests on a population of Columbia Teacher's College graduate students, who also took standard IQ tests. Once she knows the SD in that group she can use it to convert high end raw scores to z scores. Perhaps steve hsuhttp://duende.uoregon.edu/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-27222420235690038192014-07-28T18:09:50.548-04:002014-07-28T18:09:50.548-04:00I have two posts on the blog about Roe's resul...I have two posts on the blog about Roe's results and the identities of the scientists she studied.steve hsuhttp://duende.uoregon.edu/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-47359565055389497492014-07-28T11:38:04.064-04:002014-07-28T11:38:04.064-04:00I'm still quite baffled by that 166 mean V sco...I'm still quite baffled by that 166 mean V score Roe obtained. IQ is supposed to be normally distributed so 166 would imply one in 185,000 level ability. It would be somewhat equivalent to scoring near the ceiling of the verbal SAT (new scale) at age 13! It's hard to imagine the average (verbal) IQ of any group of people, no matter how accomplished, being that high given the imperfect Pumpkinperson.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-2524032776367888952014-07-28T10:26:26.565-04:002014-07-28T10:26:26.565-04:00I think you recall correctly about Roe. Pp 162-3 ...I think you recall correctly about Roe. Pp 162-3 has the relevant table and text but gives raw scores. A version of her chapter 12 tables (including that one) converted to IQs appears in http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/simonton/greatpsychologistspiiich6.pdf (I think this is worth a look, it appears to be a chapter from Simonton's Great Psychologists book). Also note Roe's Richard Seiternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-42278135356827595162014-07-28T03:29:43.194-04:002014-07-28T03:29:43.194-04:00IIRC two of the experimental physicists in her sam...IIRC two of the experimental physicists in her sample had pretty mediocre (~120) V scores. One of them could have been Alvarez. The V mean for all the scientists was very high - 166!<br /><br /><br />SMPY is a good modern update of Terman.steve hsuhttp://duende.uoregon.edu/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-47404978587066087202014-07-28T03:26:49.509-04:002014-07-28T03:26:49.509-04:00? The fact that the V ceiling on SAT/GRE is higher...? The fact that the V ceiling on SAT/GRE is higher than for M is the choice of the test makers. They could have done it the other way as well.steve hsuhttp://duende.uoregon.edu/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-80867889140986183682014-07-28T00:42:46.010-04:002014-07-28T00:42:46.010-04:00IQ is an imperfect measurement of one of the dimen...IQ is an imperfect measurement of one of the dimensions needed for "success". Aside from luck, I will bet that there are a number of genetic factors for every kind of success. When a farmer looks for a good dairy cow, he does not just look for a cow with the biggest udder. In fact, he looks for the cow that gives the most milk. The udder size is a by-product of this selection.<br /><br reservoir_dogsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-74155374849299388772014-07-27T21:09:09.621-04:002014-07-27T21:09:09.621-04:00Well assuming there are about 242 million American...Well assuming there are about 242 million American adults in America, the richest American can be viewed as having a (cumulative) income normalized Z score of 5.73 (one in 242 million level). Given the 0.4 correlation between IQ and income, his expected IQ would have a Z score of 5.73(0.4) = 2.29. Given a 0.4 correlation, the standard error of that estimate would be 0.92. So an IQ > 3 SD Pumpkinperson.comnoreply@blogger.com