Hello There, Guest!  

Canadian IQ on WAIS IV

#11
(2014-Aug-13, 09:51:48)Emil Wrote: I guess "Asians" may refer to Amerindian natives.


No, "Aboriginals" in Canadia means Native Americans and is at 4.3%. Asians is Asians, the problem is whether it's mainly East Asians (Chinese, Japanese) or West Asians (Pakistani, Indian).
 Reply
#12
(2014-Aug-13, 12:00:56)Duxide Wrote:
(2014-Aug-13, 09:51:48)Emil Wrote: I guess "Asians" may refer to Amerindian natives.


No, "Aboriginals" in Canadia means Native Americans and is at 4.3%. Asians is Asians, the problem is whether it's mainly East Asians (Chinese, Japanese) or West Asians (Pakistani, Indian).


It is mainly Chinese
 Reply
#13
Quote:I was thinking the same myself and this would be congruous with IQ predicting immigration: i.e. Canadians are the descendants cleverer British people. But, on the other hand, when you match the Canadian sample with a US one of the same race/class/ etc then the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13, as indicated in the paper. Surely, this is not significant.

I am not sure this is the right thing to do. First you get a Greenwich IQ by subtracting two points from the total IQ score, because the Greenwich IQ is 2 pts higher than the US IQ. Then you subtract another 2.5 points because when you match Canadian and US samples for race, the Canadian IQ goes down another 2.5 points.
This is a bit circular. It would be correct only if the correction for British IQ were not related to the more mixed racial composition of the US and you're assuming that the British IQ is pure White, whereas it's calculated on the total population living in the UK, including immigrants.
But here, you're doing a double correction which in my opinion is not justified. When you do that racial comparision between Canada and US, you subtract 2.5 points from the Canadian IQ and you are assuming that that IQ is 2 points lower than the Greenwich IQ, whereas it's more likely that it's equal to the British IQ (because the US and Canadian sample is 90%white and does not include blacks). So once you subtract 2.5 points, you cannot subtract 2 more points. Hence the White Greenwich Canadian IQ is more likely to be 104.5-2.5=102.
You can speculate that this advantage in relation to the Greenwich IQ is due to Asians but there is no way we can know for sure unless we have data for Canadian Whites and British Whites. Better to mention this in the discussion. You'd have to argue that the 2 points correction you make is due to Canadians having more East Asians and UK having more lower IQ ethnicities. But it's difficult to support this claim with data. When I looked at the PISA CPS scores, the IQ for British immigrants was not much lower than that of Natives, in striking contrast to other countries (e.g. Germany or Denmark) where immigrants have much lower IQ. In conclusion, I'd delete the sentence that the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13 because it's based on too many untested assumptions.
 Reply
#14
(2014-Aug-13, 12:32:29)Duxide Wrote:
Quote:I was thinking the same myself and this would be congruous with IQ predicting immigration: i.e. Canadians are the descendants cleverer British people. But, on the other hand, when you match the Canadian sample with a US one of the same race/class/ etc then the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13, as indicated in the paper. Surely, this is not significant.

I am not sure this is the right thing to do. First you get a Greenwich IQ by subtracting two points from the total IQ score, because the Greenwich IQ is 2 pts higher than the US IQ. Then you subtract another 2.5 points because when you match Canadian and US samples for race, the Canadian IQ goes down another 2.5 points.
This is a bit circular. It would be correct only if the correction for British IQ were not related to the more mixed racial composition of the US and you're assuming that the British IQ is pure White, whereas it's calculated on the total population living in the UK, including immigrants.
But here, you're doing a double correction which in my opinion is not justified. When you do that racial comparision between Canada and US, you subtract 2.5 points from the Canadian IQ and you are assuming that that IQ is 2 points lower than the Greenwich IQ, whereas it's more likely that it's equal to the British IQ (because the US and Canadian sample is 90%white and does not include blacks). So once you subtract 2.5 points, you cannot subtract 2 more points. Hence the White Greenwich Canadian IQ is more likely to be 104.5-2.5=102.
You can speculate that this advantage in relation to the Greenwich IQ is due to Asians but there is no way we can know for sure unless we have data for Canadian Whites and British Whites. Better to mention this in the discussion. You'd have to argue that the 2 points correction you make is due to Canadians having more East Asians and UK having more lower IQ ethnicities. But it's difficult to support this claim with data. When I looked at the PISA CPS scores, the IQ for British immigrants was not much lower than that of Natives, in striking contrast to other countries (e.g. Germany or Denmark) where immigrants have much lower IQ. In conclusion, I'd delete the sentence that the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13 because it's based on too many untested assumptions.


Ok. I see your point. I will now edit the paper i line with people's suggestions and put up a second version
 Reply
#15
Here is the updated version of the paper, edited in line with your suggestions.


Attached Files
.doc   Canada IQ WAIS 1V.doc (Size: 89.5 KB / Downloads: 559)
 Reply
#16
(2014-Aug-14, 10:21:45)Barleymow Wrote: Here is the updated version of the paper, edited in line with your suggestions.


I approve publication.
 Reply
#17
Okay, good. Is everyone else content now?
 Reply
#18
I'm still waiting for the datafile. :)
 Reply
#19
(2014-Aug-15, 10:19:38)Emil Wrote: I'm still waiting for the datafile. :)


I've inserted into the paper i have.
 Reply
#20
I think it should be published now.
 Reply
 
Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)