The point, from a statistical worldview, is not whether Lynn personally produced the national IQ data, but whether there was enough of that data available to develop quantifiably reliable and statistical trends, and whether major contingencies have been named and statistically quantified. Both the reliability and validity of the data were quantified and the relevance of those quantification further rest upon the contingencies of their own reliabilities and validities. The fact that statistical tools allow us to quantify both reliability and validity of data means that we can develop statistical inferences of the meaning of what Lynn and Vanhanen have brought to us, without having to go frame-by-frame over Zapruder-type films of the original data collection procedures, and without collecting things like standard deviations of the raw scores in each original IQ data collection academic article.Originally posted by Nereid
SelfAdjoint: "I think Nachtwolf is quoting from the Flyn book "IQ and the Wealth of Nations". There's a lot of misinformation about this book, such as he did his own tests, used Raven Matrices, etc. Actually it was all done off of published data with little or no attention to different methodologies in different countries.
Neither Apollo, nor Nachtwolf, nor hitssquad have provided any data other than that in Lynn's book, nor offered a counter to SelfAdjoint's characterisation of that book.
The validity was quantified.Quoting a previous message in this thread by hitssquad
The reliability of these measures was
(Lynn, R, and Vanhanen, T. IQ and the Wealth of Nations. p64.)quantified by the correlation between two measures taken from a number of countries. In the sample of 81 nations, there are 45 for which there are two or more measures of IQ. There are also 15 countrues for which there are two or more measures and for these we have used the two extreme values. The correlation between the two measures of national IQ is .939. This high correlation establishes that the measure of national IQ has high reliability.
The validity of national IQ measures was quantified by comparing IQ test results with popular assessments in those nations of bright and dull. It turns out that assessment of bright and dull is universal among all human cultures and that these assessments have strong correlations with IQ test results.
(IQ and the Wealth of Nations. p65.)This has been shown to be true in Turkey (Kagitcibasi and Savasir, 1988) for Ugandans, Eskimos, and Native American Indians (Hakstian and Vandenberg, 1979) and for Blacks as well as Whites in South Africa (Kendall, Verster, and von Mollendorf, 1988).
Two other national IQ validity assessments consisted of comparisons with reaction time scores and comparisons of national education attainments. For the reaction time comparisions, r scores ranged from .73 to .96, with the higher r scores corresponding with higher statistical significance. For the education attainment comparisions
(IQ and the Wealth of Nations. p71.)The correlation between national IQs and mathematics achievement scores is .881 (N-38) and between national IQs and science achievement scores .868 (N=38).... All countries are relatively close to the regression line which indicates a very strong correspondence between national IQs and national differences in school achievements.
In a statistical worldview, statistical reliability and statistical validity matter. These things are focused on as important.
Some of the specifics you have been asking about do not seem to be relevant in a statistical sense. Whether or not Lynn's IQ regression line is flawed, in a statistical sense, is quantifiable by measures of reliability and validity. Lynn and Vanhanen provided a reliability figure of .939; and validity figures of reaction time correlation with IQ r values from .73 to .96, a national mathematics achievement score correlation with IQ r value of .881, and a national science achievement score correlation with IQ r value of .868.Originally posted by Nereid
Apollo, Nachtwolf, hitssquad: if you want PF members and guests to take what you post seriously, please do us the courtesy of answering simple, basic questions about the research on which your assertions appear to rest.
From the perspective of a statistical worldview, the reliability and validity of Lynn's and Vanhanen's IQ/Wealth regression correlation work is contingent upon the reliability and validity of those reliability and validity measures.