At Frontiers in Psychology, it seems that users on X are now part of the peer review process.
On January 4th, the paper “Meta-analysis: On average, undergraduate students’ intelligence is merely average,” was accepted to the journal. That same day, the abstract was published with the notice that the “final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.”
Soon thereafter, the paper went viral, quickly accruing over 54,000 views, wide discussion on X and Reddit, and coverage in popular media (including RCS). It garnered this attention for its intriguing yet simultaneously obvious finding: over the past 80 years, as a far greater proportion of North Americans attended college, the average IQ of college undergraduates dropped from around 120 to 102, just slightly above the average of 100.
As the authors, Bob Uttl, a psychologist and faculty member at Mount Royal University, and his students Victoria Violo and Lacey Gibson, noted, “The decline in students’ IQ is a necessary consequence of increasing educational attainment over the last 80 years. Today, graduating from university is more common than completing high school in the 1940s.” College students no longer come solely from the ranks of the highly intelligent and privileged, they come from all corners of society. Uttl and his colleagues noted that this has implications. For example, academic standards and curricula might have to be adjusted. Moreover, employers can’t assume that applicants with university degrees are more capable or smarter than those without degrees.
A little over a month after Uttl, Violo, and Gibson’s paper was accepted and the abstract published, they were abruptly notified by email that it was rejected. They were apprised that Specialty Chief Editor Eddy Davelaar, a Professor of Psychology and Applied Neuroscience at Birkbeck, University of London, overrode the three peer reviewers who approved the paper and even his own handling editor. His reasons were subsequently forwarded to Uttl and his colleagues.
“You can’t handle the truth.”
The “Feeling” of a scientific paper is now means for rejection?
We are seriously DOOMED. Oops … that’s a word loaded with demeaning feelings
So if 102 is the average I guess we can assume that there are as many IQ’s at 115 as there are at 85.
Years ago the university undergraduate would have an IQ of between 135 – 105. Now they range from 120 – 85. I’m sure the range is different for engineering compared to … well … say … women’s studies or black history where the IQs would be much higher.
Correct me if I’m wrong but 85 is level 1 moron.
Now, now … “moron” is a word only used to hurt feelings. Consider yourself officially CENSORED
i believe that blackiemcblackface has an IQ of 85.
Levels of morons.
That’s fantastic.
Garbage In = Garbage Out
Goes for everything.
If the average is 102, then there are those above (STEM) and those below (“Studies”).
Let’s see IQ distributions by field of study.
If you are brave, let’s see IQ distributions by race.
.
Rushton tried that. That’s a no-no. By field of study would be interesting and that’s why it will never happen.
A long time friend of mine has a theory:
– 5% of the population are extra smart/brilliant.
– 15% are smart.
– 80% are below average.
Or something along those lines.
How about:
– 5% of the population have an extra high IQ
– 15% have a high IQ.
– 80% have a below average IQ.
That *might* work. Either way, statistics are the best way to tell a lie.
*gasp*!! You just suggested a bell curve!? Ohhhhhhhhhhh mommmaaaaaa … those have been CANCELLED a decade ago, eh?
” … they complained purely about the authors’ tone and provocative conclusions … ”
Step one of the Peterson Process.
Which is all it takes for beneficiaries of the Peter Principle.
The U.S. Marines and I dare say all branches of the military have known about declining IQ’s since the 80’s. To be selected as an officer in the marines one is required to possess at least a B.A.. the presumption being that these types weren’t morons and could easily fill desperately needed leadership roles…that is until higher ups slowly realized that possession of a college degree isn’t the intelligence indicator it once was.
And that’s a problem.
Matt Briggs discusses this here: https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/50490/ and here: https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/50645/
Poilievre: China is involved in the stealing of state secrets, including virus samples and the associated research, and infiltration of our level four bio lab..the Chinese have helped Trudeau benefit electorally by interfering in our elections..they are a threat to our security and the Trudeau Gov’t did their best to disrupt and deny any investigations into this infiltration, indeed tried to cover it up..
Press: will you dismantle Pharmacare?
Canada is full..FULL!! of unserious, simple minded people.
This is NOT the way submitted papers are supposed to be handled. I’ve never heard of a paper being accepted and then having it reversed because a senior editor decided he didn’t like it. Frontiers in Psychology needs to review its entire process for handling submitted papers. They also need to apologize to the authors for this mistreatment.
the book The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray has all the curves. , by race , actual sex , ethnicity . and time charts about programs
pretty much opposite to everything we are told .
It’s not a bad idea, in theory. It would have been much more rigorous than I experienced back in the day, but if your paper has a note in its eye, the internet with point it out.
I refer of course to pre publish papers, at the peer review stage. The idea of papers being withdrawn due to non scientific criticism from the public is the end of useful science.
Could it be that this Davelaar is just a little bit touchy about low IQs?