Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

On Sunday, July 25th, 2010 at 04:09:08h +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Research into the relationship between intelligence and race is not
allowed.

You had better tell that to Professor J P Rushton who has been
conducting research on and off in that area for over 20 years.

http://psychology.uwo.CA/faculty/rushton_pubs.htm

eg

Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2006).
The totality of available evidence shows race-IQ gap still remains.
Psychological Science, 17, 921-922.

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

In article , Andy
Burns
wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may or
may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you saying
they are? if so, can you explain?

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

In article , Richard Tobin
wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.

I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a regular
symetrical curve.

There is: that's how IQ is defined.

If you'd said "intelligence" instead of "IQ" you would have been right.

We have no way to determine intelligence directly, even supposing that
such a thing makes sense. We only have performance on tests. And
because we have no objective measure of the intelligence required to
answer a question, all we can do is say that one result is higher than
another. It's as if we had no rulers but could only compare lengths to
see whether they were shorter or longer. Mapping the scores to IQs is
therefore arbitrary; the producers of IQ tests have generally decided to
map scores to a normal (i.e. Gaussian) distribution with a mean of 100
and standard deviation of 15.

That seems rather harsh on those people who then have to be assigned an IQ
value of less than zero. :-) Or did we decide to use this as the
criterion for being chosen as a member of the current cabinet as a 'booby
prize' for being members of 'Densa'? I think we should be told. 8-]

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Richard Tobin
wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.

I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a regular
symetrical curve.

There is: that's how IQ is defined.

If you'd said "intelligence" instead of "IQ" you would have been right.

We have no way to determine intelligence directly, even supposing that
such a thing makes sense. We only have performance on tests. And
because we have no objective measure of the intelligence required to
answer a question, all we can do is say that one result is higher than
another. It's as if we had no rulers but could only compare lengths to
see whether they were shorter or longer. Mapping the scores to IQs is
therefore arbitrary; the producers of IQ tests have generally decided to
map scores to a normal (i.e. Gaussian) distribution with a mean of 100
and standard deviation of 15.

So how would it work if there were 10 people with an IQ of 99 and one
with an IQ of 101?

Bill

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
Burns
wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may or
may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you saying
they are? if so, can you explain?

Well that was what I was taught; seems it's still being taught today

http://www.gcse.com/maths/averages.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/average

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

J G Miller wrote:
On Sunday, July 25th, 2010 at 04:09:08h +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
Research into the relationship between intelligence and race is not
allowed.

You had better tell that to Professor J P Rushton who has been
conducting research on and off in that area for over 20 years.

Yes, and doesn't he get some flak for it!

Bill

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

In message , J G Miller
writes:
On Saturday, July 24th, 2010 at 15:15:40h +0100, Adrian C wrote:

Ah, knowing that twits connections, Channel 5 will become this ...

But will it appeal to viewers of the demographics with disposable
income that television advertising agencies wish to reach?

At the end of the day, it is the overall ratings and advertising time sales
which determine the success of a tv network.

Indeed: as has been observed here before, the product of (commercial) TV
companies is audiences. (They may make a small amount from DVD sales and
foreign material sales, but that's not their main product.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"He just 'phoned up to wash his head at us" - Zaphod Beeblebrox (on Marvin).

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
o.uk...
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
Burns
wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may or
may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you saying
they are? if so, can you explain?

Well that was what I was taught; seems it's still being taught today

http://www.gcse.com/maths/averages.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/average

And they don't include http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_mean or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_mean

--
Max Demian

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
o.uk...
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
Burns
wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may or
may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you saying
they are? if so, can you explain?

Well that was what I was taught; seems it's still being taught today

http://www.gcse.com/maths/averages.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/average

And they don't include http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_mean or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_mean

And I forgot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_mean beloved of
electrical and electronic engineers, and audiophiles.

--
Max Demian

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

In article , Andy
Burns
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
Burns wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may
or may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you
saying they are? if so, can you explain?

Well that was what I was taught; seems it's still being taught today

http://www.gcse.com/maths/averages.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/average

Interesting that such errors and muddles should propagate into such
sources.

Particularly odd for a 'dictionary' to say that a series of things that
have quite different meanings in statistics are 'synonyms'. Perhaps they
don't even know the meaning of 'synonym'. :-)

Oh well, given that 'English' ends up being defined by useage I assume
this will become established as the general usage. Not unusual for
terms in daily common use to be assigned a different meaning to when
specialists use the same word. a la muddles over 'weight' and 'mass'
and of course 'energy' and 'power'.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html