Tell me more ×
Skeptics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for scientific skepticism. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 18 down vote favorite
5

I recently stumbled across the following article:. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1274952/Men-ARE-brainy-women-says-scientist-Professor-Richard-Lynn.html, where the following claim is made:

one of the main reasons why there are not more female science professors or chief executives or Cabinet ministers is that, on average, men are more intelligent than women.

This perplexed me, as I thought women and men were intellectually on par with each other. Is the article right or wrong?

share|improve this question
6  
Oh Daily Fail, you never cease to disappoint. Just because the dude’s a professor doesn’t mean you can just publish his ejaculations unchecked. – Konrad Rudolph♦ Dec 22 '12 at 13:31
4  
@KonradRudolph - Was that really what the professor said said? Or did he instead say a significantly more scientifically backed fact that the IQ distribution in males has fatter tails tham females? (e.g. on average they are equally smart, but there are a lot more male geniuses AND morons than female of both). Larry Summers said the same thing, for which he was tarred and feathered by anti-scientific left. – DVK Dec 22 '12 at 15:39
2  
@DVK You seem to believe that just because your industry is making an effort you’re not sexist. This is an illusion. You need to read the MIT report on gender bias. If your industry is truly not sexist then you are the sole exception in pretty much the whole world. – Konrad Rudolph♦ Dec 22 '12 at 23:02
3  
@KonradRudolph - "Did you stop beating your wife yet" may work for you as a tactic but doesn't exactly make anyone want to engage with you on intellectual level. In democratic countries, typically the burden of proof is on the person accusing the wrongdoing, not one being accused. – DVK Mar 6 at 10:58
1  
@DVK Please, whatever else, have the honesty to admit (to yourself) that you are ideological on this issue. You want examples? You will reject them as anecdotes. You already have, above. How is that intellectually honest? Nothing will convince you. Want to disprove me? Have a look at the references I just posted. – Konrad Rudolph♦ Mar 6 at 16:10
show 27 more comments

1 Answer

up vote 18 down vote accepted

The title of the article is "Sorry, men ARE more brainy than women (and more stupid too!) It's a simple scientific fact, says one of Britain's top dons" - note the bolded part.

The article makes two independent claims, only one of which is relevant to the social/political topic being discussed (lack of women in top positions):

  1. There are more males with extremely high IQ compared to female (which is counterbalanced with having a lot more men with extremely low IQ compared to women).

    In scientific terms, the IQ distribution has fatter tails in males.

    There are astonishingly few studies (due to political sensitivities of the topic) either confirming or denying that, but the main one cited is usually the Scottish early 20th century survey, which is exceptional in that it looked at a vast majority of children of the studied age group.

    enter image description here

    Note that there are virtually identical amount of men and women with "normal" IQ (85-120 IQ) - the differences are +/- 2% one way or the other.

    But on a gifted level (typically considered to be 130-160) there are 15-20% differences at low end. The graph doesn't even show true genius levels (160+) but extrapolating the trend, it's likely that the differences are even higher (I've seen mentions of 1:8 ratios but couldn't find a reliable source on short order).

  2. The second one is that on average, male IQ is higher than female.

    Frankly, I'm somewhat skeptical of this claim myself, but don't have time to dig out studies (as the topic under discussion is imbalance of women in top positions that typically involve 130+ IQ, I see the claim as irrelevant even if true).

share|improve this answer
9  
It is probably due to the fact that IQ is a fairly poor measure of "intelligence". – nico Dec 22 '12 at 16:53
3  
@KonradRudolph - They don't start at 16. They start much earlier. And I've been in highly egalitarian environments that encouraged girls into math since grade 1 (elite school). Result? 6 girls vs 30 guys in 9th grade by the time they formed special "math" class based on math/physics test results. None of the 6 qualified to participate in math olympiads (3 of the guys did) – DVK Dec 22 '12 at 18:55
2  
@KonradRudolph - blaming things on teachers and style of education is convinient, but not when you talk about elite levels. At a certain level of maths, you either have aptitude or not, and no teacher will be able to affect that simple variable significantly. There's a difference between being "gifted at math" and able to add 2+3 at age 7, and being gifted at math and independently arriving at a table of squares at age 6 when the rest of the class learns 2+3. Boys and girls are quite likely to be equal at the former, but not at the latter. Yes, some girls have that level, but fewer of them – DVK Dec 22 '12 at 22:31
5  
@KonradRudolph - The best counterargument is modern American education. For at least the last 10 years they 100% stacked it against boys both socially (girls are treated as special), educationally (modern american school education was changed specifically to be styled to be better for girls based on same argument you made), and culturally (all the talk about women being just as good at everything, 24x7). Result? International math contests are for some reason STILL not dominated by all-girl USA teams. ISAMO 12 winners in 2012 were 12:0 Male/Female ratio. – DVK Dec 22 '12 at 22:53
1  
@KonradRudolph - That seems inconsistent. Teaching girls with methods helpful to boys stunts them. Teaching girls with methods helpful to girls sabotages them by telling them they are stupid at math (but somehow, the reverse didn't sabotage boys?). – DVK Dec 24 '12 at 3:05
show 16 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.