User talk:Andrewa/Archive 23

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Controversial Issue and Consensus

Hello Andrewa,

I'm a relatively new editor and would like your advice. I felt you might be a good fit to help given the inclusion of the picture on the top of your page.

I am trying to edit a page that has very controversial connotations, and have felt I've been met with the "contradiction" response, refutation with little/no evidence provided. I'm well read on the subject, but may be making community mistakes as per the rules (at least so I keep being told). I understand the conclusion is not tolerated in society, especially politically, but it is documented in many sources; thus, there is a discrepancy between the laypeople and experts in the field. It is instinctively rejected without analysis of the literature, which caused problems when the discussion went to fringe theories. I want to make sure I follow the correct plan of action, but am continuously having my edits reverted without any response in the talk page. Even my edit that simply reverts the changes by a user who was banned a day after their comments keeps getting reverted. These reverts are primarily by one user, but also by other random users who have never edited the page before, which I find odd. Would you please help me find the right path forward, or at least how to navigate what is acceptable and unacceptable?

More background if interested:

The topic is sex differences in intelligence. The conclusion under question is the developmental theory or mean difference in IQ, and the controversial tangent is the male variability hypothesis. I have a good amount of citations and sources supporting the claim but am met with non-engagement, and no counter citations. I am not saying that the developmental theory/male mean advantage in iq is true, but it is well documented/sourced, appears in many encyclopedias/texts on the subject, and never has been proven false, so should be included, but, however, it is being cast as fringe by contributors here. Additionally, the variability hypothesis has been generally held as the scientific consensus by experts, but the article is incorrectly positioning it as only a possible option and painting the evidence as equally strong on both sides. The page further has statements that are almost entirely unsupported by the citations provided, but my edits addressing this have been reverted and no direct quotes have been given to contend with my claim. My lack of understanding of the rules makes me unable to determine what the correct steps are for addressing the constant reverts and non-engagement in the talk page. I have pulled the following quotes from the 2020 cambridge handbook of the international psychology of women, written by Diane Halpern, a very prominent psychologist in the field and former APA president, to illustrate the validity of my claims. On Mean difference: (each block is a distinct quote pulled from the text) However, a recent review study of Richard Lynn (2017) came to an opposite conclusion: Taking meta-analytic results from the Raven Matrices (a common measure of fluid intelligence; Lynn & Irwing, 2004) and results from the Wechsler tests, the German IST, and others in many different countries from the United States and Britain to China, Libya, and Sudan, he came to the conclusion that there is on average an IQ difference of “approximately 4 IQ points in adulthood” favoring males (Lynn, 2017, p. 9). The pattern is backed by average differences in brain size (males have somewhat larger brains) being equivalent of approximately 4 IQ points (Lynn, 2017, pp. 12f.). "Even some critics of Lynn’s (and Irwing’s) studies concede that there are differences in IQ favoring men (d = 0.15, about 2.25 IQ; Blinkhorn, 2005). But other measures of intelligence provide a different conclusion. There are no differences in childhood; on the contrary, girls are usually more advanced. Regarding student achievement in school as measured by grades given by teachers or student assessment tests, girls outperform boys (see Chapter 24 on education in this volume; Stoet & Geary, 2015; Voyer & Voyer, 2014)." Lynn (2017) summarizes the findings that sometimes favor girls and sometimes favor boys with a developmental theory: Up to the age of 15 years girls are ahead or similar to boys in development; from age 15 years on boys develop further. Even if we were to conclude that sex and gender differences in general (or specific) intelligence exist, it is Figure 10.1 Percentage of females and males according to IQ based on (a, left) g extracted from a battery of six reasoning tests, and (b, right) g extracted from the same battery without Mechanical Reasoning (based on the study conducted by Flores-Mendoza et al., 2013). important to keep in mind the overlap between distributions of scores for both sexes. The concept of overlap is depicted in Figure 10.2. As shown, the two groups presented differ in mean (average) intelligence, with Group 2 having a higher mean (average score) than Group 1, but the average difference in this figure is small, and, depending on domain and task complexity, the difference may be too small to be practically significant. On variance: "There is a “consensus of more than 50 years, that the only sex difference in IQ is a slightly greater variance among males” (Blinkhorn, 2005, p. 31)." Such a pattern also contributes to the large frequency differences found among top intellectual accomplishment historically and at the present time, for instance in the sciences, and in literature, arts and music (e.g., Murray, 2003). However, showing the impact of one factor (here variance in cognitive ability, possible mean differences or not) does not negate the impact of further factors, e.g., of role models, orientations, society, and culture. I am aware this is controversial, but the sources clearly include these points in the discourse. However, it seems the rules are to align with the beliefs of contributors rather than the experts, but they won't seem to engage adequately. How should I proceed? Thank you for your consideration.

AndRueM (talk) 16:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)