Talk:Twin study

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Twin study. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080228024747/http://www2.psych.purdue.edu/~phs/pdf/81.pdf to http://www2.psych.purdue.edu/~phs/pdf/81.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Twin study. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121224043718/http://www.studentsatthecenter.org/sites/scl.dl-dev.com/files/Mind%20Brain%20Education.pdf to http://www.studentsatthecenter.org/sites/scl.dl-dev.com/files/Mind%20Brain%20Education.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www2.psych.purdue.edu/~phs/pdf/81.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This addition  by an IP adds some content that was removed later for not meeting POV and RS. They also added material on stereotype threat that uses only two sources - both advocacy material by educational groups pushing constructivist education - this does not meet RS. The pdf does not mention the word "stereotype" anywhere except for uncritically sourcing a single 2011 paper on stereotype threat - this is an argument from consequences pushed by advocates for increased educational spending.
The IP's edit tries to describe stereotype threat  without naming it and without presenting any actual evidence for the claim - I'm going to remove the section.
-- Callinus (talk) 22:59, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: stereotype threat

message: There have been many criticisms of twin studies based on the view that they suffer from fundamental methodological flaws (especially classical twin studies); it is inexcusable that this criticism is not even mentioned in the lead of this article. I will try to address this problem soon. Every morning (there's a halo...) 21:30, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and here is my criticism: it should be expected that most twins are going to have similar traits just as most people have similar traits due to regression to the mean. In other words, twins that share average traits are not good subjects for making claims about heritability, only outliers should be used to generate useful data. For example, the twin studies that show that twins have similar IQ levels should not be relevant if they have average IQs because any random sample of any population will show more people sharing average traits. So only twins that share high IQ scores or low IQ scores should be used to generate a heritability statistic, and that comes with it's own problem, that higher and lower IQ scores from the mean are less reliable than those at the mean. That means that twins who share average IQs should be ignored and twins who share rarer IQs (lower or higher than average) aren't very reliable. These two forces should act to drive the correlative value of twin studies down. 108.180.92.37 (talk) 05:44, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Egregious lack of criticism 

message: Sexual Orientation in Twins: Evidence That Human Sexual Identity May Be Determined Five Days Following Fertilization PMID: 38161549 PMCID: PMC10757681DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51346 Narraburra (talk) 05:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexual Orientation in Twins