Talk:Spearman's hypothesis

message: Is the information given in the Controversy section really relevant to this article? - dcljr 01:31, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of Controversy section?

message: This article is interesting, but rather duplicative of some other articles on the same subject. It would be best, I think, to merge this content with some existing article, perhaps General intelligence factor. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This looks like a great candidate for merger with some other article. 

message: You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of  Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by  suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the  Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing 

message: In the section "Under Criticism," I changed the wording from "considered to be an important justification for the genetic explanation" to "considered to be an important piece of evidence for the genetic explanation."  Justified means makes acceptable or right.  The methods of correlated vectors was not meant to "justify" the hereditarian hypothesis, but to provide evidence for it. I'm not sure what justification is supposed to imply here.  If it's supposed to imply "make a plausible hypothesis," as Flynn has noted, the Hereditarian hypothesis would stand if Spearman's hypothesis was disproved.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.65.235.88 (talk) 23:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording 

message: I made extensive revisions to the original article. I consider this to be a preliminarily edit. If anyone has objections to the revision please note the objections and we can discuss the issue. One problem that I will note is that I was forced to impose some order on this topic.  The primary and secondary sources present a confused conceptualization of what Spearman's hypothesis actually is.  At one time, it's simply the hypothesis that the Black-White differences in mental ability correlates with g-loadings (Jensen, 1985; Jensen, 2002).  At another time, it's the hypothesis that group differences are substantially due to general intelligence differences (Jensen, 1998). These two conceptualizations are poorly distinguished.  And this situation makes discussion of this issue difficult.--Zebrapersonfrank (talk) 19:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for commenting on the talk page. I have a lot of the sources at hand, and I'll take a look at the new overall look of the article. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 02:27, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting. I'll look in reliable secondary sources (rather than first reports in journals) for more about this. Thanks for the recent substantive edits, which I've just touched up with some copy edits, most rather minor. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 21:37, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013 Revision  

message: "For example, Flynn argues that the most g-loaded and heritable tests are those that have seen the highest increases due to the Flynn effect. "
This is wrong, Flynn has said: "The magnitude of white/ black IQ differences on Wechsler subtests at any given time is correlated with the g loadings of the subtests; the magnitude of IQ gains over time on subtests is not usually so correlated; the causes of the two phenomena are not the same"
Source: http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/flynn2013.pdf (see under section 4. Jan te Nijenhuis and Henk van der Flier) 109.78.58.68 (talk) 02:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flynn on g-loadings 

message: Why is there a "factual accuracy is disputed" template at the top of the article? Should reliably disputed statements be tagged within the article instead? Llll5032 (talk) 20:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: There were three tags, for factual accuracy, neutrality, and undue weight, all tagged by the editor who started the discussion immediately above. I removed two of the tags, leaving the factual accuracy tag because it seemed relevant to the above discussion, which amounts to a dispute over whether to include examples of Spearman's hypothesis. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy template