"Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
news:3D2AB9D5.4090207 at NOSPAMgwi.net...
> Tom Breton wrote:
> > "Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at PETERHOOD69gwi.net> writes:
>> >>How? Point me to one peer reviewed article that makes this challenge.
> >>Are you even familiar enough with the tests to make this idiotic
> >>statement? What specific items are biased?
> >
> >
> > Now, be fair. You know there are severe political and ideological
> > pressures against publishing anything like that.
>> No, I don't know that.
>
hmmm, even the left wing "news" is full of reports of such bias, so it
shouldn't take long for you to locate it if you look. If you can't find it,
let me know and I'll give you a ton of leads.
> > Scientists like
> > Suzanne Steinmetz have received death threats against themselves and
> > their children simply for publishing results that went against
> > Feminist interests. At the very least, anyone who published about
> > anti-male bias in IQ tests could look forward to great difficulty ever
> > getting another research grant. Anyone who reviewed it favorably
> > would be taking a political chance too. So you can't just assume that
> > such information would make its way into peer-reviewed journals.
> >
> > But the *information* is out there. Credit to Leonardo
> > <Leonardo_member at newsguy.com> in <9miftl0239r at drn.newsguy.com> for the
> > following:
> >
> >
> >> When Wechsler was developing his IQ test, he found
> >> that out of 105 tests assessing skills in solving
> >> maze-puzzles, involving the most heterogeneous
> >> populations throughout the world, 99 showed an
> >> incontrovertible male superiority. (Wechsler resolved
> >> this type of problem by eliminating all those tests
> >> that resulted in findings of significant sex
> >> differences.)
>> Which is supposed to support the original poster's position?
>> There are a lot of empirical data out there on these tests--data that
> break down by multiple variable including gender. If there is a systemic
> bias, it needs to be demonstrated, not simply asserted.
>
You seem to miss the incredible significance of throwing out 94% of the
problems when developing a purportedly objective "IQ test".
About the only way this could be justified is if you agreed right from the
start that you wanted to develop a test which did NOT measure the
differences in mental skills between men and women. And exactly who would
agree to such a thing, and why would they do it?
The irony is that what's called an "IQ test" is exactly what Wechsler did
NOT develop, whereas what's called "the Graduate Record Examination" which
contains numerous disclaimers that it's not an IQ test, IS.
How else can it be explained that the average Black man taking the GRE
scores 42 points higher in Quantitative than the average Black woman? Or
that the difference for Puerto Ricans is 59 points (men = 505 and women =
446)? For Hispanics it's 74 points (542 vs. 468). Mexicans 62 points (516
vs. 454). Whites 73 points (589 vs. 516). Asians 68 points (643 vs. 575).
This isn't an anomaly. The pattern's repeated year after year. If anything
changed, GRE scores of American citizens have actually decreased relative to
GRE scores of immigrants.
Where it appears that Hispanic men score 15.8% higher than Hispanic women,
the reality is that the base score is close to 298, because only a handful
of Black women, the lowest scoring group, scored lower than that. So the
comparison of Hispanic men to Hispanic women is really 244 to 170 rather
than 542 to 468, which is more like a 44% difference.
How could IQ tests possibly have missed such a huge difference in
fundamental skills that industry and universities believe are crucial to
potential employees?
What good could possibly come out of a "test" that shows two virtual
opposites to be "equal"?
http://christianparty.net/gre.htm
John Knight
