File talk:National IQ per country - estimates by Lynn and Vanhanen 2006.png

 

Observation

This file seems to have been copied from en:File:National IQ Lynn Vanhanen 2006 IQ and Global Inequality.png without identifying uploaders, sources, attribution, map legend colour scale, etc. Athaenara (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Followup: Angusmclellan fixed that in June. Athaenara (talk) 23:19, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

bias of IQ test

This map seems to me not right. THere is no way that Italain have a highest IQ than Germans!!!!!! ( I'm not german but I have traveled enough to notice those things) That's the same for polish. I can't imagine that polish people are more intelligent than french... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikanti (talk • contribs) 08:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Travel and personal experience are usually unscientific. Because most people cannot approach random people of the population. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28statistics%29 Common human perceptions are often influenced by prejudice. 124.170.210.112 (talk) 03:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

The legend is wrong

I can count to 8 different blues in the map, but the legend contains only 4 blues, and I'm not sure that the legend blue colors counterpart anything in the map. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 08:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

The legend is not wrong. If you read the bold message above the legend, it says that the map is colored on a continuous scale, meaning it uses more colors than just those appearing in the legend. Illini407 ^talk 06:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

fact disputed

In reality this is not true - Czech are not that low, as in the picture rating is represented, neither Slovaks as well. In contrary Germany, Polland and Austria are in that scale lower, than Czech and Slovak. Compare the other countries only after appropriate ratio facts. This picture is false. Rsramko, Czech Republic. — 以上未签名的留言是由该用户加入的： 77.104.210.252 (留言 • 贡献)

ALL of the numbers are "disputed". The author's methods and rationale for the results that they published are a complete joke and none of the numbers should be taken seriously for anything other than a great representation of Lynn and Vanhanen's biases. TheRedPenOfDoom (talk) 17:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Wrong gradations

This is six gradation of blue on the map: Turkmenistan → Kyrgizstan → Kazachstan → Russia → Mongolia → China. And only 4 in legend. 46.227.184.114 14:36, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Criticism, bias against tropical population

Common IQ tests are biased against tropical population. They are designed for European population and their descendents. Asian performs well partly because they are genetically closely related to Europeans.

IQ test assume that certain mental capacity are important. Evolutionary speaking, those features only serve the needs of animals(humans are animals) within their own environment. Tropical population have lots of distinguish capacities to survive in their very different environment. But those capacities are not measured by the common IQ test.

see the link for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Criticism_and_views

I am from a region with a high average IQ on the chart. I am not trying to say my population is smart so my opinion is true. In stead, I think the study is unscientific although it makes my population look good. I don't have conflict interests regard my view of tropical population. 124.170.210.112 (talk) 03:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

This map is Biased

The map/ chart are look good but a bit flawed when it goes to the Tropical Population and specially in the Philippines (which is under-rated) , which is the literacy rate is much higher than China and usually unscientific. Because most people cannot approach random people of the population. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28statistics%29 Common human perceptions are often influenced by prejudice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.6.181.210 (talk) 03:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Not reliably sourced

The image doesn't belong on Wikipedia (in any language version) because it is not based on a reliable source. It asserts facts that have been specifically denied by scholars who have examined the facts. There may be a copyright violation here too, insofar as a user cannot simply copy a book illustration or make a derivative work from a book illustration except under limited circumstances that don't fit the use of this image on Wikipedia articles. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Non value of this image for most purposes

Note that the methodology used to create the estimates has been highly criticized and this graphic should only be used to illustrate Lynn & Vanhanen's estimates and not any factual representation of IQs. Wicherts et al stated The numbers presented by Lynn & Vanhanen could be generated "only the use of unsystematic methods to exclude the vast majority of data " With Nisbett stating the numbers rely on small and haphazard samples and for ignoring data that did not support the conclusions This crucial information has been repeatedly removed from the image page itself by those who wish the image and its context to be misrepresented. TheRedPenOfDoom (留言) 18:19, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The very "red" pen of doom here - does not seem to grasp that the accuracy of the information presented here is irrelevant. This image represents the views expressed in the book. That it represents them accurately is all that matters. Whether the information is false or disputed is not relevant at all. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Re-users of this data map need to know that the data source is at least (somewhat) questionable. Nobody should take this data as fact. So a warning should stay in the description field.--Denniss (留言) 15:42, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but {{Fact}} is unwarranted. Neither the description nor the title hint that the map represents anything more than "estimates by Lynn and Vanhanen", in fact, as you say, the desc explicitly states the estimates are challenged (and even that much could be viewed as biased representation, seeing as how those that agree with the estimates are not mentioned in the same degree). But as the image does accurately represent "estimates by Lynn and Vanhanen 2006" - there is no question as to the 'factual accuracy' of this map. If the map did not represent Lynn and Vanhanen accurately, then 'accuracy' might be questioned. This is not a claim voiced by anyone.

There is a difference between being factually accurate on the whole, and being factually accurate in representing the position of someone. Those two should not be conflated. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 17:10, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

TheRedPenOfDoom has been trying to add his own personal POV for a long time now. He desn't understand that remarks like that don't belong to commons. Commons is a file repository and only relevant description must be included. One can easily find out the fact the mep, or the book, or whatever is disputed from the Wikipedia article. If we added warnings like this to every file that could be seen as controversial, Wikipedia would turn into an edit warring ground.--Kohelet (留言) 11:11, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Your comment is irrelevant, if the data source is at least questionable (if not dangerous) this needs to be stated. --Denniss (留言) 12:47, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

It is not on us to judge the reliability of peer-reviewed publications. Many disagree with the findings, others agree. Representing only one of the positions is the definition of POV. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

this is not from a peer reviewed work. and as linked above, the peer reviewed works that look at L&V's work completely trash it - from the premise that there is a "national IQ" to their methodology - utilizing one study of orphans in Israel to be the representative study for an african country etc. TheRedPenOfDoom (留言) 01:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

New version

Denniss, you can see the file history, there is no "North Korea" in the actual report of this research on which this image is actually based on, list has South Korea[1] but no North Korea.[2]

Can you consider changing the version to this file:- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:National_IQ_per_country_-_estimates_by_Lynn_and_Vanhanen_2006_(edited).png

It is not 143kb anymore, it is 34 kb instead. OccultZone (留言) 06:30, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

INcorrect legend

Please check the number of colours, and when you mean ≥ or <. Tomastvivlaren (留言) 06:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Again, as I stated 10 years ago on this discussion page, the legend is not incorrect. Although no longer explicitly stated in the legend, the map clearly uses a continuous color scale for the data. The legend as shown displays the colors that correspond to certain data values. Values falling between those shown in the legend will have intermediate colors not contained in the legend. Illini407 (留言) 02:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)