Nov 1, 2024 12:47 AM
(This post was last modified: Nov 1, 2024 04:56 PM by C C.)
Why is most journalism about IQ so bad?
https://quillette.com/2024/10/30/why-is-...ce-so-bad/
EXCERPT: . . . of the reasons that news on intelligence research is so often negative is that some of the field’s most robust findings are unwelcome to the general public. The intelligence researcher is like a tactless party guest who tells his companions that some people are unavoidably smarter than others, that there are real-world consequences to IQ differences, and that there is not much that can be done about any of this.
Such a guest would probably not be invited back, so it is hardly surprising that when intelligence researchers announce findings no one wants to hear, universities do not want to publish a press release, journalists do not want to write an article, and the public does not want to read about it.
This negativity only increases when intelligence research contradicts egalitarian viewpoints on controversial topics. Many people instinctively recoil from studies that find differences in average IQ between different demographic groups, or that show economically developing nations to have lower average IQs than industrialised countries.
It is easier to simply dismiss findings like these (and those who discuss them) as racist rather than grapple frankly with their implications. Such research is a very small part of the scholarly research on intelligence, but it receives a disproportionate amount of attention.
And with that attention comes a backlash (some of which is deserved), which may lead outsiders to decide that all intelligence research is morally suspect. As a result, when other topics in intelligence research do come to the attention of journalists and the general public, they are already steeped in controversy.
There is little that intelligence researchers can do about the mismatch between their findings and people’s egalitarian desires. It is extremely unlikely that, after a century of consistent findings, well-conducted studies are going to discover that higher intelligence does not predict higher academic achievement, better job performance, and higher income, after all. The intelligence-research community should make peace with the fact that their “product” is not one that a lot of people want to buy. But this is not an insurmountable difficulty... (MORE - missing details)
Autistic psychiatrists who don't know they're autistic may fail to spot autism in patients
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1063365
INTRO: Groundbreaking research exploring the experiences of autistic psychiatrists has revealed that psychiatrists who are unaware that they themselves are autistic may fail to recognise the condition in their patients. The study, conducted by researchers from University College Dublin, London South Bank University, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, is the first of its kind to delve into the lives of neurodivergent psychiatrists.
It was published today in BJPsych Open.
"Knowing that you are autistic can be positively life-changing," said the study author Dr Mary Doherty, Clinical Associate Professor at UCD School of Medicine. "However, more than 187,000 people in England are waiting for an autism assessment. The situation worsens if psychiatrists, unaware of their own autism, misdiagnose patients. Recognition could benefit both psychiatrists and the patients they serve." (MORE - details, no ads)
https://quillette.com/2024/10/30/why-is-...ce-so-bad/
EXCERPT: . . . of the reasons that news on intelligence research is so often negative is that some of the field’s most robust findings are unwelcome to the general public. The intelligence researcher is like a tactless party guest who tells his companions that some people are unavoidably smarter than others, that there are real-world consequences to IQ differences, and that there is not much that can be done about any of this.
Such a guest would probably not be invited back, so it is hardly surprising that when intelligence researchers announce findings no one wants to hear, universities do not want to publish a press release, journalists do not want to write an article, and the public does not want to read about it.
This negativity only increases when intelligence research contradicts egalitarian viewpoints on controversial topics. Many people instinctively recoil from studies that find differences in average IQ between different demographic groups, or that show economically developing nations to have lower average IQs than industrialised countries.
It is easier to simply dismiss findings like these (and those who discuss them) as racist rather than grapple frankly with their implications. Such research is a very small part of the scholarly research on intelligence, but it receives a disproportionate amount of attention.
And with that attention comes a backlash (some of which is deserved), which may lead outsiders to decide that all intelligence research is morally suspect. As a result, when other topics in intelligence research do come to the attention of journalists and the general public, they are already steeped in controversy.
There is little that intelligence researchers can do about the mismatch between their findings and people’s egalitarian desires. It is extremely unlikely that, after a century of consistent findings, well-conducted studies are going to discover that higher intelligence does not predict higher academic achievement, better job performance, and higher income, after all. The intelligence-research community should make peace with the fact that their “product” is not one that a lot of people want to buy. But this is not an insurmountable difficulty... (MORE - missing details)
Autistic psychiatrists who don't know they're autistic may fail to spot autism in patients
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1063365
INTRO: Groundbreaking research exploring the experiences of autistic psychiatrists has revealed that psychiatrists who are unaware that they themselves are autistic may fail to recognise the condition in their patients. The study, conducted by researchers from University College Dublin, London South Bank University, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, is the first of its kind to delve into the lives of neurodivergent psychiatrists.
It was published today in BJPsych Open.
"Knowing that you are autistic can be positively life-changing," said the study author Dr Mary Doherty, Clinical Associate Professor at UCD School of Medicine. "However, more than 187,000 people in England are waiting for an autism assessment. The situation worsens if psychiatrists, unaware of their own autism, misdiagnose patients. Recognition could benefit both psychiatrists and the patients they serve." (MORE - details, no ads)