“Science” Proves Men Smarter-Or, Why Scientists Never Get The Really Hot Chicks
September 18th, 2006 | by Ken Grandlund |So say researchers J. Philippe Rushton and Douglas Jackson at the University of Western Ontario in a recently published study.
And it’s all because men have bigger brains…literally. Approximately 100 grams bigger on average after correcting for body size. And this mass factor leads to males having an average IQ that is 4 points higher than females.
But the study, performed using the gross data of SAT testing from 100,000 17 and 18 year old students fails to account for a variety of factors, among them the fact that more females go on to college and thus more take the test than males, including those from this study where females outnumbered men by nearly 10,000. This could skew the overall results significantly if only the more intelligent men take the test to begin with versus a larger number of women of all intelligence capabilities taking the test. In that case, the researchers were not necessarily comparing apples to apples, but rather apples to apples, oranges, bananas, and pears. Hardly a fair and balanced comparison. I’m no scientist, but it seems to me that this study was not only too narrowly constructed, but hardly even scientific at all. Where are the control group studies? It is this kind of ’science’ that makes it easy for ideologues to refute any and all science that doesn’t fit their predetermined world view.
Yet Ruston, who has made waves before by claiming that intelligence and behavior were primarily racially influenced, sticks to the “bigger brain-smarter people” theory, which makes me wonder if perhaps humans aren’t really the smartest creatures on the planet after all. After all, blue whales have huge brains, relatively speaking. Even the elephant has a larger brain than humans.
The biggest problem with Rushton’s work is that he clearly discounted all sorts of factors when coming up with his conclusion. Other studies have noted that mass alone can’t account for higher intelligence. So while having a bigger brain may give one an advantage in neurological terms, clearly other factors come into play.
Many factors besides mere size probably contribute to how well a brain functions, including the way it’s organized, how many nerve cells are packed in per square inch, the quality of nutrition and environmental stimulation that you get while your brain is developing, and a host of other issues. Also, don’t forget that these studies measure intelligence in terms of I.Q. score—a useful scale, but not necessarily the final word on how smart someone is. Many successful, shrewd, creative, and intelligent people have only average I.Q.’s, while many people with high I.Q.’s are underachievers.
From my own experience, even if males are physically advantaged with bigger brains, they are less likely to take advantage of the opportunity. And when it comes to having a traditional capacity of ‘common sense,’ women usually win hands down. After all, who’s less likely to stop and ask for directions when clearly lost? One hint guys…it isn’t us. And I wouldn’t go around spouting off these conclusions to the favorite ladies in your life…not unless a future career in the monastary is on your personal “To Do” list.
Then again, both researchers are men, so perhaps the study had an inherent bias at the outset.
[tag]Intelligence+and+gender, J. Phillipe Rushton, IQ, science[/tag]
2 Responses to ““Science” Proves Men Smarter-Or, Why Scientists Never Get The Really Hot Chicks”
By Paul Watson The Cranky Brit on Sep 18, 2006 | Reply
As I spent a good part of my Masters degree studying the statistics of IQ, I feel I should point out that 4 points it not significantly different. Anything from about 85 up to 115 is ‘normal’. It’s quite likely that men do perform better on IQ tests than women. But then again, I perform phenominally well on IQ tests, so I’ve never trusted that as a measure of ability.
By ken grandlund on Sep 18, 2006 | Reply
Yes Paul, and to be fair, Rushton does claim near the end of one of those links that the difference is relatively insignificant, but as most people don’t bother to read to the end of things, this study’s conclusions are likely to be used in all kinds of negative ways against women in general, if not in the first world, then certainly in those countries that already denigrate women.
And that was part of my point.
I also perfrom very well on IQ tests, but my own choices for life have consistently proven IQ testing to be little more than a measure of potential at best, and mostly just something to bore others with at cocktail parties. Although I do have a large capacity for useless trivia which makes me incredibly good at TV game shows like Jeopardy!