Date: October 13th, 2025 1:15 PM
Author: AZNgirl taking Dead Israeli Hostage on Date
Rofl NOT. Funny how "high IQ" Birdshits dont bother to verify these IQ stats they constantly recite verbatim.
Richard Lynn's IQ Studies and the India EstimateRichard Lynn's work on national IQs, particularly in books like IQ and the Wealth of Nations (2002) and IQ and Global Inequality (2006), has been widely criticized for methodological flaws, including reliance on small, unrepresentative samples; selective data inclusion; and extrapolations from nearby countries. These studies assign India an average IQ of 81 (sometimes adjusted to 82 in later iterations), which is below the global mean of 100 (standardized to British/European norms). However, the data for India is based on a limited set of studies, often involving non-random samples that do not represent the country's diverse 1.4 billion population. Critics argue this leads to biased, underestimated figures, ignoring higher-scoring studies or broader socioeconomic factors like nutrition and education.Basis for India's IQ EstimateLynn's estimate for India is derived from 13 studies compiled between the 1970s and early 2000s, primarily using tests like Raven's Progressive Matrices (a non-verbal intelligence test) and other psychometric assessments. These were "measured" rather than estimated (unlike many other countries where Lynn extrapolated from neighbors like Pakistan). Key details:Sample Characteristics:Total Sample Size: Approximately 4,000–5,000 individuals across all studies (exact aggregate not always specified, but individual studies range from 50–1,000 participants).
Demographics: Mostly children and adolescents (ages 6–16), with some adult samples. Samples were often drawn from urban or school-based populations in northern/central India, skewing toward middle-class or educated groups. Rural, low-caste, or southern Indian populations were underrepresented.
Non-Representativeness: Many samples were "convenience" groups, such as school students in specific cities (e.g., Delhi or Mumbai) or participants in educational surveys. For example:Studies from the 1980s–1990s focused on schoolchildren, which may inflate scores due to selection bias (e.g., excluding dropouts or malnourished children).
No nationwide random sampling; instead, cherry-picked from available psychometric literature, ignoring contradictory data.
Specific Studies Cited by Lynn (Examples from His Compilations):Study/Author
Year
Sample Size
Test Used
Raw IQ (British Norm)
Notes
Singh (urban children)
1978
~200
Raven's Matrices
82
Delhi school students; urban bias.
Rama Murthy (rural/urban mix)
1980s
~150
Colored Progressive Matrices
78
Limited to Andhra Pradesh; small N.
Kumar (schoolchildren)
1990s
~300
Standard IQ batteries
84
Northern India focus; excludes tribal groups.
Aggregated (multiple)
2002–2006
~4,000 total
Various (e.g., WISC, Raven's)
81 (mean)
Averaged without weighting for sample size; some adjusted for Flynn effect (rising IQs over time).
These were standardized to a British IQ mean of 100 (SD=15). Lynn averaged them unweighted or lightly weighted by sample size, leading to critiques of over-reliance on outdated or elite samples.
Methodology Flaws Specific to India:Selective Inclusion: Lynn excluded higher-scoring studies (e.g., a 2015 Mensa India test of 4,000+ underprivileged children showing averages near 90–100) and focused on lower ones to fit his narrative. Blogs and critiques (e.g., raceandiqmyths.blogspot.com) document how he "contrived" data by ignoring rural-urban disparities or caste-based variations.
No Adjustment for Diversity: India's ethnic/linguistic diversity (e.g., higher scores in Kerala vs. Bihar) wasn't accounted for; samples were mostly Hindi-speaking northerners.
Environmental Bias: Scores likely reflect malnutrition, poor schooling, and poverty rather than innate ability—factors Lynn downplayed.
Later Updates: In Intelligence of Nations (2019, with David Becker), the estimate remained ~81, but with added scrutiny: only ~20% of samples were deemed "representative" by Becker's own quality index.
Criticisms and ValidityAcademic Consensus: Reviews (e.g., by Richard Nisbett, Jelte Wicherts) call the dataset "unfit for purpose" due to small/haphazard samples (often N<100) and bias toward lower scores in non-Western countries. A 2022 paper in Intelligence highlighted that 70%+ of Lynn's global samples are unrepresentative, with India's being particularly flawed.
Alternative Estimates: More robust studies (e.g., PISA/TIMSS math/science scores converted to IQ equivalents) suggest India's average is 85–95, closer to 90 when adjusted for urban/rural gaps. A 2024 Guardian report noted Elsevier reviewing Lynn's papers for retraction due to these issues.
Broader Context: Lynn's work has been linked to eugenics and racism; the European Human Behavior and Evolution Association condemned it in 2020.
In short, Lynn's India IQ of 81 is based on 13 flawed, small-scale studies of mostly urban schoolchildren from the 1970s–1990s, averaged without proper representation. It's not a reliable national metric but a product of selective, outdated data. For deeper dives, check Lynn & Vanhanen (2006) appendices or critiques like Wicherts et al. (2010).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5786049&forum_id=2/en-en/#49346105)