Read on Twitter
Garbage in, garbage out. Recently, a psych sci paper was retracted after reassessing the data it was based on. This data, the national IQ data derived from Lynn and Vanhanen, is not valid, and I am helping with a project to address the use of this data. https://lynndataproject.weebly.com
The data collected by, and derived from, Lynn and Vanhanen are riddled with strong bias, miscalculations, and obviously incorrect measurements, making any conclusions based on this data uninterpretable. https://psyarxiv.com/tzr8c/
The IQ measurements provided by these datasets purport to show that in some nations, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa, that approximately half of the population would be considered intellectually disabled. This is obviously false.
There are reasons to believe that bias is ingrained throughout this data, as Richard Lynn explicitly supports white nationalism, separatism, and racism, even suggesting that nations with higher IQ subjugate or selectively eliminate nations with lower IQ. https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/richard-lynn
Despite continued concerns about this data this has not stopped some from utilizing it. It has even been the core theme of popular books such as Garett Jones's "Hive Mind: How Your Nation's IQ Matters So Much More Than Your Own" and popular articles by Satoshi Kanazawa.
Because of this we suggest that publications that use data derived from Lynn and Vanhanen (2002) should include an editorial note or correction explaining that the dataset is invalid, and where conclusions depend on this dataset, retraction should be considered.
Furthermore, all journals should to refuse to accept or agree to review papers that utilize the Lynn and Vanhanen (2002) and derived data.
For more information about this data please read:
https://www.nature.com/articles/6800418
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001470?casa_token=S6qF9XaT-noAAAAA:CID3iyQnTqrojX9mzG3DrAZqsVNnfdlNncDQ-FJ5MGf2cGszvkR_tssp8huLvxB4AnBkM3VZBjw
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-17780-001
https://www.nature.com/articles/6800418
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001470?casa_token=S6qF9XaT-noAAAAA:CID3iyQnTqrojX9mzG3DrAZqsVNnfdlNncDQ-FJ5MGf2cGszvkR_tssp8huLvxB4AnBkM3VZBjw
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-17780-001
