A new paper on which has some results on life satisfaction, intelligence and the number of social interactions one has has generated some mainstream buzz. For example, at The Washington Post, Why smart people are better off with fewer friends. I looked at the original paper: Country roads, take me home… to my friends: How intelligence, population density, and friendship affect modern happiness. The figure above shows the interaction effect between intelligence, life satisfaction, and number of times you meet up with friends over the week. What you see is that among the less intelligent more interactions means more life satisfaction and among the more intelligent you see the reverse.
But take a look at the y-axis. It cuts off at 4.10. The scale is: 1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, 4 = satisfied, and 5 = very satisfied. The effect here is very small. The less intelligent group had a mean IQ of 81. This is over 1 standard deviation below the norm, at about the 10th percentile. The intelligent had a mean IQ of 115, 1 standard deviation above the norm, so at the 84th percentile. When looking at the two groups divided between the prosocial (nearly 1 interaction per day) and antisocial (about 2 per week), the Cohen’s d for the low IQ was 0.05 and for the high IQ was 0.03. A d of 1 would mean one standard deviation difference between the two distributions in life satisfaction. In other words, the difference here is very minor.
The authors corrected for a bunch of variables, like sex, marital status, education, and ethnicity. But the data were from the NLSY, so the mean age was about 22. I wonder if the results would be different if you had an older age cohort. The authors themselves are quite guarded about their interpretation: “Given that our data are correlational and frequency of socialization with friends and life satisfaction were measured at the same time, we cannot rule out an opposite causal order to what we hypothesize, where happier people choose to socialize with their friends more frequently.”
The study may be reporting a true result, even if the effect is modest. But I’m quite confident that my inverted title may also be correct, though again, I suspect the effect will be modest. These are not actionable results for anyone. That is all.
RSS









had to stop reading the WaPo article at “Kanazawa.”
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1361390
I bet the difference would be more substantial if the smart group were smarter.
As a smart person with many friends, your experience might dispose you to question the result. But, seeming bothered by life, you don’t strike me as having high subjective life satisfaction. (Who really cares about that anyway?)
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1362374
Based on my own hypothesis/speculation/observations, I would support this finding might be consistent with more data (replicable result).
Several points
1. Concept of self-actualizers (Maslow’s characteristics of self-actualizers)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization
Self-actualizers Efficient perceptions of reality indicates high IQ. Self-actualizers enjoy Comfort with solitude and Few friends.
This study is consistent with characters of high IQ self-actualizers. Basically this study is like a replicated result of Maslow’s characteristics of self-actualizers. If multiple studies produced the basically same result, it is very likely truth despite of weak association. After better control, the result might be more robust.
2. Population distribution of IQ: Bell curve of IQ indicated that most people around are of median IQ of 100. So majority of people have level of understanding, reasoning, and interest at this level. We all aware it is very hard to engage socialization between a college professors and janitors working in the same building (due to vast different in their intelligence). Thus people of IQ 100 have best chance to have more friends. People with IQ 135 only have 1% population to socialize with. In order to be socialize with lower IQ people, intelligent person have to lie about his belief to fit in, which is terrible choice. It is better to stay away from conversation with idiots for intelligent people to be in sane.
3. Social class of high IQ: Higher IQ often lead to higher income and more personal space which keep them in less contact with people. Higher income will make a person move to larger house with more distance between neighborhood, personal bedroom and private study which will reduce frequency of seeing other person and result less social interaction with other people.
4. Wealth of higher IQ: Rich person really does not need friend’s help very much since wealthy people can afford all professional service from moving, fixing house/yard/garden/car, and even hire professional security guards/lease collectors. Thus to keep friend in order to have someone to count on during crisis is low on rich people priority. In fact, most of them even don’t believe you can count on any “friend”. They have tendency to take care thing on their own. Autonomy. Self-actualizers are free from reliance on external authorities or other people. They tend to be resourceful and independent. Again a feature of high IQ self-actualizes.
Born into this family, we even do not socialize very much with each other of even direct bloodline. None of us believe you can count on others (including your own parents or grandparents) to achieve success. We believe socialization is for losers in family. Any one approaching us with super friendly attitude is treated with suspicion. Also the family is widely spread out thorough world. It is hard to be together any way.
When we met, we kept every thing light without too much financial and emotional commitment. Our conversation topics are very geeky.
Keeping distance is the best way to avoid a lot of problems.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1363050
Several points
1. Concept of self-actualizers (Maslow's characteristics of self-actualizers)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization
Self-actualizers Efficient perceptions of reality indicates high IQ. Self-actualizers enjoy Comfort with solitude and Few friends.
This study is consistent with characters of high IQ self-actualizers. Basically this study is like a replicated result of Maslow's characteristics of self-actualizers. If multiple studies produced the basically same result, it is very likely truth despite of weak association. After better control, the result might be more robust.
2. Population distribution of IQ: Bell curve of IQ indicated that most people around are of median IQ of 100. So majority of people have level of understanding, reasoning, and interest at this level. We all aware it is very hard to engage socialization between a college professors and janitors working in the same building (due to vast different in their intelligence). Thus people of IQ 100 have best chance to have more friends. People with IQ 135 only have 1% population to socialize with. In order to be socialize with lower IQ people, intelligent person have to lie about his belief to fit in, which is terrible choice. It is better to stay away from conversation with idiots for intelligent people to be in sane.
3. Social class of high IQ: Higher IQ often lead to higher income and more personal space which keep them in less contact with people. Higher income will make a person move to larger house with more distance between neighborhood, personal bedroom and private study which will reduce frequency of seeing other person and result less social interaction with other people.
4. Wealth of higher IQ: Rich person really does not need friend's help very much since wealthy people can afford all professional service from moving, fixing house/yard/garden/car, and even hire professional security guards/lease collectors. Thus to keep friend in order to have someone to count on during crisis is low on rich people priority. In fact, most of them even don't believe you can count on any "friend". They have tendency to take care thing on their own. Autonomy. Self-actualizers are free from reliance on external authorities or other people. They tend to be resourceful and independent. Again a feature of high IQ self-actualizes.
As to my personal anecdotal experience: I have lived in ghetto or poorest neighborhood before. My grandparents were US Ivy graduates, hold VIP jobs/business and lived life with whole team of servants taking care of their house. One of my cousin is in top 50 richest people in East Asia now.
Born into this family, we even do not socialize very much with each other of even direct bloodline. None of us believe you can count on others (including your own parents or grandparents) to achieve success. We believe socialization is for losers in family. Any one approaching us with super friendly attitude is treated with suspicion. Also the family is widely spread out thorough world. It is hard to be together any way.
When we met, we kept every thing light without too much financial and emotional commitment. Our conversation topics are very geeky.
Keeping distance is the best way to avoid a lot of problems.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1363062
The masses are or tend to be average. If you have a city where most people ”have” higher-iqs then is likely that ”smarter” ones will be potentially sociable. Remember psychological relatdness, is horrible to live with a person who disagree with you all the time. What people think works as a tip about their own genes, the expression of their psychological background.
Many genius are solitary because of their rarity. Demographic proportion of people who are very similar mean higher potential to make at least social connections. But many people who ”are’ less social are also very precise in their friendship choices.
It’s like that history: many poor people give greater value to their few things.
Rich people despise and treat the abundance where they live as trivial.
Many solitary people give greater value to their few (and real) friends than ”popular” ones and i think, many of these people are smart.
Same way happen with friendship. To sustain a greater number of ''friends'' and/or unknow you need create a summarized map of this micro-population and because a lot of smarter people are also more emotionally sensitive they tend to choice make few but good friends.
Malthusian unparadox also applied for human relationships.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1363088
Is that a typo? Do you mean
Maybe I am missing something.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1363102
Many genius are solitary because of their rarity. Demographic proportion of people who are very similar mean higher potential to make at least social connections. But many people who ''are' less social are also very precise in their friendship choices.
It's like that history: many poor people give greater value to their few things.
Rich people despise and treat the abundance where they live as trivial.
Many solitary people give greater value to their few (and real) friends than ''popular'' ones and i think, many of these people are smart.
Smart people tend to choice for fewer children per couple or based on their own standard living.
Same way happen with friendship. To sustain a greater number of ”friends” and/or unknow you need create a summarized map of this micro-population and because a lot of smarter people are also more emotionally sensitive they tend to choice make few but good friends.
Malthusian unparadox also applied for human relationships.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1363258
Ok, I think I understand what you try to say for the reversed title.
Inconsistent data are common in psychological field. Repeated studies from different angles are the only way to substantiate any truth. Like Stephen R. Diamond said, selection of subjects on extreme right ends of IQ distribution vs median IQ would likely to produce even more obvious differences. My prior comment with Maslow’s characteristics of self-actualizers indicates another supporting point with different angle. Personal experience is also contributing specific aspect of whole elephant.
Like experiment of blind men vs elephant, studying the subject from all angles is likely to produce the whole truth at end.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1364415
I understand what you are saying about inconsistent data in your reply, but you didn’t bring in any data to contradict the referenced study. I didn’t check your statistics, but even if the effect is as small as you say, it still isn’t the opposite. Your title should either be reversed or indicate your conclusion that there is not a statistically significant difference in life satisfaction related to intelligence and socialization. I found it more interesting in the top (stretched) graphic that lower IQ folks are more satisfied with their lives than their higher IQ counterparts.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1366669
To eliminate further confusion, I will only give my statement here.
This is based on my speculation/intuition. That means I support this particular research result from Li NP1, Kanazawa S2.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1366911
Life satisfaction has a high heritability and is not strongly correlated with any objective life factors. It is only related to the genes that cause it.
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/smart-people-with-more-friends-may-be-more-satisfied-with-their-lives/#comment-1367381