RSS
I’ve been writing about the dubiousness of “stereotype threat” since 2004 and now it looks like the Replication Crisis in the social sciences is coming for that popular notion that the reason some groups average lower scores than other groups on tests is because of stereotypes of them scoring lower threatens their psychological safe spaces. Via Steve Hsu and James Thompson, I see that social psychologist Michael Inzlicht has blogged about the spreading Replication Crisis
… No, this is not going to be an optimistic post.
… Instead, if you will allow me, I want to wallow.
I have so many feelings about the situation we’re in, and sometimes the weight of it all breaks my heart. I know I’m being intemperate, not thinking clearly, but I feel that it is only when we feel badly, when we acknowledge and, yes, grieve for yesterday, that we can allow for a better tomorrow. I want a better tomorrow, I want social psychology to change. But, the only way we can really change is if we reckon with our past, coming clean that we erred; and erred badly.
To be clear: I am in love with social psychology. I am writing here because I am still in love with social psychology. Yet, I am dismayed that so many of us are dismissing or justifying all those small (and not so small) signs that things are just not right, that things are not what they seem. “Carry-on, folks, nothing to see here,” is what some of us seem to be saying.
Our problems are not small and they will not be remedied by small fixes. Our problems are systemic and they are at the core of how we conduct our science. …
I think these three ideas—that data flexibility can lead to a raft of false positives, that this process might occur without researchers themselves being aware, and the unknown size of the file drawer—explains why so many of our cherished results can’t replicate. These three ideas suggest we might have been fooling ourselves into thinking we were chasing things that are real and robust, when we were pursuing neither.
More sobering still: What other phenomena, which we now consider obviously real and true, will be revealed to be just as fragile?
As I said, I’m in a dark place. I feel like the ground is moving from underneath me and I no longer know what is real and what is not.
I edited an entire book on stereotype threat, I have signed my name to an amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States [in the Fisher U. of Texas affirmative action case] citing stereotype threat, yet now I am not as certain as I once was about the robustness of the effect. I feel like a traitor for having just written that; like, I’ve disrespected my parents, a no no according to Commandment number 5. But, a meta-analysis published just last year suggests that stereotype threat, at least for some populations and under some conditions, might not be so robust after all. P-curving some of the original papers is also not comforting. Now, stereotype threat is a politically charged topic and there is a lot of evidence supporting it. That said, I think a lot more pain-staking work needs to be done on basic replications, and until then, I would be lying if I said that doubts have not crept in. Rumor has it that a RRR of stereotype threat is in the works.
Some background: A dozen years ago I wrote in VDARE in the essay in which I coined the term “Occam’s Butterknife:”
A little experiment Claude [Steele, the identical twin of Shelby Steele] performed on some Stanford sophomores almost a decade ago has become wildly popular among liberals. They see it as the Rosetta Stone explaining the mystery of racial inequality. It supposedly proved that on standardized tests like the SAT college entrance exam, blacks would score the same as whites on average if only mean people like me wouldn’t ever mention the fact that they, uh, don’t score the same.
What Steele found was that when he told his black subjects that the little custom-made verbal test he was giving them would measure their intellectual ability, they scored worse than when he provided a less threatening description of the exam.
Here’s the logic behind this extrapolation: At some point back in the mists of time, a stereotype somehow emerged that blacks do less well on the SAT. So, now, blacks are seized by panic over the possibility they might mess up and score so poorly that they validate this stereotype.
And, indeed, this nervousness makes them score exactly as badly as the stereotype predicted they would.
It’s really a lovely theory. In its solipsistic circularity, it’s practically unfalsifiable.
Still, you might object that Occam’s Razor suggests a simpler explanation—that the arrow of causation runs in the opposite direction, with the stereotype being the result, not the cause, of decades of poor black performance on the SAT.
But that just shows you are a mean person, too.
If you were a nice person, then you would know that if we all just believe that everybody will score the same, then everybody will score the same!
Just like when we were children and all clapped at a performance of Peter Pan to show we had faith that Tinkerbell would recover.
Of course, to me as a former marketing executive, there’s an obvious alternative explanation of Steele’s findings: the students figured out what this prominent professor wanted to see, and, being nice kids, they delivered the results he longed for. This happens all the time in market research. After all, this was just a meaningless little test, unlike a real SAT where the students would all want to do as well as possible.
Nevertheless, countless commentators have claimed Steele`s study proves the only reason blacks score worse on the SAT than whites is because of this “stereotype threat.”
In 2010, I wrote in VDARE:
But now, it turns out that the vaunted evidence for this wildly popular concept rests heavily upon another Effect, the File Drawer Effect—defined as “the practice of researchers filing away studies with negative outcomes”. We seem to have another Climate Research Unit scandal on our hands.
A researcher, who doesn`t want his name or any potentially identifying information mentioned, for unfortunately obvious career reasons, recently attended a presentation at a scientific conference. Here is his summary of what he heard:
“One talk presented a meta-analysis of stereotype threat. The presenter was able to find a ton of unpublished studies.
“The overall conclusion is that stereotype threat does not exist. The unpublished and published studies were compared on many indices of quality, including sample size, and the only variable predicting publication was whether a significant effect of stereotype threat was found. …
“This is quite embarrassing for psychology as a science.”
By the way, the difference between my 2004 and 2010 VDARE columns on stereotype threat is reflective of an ongoing discussion I’ve been having with crusading reformer statistics professor Andrew Gelman over the years in the comments section of his blog. I may seem like a cynical bastard, but in truth I’m a softy who likes to believe the best about everyone, or at least the nicest interpretation consistent with the facts.
There’s two general explanations for why a social science experiment doesn’t replicate:
- The original finding was just a fluke or a fraud and there was never any effect to be found. (Dr. Gelman’s usual point of view on studies he deems junk.)
- Or maybe it was real but something has since changed. (My usual predilection.)
What happens is that Dr. Gelman cites some example of junk social science that doesn’t replicate. I then concoct some conceivable explanation for why the original finding could have been true but isn’t anymore. Maybe in the 1990s you could prime college students to walk slower down the hall by having them do word puzzles with lots of words about old people in them but can’t anymore because you could prime college kids in the 1990s to do lots of stuff that they wouldn’t do now, like dance the Macarena. Dr. Gelman then replies, well, maybe, but my bet would be there never was anything there in the first place.
Prof. Gelman’s skepticism usually turns out to be more accurate than my sympathetic excuses.
(By the way, this reflects the science vs. marketing research distinction. In science, you are looking for permanent, general truths that don’t wear off. In marketing research, you assume effects wear off. For example, a third of a century ago, I worked on a test market of Bill Cosby ads for Jello. Bill Cosby was a famously effective endorser back then. These days, he’s not.)
There is evidence that some researchers selectively report studies, which is a major suspect in the replication crisis. For example, the Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences program is an NSF-funded program that funds survey experiments based on researcher proposals. Franco et al. 2014 (in Science) and 2015 (in Political Analysis) reported that many of these survey experiments have not been reported on in the academic literature and that the survey experiments that have been reported on do not always contain a report for each outcome variable that was measured nor each experimental condition.
For stereotype threat per se, here is a funnel plot of data from a large-N meta-analysis of stereotype threat studies (as best I could reproduce): https://twitter.com/LJZigerell/status/704692926178267136. The funnel plot indicates the initial Steele and Aronson 1995 studies used in the meta-analysis, along with the studies co-authored by Diederik Stapel.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352642
I vaguely remember flipping through Murray and Hernstein’s the Bell Curve. At the time I thought the difference in white and black intelligence they claimed was not enough to explain the extreme academic failure of blacks. I think the authors sort of said that too. If you accept the results of The Bell Curve maybe the proposition is blacks are doing much more poorly than ‘The Bell Curve’ predicts. One reason for this could be racism or some other factor.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352651
My degree is in Psychology. I never attempted to pursue this as a field in large part due to my perception that, even in 1972, the field was being captured by leftist narratives while swiftly populating with leftists, feminists and other special pleaders.
The spirit of our time is hostile to science and any enterprise requiring strict adherence to logic. It’s sad for me to witness this revolution happening all in my lifetime. Soon the habit of objective reporting and analysis will be so rare as to have no impact.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352652
OT, and yet not. I think that the following situation shows privileged groups in America who can sense that the gravy train of special treatment might be grinding to a halt. Which is causing them to take extreme measures.
As of now, Trump’s Chicago rally has been postponed owning to protesters:
The videos of a large, belligerent, BLM/SJW, pro-illegal mob threatening peaceful Trump supporters could propel him to the nomination.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352666
Bill Cosby was a famously effective endorser back then. These days, he’s not.
Marketing conclusion: Bill Cosby helps to sell more Jello.
Scientific conclusion: A respected cultural figure helps to sell more of an already successful commercial product.
The marketing conclusion is no longer true but the scientific one still is. And it will remain true forever.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352670
Maybe it’s just matching pitchman and audience. If you’re trying to sell to all these track suit wearing “refugees” Bill Cosby could be the perfect pitchman.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352676
Marketing conclusion: Bill Cosby helps to sell more Jello.
Scientific conclusion: A respected cultural figure helps to sell more of an already successful commercial product.
The marketing conclusion is no longer true but the scientific one still is. And it will remain true forever.
“Scientific conclusion: A respected cultural figure helps to sell more of an already successful commercial product.”
How true is it? There are a lot of respected cultural figures, few of whom have been good at selling stuff as Cosby was in the late 1970s. Marketers would pay a lot of money for is a scientific system that would take all the guesswork out of picking which celebrity to endorse your product. Marketing researchers have been working on this for decades — e.g., Q ratings in which they ask people if they’ve heard of a celebrity and do they like him and find him trustworthy. But that information just gets incorporated by celebrities’ agents into the fee, so it continues to be a treadmill. What marketers want is to know whom customers will like more than they currently they will like them.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352680
Or perhaps there are other individual characteristics, e.g., personality traits such as conscientiousness, internalized time horizons and discount rates, ambition, etc., that like IQ vary on average across the races in ways that negatively impact Negro academic performance.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352685
There should be a way to distinguish between the predictions made by your vs Gelman’s interpretation. If you’re right, the closer in time two studies are, the more likely they should be to replicate. Gelman would not expect any such correlation. Ironically, this would be one case in which a theorist actually holds the “null hypothesis” of no effect which Gelman usually derides as not representing the actual hypothesis of researchers.
Define that such that it is meanigful. If it is within 1 year we accept 5% difference, two years 20%.....
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352686
As of now, Trump's Chicago rally has been postponed owning to protesters:
I’ve been watching it on cnn the whole time and it is something to see. I’ve never seen anything even remotely close to it at a political event in my life. The last year and a half in America has been extraordinary.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352688
The reason that Stereotype doesn’t replicate well is quite likely due to the well documented fact that most researchers don’t understand how the Stereotype Threat model is supposed to work. Sackett et. al. covered this in their critique:
So to the social psychologists here’s what you do, first you conduct your experiment on the task which is to be influenced by stereotype, for instance, test black and white students on their SAT performance and note the race disparity in the results. Next you conduct the experiment again but this time you tell the black students that you’re testing them specifically to measure who much worse they do that white students because everyone knows that black students are stereotypically not as academically talented as white students. When you invoke the stereotype, this puts pressure on the black students who now don’t want to confirm the stereotype and because of this added pressure they choke on the test and perform to standards which are even lower than the stereotype predicts.
Sackett noted that Steele wasn’t correcting academic and popular misconceptions about how the model was structured. Note the bolded in the quotation, how often do SAT proctors make the race of students salient for an SAT sitting? Um, never, that’s how often.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352693
Yet again, leftists show they have zero tolerance for free speech if it differs from their views. I am watching foxnews now and a mob of black lives matter types created such chaos in chicago that trump had to cancel his rally.
Are the leftists going to ask their own people to condemn these actions like trump was asked about violence at his rallies? What the idiots do not realize is this only helps Trump – no other republican is getting this type of anger and protest, and it shows what frauds the cultural marxists are about violence and free speech. This is only going to cause more regular middle class people to support the donald and defend him.
Would love to see you do a column about this, steve. This is another BLM/ferguson/Baltimore scene all over again. I just saw a video of a chubby black guy throwing a punch at a trump supporter, and heard “fuck the police” chanted.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352697
https://www.edge.org/conversation/timothy_d_wilson-the-social-psychological-narrative-or-what-is-social-psychology-anyway
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10281
Malcolm Gladwell called Strangers to Ourselves “the most influential book I’ve ever read.” It’s the only social psychology book I’ve ever read, and I guess I’d say its the only one I’m ever likely to read, since it may well be the only one of them worth reading. The only thing I could think to improve is the proper citation, which shows up not between its covers, acknowledging that Nietzsche wrote so many years before “we remain of necessity strangers to ourselves.”
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352704
As of now, Trump's Chicago rally has been postponed owning to protesters:
Trump has now cancelled his rally in Chicago over concerns about public safety. Others my age may remember the riots at the Chicago Democratic convention in 1968, in which protesters were kept under control by police.
In this case, though, police recommended that he cancel. On MSNBC Trump is being held responsible for offending people with his free speech about Mexicans and Muslims. It’s Trump’s fault.
As you recall, the country’s reaction was that Republican Richard Nixon was elected.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352706
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/17787a327ac849c1b7d0f0cfc4463ca6/trump-faces-questions-about-rally-violence-gop-debate
The main picture on drudge now is the chubby black guy I saw throw a punch. I was impressed with how the pro trump people were not bullied – they shouted right back and got in the faces of the idiot BLM types. These BLM types are learning that the trump supporters aren’t cut from the same cloth as the typical college and urban middle class and upper class types they are used to bullying and assaulting. They have no idea about these types because they never encounter them.
I did have to laugh hard at the AP being fooled in the link I just posted – one trump supporter is identified as “rusty shackleford.” Anyone who has watched a few king of the hill episodes will know why that is hilarious. This is going to be a big help to trump the rest of the way forward and especially in the general election just like ferguson and baltimore helped get out the vote in 2014 to levels not expected for the GOP.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352714
The spirit of our time is hostile to science and any enterprise requiring strict adherence to logic. It's sad for me to witness this revolution happening all in my lifetime. Soon the habit of objective reporting and analysis will be so rare as to have no impact.
Actually, my impression is that, on the whole, the situation now is better than in 1972. I am not a psychologist, but I think it’s moving in the direction of natural sciences with more grounding in the brain. Also, look: above, Steve posts on a researcher who signed his name to an amicus brief, but now has the honesty to question his own beliefs. That’s not really a bad thing; better not to make the mistakes in the first place, but…
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352718
I remember those Cosby Jello ads. They were endearing. I don’t think that it made me purchase a single more packet of Jello because I never eat/ate Jello, but my father ate Jello all the time. At least once per week. So, who knows.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352719
How do stereotypes develop? My common sense answer would be that they develop cumulatively over time because the behaviors (or whatever) keep manifesting themselves repeatedly.
I live in a very mixed urban neighborhood where over the course of many years, I built up the stereotype that black people walking towards me on the sidewalk were, more often than not, going to panhandle me. I was not particularly happy about having that stereotype, so one day I was walking along as a well-dressed black man came walking up the block from the opposite direction. “Whew” I said to myself “at least he won’t panhandle me.” But, sure enough, when he got within a couple of steps from me, he panhandled me – thus, sadly, reinforcing the stereotype.
In the late ’60s to early ’70s or thereabouts, some on the left railed against “common sense” as an embodiment of racist, classist, sexist truisms that could not only not be trusted, but that were outright wrong. The message to white people was “you can’t trust your common sense because it is built on oppressive lies and delusions.”
I’ve lived long enough to conclude that 1) my common sense usually can be trusted, and 2) there’s a sizable dollop of truth in stereotypes.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352724
More footage is showing BLM types celebrating trump canceling and waving Sanders signs. We need to make sure sanders/hillary/supporters/media types are forced over and over to answer if they condemn the attacks on free speech. If they say no, then ask what they would do if a group of trump supporters were violent and threatened hillary and bernie rallies to the point of canceling them? We would never hear the end of it!
The Associated Press shows how they openly admit it:
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/17787a327ac849c1b7d0f0cfc4463ca6/trump-faces-questions-about-rally-violence-gop-debate
“However, 19-year-old Rusty Shackleford of Lombard, in line to attend the Trump rally, said he was there to “support the man who wants to make America great again.”
Chicago community activist Quo Vadis said hundreds of protesters had positioned themselves in groups around the arena, and that they intend to demonstrate right after Trump takes the stage. Their goal, he said, is “for Donald to take the stage and to completely interrupt him. The plan is to shut Donald Trump all the way down.”
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352737
Trump just died tonight. His rhetoric and hateful attitude have created this climate of violence. The American people will reject his weakness and cowardice. We will NOT tolerate intolerance
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352738
“Pain-staking”?
Goodness, I hope your professor friend didn’t write that, and I hope his copy editor and proofreader didn’t let it pass.
It is “pains-taking” — to “take pains” to make sure things are correct, or accurate, etc.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352739
As of now, Trump's Chicago rally has been postponed owning to protesters:
Ideally these events will play right into Trump’s hands.
The videos of a large, belligerent, BLM/SJW, pro-illegal mob threatening peaceful Trump supporters could propel him to the nomination.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352744
Marketing conclusion: Bill Cosby helps to sell more Jello.
Scientific conclusion: A respected cultural figure helps to sell more of an already successful commercial product.
The marketing conclusion is no longer true but the scientific one still is. And it will remain true forever.
Micheal Jordan probably did sell a lot of overpriced tennis shoes but there is no evidence he ever managed to sell a lot of Pepsi.
Pepsi, not so much. As proven by the two Michaels, Jordan and Jackson.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352746
the closer in time two studies are
Define that such that it is meanigful. If it is within 1 year we accept 5% difference, two years 20%…..
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352749
Well think of this as those illegals in 2006 demanding amnesty with Mexican flags and flipping off the camera. It did wonders for the pro-amnesty crowd.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352753
Pass that joint because if you believe that you have a 2006 illegal alien amnesty rally to attend. Trump just got more votes tonight.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352758
The problem is, if Trump doesn’t speak, there was no attack on free speech, or at least not one that is going to play in the media very well. Trump missed a great opportunity to go head to head with the protesters, and if there had been violence, it would have been on the Bernie supporters, not Trump. If there had been violence, Trump could have been in a position to call on Bernie to denounce his supporters and denounce protesting Trump’s speeches in the name of free speech. Now he’s got nothing. Big mistake.
Trump was not allowed to speak at his own event, so it did violate his free speech rights. The screaming profanity being done to any citizen outside right now trying to speak to the media is proof of this.
I think this was another in a long line of brilliant PR moves by trump. It was a pyrrhic victory for the left - this is going to create a huge groundswell of support and positive opinion among normal people. I have already seen a few leftists become upset that this is going to make sure trump wins out on tuesday.
1.) When the police suggest that you cancel the event because things are getting out of hand, then any violence which arises during the event gets put onto Trump.
2.) Trump loses voter sympathy for willingly putting attendees at physical risk so that he could exploit their injuries to make a political point against Bernie.
Trump absolutely made the right choice. Knowingly putting your supporters at risk like that is absurd. Thank god you are not running for office.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352760
I disagree. Police told trump they did not have enough manpower to stop massive violence and someone getting hurt. I am 100% sure they would have blamed it all on trump – look at all the cultural marxists blaming trump on twitter now. Just in a few clips I have seen on tv violence was taking place from the SJW/BLM types throwing punches. Several were also hilariously interviewed where they could not say why they were protesting, including a young hispanic female who was probably a illegal and could barely speak english. The video of trump protestors stomping on the american flags is going to go viral among the right leaning sites and social media.
Trump was not allowed to speak at his own event, so it did violate his free speech rights. The screaming profanity being done to any citizen outside right now trying to speak to the media is proof of this.
I think this was another in a long line of brilliant PR moves by trump. It was a pyrrhic victory for the left – this is going to create a huge groundswell of support and positive opinion among normal people. I have already seen a few leftists become upset that this is going to make sure trump wins out on tuesday.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352788
If there had been violence, Trump could have been in a position to call on Bernie to denounce his supporters and denounce protesting Trump’s speeches in the name of free speech. Now he’s got nothing. Big mistake.
1.) When the police suggest that you cancel the event because things are getting out of hand, then any violence which arises during the event gets put onto Trump.
2.) Trump loses voter sympathy for willingly putting attendees at physical risk so that he could exploit their injuries to make a political point against Bernie.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352800
Thanks.
This video of the flag being stomped by BLM types and trump protesters needs to go viral. What a perfect issue to put hillary and bernie on the defensive - asking them if they condone what their own supporters did. This drives a wedge between them and blm if they refute it, but if they do not attack it then the general public will overwhelmingly associate the dems with black radicals who stomp the flag. It would help drive out the white vote to huge levels while also making the Dems the official black party - both sailer strategies.
I know his people read this site and vdare, and this video is handing trump a massive PR attack on a silver platter. The DNC would absolutely dread this video getting out - it would be 1968/1972 all over again for the dems except on steroids.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352823
https://mobile.twitter.com/FOX2now/status/708335123037601792
This video of the flag being stomped by BLM types and trump protesters needs to go viral. What a perfect issue to put hillary and bernie on the defensive – asking them if they condone what their own supporters did. This drives a wedge between them and blm if they refute it, but if they do not attack it then the general public will overwhelmingly associate the dems with black radicals who stomp the flag. It would help drive out the white vote to huge levels while also making the Dems the official black party – both sailer strategies.
I know his people read this site and vdare, and this video is handing trump a massive PR attack on a silver platter. The DNC would absolutely dread this video getting out – it would be 1968/1972 all over again for the dems except on steroids.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352872
Are Pygmies and other Sub-Saharan African groups, Caribbean blacks, Australian aborigines, Papuans, etc. affected by stereotype threat?
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352916
Better yet, asking them if turning America into a giant Chicago is such a good idea.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1352920
“The spirit of our time is hostile to science and any enterprise requiring strict adherence to logic. It’s sad for me to witness this revolution happening all in my lifetime. Soon the habit of objective reporting and analysis will be so rare as to have no impact.” #3
You are not alone in your sadness but, since the demise is concurrent with population shifts, are we witnessing a hostile spirit or a changing of the genetic guard? Can everyone think logically? It is starting to look as if most people put the flower in group B, because it is more inclusive and less offensive to do so, and most people seem driven to be socially included rather than stand up for mere ‘natural’ phenomena.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353031
Stereotype threat!
Methinks the Chicago PD of 2016 is a tad different from the one of 1968.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353058
There are so many separate tribes of Papuans, each with its own language, there’s no way they could keep up with all the necessary stereotyping. Not without written language.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353062
I remember Chuck Yeager endorsing a particular brand of whiskey (Cutty Sark, I think) in the 1970s. I actually bought it (I needed whiskey in the 1970s, especially 1979) because of the endorsement. Did Chuck Yeager ever endorse anything else? I doubt a Chuck Yeager endorsement (he’s still alive) would meaning anything today.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353094
Very good point that this will probably help Trump in the primaries on Tuesday–people on the fence may judge him by his enemies and conclude that with enemies like these there must be something good about him. It’s like being denounced by the Pope just before the primary in staunchly evangelical Protestant South Carolina. I hope that all those white people in Florida and Ohio are paying attention.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353098
still stereotype threat will be preached to future teachers in their training for years
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353099
I call troll.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353102
Delco Batteries.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353270
“For example, a third of a century ago, I worked on a test market of Bill Cosby ads for Jello.”
Your writing is so bizarre. Who else says things like “a third of a century ago, I…”
Normal people would say “in the 1980s”, or “in my twenties”, or “a long time ago” or “many years ago” etc.
More evidence that Mr. Sailer is an Aspie. Which is funny because he has called libertarianism “applied autism”.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353303
In the early 90s there was a computer game called Chuck Yeager’s Air Combat. I remember his crudely reproduced voice saying something or other when you started the game. Not precisely an endorsement, but the same basic idea.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353314
It would be nice if that researcher wasn’t so disgustingly obsequious to prevailing leftist norms.
Reminds me of Putnam prefacing his hatefacts about ethnic diversity and community with putrid “I really really really really really really wish I hadn’t collected this data but….”
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353316
Had Trump came on stage mass violence would have ensued and Trump would have been blamed.
Trump absolutely made the right choice. Knowingly putting your supporters at risk like that is absurd. Thank god you are not running for office.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353322
Just cancelled Cincy as well.
I’m neither a statistician nor “Todd in Marketing”, but let’s see how well my own pet theory – no setback, no matter how catastrophically it’s spun by the media, will affect the Trump juggernaut in any way except to further grow it – holds up as the Soros 2-Minutes Hate Machine kicks into high gear over the following weeks & months.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353333
“By the way, this reflects the science vs. marketing research distinction. In science, you are looking for permanent, general truths that don’t wear off.”
Ummm – no.
Science does not (did not when I was learning the trade) look for permanent truths. It looks for the best or most accurate description/explanation of the physical universe possible today. This is tentatively accepted/debated until further evidence requires that yesterday’s explanations be abandoned due to new data available today.
Philosophy and religion do claim possession of permanent truths – not science.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353355
I was thinking of leaving a comment on his blog about the meta analysis he posted about. ST is being used to explain girls’ ‘underperformance’ in maths while there is clear unambiguous evidence that boys don’t put in as much effort in maths as girls do. This is reflected in grades where girls do better in all subjects, even including maths and sciences, and apparently have been doing better since the records were kept.
To add to it, verbal skills are also correlated with maths scores so that lesser reading skills, where boys are again way behind on effort, also drag down maths scores.
In a saner society the debate would’ve been settled decades ago, boys very likely do better despite and not due to environment. And yet here we are in a reality where these researchers must chase down fairy tales because it’s ‘who?whom?’ all the way down.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353376
Forgive me, anyone else who has made this point, if anyone has. I haven’t had time to read all of the comments.
Since taking high school biology, I’ve been under the impression that you’re a member of the same species of another organism if you’re fertile and the two of you can bear or beget fertile offspring. That’s the test. That’s why horses and donkeys are members different species. Mules can’t bear/beget more mules.
Have the rules on classification changed?
However, when you go to leftist sites like Salon and use that definition to argue that macro-evolution has never been proven, besides being called a retard, you will be showered with papers where 'experts" will try to weaken that definition in order to say that macro-evolution has been proven. I once was directed to a paper where they suggested that obviously visible differences should be enough to differentiate different species. When I suggested that blacks and whites would be different species under that definition things went silent.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353468
Most researchers in the field of psychology are of good but not great intelligence: they’re smarter than teachers and social workers and journalists but not by much.
Such people are probably incapable of mastering the advanced methods of statistical analysis required in their field for distinguishing truth from falsehood.
But maybe if people like me only were to think better of researchers in psychology, they would produce more replicable results.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353493
A certain segment of our population will pay any price for a pair of new basketball sneakers, to the point of killing one another in the waiting lines.
Pepsi, not so much. As proven by the two Michaels, Jordan and Jackson.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353497
So, when for example it comes to pygmies, the only reason so few of them can dunk a basketball is because the rest of us think it unlikely they can.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353504
Since taking high school biology, I've been under the impression that you're a member of the same species of another organism if you're fertile and the two of you can bear or beget fertile offspring. That's the test. That's why horses and donkeys are members different species. Mules can't bear/beget more mules.
Have the rules on classification changed?
I always thought that was the classical definition.
However, when you go to leftist sites like Salon and use that definition to argue that macro-evolution has never been proven, besides being called a retard, you will be showered with papers where ‘experts” will try to weaken that definition in order to say that macro-evolution has been proven. I once was directed to a paper where they suggested that obviously visible differences should be enough to differentiate different species. When I suggested that blacks and whites would be different species under that definition things went silent.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1353742
[…] aren’t familiar with the “replication crisis,” in social psychology, start here, here, and […]
http://www.unz.com/isteve/is-stereotype-threat-next-on-the-menu-for-the-replication-crisis/#comment-1385432