Talk:Environment and intelligence

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Education C‑class Low‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chess Start‑class Low‑importance

	Chess portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Environment and intelligence article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.

Arbitration Ruling on Race and Intelligence

The article Environment and intelligence, along with other articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed), is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, described in a 2010 Arbitration Committee case where the articulated principles included:

Pillars: Wikipedia articles must be neutral, verifiable and must not contain original research. Those founding principles (the Pillars) are not negotiable and cannot be overruled, even when apparent consensus to do so exists.
Original research: Wikipedia defines "original research" as "facts, allegations, ideas, and stories not already published by reliable sources". In particular, analyses or conclusions not already published in reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy are not appropriate for inclusion in articles.
Correct use of sources: Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Primary sources are permitted if used carefully. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than to original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.
Advocacy: Wikipedia strives towards a neutral point of view. Accordingly, it is not the appropriate venue for advocacy or for advancing a specific point of view. While coverage of all significant points of view is a necessary part of balancing an article, striving to give exposure to minority viewpoints that are not significantly expressed in reliable secondary sources is not.
Single purpose accounts: Single purpose accounts are expected to contribute neutrally instead of following their own agenda and, in particular, should take care to avoid creating the impression that their focus on one topic is non-neutral, which could strongly suggest that their editing is not compatible with the goals of this project.
Decorum: Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, harassment, or disruptive point-making, is prohibited.
Tag-team editing: Tag teams work in unison to push a particular point of view. Tag-team editing – to thwart core policies (neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research); or to evade procedural restrictions such as the three revert rule or to violate behavioural norms by edit warring; or to attempt to exert ownership over articles; or otherwise to prevent consensus prevailing – is prohibited.

If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the above guidelines. You may also wish to review the full arbitration case page. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first.

Untitled[edit]

STRONG KEEP - anything that influences intelligence is important. This article just needs to be expanded and cleaned up.

Proposed merge[edit]

Health and intelligence and Environment and intelligence show a preponderance of overlap in subject matter, with no really sensible dividing line between the two topics. I suggest they be merged into the more general of the two articles, Environment and intelligence. Pete.Hurd (talk) 18:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. II | (t - c) 18:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New article on poverty and intelligence[edit]

Study: Poverty dramatically affects children's brains references an interesting article. I don't see it in the December issue of the J. Cogn. Neurosci, though. II | (t - c) 18:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing[edit]

You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 20:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I still welcome your suggestions of new sources, especially as it now appears likely that this article's content will be merged into the article Heritability of IQ (which should treat both genetic and environmental influences on IQ comprehensively to be fair to its own topic). -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 01:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a stub that should be merged with this article.[edit]

Apparently, an earlier POV fork resulted in a little stub article called IQ_testing_environmental_variances, which ought to be merged with this article. As soon as I learn how to do the merge (I'm much newer to Wikipedia than I am to doing research), I will try to take care of that. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 20:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fluid intelligence[edit]

This article states "Research on the effectiveness of interventions, and the degree to which fluid intelligence can be increased, especially after age 16, is somewhat controversial. Fluid intelligence is typically thought of as something more innate, and defined as immutable after maturity."

There are no references for this, and it doesn't even make much sense, and doesn't even properly define fluid intelligence in this context. While it does have somewhat of a reference early on, it only vaguely concerns the issue of fluid intelligence, and even then doesn't properly differentiate it. It doesn't explain exactly how fluid intelligence is markedly different from the rest of general intelligence, especially to the point of how it's thought of as more "innate" and "immutable" at age 16, and conflates stability of intelligence at 16 with immutability. Heritability doesn't peak until the mid 20's, which is when brain growth peaks. This article implies, in a vague manner, that the only real dynamic of intellectual maturation is neuronal connections. -- Mannoro

I now think that this should be merged into Heritability_of_IQ, with a retitling of that article.[edit]

Having read more sources recently, it seems to me that this article should be merged into Heritability_of_IQ and that that article should be retitled. I am open to the suggestions of all of you here before I do that. That will be my first article merge, so I will take my time before boldly doing this, and I appreciate any thoughts any of you have about how to proceed. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See discussion here[1].--Victor Chmara (talk) 22:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]