Skin Color & Earning Studies=Woo?

[Katana]

I have to echo the question to bpesta22. I thought I was missing something in the info that you provided, which was interesting by the way, but it seems like others have the same question that I do.

What I saw was a country-by-country breakdown with what I assume was some average skin darkness(?), IQ, GDP, etc. It seems like the question that the study mentioned in the OP asked was whether there is an association between skin tone (or degree of pigmentation) and income when people of the same race are compared.

 

[Dave1001]

It seems like the question that the study mentioned in the OP asked was whether there is an association between skin tone (or degree of pigmentation) and income when people of the same race are compared.

And not just that, for immigrants to the United States who have achieved the same education level.

 

[Katana]

And not just that, for immigrants to the United States who have achieved the same education level.

That's true.

 

[marting]

Did they account for skin color due to working outdoors?

 

[luchog]

I have to echo the question to bpesta22. I thought I was missing something in the info that you provided, which was interesting by the way, but it seems like others have the same question that I do.

Bpesta22's racist IQ theories have been hashed out exhaustively in several previous threads. All the material that he relies on for his claims of dark skin==lower intelligence is based on a couple of highly flawed studies that included manufactured data and failed on peer review; as well as a lot of out of context and unverified stuff. Look up the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, and the response by Stephen Jay Gould in The Mismeasure of Man.

As for the OP, I've not seen a single color vs. earning potential study that included a sufficient sample size and controlled for all important variables. If nothing else, this study is far too small a sample size to be adequately representative. Hersch's data selection is highly flawed and smacks of cherry-picking.

 

[kellyb]

Did they account for skin color due to working outdoors?

That's a good question.

It really wouldn't surprise me, though, if there was a subtle racism in society that resulted in an economic disadvantage to darker skinned immigrants.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Bpesta22's racist IQ theories have been hashed out exhaustively in several previous threads. All the material that he relies on for his claims of dark skin==lower intelligence is based on a couple of highly flawed studies that included manufactured data and failed on peer review; as well as a lot of out of context and unverified stuff. Look up the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, and the response by Stephen Jay Gould in The Mismeasure of Man,...

Just a correction here. Bell Curve was 1994, Mismeasure, 1981, Gould was good, but not that good.
And I would not be too quick to call Pesta a racist. He's clearly not in Rushton's camp.

 

[bpesta22]

I have to echo the question to bpesta22. I thought I was missing something in the info that you provided, which was interesting by the way, but it seems like others have the same question that I do.

What I saw was a country-by-country breakdown with what I assume was some average skin darkness(?), IQ, GDP, etc. It seems like the question that the study mentioned in the OP asked was whether there is an association between skin tone (or degree of pigmentation) and income when people of the same race are compared.

I didn't reply yesterday out of respect to the OP who thought my posts were derailing. Then, it occurred to me-- with due respect to dave-- that since this is an educational forum, if I think my inputs relevant, I can post it.

so:

I see it as a levels of analysis issue. Look at the african countries. The represent basically one "race"-- africans. And, within that race alone, skin color clearly associates with IQ (I deleted the data from my stats package, but it would be interesting to go back and do the correlations just on "black" countries).

At the aggregate level, it seems clear that looking just at people of one race-- african in this case-- IQ and skin color are still related.

I think the two earlier studies I cited look more directly at skin color variations within race and IQ.

Nonetheless, I think IQ is a compelling possible third variable explaining the results of the income study reported in the OP. So, not controlling for it (nor apparently even mentioning it) seems to make the study's validity suspect, though I wouldn't go so far as to call it Woo.

 

[skeptifem]

ive heard of problems between black people over how dark they are, like the really dark black kids will make fun of the lighter ones, and vice versa, and the ones who are more passable get **** if they act white.

Ive also heard that people from india are really mean to darker skinned people there, regardless of race.

I dont really have an opinion at this point.

 

[kellyb]

I noticed that the countries with the really low average IQs also happen to be the ones with high rates of extreme, braindamaging malnutrition.
I seriously doubt that's a coincidence.

 

[bpesta22]

I noticed that the countries with the really low average IQs also happen to be the ones with high rates of extreme, braindamaging malnutrition.
I seriously doubt that's a coincidence.

That would definately be a rival explanation. If anyone has data on rates of malnutrition across these countries I could easily do mediated regressions to see which is the better predictor of IQ-- skin color after controlling for malnutrition, or malnutrition after controlling for skin color.

 

[kellyb]

Here's an article about it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/28/w...tml?ex=1170565200&en=b31652541b6bfcdc&ei=5070

Yet almost half of Ethiopia’s children are malnourished, and most do not die. Some suffer a different fate. Robbed of vital nutrients as children, they grow up stunted and sickly, weaklings in a land that still runs on manual labor. Some become intellectually stunted adults, shorn of as many as 15 I.Q. points, unable to learn or even to concentrate, inclined to drop out of school early.
There are many children like this in the villages around Shimider. Nearly 6 in 10 are stunted; 10-year-olds can fail to top an adult’s belt buckle. They are frequently sick: diarrhea, chronic coughs and worse are standard for toddlers here. Most disquieting, teachers say, many of the 775 children at Shimider Primary are below-average pupils — often well below.

“They fall asleep,” said Eteafraw Baro, a third-grade teacher at the school. “Their minds are slow, and they don’t grasp what you teach them, and they’re always behind in class.”

ETA:
And that's about Ethiopia, which it appears came in dead last on IQs, at an average of 63 points.
I'll look to see what I can find on the other low scoring countries.

And here's the stats for the Congo, with it's average IQ of 65:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/05/05/MN235156.DTL

According to U.N. statistics, at least one-third of Congo's population, or 16 million people, are suffering from malnutrition. More than 2 million Congolese have been displaced from their homes, and 75 percent of the population lacks access to basic health care.

 

[bpesta22]

Cool; thanks for the link.

I would stipulate that extreme malnutrition would have significant negative effects on IQ, so it seems like malnutrition could be the variable explaining the skin color / IQ correlation.

Obviously, though, the darker skinned African countries would also have to be more malnutriated (er, that's not a word) for the explanation to work. In other words, there has to be a correlation between skin color by country and nutrition level.

Interesting stuff though, and it's an easily testable empirical question. If I get time later today, I will see if I can map up some index of nutrition levels to the table above and do an analysis.

In the meantime, if you have info on data sources re nutrition levels by country, please post it here!

 

[kellyb]

50% of the population starving in Sierre Leone, which comes in second to last on IQ's, at 65 points.

http://www.wfp.org/english/?ModuleID=137&Key=1850

Obviously, though, the darker skinned African countries would also have to be more malnutriated (er, that's not a word) for the explanation to work. In other words, there has to be a correlation between skin color by country and nutrition level.

I betcha a million dollars the starvation/IQ correlation will totally eclipse the skin tone one every time. After malnutrition is accounted for, the remarkable skintone/IQ thing all but disappears.

Notice who a lot of the IQ "winners" are -
China, Italy, Japan, Tiwan...
They're not all exactly the lightest skinned folks to be found, you know?

 

[skoob]

How is skin colour measured (I'm mainly referring to the table that bpesta22 posted)? It seems a bit odd that for example France and Finland both have a skin-colour value of 1.00. And why is Slovenia 1.00 while Croatia is 2.00? I've never noticed that Croatians are substantially darker than Slovenians. I really hope those skin-colour numbers weren't just fabricated to correlate with the GDP values...

 

[bpesta22]

50% of the population starving in Sierre Leone, which comes in second to last on IQ's, at 65 points.

http://www.wfp.org/english/?ModuleID=137&Key=1850



I betcha a million dollars the starvation/IQ correlation will totally eclipse the skin tone one every time. After malnutrition is accounted for, the remarkable skintone/IQ thing all but disappears.

Notice who a lot of the IQ "winners" are -
China, Italy, Japan, Tiwan...
They're not all exactly the lightest skinned folks to be found, you know?

I wish I would have posted the scatter plot here showing the relationship. I can redo it perhaps later.

Anyway, there is going to be a ceiling effect here that will be hard to overcome. The IQ/skin color correlation I calculated (using only those countries where IQ was calculated versus estimated-- n=55 iirc) was .90. Not much room for eclipsing and also leaves open a *possible* conclusion that low IQ causes malnutrition.

Also, jmo so take it with a grain of salt, but I would think if malnutrition indeed explains the table data, that would merit publication in the journal (which is premeire).

I don't know how they measured skin color. Whether the measure is reliable and valid is clearly open to debate but-- again JMO-- there's no way in hell the journal would publish dry-labbed data.

 

[kellyb]

Ok, well maybe "eclipsing" wasn't the right word. "Rendering it meaningless" might be a better way to put it.

I'm really having a hard time taking anything seriously about this study at this point seeing as how confounding factors like "extreme starvation" weren't accounted for initially.

Not much room for eclipsing and also leaves open a *possible* conclusion that low IQ causes malnutrition.

Might work for individuals, but not races. There's a reason why African Americans don't have average IQ's of 63 like their genetic counterparts in Ethiopia.
There are so many anthropological and sociological factors going on here. This just isn't good science at all.

 

[Ben Tilly]

I see it as a levels of analysis issue. Look at the african countries. The represent basically one "race"-- africans. And, within that race alone, skin color clearly associates with IQ (I deleted the data from my stats package, but it would be interesting to go back and do the correlations just on "black" countries).

And with that comment you've just demonstrated an abysmal ignorance of human genetics.

The fact is that within Africa there is more genetic variation than in all of the races found in the rest of the world combined! Take a genetic characteristic like, say, height. The tallest people in the world are from Africa. There are groups that average 7' in height. The shortest people in the world are the Pygmies, who also from Africa. Hmm...

Let's go look at sports. If you look at any Western country's Olympic track and field team you'll see that skin colour varies according to the length of race. Blacks are better at short sprints, and whites are better at marathons. (Even countries like Canada and Germany manage to find blacks to run the shortest sprints.) But there is a reason for that, and the reason is that the blacks in Western countries mostly come from Western Africa, where there is a racial type that is very good at sprinting. But where do the best marathon runners in the world come from? Oh right, Kenya. Which is in Eastern Africa. (Not so well-sampled by the slave trade.) Hmm...

I'm just giving you a couple of anecdotal examples here. But genetics bears this out. There is more variation within Africa than in the rest of the world in the vast majority of genetic traits.

Yet to you blacks are all blacks, completely indistinguishable. Just one race. And, being blacks, are genetically inferior. And, of course, anyone who looks back. For instance Caucasians from India have to be stupider than Caucasians from Germany because they are blacker.

That theory, on the face of it, is absurd. You're asserting genetic similarities across groups that you'd expect to be genetically very different. Let's try an alternate hypothesis on. And that is that IQ measurements are dependent on cultural factors, such as the ways that others treat you. And we have a cultural bias towards treating lighter-skinned people better. Now it doesn't matter how much genetic variation there is among black people, there will be a pervasive bias that is exactly dependent on skin colour.

Hmmm...that fits the data. And it explains the genetics as well.

Cheers,
Ben

 

[bpesta22]

And with that comment you've just demonstrated an abysmal ignorance of human genetics.

The fact is that within Africa there is more genetic variation than in all of the races found in the rest of the world combined! Take a genetic characteristic like, say, height. The tallest people in the world are from Africa. There are groups that average 7' in height. The shortest people in the world are the Pygmies, who also from Africa. Hmm...

Let's go look at sports. If you look at any Western country's Olympic track and field team you'll see that skin colour varies according to the length of race. Blacks are better at short sprints, and whites are better at marathons. (Even countries like Canada and Germany manage to find blacks to run the shortest sprints.) But there is a reason for that, and the reason is that the blacks in Western countries mostly come from Western Africa, where there is a racial type that is very good at sprinting. But where do the best marathon runners in the world come from? Oh right, Kenya. Which is in Eastern Africa. (Not so well-sampled by the slave trade.) Hmm...

I'm just giving you a couple of anecdotal examples here. But genetics bears this out. There is more variation within Africa than in the rest of the world in the vast majority of genetic traits.

Yet to you blacks are all blacks, completely indistinguishable. Just one race. And, being blacks, are genetically inferior. And, of course, anyone who looks back. For instance Caucasians from India have to be stupider than Caucasians from Germany because they are blacker.

That theory, on the face of it, is absurd. You're asserting genetic similarities across groups that you'd expect to be genetically very different. Let's try an alternate hypothesis on. And that is that IQ measurements are dependent on cultural factors, such as the ways that others treat you. And we have a cultural bias towards treating lighter-skinned people better. Now it doesn't matter how much genetic variation there is among black people, there will be a pervasive bias that is exactly dependent on skin colour.

Hmmm...that fits the data. And it explains the genetics as well.

Cheers,
Ben

Ben:

I haven't claimed "genetics anything." I don't think I've used the word "genes" or "genetics" anywhere in this thread (feel free to correct me if I am wrong).

Plus, I am well aware that people within the same race show individual differences. Inidividual differences within a race don't preclude mean differences across two race groups.

For African Americans, the standard deviation of IQ is 15 points-- that's a nice spread where 68% of blacks score between 70 and 100. Same is true of white americans, though the mean is 100, and 68% score between 85 and 115.

The distributions overlap, yet the mean difference exists. It'd be trivially simple to find a single black person smarter than a single white person. That does nothing though to discredit the mean group difference that's been documented since WWI.

The point of the data in the table I posted was to test a hypothesis for why skin color might correlate with IQ. The aticle asserts that distance from the equator is directly correlated with intelligence-- life's easier in warmer climates; requiring less g to survive. Life's harder where it snows, which selected for smarter people. All this being confounded with skin color.

I don't disagree with what you've said (except your claim that culture influences score on an IQ test), I just think it's irrelevant to anything I've claimed above.


ETA I wouldn't need any type of genetic marker test to reliably rank people based on how dark their skin appears to my eyeballs.

 

[dann]

For African Americans, the standard deviation of IQ is 15 points-- that's a nice spread where 68% of blacks score between 70 and 100.

So you are an IQ fan. Do you also happen to know how IQ is measured in people who haven't learned to read and write, i.e. in (many places in) Africa?