Tomorrow I'm going to post a paper here, and I think it might need a little explanation.
The paper's content will be familiar. Last fall, I scrambled together a quick series of posts on the Flynn effect (Flynn Effect 101, Flynn Effect 102, Flynn Effect 103, and Flynn Effect 104) and I've had a hankering ever since to reorganize that material into a single, more cohesive essay. Last month I finally got the opportunity to do so and tomorrow's post is the result.
For me, this paper is extremely formal. The reason for the formality is that I felt I should submit the paper at least once for publication, which I did, to the journal Intelligence. (No surprise, the paper was deemed “not suitable for a scientific journal.”) I didn't struggle with the rigidity of the format as much as I thought I would (although admittedly I bent a few of the rules), but the experience left me wondering why so many people would voluntarily submit to such confinement—the academic community never ceases to amaze me.
At any rate, for the few who might be interested in a different approach to describing human intelligence, tomorrow's essay is my semi-formal attempt to fit the bill.
1 comment:
Relevant:
The secular rise in IQ: Giving heterosis a closer look (2003)
Resolving the IQ Paradox: Heterosis as a Cause of the Flynn Effect (2007)
Post a Comment