Science desk
< December 27	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 29 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 28[edit]

IQ and Sex[edit]

Are there any scientific studies on the difference in intelligence between the sexes? In particular, I am interested in whether it is true that boys are slower to mature intellectually. Are there studies? 2A02:908:424:9D60:0:0:0:8846 (talk) 23:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This very much depends on one's definition of intelligence. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The OP wants to know if it is true that boys are slower to mature than girls. This is an infamous old western country urban myth originating mainly from school teachers. Boys have been more independent minded, questioning, and rebellious than girls - all of which makes the job of a school teacher harder. But being independent and questioning is the mark of intelligence and maturity, not the reverse. This myth is akin to poodle owners claiming that poodles are smarter than German shepherds, as poodles are easier to train and obey commands more reliably, whereas German shepherds are smart enough to think for themselves ("I've already done the 'sit' command for you today - that's enough.").

Such differences between boys and girls are likely not actually sex linked but culturally programmed. Western culture has changed - the obvious marker is this: 60 years ago only boys had fights in the school playground (fights are a marker of immaturity and low social IQ), and they hardly ever led to serious injury. These days it is girls that fight, and they sometimes put each other in hospital.

In at least some other cultures, the rebelliousness of boys is not known, eg Bahai, certain branches of Islam. Dionne Court (talk) 01:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are, cat , pigeons. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature04966 Greglocock (talk) 01:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sex differences in intelligence would be a good place to start. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems very strange for Nature to have a paper about sex differences in IQ when IQs are set up balancing up any differences so overall there is no difference. Intelligenceis a better name for what you're looking for but it is multi faceted. NadVolum (talk) 19:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IQ tests are calibrated for a given population so that the distribution of test scores closely approximates a normal distribution whose mean equals 100 and whose standard deviation equals 15. Therefore it is meaningless to compare scores for population A obtained with a test for population A with scores for population B obtained with a test for population B. If there is a significant difference between the distributions, it signals a problem with the calibration. However, this does not mean that the distributions for two subpopulations of a given population are the same. If you compare the IQ scores of 25-year old college dropouts with those of 25-year olds who earned a PhD, it will be amazing if you don't find a difference. There is no a priori reason why there would not be sex-related differences in the distributions of height, or muscular strength, or hearing acuity, or pain endurance, or empathic ability, or remembering people's birthdays, or whatever. People should (IMO) get over with being so absurdly focused on IQ as if scoring 130 makes one more valuable then another human being who scores 70. The high scorer may be a total douchebag, while the other is a caring spouse and parent, bringing happiness to the lives of many. Also, inasmuch as intelligence has relevance for our daily life, it is really multifaceted, in a way a single score cannot capture. --Lambiam 20:02, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Book smarts vs. street smarts. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:39, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The OP asked for two different things. First they asked for "IQ" and sex in the header, IQ being a score on a particular standardized test, and in the text of their question they asked about intelligence and sex, intelligence being a nebulous measure of the ability of a person to think. Basically, "intelligence" is such a large concept that it is essentially impossible to quantify it or even measure what it means for a single person; IQ represents a VERY narrow measure used to calibrate one very small aspect of a person's intelligence, which is basically the person's ability to provide correct answers to the test in question. --Jayron 32 19:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crack Theory: Kritosaurini were NOT hadrosaurs?[edit]

OP has been indef'd

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

What if Kritosaurini were actually lineage of iguanodonts that resembled true hadrosaurs through convergent evolution with a ghost lineage from the late Jurassic or early Cretaceous that were widespread across the globe? CuddleKing1993 (talk) 23:51, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What if dolphins were actually ichthyosaurs? Do you have an actual question? --OuroborosCobra (talk) 01:31, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My question was trying to understand why kritosaurini iguanodonts were found in South America. CuddleKing1993 (talk) 01:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CuddleKing1993:, just a note; talk pages are not a general forum. --Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 02:46, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]