WordPress.com



July 29, 2020Dear Professor Schimmack,I have made your request a priority but it still has taken some time over the summer. I have reviewed the original reviews of the 2010 paper by Lynn and Meisenberg. Both Associate Editors and members of the Editorial Board (including some critical of national intelligence research) also have reviewed the 2010 paper, your objections to its publication, and your request for its retraction. In your initial communication to me via Twitter (6/14/20), you stated your view that this paper is “offensive and racist.” You referred to a sentence in the paper’s Introduction that listed previous peer-reviewed research that reported a correlation between skin color and IQ as evidence for your claim. You followed shortly thereafter with another tweet asking me “to retract this racist bullshit.” The following day you emailed me reiterating your concern about the skin color paper referred to in the Introduction of the 2010 paper. You also wrote, “In general, the article [the 2010 paper] fails to do what it sets out to do and does not provide?any evidence that variation in their measure across nation reflects the same construct that is measured with IQ tests within nations.”When I responded to your email (2 hours after I received it), I explained that an editor-initiated retraction would require evidence of fraud or incorrect analyses. I also informed you there was a subsequent research literature critiquing the 2010 paper and the concept of national intelligence, and I included three references and a reprint of a fourth critique. I invited you to exchange thoughts about issues surrounding publication of controversial topics.You responded later that day and clarified that you were not alleging fraud, but that the 2010 paper was “…just bad science.” You continued, “Now, there is a lot of bad science in psychology and not every bad article needs to be retracted. However, you are aware that this topic is controversial and that racists are using articles in your journal to justify their racist ideology. I think that is stretching academic freedom too far.” As I informed you, the 2010 paper and the concept of national intelligence as a component of human capital (as discussed by economists) have been discussed and critiqued in scientific journals for some time, including the central point you made about how construct validity is best determined. I recognize your expertise and concern about construct validity generally in psychology ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Schimmack</Author><Year>2019</Year><RecNum>7492</RecNum><DisplayText>(Schimmack, 2019)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>7492</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app="EN" db-id="f2x5rvzdhwspdyedarsvrw0m0e5099t2zpae" timestamp="1595442229">7492</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name="Conference Proceedings">10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Schimmack, Ulrich</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The Validation Crisis in Psychology</title></titles><dates><year>2019</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Schimmack, 2019). The 2010 paper reported similar rank ordering of countries based on either average IQ estimates or on PISA scores. This was interpreted as evidence for construct validity; the authors referenced this method was used by numerous other papers to help establish validity. The 2010 finding has been replicated subsequently and generally understood with greater caution with respect to construct validity issues. Nonetheless, your general point about construct validity is well-taken. One original reviewer discussed construct validity broadly but was satisfied that the method used in the 2010 manuscript was in accord with general practice at that time. Your other concern about “stretching academic freedom too far” also is a valid point for consideration. There is a decades-long history among intelligence researchers about finding a balance between scientific inquiry and misuse of sensitive findings. At this time, there is a strong point-of-view among our Editorial Board that racist groups who cite and misrepresent controversial research should not have a de facto veto over what research is published (see my forthcoming Editorial in Intelligence). For these reasons, in my judgement neither of your points justifies an editor-initiated retraction even though both concerns are valid. Our consensus is that whatever flaws are apparent today in the 2010 paper, after a decade of critiques (like the ones I sent you) reasonable scholars and researchers are able to evaluate its contribution to the research literature. Ironically, retracting this paper may draw more attention to it and give it more value to people intent on using the findings to advance a political agenda. A retraction could be seen as “hiding the truth they don’t want us to know.”Although Intelligence does not publish letters to the editor, we do publish critical reviews about intelligence research topics, subject to peer review. Given your expertise, I invite you to submit a more detailed and comprehensive review of this literature. Such a review would be timely and potentially informative to the field. I also would welcome a submission of any empirical study that addresses this topic.Attached please find copies of our previous correspondence referred to in this letter.Sincerely,Richard HaierEditor-In-ChiefIntelligence ADDIN EN.REFLIST Schimmack, U. (2019). The Validation Crisis in Psychology. OF CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING SCHIMMACK RETRATION REQUEST (Through July 16)THESE APPEARED ON MY TWITTER 6/14/20, BOTH FROM U. SCHIMMACK@rjhaieras the editor of this journal, I ask you to retract this offensive and racist claim that we can validate IQ scores by showing they are negatively correlated with skin tone.I DID NOT RESPONDIt is shameful that this was published, but if the journal Intelligence wants to maintain a respectable journal, it has to retract this racist bullshit. #FightRacismInPsych DID NOT RESPONDFIRST EMAIL TO ME REQUESTING RETRACTION RECEIVED 6/15/20 9:32 AMConcerns about publication in Intelligence?Ulrich Schimmack?<ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Mon 6/15/2020 9:32 AMTo:?rjhaier@uci.edu <rjhaier@uci.edu> INCLUDEPICTURE "" \* MERGEFORMATINET 1 attachments (207 KB)Lynn.Meisenberg.National.IQ.pdf;?Dear Dr. Haier,?? ? ? it has come to my attention that the journal "Intelligence" published a racist article in 2010.?The article aims to validate a measure of national differences in intelligence.??In this article, the authors claim that a correlation of r = .92 between their measure of intelligence and skin color validates their measure.?However, it is not clear which theory they are using to link intelligence to skin color. This suggests that they are merely relying on?old racist stereotypes to make this claim. This is unacceptable.? In general, the article fails to do what it sets out to do and does not provide?any evidence that variation in their measure across nation reflects the same construct that is measured with IQ tests within nations.?Unfortunately, this article is cited in other work as evidence that the national IQ scores in this and related articles are valid.?It is therefore necessary to retract this article to prevent further damage to the scientific integrity of psychological science.?Sincerely,?Dr. Ulrich SchimmackDepartment of PsychologyUniversity of Toronto4889574930MY RESPONSE ON 6:15 11:46 AMRichard Haier?<rich.haier@>Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 11:46 AMTo: ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.caDear Dr. Schimmack,Thank you for your email. National intelligence work presents a challenge. As luck would have it, just yesterday I submitted the final ms for the second edition of Hunt's textbook,?Human Intelligence?(with Roberto Colom). We rewrote?his chapter that dealt with this kind of research. We decided we should include it along with compelling critiques (see refs below and the attached; two were published in?Intelligence) because this work is widely debated and students should be aware of it.The highlighted sections you sent all have references?(some also in?Intelligence). These citations?are only part of the larger problems with national IQ data. The concept of national intelligence defined by PISA and other non-IQ tests, however, is generating new research,?some of which is submitted to us. We do not reject or refuse to review any category of intelligence research?a priori,?consistent with our view of academic freedom. We do take care to ensure our reviewers approach their evaluations with the requisite expertise and skepticism.Retraction of papers usually involves fraudulent data or incorrect analyses, which you are not suggesting. The fact that this paper makes claims that are debatable?or even reprehensible is not sufficient for an editor-initiated retraction. In my view, the critiques of national IQ that we and others have published are consistent with the way science should work. If others cite?the original without the subsequent critiques, their poor scholarship?(or deliberate cherry picking) should be called out.I hope this addresses your concern. I would be interested to know if you might have desk-rejected this paper had you been editor, and if so, why. I'm asking because since I became Editor in 2016, I'm more interested than ever in dialogue about such issues,?which I often face.Sincerely,Rich Haierpersonal website:?WICHERTS, J. M., DOLAN, C. V., CARLSON, J. S. & VAN DER MAAS, H. L. J. 2010a. Raven's test performance of sub-Saharan Africans: Average performance, psychometric properties, and the Flynn Effect.?Learning and Individual Differences,?20,?135-151.WICHERTS, J. M., DOLAN, C. V. & VAN DER MAAS, H. L. J. 2010b. The dangers of unsystematic selection methods and the representativeness of 46 samples of African test-takers.?Intelligence,?38,?30-37.WICHERTS, J. M., DOLAN, C. V. & VAN DER MAAS, H. L. J. 2010c. A systematic literature review of the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans.?Intelligence,?38,?1-20.Wicherts 2010.pdf240K?SECOND EMAIL RECEIVED ON 6/15 12:47PMUlrich Schimmack?<ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 12:47 PMTo: Richard Haier <rich.haier@>Dear Rich Haier,?? ?unfortunately, your response does not satisfy my concern. It doesn't even address my concern.?It is a general problem in psychology that there are no clearly established criteria for construct validation (see my in press article about the validation crisis).? So, I think it is fair to ask whether the article in question?provided information that justifies the claim that the scores reported in this article reflect national differences in intelligence.?To do so, the authors would need to do a few things that have been outlined by Campbell and Fiske (1955) many years ago.1.? They have to define intelligence.? What is the attribute that they are measuring?? The authors never explicitly define intelligence,?but they imply that they are measuring the same attribute that is measured when IQ tests are used within nations. However,a valid measure of within-nation variation is not automatically a valid measure of between-nation variation.?2. They have to demonstrate that their measure correlates in a meaningful way with measures that we would expect to be correlated with intelligence.?Now we are getting to the racist part of the article. The authors list a bunch of correlates of their measure, but they never explain why intelligence would be related to skin tone or the risk of contracting HIV.? This means they are not validating their measure. This is simply not how validation works.?3. The main focus is on the near perfect correlation with educational attainment. The authors use this as evidence that their measure is valid. However, it may actually show the opposite.? We can only test differences in dispositions and abilities, if we keep other factors constant. Giving a Chinese participant a test in English would lead to low scores and invalidate the test.? So, the key finding is that more education leads to better performance on tests that require education. This does not justify the conclusion that the scores reflect national differences in intelligence.?In short, the article contains no scientifically valid conclusions. Was it fraudulent. No. But it is just bad science. Now, there is a lot of bad science in psychology and not every bad article needs to be retracted. However, you are aware that this topic is controversial and that racists are using articles in your journal to justify their racist ideology. I think that is stretching academic freedom too far.? I hope you consult with the editorial board and give this request more consideration.?Best, Uli Schimmack?From:?Richard Haier <rich.haier@>Sent:?Monday, June 15, 2020 2:46 PMTo:?Ulrich Schimmack <ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Subject:?inquiry re Lynn & Meisenberg?[Quoted text hidden]1645-Manuscript in docx or tex-5683-1-18-20191210.docx2789K?BEFORE I COULD RESPOND, THE THIRD EMAIL WAS RECEIVED ON 6/16Ulrich Schimmack?<ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:26 PMTo: Richard Haier <rich.haier@>Dear Rich Haier,?? ?I outline very clearly what the main problem with the article is. It does not follow the steps necessary to validate a measure.?Do you disagree with my assessment of this article? If so, I am very interested in your justification for the validation procedure.?If not, I am wondering what you are planning to do about it??Sincerely, Uli SchimmackFrom:?Ulrich Schimmack <ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Sent:?Monday, June 15, 2020 3:47 PMTo:?Richard Haier <rich.haier@>Subject:?Re: inquiry re Lynn & Meisenberg?[Quoted text hidden]ON JUNE 17 HE AGAIN WENT TO TWITTER AND TO ELSEVIER@ELSpsychologyThis racist quote is published in one of your journals. The editor of intelligence, @rjhaier, has no problem with it, so I am asking you. What are you going to do about it?AND ALSO, ON JUNE 17Replying to @R__INDEXDear members of the editorial board of Intelligence, I ask you to do something about this racist quote in your journal. @LarsPenke, @JelteWicherts@Russwarne@AndrewRAConwayAND ALSO, ON JUNE 18 HYPERLINK "" INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/ntip1Pco_reasonably_small.jpeg" \* MERGEFORMATINET HYPERLINK "" Ulrich Schimmack@R__INDEXThe editor of Intelligence, @rjhaier, is buddy buddy with Murray. No wonder he is not responding to my emails about the racist article by Lynn in his journal that validated a measure of national differences in intelligence by correlating it with skin color.SENT BY ME, JUNE 18Richard Haier?<rich.haier@>Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 2:59 PMTo: Ulrich Schimmack <ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Bcc: "Rodney, Gail M. (ELS-NYC)" <G.Rodney@>Dear Dr. Schimmack,Thank you for clarifying that your concern is?not fraud or incorrect analyses. As I understand it, the core problem is that you feel the conclusion?of the paper was unwarranted from the results and therefore, the paper should be retracted. Retraction requests are serious and require a process to ensure fairness. As a first step, I've requested the original reviews so I can better understand the history of this paper. After that, I'll determine?how to investigate your concern further. Please understand, this may take time as I draw others into the evaluation.Sincerely,Richard HaierRECEIVED JUNE, 18Ulrich Schimmack?<ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:44 PMTo: Richard Haier <rich.haier@>Dear Dr. Haier,?? ? ?I appreciate it that you are taking this request seriously.? I would like to inform you that the authors of an article that used this measure that was published in Psychological Science just voluntarily retracted the article on the basis that they did not vet their measure of national differences in intelligence fully and now doubt its validity.? I believe this strengthens my case to ask for a retraction.? I understand that investigating this matter will take some time.?Best, Uli SchimmackReceived July 17Ulrich SchimmackJul 17, 2020, 7:59 AM (12 days ago) INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET to?me INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET Dear Richard Haier,?? ? I understand that it is summer and that my request is not a top priorty, but I would appreciate it if you could give me an update.?Best, Uli SchimmackFrom:?Ulrich Schimmack <ulrich.schimmack@utoronto.ca>Sent:?Thursday, July 9, 2020 8:03 AMTo:?Richard Haier <rich.haier@>Subject:?Fw: inquiry re Lynn & Meisenberg INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET Richard Haier?<rich.haier@>Jul 17, 2020, 9:53 PM (12 days ago) INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET to?Ulrich INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET Thank you for your email. This is a priority for me but, as you suggest, communication during the summer is slow. I will let you know when I have a result.?R. Haierpersonal website:? INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET Ulrich SchimmackJul 18, 2020, 4:40 AM (11 days ago) INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET to?me INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET Thanks for the update.?Best, Uli INCLUDEPICTURE "/var/folders/2y/pj239rbj27336mnp7mhqsjxm0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/WebArchiveCopyPasteTempFiles/cleardot.gif" \* MERGEFORMATINET ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download