Talk:Variability hypothesis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Variability hypothesis 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: 90 days

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.

Evolutionary biology Low‑importance

	Evolutionary biology portal This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Surprisingly, no discussion of sex chromosomes[edit]

The sex chromosomes seem like such an obvious explanation and support for this. The connection was mentioned in an archived talk, but not followed up on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Variability_hypothesis/Archive_1#X_Chromosome_Inactivation (unduely lost, in my opinion) Elias (talk) 12:52, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What was not explicitly mentioned in that discussion, but is documented elsewhere on Wikipedia, is the fact that mental abilities are disproportionately X-linked. This goes in line with, and explains, the observation that, as the article observes, IQ scores have greater variability than e.g. height or weight. I think this insight adds very valuable context to the article and should be cross-linked in some way. 109.192.220.240 (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here is that we will need to take care to avoid WP:SYNTH. We will need to stick to what reliable sources say. If they make an explicit link to the variability hypothesis then it would probably be worth stating in this article, but if not such a statement would be prohibited. Generalrelative (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's because there is no concrete evidence for "intelligence genes" (in particular the recessive ones, since its the only ones males are more likely to express). Plus females can have "hybrid" traits - the ones that are neither dominant nor recessive, that males simply dont have. This could produce additional combinations that result in high intelligence. And also something as primitive as "the heterezygotic sex is inherently nore variable than the homozygotic one" simply throws epigenetics out in the window. TL;DR real-life trait determination is far more complicated than this model suggests. 37.144.32.195 (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Though there is extremely good and reliable evidence for multiple intelligence genes, that doesn't support greater male variability. Males also have hybrid traits. XY isn't necessarily more variable genetically for IQ than XX due to X inactivation mosaicism. BooleanQuackery (talk) 03:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Overemphasis on Leta Hollingworth[edit]

I think there is over emphasis on Leta Hollingworth. There are 3 rather large and expansive paragraphs about her whereas for every other scientist there is only a paragraph and no explanation of their studies. Is there a reason why she has such an outsized section? Phoenix1494 (talk) 17:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Phoenix1494Agree! Geysirhead (talk) 10:32, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Economic[edit]

Examine the concept of demand as multifactorial variable 105.113.12.88 (talk) 06:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]