The NAEP provides ethnic averages and percentiles in both reading and math for 8th graders in 2019. I chose 8th graders because they are the oldest age group for which they have nationally representative samples, since 12th graders only include those who have not yet dropped out of school. Note: scores are reported on 0 to 500 scale.
| whites | blacks | Hispanics | American Indian/Alaska native | Asian/Pacific Islander | Multiracial | |
| 90th percentil | 314 | 288 | 297 | 293 | 326 | 312 |
| Average | 272 | 244 | 252 | 248 | 281 | 267 |
| 10th percentile | 227 | 197 | 202 | 198 | 232 | 218 |
| Estimated SD | 34 | 36 | 38 | 38 | 37 | 37 |
| whites | blacks | Hispanics | American Indian/Alaska native | Asian/Pacific Islander | Multiracial | |
| 90th percentil | 339 | 306 | 314 | 308 | 364 | 337 |
| Average | 292 | 260 | 268 | 262 | 310 | 286 |
| 10th percentile | 245 | 215 | 222 | 215 | 252 | 235 |
| Estimated SD | 37 | 36 | 36 | 37 | 44 | 40 |
Although the NAEP is not an IQ test, the correlation between IQ tests and scholastic achievement tests is about as high as the correlation between two IQ tests, making them statistically equivalent in the general population. Further, the main reason people care about racial IQ gaps is because they translate into racial learning gaps, so converting to IQ seems appropriate and the advantage of using the NAEP to infer group IQ gaps is the excellent sampling this data has among subjects who have spent their whole lives learning these skills.
| reading IQ | math IQ | composite IQ | |
| whites | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| blacks | 88 | 88 | 86 |
| Hispanics | 91 | 90 | 90 |
| American Indian/Alaska native | 89 | 88 | 88 |
| Asian/Pacific Islander | 104 | 107 | 106 |
| Multiracial | 98 | 98 | 97 |
For technical details on how these scores were converted to IQ, see technical note below.
Technical note
The reading, math, and composite NAEP scores were converted to IQ by equating the white NAEP means with 100 and the white NAEP SDs with 15. The reading and math SDs were estimated by subtracting the 90th percentile NAEP scores from the 10th percentile scores and dividing by 2.53 (the bell curve Z score difference between these percentiles) .To determine the white mean of the composite score, we simply add the reading and math means, which gives 564. The white SD of the composite score was crudely estimated by assuming the reading and math correlation among all white 8th graders taking the NAEP is the same as the correlation among all college bound 17-year-olds taking the SAT (r = 0.67 according to Herrnstein and Murray). Using the formula for calculating the composite SD (from page 779 of the book The Bell Curve by Herrnstein and Murray):
This gives a composite white SD of 65.
Pumpkin Person 
rr believes all IQ test scores are just cultural effects. Intelligence is never really measured, only cultural conditioning. no test is culture fair.
but I don’t by it. Cognitive capacity is obvious when you observe people.
Intelligence has three parts:
representational memory
manipulation capacity
preferential values
Because intelligence has these components the first two are universal therefore culture-free and can be measured objectively. Culture fair. The point is that memory can be stored in many ways yet is still a storage of information. Manipulation of information happens in many ways yet the mind still holds an amount to be put together. Values can differ but no set of values increases or decrease intelligence.
it may be obvious, but the things you list aren’t measured by IQ tests directly.
tests which did might be better.
IQ tests measure something so far as they are (very) reliable. but there’s very little or no evidence regarding their reliability over decades and the tests keep changing. how many versions of the wechsler sandwich test have there been?
that is, contra rr, as long as IQ tests are very reliable over decades then one can say they are measuring something even of one can’t say what that something is.
Class-/culture-specific knowledge and skills.
contra mugabe I think the WAIS measures intelligence better than the SAT/ACT. at least the modern versions.
I’ve known plenty of 1550+ SAT and 35+ ACT people who weren’t exceptionally smart. But I doubt there’re many 140 IQ people who aren’t.
Santo said perception was needed for creativity.
There is no good test for creativity.
Working memory yes but not creativity.
I think there’s a common sense/social IQ proxy embedded in a few of the WAIS subtests that doesn’t influence how you do on the SAT.
The people I referred to lacked this above all else. Also creativity.
What are you talking about, Caffeine, WAIS is kind of a dumb test when compared to the SAT. SAT overall measures intelligence, raw intelligence, a lot more precisely than the WAIS, which is all you could ask for.
LOADED, think about it this way. Kitty scored 1470 on the SAT. His IQ is in the 110s.
Which score explains him better?
He didn’t take the SAT it’s just a standardized test with the same scoring distribution.
There’s no way someone with half a brain would believe he scored a 1470 on his SAT especially during the 2000s, even harder during the 90s. So you’re just confusing yourself, bud.
Anyone with half a brain knows that you can game the system with extended time and get 6 hours to take the test.
If anyone’s confusing himself, it’s Kitty, who’s explicitly said a gazillion times that he scored 1471 on the SAT.
This is my school scores.
I no longer think it is the SAT I took.
“Although the NAEP is not an IQ test, the correlation between IQ tests and scholastic achievement tests is about as high as the correlation between two IQ tests, making them statistically equivalent in the general population. Further, the main reason people care about racial IQ gaps is because they translate into racial learning gaps, so converting to IQ seems appropriate and the advantage of using the NAEP to infer group IQ gaps is the excellent sampling this data has among subjects who have spent their whole lives learning these skills.”
Because they’re different versions of the same test.
Speaking of the charlatan Murray, his new book drops in 2 days. Already pre-ordered.
This guy did the same thing (using a different method of calculation?) and got similar results:
https://www.unz.com/anepigone/state-summaries-of-iq-estimates-from-naep-results/
Pumpkin, if you have a high arithmetic score because of strong working memory and not math IQ, could you still do well in high school algebra and precalc without trying very hard?
People don’t want to be reminded of their insecurities. It’s the last thing they want and this website is a great understanding of that. People like Rahul always focusing on what they’re bad at. Nothing but failure and misfortune who does just that.
My personal IQ distribution is 125 verbal, 135 logical, 92 spatial, 81 working memory, and 73 spatial memory.
shitholers like this personality and peepee need to stop commenting on her own blog.
if rr and peepee and arnold and oprah were locked in a room for an hour…everyone would be dead when you opened the door.
THAT was funny. Holy shit
You’ve got a very sick and twisted mind, Mugabe. Might want to work on that soon before you lose your sanity.
I actually like Gary Numan and I don’t understand why he was diagnosed with autism. He doesn’t show any of the traits. I would say its almost impossible to be autistic and good at songwriting. I think the guy has been misdiagnosed but he probably has something else.
I would say I exhibit almost zero of the traits of autism contrary to puppys idiot conspiracy theory. Im almost the opposite of it neurologically. But I have a good insight into what it looks and feels like because I had a friend growing up that would later fit all the criteria that I now know is autism.
People with autism stand out like a sore thumb. You don’t have to look very hard. People react almost universally negatively to people with it. Especially girls. Girls absolutely have no time for an autist.
Subjectively you don’t strike me as autistic, but objectively, as a scientist looking at the autism check list, it’s clear that you are. You have the two core symptoms: obsessive repetitive behavior and impaired social communication. The occurrence of those two core symptoms in the same individual is the definition of autism. You talk about the same topics ad infinitum (99% of which I moderate) and you struggle to understand the perspective of others.
There is always someone more autistic than you out there.
Philo is heavy into social intelligence, he simply chooses to ignore the consequences of his skills. He also tries to be logical with his conclusions.
There is a difference between rational and irrational. The rationale is cause and effect. Irrational is instinctive and unquantifiable.
example
1. thinking out your actions
2. doing without thinking
It is highly problematic that I talk in such an unnatural way. I force myself to talk, I get stuck, forget things, and have sever contorted anxiety.
I am not a smooth talker.
That does not mean I have a poor theory of mind. I am very emotionally fluid in conversations. But it’s the anxiety that blinds me. I was prescribed Lexapro for GAD (Generalized Anxiety Disorder) Also I have Schizoaffective disorder Philo still thinks is not the correct diagnosis.
Philo is not autistic.
He just doesn’t care.
[redacted by pp, Jan 27, 2020]his traits culminate together to form autism, they just happen to independently exist and cause major suffering in his life, but at least it’s not as bad as Mugabe’s where the guy is an inherent psychotic and keeps going on and on about the same topics just as much as Pill does.
I think you could write a good comedy show with an autistic character. Theyve already done it a bit with the Sheldon character in Big Bang Theory. Actually I don’t think Sheldon is a full on aspy. But hes close to it.
I might’ve said this here already. Or maybe it was on Sailer’s blog, but I worry about the ability and willingness of historians to accurately document what has happened.
I’d bet that at least 95 out of the 100 most influential historians alive today are hardcore blue-pillers who believe every in PC trope under the sun. If they don’t really know what’s going on now, why should we believe everything they say about stuff that happened before 1950?
Love him or hate him, look at what happened to David Irving. Most historians refuse to take anything he’s said seriously—ever since his failed libel suit gambit.
It’ll be interesting to see how people write about the 2010s 50 years from now. Their picture will be very different from our lived experience.