<For instance showing a Chinese group and a US group a picture, and then ask questions about it, the US group overwhelmingly points out the biggest most exciting object where as the Chinese group usually looks at context and notices the background first much more often than the counterpart.>
Ah, now I see where you are going wrong.
You [and the researchers] are confusing correlation with causation. We easterners, being strong on causation, as you pointed out, are up on those things.
When you get the Chinese group and compare it with the USA group, you are not comparing Chinese and Americans, you are comparing intelligent with unintelligent.
If you select, randomly, equally intelligent groups from the Chinese and non-Chinese American, based on IQ, you will find that the Americans perform much the same, not just grabbing for the biggest most exciting object.
See here for how it works: lagriffedulion.f2s.com
and here for "Why Asians Lag" lagriffedulion.f2s.com
You should get the researchers to do it for both verbal and overall IQs to get to the fine detail, which we easterners like to see.
Correlation vs Causation. Every researcher and more importantly, journalist, needs it tattooed on the back of their left hand and right hand so they remember it while they type about the conclusions from some research.
Correlation is good for finding possible causes, but that's when the thinking needs to start.
Mqurice
PS: I don't think there is a latitude effect, though getting up early in the day, as we easterns do, makes us healthy, wealthy and wise. Americans in New York are just finishing work yesterday, and will go to bed in a few hours, while we easterners are already busy with tomorrow. |
