Researchers Find Link Between Low Intelligence And Homophobia

[Anonymous No.12433919]

https://www.iflscience.com/brain/researchers-find-link-between-low-intelligence-and-homophobia/

How valid and scientific is this?

What would the reaction be, if same kind of research were done for races?

[Anonymous No.12433927]

>jewish funded study claims people who dislike social degeneracy are stupid

[Anonymous No.12433938]

>>12433927
If it's not true, can you pinpoint to where this research went wrong?

[Anonymous No.12433945]

>>12433938
Anon please. Any science that makes a claim about woke values being superior is a fraud. I could debunk it but then twitter would find and cancel me.

[Anonymous No.12433949]

>>12433945
>a fraud
Because such claims are immune to even basic scrutiny. Imagine being a reviewer for a hypothetical paper titled "Gays are good" and finding massive logical and procedural errors with it. Anything other than total support of the paper will be taken as homophobia and your career will be destroyed. I don't trust any claim made about gays, trannies etc in science because it literally cannot be properly reviewed.

[Anonymous No.12433950]

full paper

>https://scihubtw(dot)tw/10.1016/j.intell.2018.03.012

[Anonymous No.12433953]

>>12433945
>>12433949
I posted the paper here. Can you please show exactly what is wrong with it. I havent had time yet to work it out myself.

[Anonymous No.12433957]

>>12433945
Replace 'any' with 'most' and remove the 'I could' part.

[Anonymous No.12433958]

>>12433953
Any quantifiable means of measuring intelligence is discarded when it shows "one race" is inferior. Now it's suddenly permissible again when it produces results in line with their social agenda.

[Anonymous No.12433969]

>>12433949
Can you cite one example of a scientists career being destroyed for failing to accept a paper that was in support of progressive values?

[Anonymous No.12433972]

>>12433919
define homophobia.

[Anonymous No.12433974]

>>12433958
There is hypocrisy on both sides. I don't know how many people who believe in the race/IQ study can believe in the homophobia/IQ study.

[Anonymous No.12433976]

>>12433919
>finds link
So basically absolutely nothing.

[Anonymous No.12433984]

>>12433919
I mean it makes sense.

From an evolutionary perspective, homosexuality does not have enough of an impact on productive rates to endanger a group/community and it's a trait that obviously doesn't tend to persist and/or spread.

Spending valuable mental and social resources worrying about/combating homosexuality is not a very intelligent behaviour.

[Anonymous No.12433985]

>>12433953
You haven’t posted it. Because it’s not open, but paywalled. I didn’t see it, but you can tell it’s like all the others because they take all the other studies uncritically in the abstract.
>There are well-known correlations between low cognitive ability and support of prejudicial or non-egalitarian attitudes.
>This paper adds to existing knowledge by providing the first analyses of the associations between cognitive ability and attitudes towards LGBT issues in a non-US sample
The studies have always the same issues. Most important. Intelligent people know what they are required to think and what consequences there are for violation. They also get that the researchers have a bias and hence won’t tell them how they truly feel. Basically it doesn’t measure real sentiment, but how well certain groups display compliance with current social forces.

[Anonymous No.12433990]

I did post it in an later post. Its through scihub

Look at >>12433950

>https://scihubtw(dot)tw/10.1016/j.intell.2018.03.012

[Anonymous No.12433994]

>>12433990
Doesn’t work.

[Anonymous No.12433997]

>ifls.com
Stopped reading there
Faggot thread

[Anonymous No.12433999]

>>12433969
did you think this through?
the fact that you can't dissent means it only gets supportive responses

[Anonymous No.12434007]

>>12433994
How come. Did you replace the (dot) with a real dot?
Where do you live? Perhaps you need to use another scihub proxy. Just google sci-hub and paste the sciencedirect link into scihub. You can find it in my original post.

[Anonymous No.12434008]

>>12433994
>to dumb to understand you have to change (dot) to .

[Anonymous No.12434013]

>>12433999
I did think it through. If anon claims any scientist who doesn't fall in line with progressive lines is cancelled, he surely should be able to name one example. There must be at least a few who were brave enough to stand up.

[Anonymous No.12434016]

>>12434013
James Watson
Good enough for you?

[Anonymous No.12434020]

>>12434007
I would have just screened through and find the same ten to twelve issues there always are.
>>12434008
It is either working or it isn’t.

[Anonymous No.12434022]

>>12433919
>our jewish social "science" found another link between being dumb and being -phobic, racist or not voting neoliberals
Am I on reddit?

[Anonymous No.12434038]

Serious question: If the study found that high IQ people hated gays, would it be published and recieve the same publicity on sites like ifls?

[Anonymous No.12434042]

>>12434007
The website is there, but I can’t do anything on it with my iPhone. If this study was relevant somebody would have paid for it to not behind a paywall so it‘s irrelevant anyway. We could just take any number of similar studies and go into the methodology section.

[Anonymous No.12434044]

OP here.

I need concrete things to point out in this reserach to claim it bogus.

It is published in ScienceDirect which gives it more reliability.

One anon pointed out about not being critical to previous studies it relies on.

However it does account for religion, background, education etc. I think the problem might be in the 1 to 7 scale of the question. It seems to be completeley subjective as ti what 3 and 7 might be. Someone might perceive 4 to be completely neutral and the person being not interested in the topic while someone would take anything less than a 7 to be "homophobic". What i mean is that its not clear what makes 6 and 7 different. Someone could think that 1 is "kill all gays" and someone else might think 1 is "gays shouldnt have any more rights as they have now". Would that make sense?

[Anonymous No.12434046]

>>12434042
here's the pdf for those that cannot access due to paywall or problems with scihub.
I have no dog in this fight, no comment on the content.
https://mega.nz/file/a9tDVQDJ#oXkYuY-49Tx0a_Irbr4aVCJnm22N51dBEECKVoNSnQ4

[Anonymous No.12434048]

If you are not retarded you probably know that saying "I dont like gays" is social seppuku these days, so you would avoid that even in anonymous studies

[Anonymous No.12434050]

>>12434044
>It is published in ScienceDirect which gives it more reliability.
No it doesn't, ScienceDirect is just a database for Elsevier. They host unfalsifiable humanities pieces like this in addition to hard STEM.

[Anonymous No.12434052]

>>12434050
yes, but normies hold it to higher standar than others.

[Anonymous No.12434060]

People with little or no education are attracted to far right ideology. No surprise here.

[Anonymous No.12434071]

>>12434044
If you stick around. I will deliver an explanation of how a valid, reliable and objective study would look like and you can criticize it based on that, if you compare it to that.

[Anonymous No.12434073]

>>12434071
I'll be around

[Anonymous No.12434079]

>>12434060
>t. midwit

[Anonymous No.12434080]

>>12433919
Blacks are generally the most "homophobic" race so these results are plausible. That being said, high IQ people are also prejudiced just like low IQ people except towards different groups. But since most academics are leftists who care more about their moral superiority than academic rigor, you only get papers exploring one side of the issue.

>Second, we test “who shows intergroup bias?” and find that people with both relatively higher and lower levels of cognitive ability show approximately equal levels of intergroup bias but toward different sets of groups.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550616660592

[Anonymous No.12434140]

>>12433919
Science finds libertarians are the most intelligent political group. Leftist brainlets can only cope and screech at this.

https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2014-carl.pdf

[Anonymous No.12434155]

Explains why Africa is so homophobic

[Anonymous No.12434172]

>>12434155
If you want to piss off a group of black people, hold up a sign that says "Black Trans Lives Matter"

[Anonymous No.12434189]

>>12433919
>Author (((Perales))) (((Perez))) is a sephardi jew
>Perales Perez is a sociologist (not an actual scientist)
>Max correlation 0.21, general model 0.04
Discarded as pseudoscience, fuck kikes

[Anonymous No.12434194]

Also this is what a 0.21 correlation looks like, very weak and could be easily made artificially by cherrypicking or other techniques like formula manipulation etc.

[Anonymous No.12434207]

exactly, they "adjusted" the models according to pseudoscience like gender identity etc. it appears, so the actual correlation is 0.04, pic related, basically could be caused by random noise plus some (((help)))

[Anonymous No.12434212]

I have a confirmed IQ of 125 and I fucking hate faggots.

[Anonymous No.12434213]

>>12434194
>>12434207
pics were made with random normal distributions ofc just to show what these correlations look like.

[Anonymous No.12434225]

>>12433919
>https://www.iflscience.com/brain/researchers-find-link-between-low-intelligence-and-homophobia/
well studies have found stornger links of being black and low-intelligence so I guess lefty libs wouldn't wanns go that road ;)

[Anonymous No.12434227]

these are the criteria for (((adjustments))), basically if you are a migrant you get free intelligence points because you were oppressed by le ebil white man

[Anonymous No.12434233]

these are the criteria for (((adjustments))), basically if you are a migrant you get free intelligence points because you were oppressed by le ebil white man, there are like 10 criteria so they can obtain whatever results they want by tweaking the knobs and claim they're significant. Do you agree frens?

[Anonymous No.12434268]

the main problem seems to be the SDMT test, that causes basically the whole variation in the composite model, there must be some (((trick))) in that test.

[Anonymous No.12434276]

plus all this stat is based on a single question that is posed in a way that I don't like (of course you love human rights, don't you goy?)

[Anonymous No.12434280]

>>12434071
First accurate measure of intelligence. You need to make sure it’s matrices and not something mixed with verbal etc. that’s loosely correlated. Secondly you need to make sure it’s something measurable, especially if bias is a concern. You can’t just flat out or even covertly ask somebody and except relevant results, if it’s related to taboo subjects. So neuroimaging is obligatory. The subjects and the people doing and evaluating the scans have to be clueless, what the study is about (double blind). The people need to get stories, pictures or movies about the issue paired with test/calibrating pictures/movies were you see how certain feelings (anger/disgust/happiness/etc.) look in an individual (these calibration questions are the only ones revealed to the interpreters of the scans). There have to be decoy pictures/movies too. Optimal would be pictures/movies of randomly chosen pictures/films of people that openly are LGBT and doing LGBT stuff. You need at least n=200, but n=300 would be better. The people need to be randomly chosen and checked at different sites. And let somebody, who is blinded to too, who can just see variables do the statistical interpretation. That’s needed to prevent the usual p-value hacking. I had less time than I thought, but that’s the elevator pitch. Maybe I can elaborate more later. I hope it helps.

[Anonymous No.12434292]

>If you don't support absolute egalitarianism you're stupid, goy

[Anonymous No.12434303]

>>12434292
I noticed that too. That guy treats prejudice and non-egalitarianism as one and the same. As if the only reason why you dislike brown and LGBTHIV+ community is because you don't know them well and judge them too early. But once you get to know them better you realize how wonderful people they are start treating them nicely. Even though in real life, it is the exact opposite.

[Anonymous No.12434322]

>>12434280
Excellent. Thank you very much for this. I am now better analyzing this sort of data.

[Anonymous No.12434325]

>>12433919
>Blacks socially conditioned to hate gays 100x harder than whites
>Blacks on average have lower IQ
Wow, what could be behind this mysterious hatred of homos that dumb people have!? It must be those stupid Nazis at work again!

[Anonymous No.12434328]

The author's facebook and his wife seems to be jewish too but I'm checking that

https://web.cuckbook.com/paco.p.perez.1/about

[Anonymous No.12434343]

>>12434328
wife probably jewish too but can't confirm with 100% accuracy, both are SJW anyway, that's pretty clear by reading the titles of their publications.
https://researchers.uq.edu.au/researcher/2758
https://researchers.uq.edu.au/researcher/24801

[Anonymous No.12434371]

>>12434233
>adjusted for ethno-migrant background
Lmao

[Anonymous No.12434380]

the author's sister... maybe they're not kikes after all... just communists.

[Anonymous No.12434391]

>>12434380
Communism is literally a Jewish conspiracy

[Anonymous No.12434394]

>>12434325
The white straight man strike again.

[Anonymous No.12434403]

>>12434189
ok I checked in depth he doesn't appear to be a kike, just a SJW commie with christcuck background. Wife still possible tho.

[Anonymous No.12434412]

Holy fuck the amount of cope itt

[Anonymous No.12434425]

>>12434412
>OP: Hey prove this study wrong
>Anons: Try to prove study wrong
>Retard: Lmao why you all trying to prove it wrong!? COPE!

[Anonymous No.12434432]

>>12433919
If they had found the opposite result, they would lose their jobs, so the result is meaningless.

Also, Intelligence leads to Education leads to Political Indoctrination.

This is politics, not science.

[Anonymous No.12434436]

My IQ is 167 and I think gays should not paint their flags everywhere. So you fuck ass, great. Do you need to remind us every second of our lives.

Also, you guys contribute to all new cases of AIDS, given everything we know now and every protective measures we have now. At some point, it is YOUR choice and your fault. The rest of the society should not pay for your indulgence.

[Anonymous No.12434519]

>>12433919
the problem is the word "homophobe" is a pretty idiotic one. like if you get frustrated of being around a gay person and think you get the gay disease from looking at them is pretty idiotic indeed, but thinking gay marriage,pride etc. are destructive for society is an entirely different category,but the woke left uses "homophobe" in both cases

[Anonymous No.12434562]

it's threads like these which simply serve to prove such claims over and over and over.
also, there is a big difference between "what beliefs do you hold" and "what is your race"

[Anonymous No.12434568]

>>12434519
they're both very clearly a fear of gay people

[Anonymous No.12434677]

>>12434436
>Muh iq is 167
Sure, keep telling yourself that buddy

[Anonymous No.12434685]

>>12433919
>ifl
>word ambigously used
>anything to do with this topic in where you disagree with one of the popular ideas, is a something epobe
Yeah I'm going to say unscientific.

[Anonymous No.12434713]

>>12433919
>https://www.iflscience.com/brain/researchers-find-link-between-low-intelligence-and-homophobia/
Yeah i can see a link clearly, smart people dont like homos, stupid ones dont have any homophobia

[Anonymous No.12434877]

>>12434568
stop being midwit please

[Anonymous No.12434893]

>>12433919

[Anonymous No.12436677]

>>12434425
Because we aren’t at „I f***ing love science“. You don’t believe things just because somebody in a lab coat tells you. You search for flaws in the methods.

[Anonymous No.12436717]

>>12433919
I would expect there to be some correlation between lower intelligence and an unwillingness to accept something that's different. That's not to say some intelligent people aren't incredibly stubborn, and some dumb people aren't willing to accept new ideas.

[Anonymous No.12436725]

>>12433919
>[soft science] researchers find [politically correct result]
Absolutely groundbreaking.

[Anonymous No.12439017]

>>12434212
>the anecdoteburger
fuck off faggot

[Anonymous No.12439049]

>>12433919
OP is a faggot

[Anonymous No.12439056]

>>12433919
People who are more intelligent probably have statistically more contact with and absorption of official education, which contains embedded within it the moral assumptions of the society in which it exists.

[Anonymous No.12439494]

>>12433945
Ayn Rand warned about the politicization of science in her book "Atlas Shrugged".

[Anonymous No.12439500]

>>12433927
Casually implies being a conservacuck who sucks on trumps nipples isnt social degenracy

[Anonymous No.12439510]

Stupid people are more likely to express their opinion and those same opinions are made based on instinct and emotions, therefore hating gay people is based(on nature).

[Anonymous No.12439584]

>>12433984
Disagree. There is a very good reason why practically all societies have either an aversion to homosexuality or else place a value on it that leads to a form of social distancing.

Its a disease caused by a parasite. One which leads to the infected altering their sexual behavior. This helps the parasite to reproduce.

Behavior altering parasites are nothing new. Look it up sometime. There are many different types. Some affect sexual behavior some do not. But they all have one thing in common, they adversely affect the host. Either killing it or reducing its ability to reproduce.

Our ancestors knew nothing about disease vectors, or even about microorganisms. But through untold eons of social adaptation they learned to avoid and distance themselves from individuals exhibiting unusual behavior and characteristics. It was a form of protection against infection.

[Anonymous No.12439615]

>>12439494
She also made up imaginary physics in 'Atlas Shrugged' to push her ideology.

[Anonymous No.12439638]

>>12439584
Pray tell what parasite would this be?

[Anonymous No.12439662]

>>12433919
smart people are full of the gay

[Anonymous No.12439938]

These studies are always fun. You know what groups of people have the least education world wide? Minorities. These studies make it main stream that globally minorities hates the gays. Even in the US the most homophobic parts of the country is the innercities.

[Anonymous No.12439976]

>>12439638
that (((parasite)))

[Anonymous No.12440161]

>>12439615
So do a lot of science fiction novel that isn't either a dystopian "Mad Max" story or a hard sci-fi story like "The Martian".

"Atlas Shrugged" was a polemic against the creeping socialism and the rise of the bureaucratic ABC agendas of FDR's New Deal politicies.

Also, the politicization of science was going on at this time of FDR though the biggest offender were the Soviet Union with its dogmatic promotion of Lysenkoism.

[Anonymous No.12440336]

>>12433919
I'm smart and homophobic. This study is bullshit.

[Anonymous No.12440526]

>>12433919
Isn't it obvious that less intelligent people are going to rely more on heuristics such as biases?

[Anonymous No.12440547]

>>12433919
Smart people will be better at hiding their prejudice.

[Anonymous No.12440555]

>>12433919
Where's the link to the original?

[Anonymous No.12440565]

>>12439494
>>12440161
>taking Rand seriously
She was a radical. She was also arrogant and overly verbose in her writing. That same book you just mentioned included a FORTY PAGE rant in the form of a radio message near the end. Her criticisms are valid, to an extent, but she takes her ideas and runs too far with them.

[Anonymous No.12440639]

>>12439494
>ayn rand

lmao are you 12? read some big boy books. at least read Nietzsche or something if you want to be edgy about leftists

[Anonymous No.12440677]

Researchers find link between homosexuals and pedophilia.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1556756/

[Anonymous No.12440680]

I think that the other posters already answered the question very well, but to add my two cents:

cent 1: the measures used are not proper intelligence tests, rather pre-clinical screening tools that can be dressed up as such
cent 2: there were no corrections for response biases (social desirability of the answers is an obvious one), and only a single item measure for the variable of interest

[Anonymous No.12440685]

>>12433919
>>12433950
I'm gay myself but I'd like to see which questions they used to measure intelligence.

[Anonymous No.12440702]

>>12440639
This. Nietzsche was based.

[Anonymous No.12440728]

>>12433919
>Researchers find link between low intelligence and homophobia

Ok I'll translate:

>Psychologists niggers find a linear correlation coefficient of about 0.6 between bad grades in middle school and answering "yes" to a question in their poll, the question being: "are you against giving or receiving anal sex with another man?"

[Anonymous No.12440791]

>>12434044
Anon .. think about a publisher who refuses to publish it..
>homophobe
Meanwhile if you do publish it and even if the sample space isn't taken from the universe on a random basis and the researcher is biased; the publisher ignores/makes little adjustments and publishes it The publisher gets a pat on the back for being
>progressive
Next thing you know its in the high school science books telling kids they're retarded for having an individual thinking and not being a sheep for the deep state

[Anonymous No.12444088]

>>12440639
Don't be so testy just because your dildo got stuck in your fake vagina while you were dilating.

[Anonymous No.12444128]

>>12433927
Found the IQlet.

[Anonymous No.12445210]

>>12444088
>d-d-d-dilate!!!!!!!
kek. it's like being called gay on a MW lobby at this point

[Anonymous No.12445256]

>>12433919
Based brainlets.

[Anonymous No.12445260]

>>12440547
This desu. The retards just say what a lot of smart people think but keep to themselves since they'd like to keep their job.

[Anonymous No.12445278]

>>12445260
Some people have very little to lose and/or believe hiding their opinion is cowardly.

Only a retarded fuckwit would think that makes them stupid.

[Anonymous No.12445302]

>>12433974
Homophobia is literally the highest among african american populations LOL. This paper is unironically unintentionally based. However, just because black culture happens to hate gays and happens to be low IQ does not mean the correlation is causation.

[Anonymous No.12445519]

>>12434140
>the republicans are libertarian and the democrats are leftists

[Anonymous No.12445529]

>>12445302
so homophobia is for niggers lmao

[Anonymous No.12445537]

>>12433927
/thread

[Anonymous No.12445552]

>>12445519
neither party is libertarian although republican is intrinsically more libertarian concerning regulation and taxation (and just smaller gov in general) wheras dems are inherently opposed to libertarianism as a concept because their entire fundament is using the government as an instrument to redistribute resources. Social conservatism has little bearing on liberty because social views don't have much influence on our constitution

[Anonymous No.12445979]

/pol/ is not very bright as this thread demonstrates.

[Anonymous No.12445999]

>>12445302
>>12445529
but don't blacks also have the highest rates of LGBT proportionality? that's gotta be kind of awkward