Aibu to think we're entering a new "dark age"?

[Sorrelle]

Over-reliance on social media, living in our little bubbles; economic nationalism rather than globalisation; growing inequality; growth of illiberal democracies... Anyone agree?

No, Ego, if 100 people take an IQ test and 60 of them score exactly 100, 20 below 100 and 20 above 100 (as example figures), then 80% have a median or below intelligence and 80% have a median or above intelligence, because 60% got the same score.

'If there are ten of us, and one person has size eight feet, one has size six feet and eight have size seven feet, then only ten percent of us are below the median

That is using whole numbers which is sneaky.'

As opposed to on IQ tests, where results are given to so many decimal places, that thousands, or 60 million or 7 billion people can all get a totally different score, so that one person and one alone can be declared the only middle person!?!

I'm really confused by this. But yes, ego, IQ is set on a bell-shape curve. I'm really pretty sure 100 sits at the top of the curve - it's designed that way.

Right?

So you will never find that 50% of people score below the average.

This might help Jeanne:

www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/maths/statistics/samplinghirev1.shtml

Nope, doesn't help in the slightest, sorry!

I am still stuck on the fact that IQ is organised such that you score a whole number (eg., 100), and also organised on a bell curve, such that 100 is the commonest score.

The examples you're linking to are different.

ego, isn't it just a way of making sure the curve is the same shape for everyone, no matter what age?

clearly a very large number of people have exactly the same temperature - the median temperature, with a few above or below
The 'same temperature' you're referring to would be the mode, not necessarily the median?

Median household incomes in the UK grew more slowly than inflation, as measured by the Retail Prices Index, between 2009/10 and 2013/14. Consequently more people are in absolute low income than in 2009/10, since this threshold moves according to inflation.
researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN07096

It is reported by the DWP that there are 14.5million people living in absolute poverty in the UK. This was 23% of the UK population in 2013.
www.leeds.gov.uk/docs/Poverty%20Fact%20Book%20November%202015.pdf

Concerning PP's comments about removal of access to the law: did you know that poor people are now pleading guilty to crimes purely because they can't afford the court fees if they're found guilty? The guilty verdict is pretty likely when legal aid's unavailable for defence against small criminal charges, such as stealing food.

Also see: restriction of dental care, health care and even cancer treatments for those who cannot pay. Erosion of care provision and of support for home carers.

Also also see: the mounting death toll among ESA claimants being put through the Kafka-esque 'work capability' process, which is so demonstrably unfair that it's being investigated by two international human rights organisations. What do you think happens to people when they can't claim either sickness or job-seekers allowance? How about people being 'sanctioned' - having their money stopped for weeks, months or years - on spurious grounds? Did you know the changes to both benefits and housing payments next April will leave many disabled households in deficit after paying their rent?

Poverty's about to increase to levels that ought to shame any well-off society like ours. The complacent will still be blind to it, though so that's about half the country then.

Sorry, I missed the IQ page.

Am feeling grumpy enough to remark that the existence of so many posts about it rather proves OP's point!

Jeanne, an IQ score is in effect a discrete variable, like shoe size.

You can't get any possible number between 20 and 180. There is no IQ score of 123.9999999999999992, for example.

So everyone is going to score the same score as huge numbers of other people.

And then on top of that, the Wiki point, IQ is worked out in reference to the peer group so that most people will be given within a very small number of scores on or near to the median score.

IQ testing has always been up for debate in the past in terms of cultural ability to answer questions. I haven't seen any recent test papers so not sure if this has been addressed.
I think it's obvious that over time IQ levels will have increased but that is due to testing. The tests are standard, a very intelligent person who is not a cultural norm to the person who sets the test questions will be at a disadvantage.
IQ testing aside I think the ability to look up anything you need to know so easily has led to people not really being bothered to learn information in a concrete way.
Time will tell if this is bad or not....

Maid, in the case of temperature, the median and mode happen to be the same.

You'll get no argument from me, Ego. I think it's a strategic mistake for us, as well as an absurdly expensive exercise in willy-waving.

almond Sure, but it is not a given that this temperature would be the median. Your words - 'same temperature' - defines mode.

...assuming this 'same temperature' is the most common temperature.

What are the Wright Stuff topics next week?

FGS, I was only talking in terms of median of human body temperature!

I will now use another example where it is possible for median and mode to be different.

(So glad this thread will vanish in a month)

A patient is given the following doses of a drug..

1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 4.

The mode is 1. The median is 1. No doses were below the median.

A patient is given the following doses of a drug...

1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3

The mode is 1. The median is 2. 30% of doses were above the median and 40% were below.

In neither example are 50% below the median.