Anyone have a link to the source
Edit: I need this for a argument I’m currently having
I googled but could not find source. I only found more memes based on this graph. Which isn’t to say it’s fake, could simply be in some research paper hidden away under a paywall. 15k sample is a very big study though.
The graph alone is highly problematic to make any argument though as it doesn’t specify other critical axis such as age which would highly change the meaning of this graph. The older you are, T levels fall, but your IQ increases. So age alone can potentially explain the phenomenon we’re seeing here.
My attempt to find the graph only resulted in many counter points, however.
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9845018/ looked at only young men and women, so the age no longer becomes an issue. But among young men, higher T is advantageous. I can only read the abstract without paying. But does outline three conclusions there.
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15878571/ studied only 5 year old children. Which again showed a positive relationship between T and intelligence in boys.
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/030645309190018O this study on “normal” men and women, though not sure how they define normal, showed a negative relationship. But this once again doesn’t define age in their study. Which continues with my previous point that simply older men will have lower T but higher IQ.
- Prenatal exposure to higher T also raised intelligence here: https://psychcentral.com/news/2011/03/14/testosterone-hormone-linked-to-higher-iq
You are are gift. Thanks for all the links!
Gigachad
Probably bald and sad
For about a month every day, he drank 500grams of protein powder, mixed with meth and cocaine - power lifted every day … literally saw the face of God for a moment and could understand space and time … then suffered a massive heart attack and died.
Testosterone Georg, who live in a library and dopes up on T is an outlier and should not have been counted.
thats blatant discrimination against outliers, I vote the line be tweaked into a third order polynomial that fits the highest points to better fit the data.
Excel curve fitting to the rescue!
lol, Spiders Georg was my first thought as soon as I saw the graph
logically, I’m horny
A guy who is likely kind of smart and on steroids
Idk man styropyro just got diagnosed with extremely abnormally high test. He most definitely isn’t on gear.
I would believe StyroPro was the outlier on the graph, absolute peak human male without a doubt.
I was just thinking, is this him?
A guy who is really* smart.
Some people have crazy testosterone levels for medical reasons. StyroPyro did a YouTube video a few months back about his testosterone levels.
Hope he’s doing alright. He didn’t know why they were elevated at the time.
Five fingers on the right hand
This is what full testosterone does to a man
Is that the laser, electricity, microwave, etc. YouTube channel guy who has a medical condition causing super high testosterone?
Styropro?
Yes!
a wild Styropyro appears
roid raging chess club president
Presidential. /s
Maybe this guy? https://youtu.be/bLHL75H_VEM
I know that guy, he’s sound.
So, because women have a much lower content of Testosterone, we can conclude that there are much more stupid than men or what does this silly correlation wants to tell us???
The only thing this graph shows is that average people are average. This graph essentially shows no -> very weak correlation between testosterone levels and IQ. in fact I would say this graph argues that correlating testosterone levels with IQ is essentially flawed. However because of the way the data is represented it makes it look as though there might be a correlation.
AFAIR the R2 is (almost) equal to rho in the Pearson correlation. I just see two variables, a linear fit from - possibly - an OLS. The small R2 is likely due to the outlier (though a single outlier by this mass of points raises my eyebrows as the MSE (or take the RSME) won’t be affected as such by a single point when there are 15’000 points centered closely around an estimate, but CCV would tell) and R2 says nothing about the p-value, which is determined by the amount of information in a system/about variables, and hence likely way below 0.05.
This relationship aka in this case correlation says pretty much nothing about real world, because IQ is (possibly) not only determined by IQ, but way many other factors. The picture is utterly simplified. It is similar to the relationship between the number of babies and the number of storks.
women have a much lower content of Testosterone, we can conclude that there are much more stupid than men
This poster is High T. Ask me how I can tell.
Understand the meaning of question marks, you do not? Much to learn, little Padawan, you still have.
It’s about men but your takeaway would be that women are smarter because as IQ goes up, Testosterone goes down
Absolutely right. Sorry.
this graph very clearly states it’s only related to men and has nothing to do with women at all. the only thing it shows is that the majority of men have average intelligence and average testosterone levels. R2=0.19 value means only 19% of the variation in testosterone levels can be explained by IQ, leaving 81% unexplained. This is a very weak relationship, bordering on statistical noise.
I wonder why they chose IQ as the independent variable? Surely it would be the other way around.
The thing about very superficial analysis like this is you can just go fishing for correlations and come back with something meaningless but publishable.
His takeaway is that women are as smart as men (as in the IQ is the same) but because men have higher testosterone holding them back men are actually smarter than women. What I think he’s actually trying to say is that he’s a high testosterone misogynist.
Your conclusion is based on deduction which in many occasions - like this one - leads to false conclusions. Try again.
Wait? So the other person isn’t being misogynistic? I’m lost.
If that is someones takeaway they are wrong. This chart essentially shows that these things are not actually correlated.
