My gut is that, at minimum, it would be gauche to bring up IQ, and especially IQ patterns here. Save that for iSteve.
However, I see hints that suppression of such talk is growing less focused. For example, there is a particular psychometric text that has long had certain pages excluded from Google Books. Some content manage at Google …
My gut is that, at minimum, it would be gauche to bring up IQ, and especially IQ patterns here. Save that for iSteve.
However, I see hints that suppression of such talk is growing less focused. For example, there is a particular psychometric text that has long had certain pages excluded from Google Books. Some content manage at Google had been very precise in her censoring. I was able to purchase the text online, but the only retailer that came up on the first page of Google results was in Europe - the link to Amazon had been deranked to the second or third page of results.
I checked recently, and found that the pages had been restored to Google Books, and the Amazon link is now on the first page of of results (in second place). They're just not working at it quite as hard.
My gut is that, at minimum, it would be gauche to bring up IQ, and especially IQ patterns here. Save that for iSteve.
However, I see hints that suppression of such talk is growing less focused. For example, there is a particular psychometric text that has long had certain pages excluded from Google Books. Some content manage at Google had been very precise in her censoring. I was able to purchase the text online, but the only retailer that came up on the first page of Google results was in Europe - the link to Amazon had been deranked to the second or third page of results.
I checked recently, and found that the pages had been restored to Google Books, and the Amazon link is now on the first page of of results (in second place). They're just not working at it quite as hard.
If you're interested...
https://www.google.com/books/edition/WAIS_IV_Clinical_Use_and_Interpretation/lszPs4JXxBYC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA118