Also, shoe size correlates with income (i.e. correlation is no proof of causality).
It may well be that it is an environment of cooperative learning that is conducive to both testing higher on IQ tests and cooperating on prisoner’s dilemmata.
(The paper’s “environment” robustness test only checked by factoring out private schools, which is a poor proxy.)
Yes; while we may surmise that part of that causation is based on height correlating with gender and social status which correlate with income (and for the latter, IQ), the major lurking variable that determines both height and income is age (children versus adults).
Factoring out all three of the aforementioned, the correlation remains (there’s still e.g. nutritional status, and it’s quite hard to factor out all aspects of an unformalized, soft criterion such as “social status” anyways).
Also, shoe size correlates with income (i.e. correlation is no proof of causality).
It may well be that it is an environment of cooperative learning that is conducive to both testing higher on IQ tests and cooperating on prisoner’s dilemmata.
(The paper’s “environment” robustness test only checked by factoring out private schools, which is a poor proxy.)
Note, shoe size correlates with height, which correlates with income and iq.
N.B.:
Yes; while we may surmise that part of that causation is based on height correlating with gender and social status which correlate with income (and for the latter, IQ), the major lurking variable that determines both height and income is age (children versus adults).
Factoring out all three of the aforementioned, the correlation remains (there’s still e.g. nutritional status, and it’s quite hard to factor out all aspects of an unformalized, soft criterion such as “social status” anyways).
Wait… I had always assumed such comparisons to control for age, or at least to not include underage people.
In fact, I’d expect the correlation between shoe size and height to be around 0.8 or more.