

Gene for memory and IQ gives students low grades  - prat
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17837-gene-for-memory-and-iq-gives-students-low-grades.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=genetics

======
tokenadult
"Alternatively, the results could be a statistical fluke, resulting from a
small sample. 'This is very common among these kinds of studies because the
genetic effects on cognition are so tiny that you need perhaps thousands of
people to get a good estimate of the effect,' she says."

That was very good of the reporter to mention this possibility. That kind of
issue always has to be evaluated when looking at new scientific studies.

<http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html>

It's an intriguing finding that should probably be looked at further in a
different cultural context (is taking the SAT in America like taking the
Taiwan college entrance exam in Taiwan?) and definitely should be looked at
with a larger sample.

~~~
roc
_"because the genetic effects on cognition are so tiny"_

Did that quote stun anyone else?

'Tiny' implies a comparison. The only other thing to compare these effects
with, would be more well-studied factors, such as nutrition, environment and
sleep. And if effects such as those _dwarf_ the effects of genetics... well
that's just not something that I can recall ever being _hinted_ at.

~~~
tokenadult
Oh, you need to check the article I submitted in the last twenty-four hours,
just published by leading researchers on the issue you ask about.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=838534>

------
derefr
Could I propose that this whole thing is causated in the reverse direction to
the one the article proposes: that the gene is for increased sensitivity to
pressure and stress, and that kids try to escape the feeling of stress by
fleeing into logic and hypothetical situations and memories, things that don't
hold the same pressure as the present moment, but also thereby increase their
IQ and memory with repeated "practice?"

~~~
biohacker42
Could I propose that what the article saves for last, because it's such a
kicker, is that the sample size was tiny and thus the study is fundametally
flawed.

And this is almost always the case with these types of studies.

------
strlen
This is far too early and I wish to see more conclusive results, but this
might provide information as to why some _really_ bright people don't fare
well until they're at a university or in graduate school/the industry.

Perhaps employers could use this information: e.g. if a candidate fits a
certain pattern, they could structure the interview process to be less
stressful (to avoid situations where they may be passing up on some of the
_brighest_ people).

That could be also why really smart hackers tend to flock to startups,
R&D/"platform" teams (as opposed to product development/customer facing teams)
and graduate schools: ability to set your own schedule, greater say in setting
the overall technical direction and timing/deadlines.

~~~
kiba
Wouldn't startup be more stressful?

~~~
strlen
For an employee (not a founder), a funded (series A or above) start-up might
not be. Much less management, much more flexibility in terms of schedule and
work description.

