The Canadian IQ calculated from the standardization of the WAIS IV


Abstract
The Canadian standardization sample of the WAIS IV obtained a Full Scale IQ 104.5 in relation to 100 for the American standardization sample, giving Canada a British (Greenwich) IQ of 102.5.

Key Words: WAIS IV, Full Scale IQ, Canada, Intelligence.

The Canadian IQ calculated from the standardization of the WAIS IV


Abstract
The Canadian standardization sample of the WAIS IV obtained a Full Scale IQ 104.5 in relation to 100 for the American standardization sample, giving Canada a British (Greenwich) IQ of 102.5.

Key Words: WAIS IV, Full Scale IQ, Canada, Intelligence.

This is pretty much in line with PISA Creative Problem Solving, whose score converts into a Greenwich IQ for Canada of 101.4, the highest among Western countries, only topped by northwestern Italy's IQ at 102.5 and by East Asian countries (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16vdyElN4nwnfk0J6IKXq6Zf6RMdqbUUXKxYKgkxTW9A/edit?usp=sharing).
Actually you may want to cite that PISA CPS score in this paper. This is what future studies should do, start using PISA CPS for what it is, probably even better than Raven's at assessing fluid intelligence (and certainly more representative). After you do that, I'll approve.

Do you have the IQ scores by gender group ? Is it possible to publish these numbers ? Also, if you have the correlations, standard deviations and means for each of the WAIS-IV subtests, that will be pretty good for people who want to use MGCFA on that data.

Do you have the IQ scores by gender group ? Is it possible to publish these numbers ? Also, if you have the correlations, standard deviations and means for each of the WAIS-IV subtests, that will be pretty good for people who want to use MGCFA on that data.

I don't have it by gender group but i do have it for other subtests and can include that.

Quibble: "The result confirms the four previous studies showing that the Canadian IQ is approximately the same as the British": In national IQ research, especially with regard to European diaspora countries, a difference of 2.5 IQ points is fairly significant, so this sentence should be amended to read "...slightly higher...". Other than that quibble, this paper is good and should be accepted.

I don't have it by gender group but i do have it for other subtests and can include that.

I think it's better than nothing to report those numbers. Still, without group membership, I can't use MGCFA because the technique needs means, SD and correlation for every groups (i.e., men and females) so you must have 2 matrices.

(to be clear, MGCFA works with covariance, not correlation, but you can transform correlation into covariance and inversely if you have the SD; most packages (LISREL, R, AMOS/SPSS) do this transformation)

Quibble: "The result confirms the four previous studies showing that the Canadian IQ is approximately the same as the British": In national IQ research, especially with regard to European diaspora countries, a difference of 2.5 IQ points is fairly significant, so this sentence should be amended to read "...slightly higher...". Other than that quibble, this paper is good and should be accepted.

I agree with Philbrick, especially in light of the PISA CPS results, the Canadian IQ does seem to be slightly higher than the European IQ. I wonder if this is due to the ethnic composition, there seem to be a lot of Asians (not specified whether it's East or West Asians though), so this can partly explain the slight advantage compared to the US (with lots of Blacks) or Europe (with lots of north Africans). It would be also good if you could add a sentence or two to the discussion section, discussing about why the Canadian IQ is a bit higher (possibly due to racial composition). Here is what I found on Wikipedia for Canada:
76.7% European
14.2% Asian
4.3% Aboriginal
2.9% Black
1.2% Latin American
0.5% Multiracial
0.3% Other

Are there results broken down by race?

Quibble: "The result confirms the four previous studies showing that the Canadian IQ is approximately the same as the British": In national IQ research, especially with regard to European diaspora countries, a difference of 2.5 IQ points is fairly significant, so this sentence should be amended to read "...slightly higher...". Other than that quibble, this paper is good and should be accepted.

I was thinking the same myself and this would be congruous with IQ predicting immigration: i.e. Canadians are the descendants cleverer British people. But, on the other hand, when you match the Canadian sample with a US one of the same race/class/ etc then the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13, as indicated in the paper. Surely, this is not significant.
[hr]

Quibble: "The result confirms the four previous studies showing that the Canadian IQ is approximately the same as the British": In national IQ research, especially with regard to European diaspora countries, a difference of 2.5 IQ points is fairly significant, so this sentence should be amended to read "...slightly higher...". Other than that quibble, this paper is good and should be accepted.

I agree with Philbrick, especially in light of the PISA CPS results, the Canadian IQ does seem to be slightly higher than the European IQ. I wonder if this is due to the ethnic composition, there seem to be a lot of Asians (not specified whether it's East or West Asians though), so this can partly explain the slight advantage compared to the US (with lots of Blacks) or Europe (with lots of north Africans). It would be also good if you could add a sentence or two to the discussion section, discussing about why the Canadian IQ is a bit higher (possibly due to racial composition). Here is what I found on Wikipedia for Canada:
76.7% European
14.2% Asian
4.3% Aboriginal
2.9% Black
1.2% Latin American
0.5% Multiracial
0.3% Other

Are there results broken down by race?

No, they're not. But, as we said in the paper, when the match the US sample and the Canadian sample on race then the difference almost disappears and you get a Greenwich IQ of 100.13. So this would imply the reason is Asians. I will add this into the paper.
[hr]

Can you upload the dataset?

The paper type should be "Short communication".

I can include all the raw scores etc that have been requested.

I guess "Asians" may refer to Amerindian natives.

No, "Aboriginals" in Canadia means Native Americans and is at 4.3%. Asians is Asians, the problem is whether it's mainly East Asians (Chinese, Japanese) or West Asians (Pakistani, Indian).

I guess "Asians" may refer to Amerindian natives.

No, "Aboriginals" in Canadia means Native Americans and is at 4.3%. Asians is Asians, the problem is whether it's mainly East Asians (Chinese, Japanese) or West Asians (Pakistani, Indian).

It is mainly Chinese

I was thinking the same myself and this would be congruous with IQ predicting immigration: i.e. Canadians are the descendants cleverer British people. But, on the other hand, when you match the Canadian sample with a US one of the same race/class/ etc then the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13, as indicated in the paper. Surely, this is not significant.

I am not sure this is the right thing to do. First you get a Greenwich IQ by subtracting two points from the total IQ score, because the Greenwich IQ is 2 pts higher than the US IQ. Then you subtract another 2.5 points because when you match Canadian and US samples for race, the Canadian IQ goes down another 2.5 points.
This is a bit circular. It would be correct only if the correction for British IQ were not related to the more mixed racial composition of the US and you're assuming that the British IQ is pure White, whereas it's calculated on the total population living in the UK, including immigrants.
But here, you're doing a double correction which in my opinion is not justified. When you do that racial comparision between Canada and US, you subtract 2.5 points from the Canadian IQ and you are assuming that that IQ is 2 points lower than the Greenwich IQ, whereas it's more likely that it's equal to the British IQ (because the US and Canadian sample is 90%white and does not include blacks). So once you subtract 2.5 points, you cannot subtract 2 more points. Hence the White Greenwich Canadian IQ is more likely to be 104.5-2.5=102.
You can speculate that this advantage in relation to the Greenwich IQ is due to Asians but there is no way we can know for sure unless we have data for Canadian Whites and British Whites. Better to mention this in the discussion. You'd have to argue that the 2 points correction you make is due to Canadians having more East Asians and UK having more lower IQ ethnicities. But it's difficult to support this claim with data. When I looked at the PISA CPS scores, the IQ for British immigrants was not much lower than that of Natives, in striking contrast to other countries (e.g. Germany or Denmark) where immigrants have much lower IQ. In conclusion, I'd delete the sentence that the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13 because it's based on too many untested assumptions.

I was thinking the same myself and this would be congruous with IQ predicting immigration: i.e. Canadians are the descendants cleverer British people. But, on the other hand, when you match the Canadian sample with a US one of the same race/class/ etc then the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13, as indicated in the paper. Surely, this is not significant.

I am not sure this is the right thing to do. First you get a Greenwich IQ by subtracting two points from the total IQ score, because the Greenwich IQ is 2 pts higher than the US IQ. Then you subtract another 2.5 points because when you match Canadian and US samples for race, the Canadian IQ goes down another 2.5 points.
This is a bit circular. It would be correct only if the correction for British IQ were not related to the more mixed racial composition of the US and you're assuming that the British IQ is pure White, whereas it's calculated on the total population living in the UK, including immigrants.
But here, you're doing a double correction which in my opinion is not justified. When you do that racial comparision between Canada and US, you subtract 2.5 points from the Canadian IQ and you are assuming that that IQ is 2 points lower than the Greenwich IQ, whereas it's more likely that it's equal to the British IQ (because the US and Canadian sample is 90%white and does not include blacks). So once you subtract 2.5 points, you cannot subtract 2 more points. Hence the White Greenwich Canadian IQ is more likely to be 104.5-2.5=102.
You can speculate that this advantage in relation to the Greenwich IQ is due to Asians but there is no way we can know for sure unless we have data for Canadian Whites and British Whites. Better to mention this in the discussion. You'd have to argue that the 2 points correction you make is due to Canadians having more East Asians and UK having more lower IQ ethnicities. But it's difficult to support this claim with data. When I looked at the PISA CPS scores, the IQ for British immigrants was not much lower than that of Natives, in striking contrast to other countries (e.g. Germany or Denmark) where immigrants have much lower IQ. In conclusion, I'd delete the sentence that the Canadian Greenwich IQ is reduced to 100.13 because it's based on too many untested assumptions.

Ok. I see your point. I will now edit the paper i line with people's suggestions and put up a second version

Here is the updated version of the paper, edited in line with your suggestions.

Here is the updated version of the paper, edited in line with your suggestions.

I approve publication.

Okay, good. Is everyone else content now?

I'm still waiting for the datafile. :)

I've inserted into the paper i have.

I think it should be published now.