Since Emil counted 6 moroccan studies in L&V 2012 book, Lynn & Bakhiet corrected it in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the paper. However, in another paragraph :

The Moroccan IQs of 74 and 72.5 are substantially lower than the median of 84 obtained in the seven studies of Moroccan immigrants in the Netherlands or Spain and may be regarded as a better estimate of the Moroccan IQ.

That should be six studies, as well no ?

Also, the number in this paragraph has spacing problem.

Similarly in France, regional differences in intelligence in the mid-1950s obtained from 257, 000 18 year old male conscripts into the armed forces were highest in those from the Paris region and the lowest in rural Corsica.

That should be "257,000" and not "257, 000".

Since Emil counted 6 moroccan studies in L&V 2012 book, Lynn & Bakhiet corrected it in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the paper. However, in another paragraph :

The Moroccan IQs of 74 and 72.5 are substantially lower than the median of 84 obtained in the seven studies of Moroccan immigrants in the Netherlands or Spain and may be regarded as a better estimate of the Moroccan IQ.

That should be six studies, as well no ?

Also, the number in this paragraph has spacing problem.

Meng Hu,

Can you email Richard Lynn and ask if you can make the necessary adjustments? These are Mickey Mouse corrections that he need not waste his time on.

I have emailed Lynn yesterday. I will post it as soon as he answers. I think, given his illness, that we can make him this favor.

The sample used in this study is the same as the one used in Sbaibi 2014. And it's available here.

http://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=ajsr.2014.376.385&org=11

I think the commune is named Sidi El Kamel, and not Kamal. I have corrected the mistake in Bakhiet & Lynn.

Place and population of study: The survey was carried out between March 2010 and October 2012 at the only middle school of the rural commune Sidi El Kamel, in the province of Sidi Kacem (North-Western Morocco) (Fig. 1); the population includes 1177 middle school children, consisting of 454 girls (38.6%) and 723 boys (61.4%), aged 11.8-17.7 years (Mean = 14.88±SD = 1.47 years), all subjects were tested with consent of their parents and the director of middle school.

That's the only information I'm able to get on the sample. I don't think there is much to say. In general, I have no objection to what is written in the Bakhiet & Lynn paper.

I would like to approve, because I see nothing particularly wrong here, but I'm waiting the others to see what they have to say. After all, it needs several approvals.

Regardless, there might be a mistake (highlighted) in this sentence.

For instance, in 13 regions of the British Isles in the mid-twentieth century and reported that the highest IQ was in London and the south east, and the lowest IQs were in rural Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (Lynn, 1979).

I don't understand the "in 13 regions ... and reported".

I would like to approve, because I see nothing particularly wrong here, but I'm waiting the others to see what they have to say. After all, it needs several approvals.

Regardless, there might be a mistake (highlighted) in this sentence.

For instance, in 13 regions of the British Isles in the mid-twentieth century and reported that the highest IQ was in London and the south east, and the lowest IQs were in rural Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (Lynn, 1979).

I don't understand the "in 13 regions ... and reported".

The reference is to this paper: "Lynn, R. (1979). The social ecology of intelligence in the British Isles. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18(1), 1-12."

I don't have access to the above, but Richard Lynn references the study and the said-13 regions elsewhere so I imagine that the number is correct.

To note, I found this to be an oddly written sentence, though:

"Similarly in France, regional differences in intelligence in the mid-1950s obtained from 257, 000 18 year old male conscripts into the armed forces were highest in those from the Paris region and the lowest in rural Corsica. by Montmollin (1958)."

First there is an extra period (full stop) and an extra space. Second, the construction is odd. It should instead say something akin to:

"Similarly in France in the mid-1950s, measured intelligence, obtained from 257,000 18 year old male conscripts into the armed forces, was highest in the urban Paris regions and the lowest in rural Corsica (Montmollin, 1958)."

Whatever the case, this is immaterial with respect to the point of the paper. The numbers reported look accurate relative to the source paper (table 2). Can someone upload the raven norms so we can double check if the transformations (from raw scores to IQs) are accurate?

Like before, for this kind of article, I require the original language article to be posted for those who can read the language.

It would be very nice if the authors could supply a scan of the conversion tables used. These tables are very difficult to find. I have not been able to find them online anywhere.

The original paper is attached. Scores are from Table 2.

It would be nice to have the conversion tables.

It would be very nice if the authors could supply a scan of the conversion tables used. These tables are very difficult to find. I have not been able to find them online anywhere.

Jason Malloy kindly sent the conversion tables. I attached them below. (Emil could you check the numbers over?)

It would be very nice if the authors could supply a scan of the conversion tables used. These tables are very difficult to find. I have not been able to find them online anywhere.

Jason Malloy kindly sent the conversion tables. I attached them below. (Emil could you check the numbers over?)

Based on the conversion tables provided by Malloy, I estimated different percentiles than did the authors. This might be due to how they handled rounding.

I attached my and their estimated values.

Also, age 17 and 17.5 norms were unavailable. I can not approve publication until this matter is resolved.