Is "Latino Lover" a thing?

I was watching "Being the Ricardos" last night, and one of the film's themes was Desi Arnaz' infidelities. It made me wonder if there is any truth to the stereotype of the Latin lover. 

The General Social Survey asked married men if they had ever cheated on their spouse. Here are the percentages (N = 4,243):

Percent of married men who have cheated

Non-Hispanic black  25.2
Black Hispanic  20.0
White Hispanic  16.9
Non-Hispanic white 16.3
Hispanic--other race  15.0
Non-Hispanic--other race  13.9

I calculated percentages for each race because I know it is relevant for infidelity. There is evidence here that black men cheat more than other groups, but rates are not high for Hispanics.

The 2021 General Social Survey: How many transgenders?

 The 2021 General Social Survey is out. Respondents were asked their gender. Here are the results:

I am interested in the transgender issue, but let's take notice of an important GSS fact: It is heavily skewed toward women, so you need to take this into account when looking at results that differ by gender. For example, in 2021 8.4% of men do not believe in God, but only 5.1% of women believe the same way, so an excess of women in the sample will skew the results for the total sample. 

But let's focus on transgenders: They are 0.3% of the sample. This is 3 per 1,000, folks, not radically different from what I was taught in college many years ago. The figure is also similar to that of the California study that reported .35% of the state is transgender. 

You do see 0.4% who don't fit into the other boxes, so there is a small percentage of confused people out there. 

The GSS is a sample of adults (18+), so the apparent growth in transgenderism is occurring among teens. 

What percent of Americans under 40 are Christians?

 A follower on Twitter indicated that he is not Christian and wondered what percent of Americans under 40 are. Well, you know I'm a sucker for that kind of question. The General Social Survey asked people about their religious affiliation in 2018--the latest published data. Here are the results: 

If we add up the numbers for Christians, we get 59%, and it's probably closer to 60% since I did not include "Other", which, for example, probably includes quite a few Mormons, who consider themselves Christians and restorationists, not Protestants. If we we create a table with adults 40 and over we get this:

Added up, 78.2% of older Americans are Christians, so the percentage among young people is dramatically lower. It's not a coincidence that many young people also favor socialism.  

Is skin tone correlated with job prestige?

The General Social Survey rated the skin darkness of a sample of black Americans, ranging from "very dark brown" to "very light brown." Biologically oriented researchers might see the question as a rough measure of the percentage of European ancestry, while sociologists would see it as a measure of discrimination--lighter-skinned blacks getting better treatment. Respondents were also given a job prestige score that ranges from 16 to 80--16 is a shoeshine and 80 is a physician. Here are the job prestige means listed by skin tone:

You can see that average job prestige tends to rise with lighter skin. The mean for blacks with "very light brown" skin is roughly two-thirds of a standard deviation higher than the mean for "very dark skin" blacks. 

The pattern can be interpreted in at least two ways: 1) genetic--blacks with more European ancestry tend to rise in the status hierarchy much more than African blacks, or 2) sociological--whites discriminate more against darker blacks, and perhaps light-skinned blacks have white (privileged) relatives who gave them advantages. 

For several reasons, I'm inclined toward the genetic explanation. For one, my experience is that when a white person is interacting with a black person, his thought is, "I'm talking with a black person," not, "I'm talking with a light-skinned black person." For another, how do those Nigerian immigrants do so well in the US when their skin tends to be so dark? The sociologist would predict severe discrimination. The biologist would argue that African immigrants are a select group of Africans--above average in IQ and drive--and this overwhelms any bias they might experience. 

Do blacks and whites who grow up equally wealthy end up with the same mean IQ?

Some people argue that mean IQs for whites and blacks differ because blacks tend to come from poorer families. A black kid raised with resources equal to a white kid will have the same IQ. Is this the case? 

Using data from the General Social Survey, I calculated mean IQ for blacks, whites, and others for several ranges of father's socioeconomic index (SES): 1-2 standard deviations (sd) below average, 1 sd below average to average, average to 1 sd above average, 1-2 sds above average, and over 2 sds. The sample size is 12,016 (immigrants were excluded). Here's a graph that summarizes the results: 

Blacks and whites raised at the same SES level do not have the same mean IQs. The higher white average ranges from about 7 points among the poorest group to more than 10 points among the wealthiest group. By the way, other non-whites--mostly Hispanics--are closer to blacks than whites. 

Who is more likely to be murdered by a black offender: a white or an Asian?

 Wilfred Reilly (@wil_da_beast630) has a discussion going on at Twitter about which race currently faces the most "systemic racism." Some people are assuming that Asians are victimized by blacks more than whites are. Two sources of data are not very helpful here: hate crimes and victimization data from the National Crime Victimization Survey. Hate crimes are a tiny drop in the bucket of all violence, and you don't see NCVS tables with Asian victims by race of offender. (Let me know if I've missed them.) Victim data in general indicates that Asians face low levels of victimization, which makes sense because most crime is intra-racial, and Asians have very low rates of criminal offending. 

Perhaps homicide data is the best way to go here. I looked at expanded FBI homicide data and the Census to calculate rates for being murdered by a black person for two groups: 1) Whites/Hispanics, and 2) Asians/ Native Americans/Pacific Islanders. I'm afraid the FBI lumps people together that way. The rate for group 1 is 2.30 murders per 1 million population. For group 2, it's 1.44 murders per million. According to FBI data, blacks pose more of a threat to whites and Hispanics than Asians plus. 

Which low IQ groups have low arrest rates?

DGo (@Go321) on Twitter wondered which lower IQ groups still manage to be well-behaved as groups. Criminality is a decent measure of behavior, so I looked at General Social Survey data to see which groups with low average IQs also have lower than average arrest rates: 

The percent arrested for the whole country is 12.7%. The groups listed above with an arrest rate lower than that are: Filipinos, West Indians, and Non-Spanish West Indians. And let me add that these three groups have IQ means that are not very low: 96.7, 98.8, and 95.9, respectively. 

Most lower-IQ groups have high arrest rates, as expected.

UPDATE: After checking, I see that Arabs do not have a low mean IQ: it's 102.   

It's a clean sweep: IQ is more predictive of education, income, and job prestige than dad's social class

 Someone at Twitter, I forget now, wondered if IQ or one's social class was more important for adult success. Well, the General Social Survey can help with this. I threw in basic demographics as controls. 

Here are OLS results for income:

Looking at the betas, you can see that IQ is more strongly predictive of income than father's socioeconomic status (PASEI). Notice how race is not statistically significant when IQ is included in the model. 

And job prestige? 

IQ is much more predictive of job prestige than father's PASEI. 

The results for education should be even stronger for IQ:

 

The beta for IQ is much larger than for dad's social class. How far one goes in school depends much more on brains than dad's wallet (or his other influences). 

An updated analysis of the 2020 election: CPS data

In December, I posted data that make me skeptical about the integrity of the 2020 election. This is an update with new data.

In the December analysis, I reported that 158.4 million voted for US President but based on an estimate derived from the Current Population Survey (CPS), only 158.1 million were registered. Impossible. The CPS didn't have current data in December. Now they do, and they report that 168.3 million were registered in November 2020. This stunned me since the CPS estimated only 153.1 million in November 2018, so total registrations increased 15.2 million in only two years, 2018-20. For context, here's the total number registered by year since 1968:

Total number registered to vote (in millions)

1968       86.6

1972       98.5

1976       97.8

1980     105.1

1984     116.1

1988     118.6

1992     126.6

1996     127.7

2000     129.5

2004     142.1

2008     146.3

2012     153.2

2016     157.6

2018     153.1

2020     168.3  

The biggest four-year increase was 2000-2004 with 12.6 million additional registrations. Such a big increase makes the 10.7 million 2016-2020 plausible, but it's weird that the total went from 157.6 million in 2016 down to 153.1 million in 2018, then it increased 15.2 million in only two years, a bigger increase than any 4-year increase since 1968! Weird but possible. By the way, the margin of error for the CPS is less than a million.  

168.3 million registered people in November 2020 means 94.1% of registered voters voted for President. Election experts say that 90-95% of registered voter voting is indicative of election fraud. Countries like Australia that mandate voting can't get 94% of registered voters to vote. 

For context, here are the percentage of registered voters who voted going back to 1960:

Percent of registered voters who voted

1960   107.8

1964     95.1

1968     89.4

1972     79.8

1976     77.7

1980     76.5

1984     74.6

1988     74.5

1992     71.2

1996     65.9

2000     67.5

2004     70.0

2008     89.8

2012     84.3

2016     86.8

2020     94.1

The years 1960 and 1964 look screwy, but the only other year that looks suspicious is 2020. I'm still not convinced that there was not enough funny business to change the election outcome. 

By the way, according to CPS, 154.6 million people said they voted. According to the official count, 3.8 million additional votes were cast. 

What predicts virginity among young American men?

 According to the General Social Survey, 28% of American men under 30 report not having sex since they turned 18. I was baffled by that and wanted to know what predicts virginity among young men. 

Using General Social Survey data, I looked at a long list of possible predictors but found that most factors are unrelated. As you can see below, being younger predicts virginity (not surprisingly). More educated men are more likely to be virgins which cuts against the claim that high-status men are the ones who get sex. (Income and job prestige were not predictive.) 

Never going to bars and not watching an X-rated film in the past year predicted virginity. So porn doesn't look like a substitute for sex: sexually active men are more likely to watch porn. Perhaps celibate men tend to have lower levels of testosterone? Men who go to bars are more likely to have sex, so men who make an effort or who are more social are more likely to have sex. 

The GSS doesn't have many personality-type questions, so I wasn't able to look at traits like introversion or social awkwardness, but if you've got other ideas for unconventional variables, let me know. 

Which white groups have noticeably low IQs?

To answer this question, I calculated mean IQs for all self-described whites by the country they said their ancestors came from. Only people born in the US are included since immigrants are at a disadvantage on a vocabulary test (the measure of IQ used here). Here are the results:

Mean IQ

Africa  93.4
Mexico  90.0
Puerto Rico  93.2
Spain  97.2
American Indian  94.7
India  95.8
Other Spanish  95.9
American only  90.4

It looks like many of these people are racially mixed. They label themselves as white but often have some non-white ancestry. The mixed groups that do not have low mean IQs are self-described whites whose ancestors came from east Asian countries--Japan, China, or the Philippines. 

UPDATE: The mean IQ for self-described whites whose ancestors are from east Asia is 99.8. 

 

Is Douthat right that Rush ruined the GOP?

Ross Douthat wrote in the NYT recently that the declining appeal of the GOP is the fault of Rush Limbaugh. He claims that Republicans were a 55% proposition during the Reagan Era because the message of conservatism was preached by well-bred men like William F. Buckley. Rush came along and turned conservatism into something angry and strident and that only appeals to 45% of voters. 

If Ross is correct, we should see greater support for Reagan among racial minorities--the groups we have a hard time winning over. After all, Buckley was a leading advocate for conservatism during that time and Rush was unknown.

Using the General Social Survey, we can compare minority deficits over time. I calculate this as the percent of a racial minority voting for the GOP presidential candidate minus the percent of all voters who cast a vote for the Republican candidate.

Minority deficit

1980
Blacks  -39.2
Mexicans  -18.2

1984
Blacks  -48.3
Mexicans  -19.5

Damn, impressive: under Buckley and Reagan sophistication, Blacks and Mex-Ams supported the GOP by only 18 to 48 points less than the general population! The power of positivity!

And since then? Bush Sr. wasn't strident. Perhaps he did better.

1988
Blacks  -41.9
Mexicans  -26.2

1992
Blacks  -34.6
Mexicans  -18.1

1996
Blacks  -26.2
Mexicans  -12.1

The numbers are slightly less bad with grumpy Dole. 

2000
Blacks  -42.5
Mexicans  -6.5

It looks like angry Rush didn't chase away Mex-Ams in 2000.

2004
Blacks  -37.6
Mexicans  -11.7

2008
Blacks  -34.7
Mexicans  -15.3

2012
Blacks  -33.3
Mexicans  -17.8

2016
Blacks  -38.2
Mexicans  -19.7

The Republicans did no better among minorities before strident Rush became influential in the early 1990s. 

Douthat ignores the obvious: the GOP is struggling because there were fewer than 20 million Hispanics during the Reagan Era. In 2021, there are more than 60 million--and this perennially poor group likes generous social programs and is susceptible to anti-white propaganda like all non-white groups. And probably will be for a very long time. 

Which religion has the most forgiving people?

The General Social Survey asked respondents if it is true that: "I sometimes try to get even rather than forgive and forget." Below you see the answers by religious affiliation. 

All groups have higher rates of vengefulness than Christians, including the "nones." This makes sense since Christianity stresses forgiveness.

Among Christians, those that attend church all the time are the most forgiving. 

And nowadays many of the people with no religion like to accuse devout Christians of being the haters.  

What is the mean IQ of whites who say their ethnicity is "American only"?

Based on the General Social Survey, if you ask Americans where their families originally came from, they will typically give you an answer. But about 1% of whites and 13% of blacks will tell you they are "American only." 54% of whites who give this answer live in the South, and Americans of Scots-Irish ancestry are known to sometimes give this answer. By contrast, "American only" blacks are concentrated in the mid-Atlantic and East North Central regions. 

And their mean IQs? 

 

  

Wow, it's around 90 for whites. That is low. 

I wouldn't generalize these findings to the Scots-Irish. Many of the whites, and perhaps some from other races, who say "American only" are probably from lower IQ families who simply have not kept track of where their people are from. Or lower IQ people might be more likely to prioritize their American identity. 

Are French Americans an underprivileged minority?

 In "The Son Also Rises," Gregory Clark presents historical data that suggests that French Americans are an underprivileged minority. They have been underrepresented among doctors and lawyers, for example. 

Do General Social Survey data support this view? 

Here are mean years of schooling for the French versus other white Americans:

No difference in education. Here's median income in 1986 dollars:

A lower median income for Americans of French descent. And mean job prestige:

The French have a slightly higher mean job prestige. And IQ?

Basically the same mean IQ.

Clark predicted to the French would eventually move to average levels. It looks like they've made it.  

Are Christians repressed and thus unhappy?

A common claim by liberals and anti-Christians is that Christians are unhappy because the religion is repressive. 

The General Social Survey Survey asks people how happy they are overall these days with answers ranging from not too happy (1) to pretty happy (2) and very happy (3). Here are the means for various Christians and those with no religion:

All five Christian groups have higher happiness averages than the "nones." 

What about devout Christians? Maybe they are the miserable ones.

Mean happiness rises with more frequent "repression" (church attendance). 

The research literature in general reports that religiosity is associated with a wide range of positive characteristics, but that doesn't stop smug, ignorant anti-Christians from going on about how religion is harmful. 

Has the mean IQ of American Jews fallen because of intermarriage?

Someone claimed on Twitter that the mean IQ of American Jews has been falling due to intermarriage. What do General Social Survey data have to say? Here are mean IQs by decade since the 1970s:

No evidence of a decrease here. 

GSS data: Do Jews have prestigious jobs because they are smart, or are there other factors?

 Another IQ issue arose on Twitter today: Does IQ explain the disproportionate number of Jews in high positions in the new Biden administration? Or is there some other factor? The General Social Survey can't answer this specific question, but we can look at job prestige in general. The table below shows that at the same IQ level, Jews tend to have noticeably higher average prestige scores than non-Jews. 

So, according to GSS data, Jews tend to have characteristics beyond IQ that boost their job prestige. What would those be? I'd be guessing, but in the case of Biden, it might not be a coincidence that most Jews are Democrats and are a key presence in the Democrat Party. My impression is that Jews are very achievement-oriented and are drawn to centers of power. In addition to that, I suspect that a Jew is also likely to enjoy the benefit of being born into a social network of high-achieving people. Connections matter.  

Does education increase IQ? The General Social Survey says no

The question was raised on Twitter the other day about whether more education causes increases in IQ. The General Social Survey can help a little with this. Below we have a chart of the mean years of schooling completed since 1977. The mean starts out at 11.71 and ends in 2018 at 13.89 years of education. Over the period, that is an increase of 19%. 

By contrast, here is the trend in IQ. In 1978, it was 97.45, and in 2018 it was 97.80--an increase of 0.3%. Basically, no change. US trends are consistent with the view that keeping people in school longer does not make them smarter.