Prefer to Walk Alone? Maybe you're just Smarter?

[Robo]

An interesting read.............
Probably AI generated.
(edit, though as pointed out below it was written prior to AI)

Why Intelligent People Prefer To Socialize Less

 

[dougfitz]

An interesting read.............
Probably AI generated.

Why Intelligent People Prefer To Socialize Less

Why are you being so cynical about it's origin? The byline suggests it is by Brianna Wiest, and the publication date is 9 Aug 2016, a little before the recent emergence of AI tools for content generation.

Edit: an interesting read, but there is an unfortunate point where it creates a link suggesting that more intelligent people are superior humans. It sounded rather elitist.

 

[Robo]

Why are you being so cynical about it's origin? The byline suggests it is by Brianna Wiest, and the publication date is 9 Aug 2016, a little before the recent emergence of AI tools for content generation.

Edit: an interesting read, but there is an unfortunate point where it creates a link suggesting that more intelligent people are superior humans. It sounded rather elitist.

Thanks, didn't see the date.
I was probably a bit cynical given the amount of advertising on the site.
Looked like that was it's main purpose, to draw traffic to adverts.
I agree, the tone was a bit off.........

 

[dougfitz]

I was probably a bit cynical given the amount of advertising on the site.

You will go and read all those Millenial/Gen Z lifestyle mags!!

 

[dick bird]

One thing we can say (and the red pen came out whenever I saw that in a student essay) is that if you are more intelligent, you are probably better at finding reasons to be selfish. It might be more credible if it actually cited sources for its assertions.

 

[Kathor1]

The byline suggests it is by Brianna Wiest, and the publication date is 9 Aug 2016

The article sounds like the usual fairly free interpretation of a boring scientific study that is so far away from its original that the actual content and result of the study is barely recognisable. The writer may not even have read the study itself but relied on other news article which were based on a PR release - usually designed and worded to catch attention.

The source for this lifestyle article is a study published in February 2016 in the British Journal of Psychology. The authors are Li and Kanazawa. The title is: "Country roads, take me home … to my friends: How intelligence, population density, and friendship affect modern happiness." A quote from the introduction:

More importantly, the main associations of life satisfaction with population density and socialization with friends significantly interact with intelligence, and, in the latter case, the main association is reversed among the extremely intelligent. More intelligent individuals experience lower life satisfaction with more frequent socialization with friends.​

The data for this study were taken from a "wave" of a study of a large number of US students called National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health). It is a study of a nationally representative sample of over 20,000 adolescents who were in grades 7-12 during the 1994-95 school year, and have been followed for five waves to date, most recently in 2016-18.

Google the full title of the 2016 publication and/or "Savanna theory of happiness" to find more articles including the study itself which is available online.

PS: I guess you could as well title a similar article, were you so inclined, as: "Geeks don't have as many friends as others."

 

[Kathor1]

BTW, what the lifestyle article omits is the long general discussion and conclusion by the authors of the study, including this:

Limitations, implications, and future directions​

​

Despite using a large, nationally [= USA] representative sample with over 15,000 participants, a limitation of the current studies is that the data are correlational. Although we have considered and potentially ruled out some alternative explanations, we cannot be sure of any causal relationships until experiments are conducted. Accordingly, future research should attempt to manipulate the key factors and observe and measure the appropriate outcomes.​

​

Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293045439_Country_roads_take_me_home_to_my_friends_How_intelligence_population_density_and_friendship_affect_modern_happiness

 

[bullingtonce]

BTW, what the lifestyle article omits is the long general discussion and conclusion by the authors of the study, including this:

Limitations, implications, and future directions​

​

Despite using a large, nationally [= USA] representative sample with over 15,000 participants, a limitation of the current studies is that the data are correlational. Although we have considered and potentially ruled out some alternative explanations, we cannot be sure of any causal relationships until experiments are conducted. Accordingly, future research should attempt to manipulate the key factors and observe and measure the appropriate outcomes.​

​

Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293045439_Country_roads_take_me_home_to_my_friends_How_intelligence_population_density_and_friendship_affect_modern_happiness

Astutely pointed out. Many studies are condensed down to one or two major points and, thereby, result in an unfortunate and erroneous interpretation. Plus, how valid are the credentials of the scientists associated with this particular study and their track record. So many studies have been pre-decided in the results because of various motivies. I would say trust studies about as much as you would trust the words coming out of a politician's mouth.

Having said this, I generally and with some restrictions agree with this study. Look at the damage social media has done to so many young people as well as some oldies. In any case, anyone with a farmer's commonsense perspective knows the value of silent reflection and meditation although I am sure there is none of this embedded in a Camino or in religion, Christian or otherwise..

Chuck

 

[DoughnutANZ]

an interesting read, but there is an unfortunate point where it creates a link suggesting that more intelligent people are superior humans.

I wonder why the author only "suggested" the link. I would have thought that it was obvious.