Talk:Richard E. Nisbett

Regard discrepancy
In this article (criticism in bold):

The book reviewed extensive favorable attention in the press and from some fellow academics; for example, University of Pennsylvania psychologist Daniel Osherson wrote that the book was a "hugely important analysis of the determinants of IQ". On the other hand, more critical reviewers argued that the book failed to grapple with the strongest evidence for genetic factors in individual and group intelligence differences.

At the book article itself (non-critical content in bold):

Writing for The New York Times, philosopher Jim Holt described the book as "a meticulous and eye-opening critique of hereditarianism." The book was criticized by prominent hereditarians J. Philippe Rushton and Arthur Jensen in a 2010 paper. In their paper, Rushton and Jensen concluded that, contrary to Nisbett's conclusions, racial differences in IQ and other life history traits exist, and that "The group differences are between 50 and 80% heritable." Psychologist Earl B. Hunt reviewed the book in the journal Intelligence, stating that "Nisbett is a very good writer, but he is a combative writer", and while "Nisbett is writing for a general audience" and "does so very well", Hunt argues that "Nisbett...goes too far in attacking discussions of the genetics of intelligence", that Nisbett's argument against the genetic origins of racial and ethnic differences was weakened by citing research on parenting practices without "[considering] the possibility that these practices may themselves be influenced by the parental genotype", and that Nisbett repeatedly attributed positions to unnamed "experts" without citation. Hunt concluded that "Presenting scientific findings, including controversies, to the general public is an honorable and important endeavor. In my opinion that goal is better served if the writer is specific about who said what, where, and is careful not to overstate his or her case." Another unfavorable review of the book published in Personality and Individual Differences by psychologist James J. Lee also concluded that "Nisbett's arguments are consistently overstated or unsound" with regard to the heritability and mutability of IQ and racial differences in IQ.

Yikes. &mdash; MaxEnt 00:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Actor-observer bias
I have just added some information about the actor-observer bias. I have put in information about Jones and Nisbett's attentional focus explanation for this effect, and have added that other explanations are needed, but would be grateful if some one with a textbook on social psychology can add some citations before this gets "Citation needed". Vorbee (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2018 (UTC)