It is concerning to see ‘discredited’ used so easily when it is far from clear that it is an accurate label. This is not my specialty so I’m not qualified to have an opinion, but it seems more like rejecting some hypotheses a priori, without consideration. I’d like to see further discussion which qualifies such claims.
Are you referring to Rindermann et al. 2016? The core table is this,
It is concerning to see ‘discredited’ used so easily when it is far from clear that it is an accurate label. This is not my specialty so I’m not qualified to have an opinion, but it seems more like rejecting some hypotheses a priori, without consideration. I’d like to see further discussion which qualifies such claims.