E90Post
 


TireRack
 
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion > States Ranked by Religiousness



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      02-01-2010, 06:56 PM   #1
MrRoboto
Colonel
Canada
54
Rep
2,715
Posts

 
Drives: VO 1M
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

States Ranked by Religiousness

This is interesting....draw your own conclusions.

Appreciate 0
      02-01-2010, 07:10 PM   #2
whathappened
Banned
0
Rep
45
Posts

 
Drives: yes
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: here

iTrader: (0)

That people who are impoverished, targets of crime (including murder), and are unhappy with their personal life and marriages often turn to religion for solace in their times of need?

And that religion provides for the emotional, moral and personal support they need when they are down and out?

That people with lower IQ more often get worse jobs that pay less, live in communities targeted more for crime, and have the hardest time making marriages work due to the adversities of all of the above?

Not sure where you are going here...
Appreciate 0
      02-01-2010, 07:24 PM   #3
MrRoboto
Colonel
Canada
54
Rep
2,715
Posts

 
Drives: VO 1M
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Just for fun.

I figured the closer the states are to Canada, the higher the average IQ ;-) Must be in the water.
Appreciate 0
      02-01-2010, 08:53 PM   #4
fdsasdasdf
Captain
fdsasdasdf's Avatar
30
Rep
779
Posts

 
Drives: 330Ci ZHP 6sp
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whathappened View Post
Not sure where you are going here...
I think he's just trying to show the correlation between religion and different aspects (IQ, crime, etc).

I agree with all of your points.

Actually I may go ahead and run up SAS and see the correlation between all of these. I'm interested in the r value myself.

Last edited by fdsasdasdf; 02-01-2010 at 10:07 PM.
Appreciate 0
      02-04-2010, 07:46 PM   #5
Kroy
Brigadier General
Kroy's Avatar
United_States
39
Rep
3,035
Posts

 
Drives: E90
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA

iTrader: (1)

interesting read. i'd have expected a little different results on some of those catagories. i expected theft to be lower rather than higher in religious states.
Appreciate 0
      02-07-2010, 12:09 AM   #6
fdsasdasdf
Captain
fdsasdasdf's Avatar
30
Rep
779
Posts

 
Drives: 330Ci ZHP 6sp
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC

iTrader: (0)

My analysis:

So, out of my curiosity, I wanted to find out if being religious has a correlation with IQ. I say that it does not. Time and time again people view data, look at the possible trend, and then assume that it's completely true. Some parts of this data are stupidly subjective; for example, one person's "contentment" ranking is not the same as what someone else would rate it as. It's a stupid measure, but I digress.

I did not check any of the data to see if it were accurate or how it was gathered, as it takes too much time and I don't feel like spending that much time trying to figure out how it was collected (even though I really should). Therefore, for lack of better data at hand, let us make a very, very loose assumption that all of the data are correct.

Let us start off with the big one: IQ vs. religiousness.

Here is the one-way ANOVA of the data:



Notice that the SSE (Sum of Squares error) takes up a HUGE majority of the total; it is over 3 times that of the SSM (Sum of Squares Model). We can calculate R^2 from this, but it is given to us anyway. Notice that R^2 = .2308. This says that only 23.08% of the data are described by a least squares regression line. That is very little data; it does not describe it very well in any way. We can safely say that IQ is not correlated with being religious. Notice that the p-value is 0.0002; it is statistically significant from this data that religiousness affects IQ (H0: mean=0 vs. Ha: mean does not equal 0); we can easily reject the null at an alpha of both 0.01 and 0.05; however, due to the fact that only 23.08% of the data are described by a trend line, it is difficult to accept that answer and a such we cannot say that IQ is not very affected by being religious. Remember, R^2 doesn't care what is x or y; I can swap religiousness and IQ on the axes and get the same R^2 value.

Let's look at this one in some more detail. Here is the residual plot of IQ vs. religiousness:



Poor. Look at the obvious linear relationship on the residuals plot. It is not evenly distributed in any way about the residuals=0 line; as a result, we cannot use a linear line to measure this. Let's look at the plot to get some more info:



Can you make a good approximation for any of that data with a trend line? Obviously not; the data are extremely random. There is virtually no relationship between IQ and being religious.

What about political affiliation? Is that affected by being religious, according to the data?



That F is huge. 62.38 is phenomenally large. We get a p-value of way, way less than 0.001. Note that in these one-way ANOVAs with one degree of freedom due to the single independent variable, the p value from t is exactly equal to the t value from the ANOVA F test. F of 62.38 is hugely statistically significant at 0.05, 0.01, and even 0.001, and with that R^2 value describing 55.61% of the data, we can pretty safely reject H0 and say that being religious tends to correlate with your political affiliation. In this case, it is conservative.

And what about theft?



Only 16.96% of the data are described, but the p-value is 0.0017. It's statistically significant at 0.05 and 0.01, but the data are practically randomly scattered and this isn't a good model. So no, your religiousness and amount of theft that you do is uncorrelated.

I will not go into detail with the others, as it will take too much time to perform the contrast analyses. So, instead, let's consider what happens if we put all of these variables together such that, mathematically, have an 8th dimension linear equation where we measure how religious you are vs. all those other factors.



Note that R^2 is 0.8099, and the F-test produces a value less than 0.0001. Let's look at the partial linear equations:

IQ is 0.5730, divorce is 0.5649, and the rest are all statistically significant at at least 0.05. The partials of IQ and divorce are incredibly poor indicators; so, they do not have much to do with being religious at all; this definitely follows with what we have seen thus far with IQ, and the divorce rate can be explained through its own analysis that I will not get into for reasons I have stated above.

This states only if those factors influence your religiousness. Now let's take a major factor, say, theft, and see if all of the factors affect it:



Here's a very interesting case of Simpson's Paradox! All of the variables themselves alone do not influence it very much, but the factors combined do! The R^2 is .4451, which is decent for describing it but not excellent. Now, let's see how much theft is affected if we remove religiousness, thus creating a 7th-dimensional linear equation (y=x1 + bx2 + bx3 + ... + bx6 + e, e -> N(0, sigma)).



R^2 = 0.4553, and the rest of the values are hardly affected. It, in fact, made it more accurate without religiousness being there. What does this say? Relgiousness has little to do with theft rates. Note how R^2 went up!

Let's check out IQ.



A very good R^2 of 0.7913, and good p-values for the most part. That is, except religion and a few others.

Let's take religion away:



Well now, the R^2 value is now 0.7952. A very slight increase, and a very slight change in the other p-values, too. That's hardly a difference at all. Interesting, is it not?

So, in conclusion, don't look at graphs that show pretty colors and assume there is correlation. People skew data all the time; you should ask yourself how biased the data are each time you see something. This entire graph proves itself wrong. It just puts on a pretty face to make it seem like there is a correlation when there really is not. Good game. Statistics 1, biased morons 0.

Last edited by fdsasdasdf; 02-07-2010 at 03:35 PM.
Appreciate 0
      02-07-2010, 08:54 AM   #7
MrRoboto
Colonel
Canada
54
Rep
2,715
Posts

 
Drives: VO 1M
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

You certainly have some time on your hands. It appears the author may have used Excel to build the table and applied some simple conditional formatting to colorize the cells.

Based on your analysis does it not appear the those with higher IQ are more likely not to be religious? Even with the small data set the graph you put together does display that those in the upper IQ trend center left (less religious), those with lower IQ trend center/right (more religious).
Appreciate 0
      02-07-2010, 11:43 AM   #8
TMNT
Captain
41
Rep
875
Posts

 
Drives: 330ci ZHP
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: VA

iTrader: (0)

I didn't need a chart to see the obvious
Appreciate 0
      02-07-2010, 03:38 PM   #9
fdsasdasdf
Captain
fdsasdasdf's Avatar
30
Rep
779
Posts

 
Drives: 330Ci ZHP 6sp
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboto View Post
Based on your analysis does it not appear the those with higher IQ are more likely not to be religious? Even with the small data set the graph you put together does display that those in the upper IQ trend center left (less religious), those with lower IQ trend center/right (more religious).
Yes, the graph that was made looks that there is a correlation, but there is not. Take a look at the scatterplot of IQ vs. religiousness. It's close to entirely clustered and pretty much no conclusion can be drawn from it. That entire graph up at the top is designed to skew it into looking like it is when it isn't using colors. It's a pretty biased graph.
Appreciate 0
      02-07-2010, 08:03 PM   #10
GreenPlease
Lieutenant Colonel
GreenPlease's Avatar
United_States
40
Rep
1,635
Posts

 
Drives: BMW 335i e92
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando Florida

iTrader: (2)

Well done Zell. Very well done. I wish more people were as analytical as you.
__________________
Cars>Women
Appreciate 0
      02-08-2010, 12:25 AM   #11
JayKay335i
Banned
Egypt
77
Rep
5,047
Posts

 
Drives: ///M323 DCT
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: North Dakota; its best DUHHHHHH

iTrader: (1)

Not surprising. I guess what surprised me the most is the average IQ in most states.
Appreciate 0
      02-08-2010, 04:16 AM   #12
radix
you know he kills little girls like you
radix's Avatar
No_Country
56
Rep
896
Posts

 
Drives: -
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: -

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayKay335i View Post
Not surprising. I guess what surprised me the most is the average IQ in most states.
The average IQ is the average IQ (100). Admittedly, after only eyeballing things, it seems about right, some are a bit higher and some are a bit lower.
Appreciate 0
      02-08-2010, 08:54 AM   #13
MrRoboto
Colonel
Canada
54
Rep
2,715
Posts

 
Drives: VO 1M
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Based on your plot, if we only include only those with highest IQ and those with lowest IQ it definitely does show that those states with higher IQ tend to be center/left (less religious) while those with lowest IQ tend to be center/right (more religious)

Appreciate 0
      02-08-2010, 09:02 PM   #14
fdsasdasdf
Captain
fdsasdasdf's Avatar
30
Rep
779
Posts

 
Drives: 330Ci ZHP 6sp
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboto View Post
Based on your plot, if we only include only those with highest IQ and those with lowest IQ it definitely does show that those states with higher IQ tend to be center/left (less religious) while those with lowest IQ tend to be center/right (more religious)
Well, if we did that, then the trend line would look like so:

Let's call the highest IQ 104 and lowest 94-97 (there is only one data point for 94, and 7 for the rest). I don't know what states those are from just the plot you produced alone, so I'll just choose what is the highest and lowest. Well...I guess I could figure them out by matching the numbers with the data set, but that'd be incredibly tedious



Looks pretty similar with the trend line; there is a huge gap of data. As one who does statistics, I'd look at that and say, "Well, obviously data are missing here and we aren't getting the full picture. Either they didn't take enough samples, or someone is leaving out data on purpose." Then I'd have to figure out if any of those are outliers and stuff and try to explain them and stuff; it'd be a big ol' mess.

Let's check the ANOVA (Analysis of Variance):



24.17% of the data are described by that trend line, and the data are now no longer statistically significant. It fails at the generally accepted p-value of 0.05.

So no, even if one were to bias the data and pick and choose what to show, it isn't statistically significant nor is it described by a trend line very well.

Picking a choosing data to show is a high form of bias; in order to get the full picture, all data must be shown and no data in the middle should be lost. That is why I said above that I was going to choose what is the highest and lowest IQ. What is the highest and lowest? Are we going off of subjective intuition as to what we consider high, or are we going off of what is statistically significant as considered high or low based upon the mean IQ of all states? As you can see, it can become very fuzzy and really changes how data are produced big time.

Sometimes data are lost and can be interpolated through the trend line; a good example would be all the divorce stuff. I can tell SAS to go ahead and fill in the missing data from divorce rates through interpolation if I wanted to, but I'd have to record that that's how I got it. If a few data points are lost, then it's not too big of a deal. But if entire sections are lost, then it's a very big deal and introduces a tremendous amount of bias.

This is really good SAS programming practice It's always good to review statistical concepts and such using real-world examples.

Last edited by fdsasdasdf; 02-08-2010 at 09:09 PM.
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2010, 05:09 PM   #15
tuned2ride
First Lieutenant
10
Rep
363
Posts

 
Drives: E90
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hell

iTrader: (0)

So less the people are religious, more intelligent they are.

I could have figured that one out by myself. lol!
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2010, 05:17 PM   #16
FStop7
I like cars
FStop7's Avatar
Vatican City State
96
Rep
5,059
Posts

 
Drives: M6
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Newbury Park, CA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuned2ride View Post
So less the people are religious, more intelligent they are.

I could have figured that one out by myself. lol!
Someone failed to read the thread.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2010, 05:22 PM   #17
tuned2ride
First Lieutenant
10
Rep
363
Posts

 
Drives: E90
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hell

iTrader: (0)

What are you insinuating exactly? Yes I read it, fyi.
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2010, 07:13 PM   #18
radix
you know he kills little girls like you
radix's Avatar
No_Country
56
Rep
896
Posts

 
Drives: -
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: -

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuned2ride View Post
What are you insinuating exactly? Yes I read it, fyi.
Someone failed to understand the content of the thread.
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2010, 08:00 PM   #19
tuned2ride
First Lieutenant
10
Rep
363
Posts

 
Drives: E90
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hell

iTrader: (0)

Some think that they are good in sarcasms.
Appreciate 0
      05-15-2010, 10:42 PM   #20
Aurora Bearialis
¡Barça!
Aurora Bearialis's Avatar
Spain
122
Rep
12,042
Posts

 
Drives: Rainbow Sandals
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ohio

iTrader: (5)

Garage List
2008 E92 335i  [0.00]
Send a message via AIM to Aurora Bearialis Send a message via Yahoo to Aurora Bearialis Send a message via Skype™ to Aurora Bearialis
hmmm interesting... I will be moving to a more religious, smarter, less murderous, more theft, less generous, more conservative and healthier and happier state This was a good read, thanks.
__________________
Tate's chicken sucks!
Appreciate 0
      05-18-2010, 02:19 PM   #21
carve
Major
carve's Avatar
30
Rep
1,098
Posts

 
Drives: 335i
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: usa

iTrader: (0)

My conclusion: The people who say religion is necessary for people to be good, to help families stick together, to help form a strong, healthy, peaceful society etc. are not only wrong, but might even have it backwards.

Biggest surprise: That Utah wasn't higher on the religiousness list. Mormons, for all their ridiculous beliefs, seem to disproportionaltely practice the values they preach, and are the only major religion disproportionately under-represented in the prison population (with the non-religion of atheism being way, WAY under-represented)
Appreciate 0
      05-18-2010, 02:48 PM   #22
jeremyc74
Banned
United_States
66
Rep
5,972
Posts

 
Drives: '08 135i Montego/Terra
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Evansville, IN

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by carve View Post
My conclusion: The people who say religion is necessary for people to be good, to help families stick together, to help form a strong, healthy, peaceful society etc. are not only wrong, but might even have it backwards.

Biggest surprise: That Utah wasn't higher on the religiousness list. Mormons, for all their ridiculous beliefs, seem to disproportionaltely practice the values they preach, and are the only major religion disproportionately under-represented in the prison population (with the non-religion of atheism being way, WAY under-represented)
Hell, when you've got three wives waiting on you hand and foot, what could you have to unhappy about?!

(That's a joke, before anyone gets offended)


I'm actually a little bit surprised IN isn't higher on the list. I think with some of these places with larger urban populations the numbers are probably very different depending on the area you're looking at.

I would expect that rural IN is at the extreme end of the scale, and the numbers are moderated to a degree by the cities, with reasonably large higher learning institutions.

It's also interesting to note that the crime numbers are very inverse to IQ. It's not a surprise, but the numbers confirm it very well.
Appreciate 0
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:51 AM.




e90post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST