Section 9 Designing Surveys To Measure Inequality: Fill & Download for Free

Hello Aspirant,Here are FCI phase 1 and phase 2 syllabus;FCI Manager Exam Pattern: Phase-IThe FCI Manager Phase-I examination will be conducted online and Objective type (Multiple Choice Questions). Candidates are allocated total duration of 60 Minutes to complete the preliminary exam. There is section wise timing for all sections i.e. 20 minutes each. It consists of 3 sections with a total of 100 questions and maximum score of 100 marks.FCI Syllabus 2019: Phase-IFCI covers three sections in FCI Manager Phase-I exam i.e. English Language, Numerical Aptitude and Reasoning Ability. The details syllabus for FCI Manager 2019 Phase-I exam is mentioned below:FCI Syllabus English LanguageReading Comprehension, Cloze Test, Fillers, Sentence Errors, Vocabulary based questions, Sentence Improvement, Jumbled Paragraph/Sentences, Paragraph Fillers, Paragraph Conclusion, Paragraph/Sentences Restatement.FCI Syllabus Reasoning AbilityPuzzles, Seating Arrangements, Direction Sense, Blood Relation, Syllogism, Order and Ranking, Coding-Decoding, Machine Input-Output, Inequalities, Alpha-Numeric-Symbol Series, Data Sufficiency, Logical Reasoning, Passage Inference, Statement and Assumption, ConclusionFCI Syllabus Numerical AptitudeData Interpretation, Inequalities (Quadratic Equations), Number Series, Approximation and Simplification, Data Sufficiency, Miscellaneous Arithmetic Problems, HCF and LCM, Profit and Loss, SI & CI, Problem on Ages, Work and Time, Speed Distance and Time, Probability, Mensuration, Permutation and Combination, Average, Ratio and Proportion, Partnership, Problems on Boats and Stream, Problems on Trains, Mixture and Allegation, Pipes and Cisterns.FCI Manager Syllabus for Phase-IIPaper 1 (Duration – 90 minutes) (120 Marks) -:120 Multiple Choice Questions of General Aptitude consisting of Reasoning, Data Analysis, Computer Awareness, General Awareness, Management and Current Affairs for the post of Manager (General / Depot / Movement / Accounts / Technical / Civil Engineering / Electrical Mechanical Engineering).Paper 2 (Duration – 60 minutes) (120 Marks) -:I. 60 Multiple Choice Questions on General Accounting and Finance for candidates applying for Manager (Accounts)ORII. 60 Multiple Choice Questions on Agriculture, Food Science and Technology, Agricultural Engineering & Bio Technology for candidates applying for Manager (Technical)ORIII. 60 Multiple Choice Questions on Civil Engineering / Electrical Mechanical Engineering for candidates applying for Manager (Civil Engineering / Electrical Mechanical Engineering).I. FCI Manager (Accounts) (Post Code-D): This post has categories for specialised persons from Accounting, Finance, Taxes, Auditing and who has basic knowledge of Computers.Basic Accounting concept– This includes preparation of books of accounts and Accounting Standards.Financial Accounting –(a) Analysis of Financial statement(b) Budgeting & Budgetary control(c) Working Capital management(d) Capital Budgeting & Ratio AnalysisTaxation –(a) Income Tax including filing of return, TDS, Advance Tax etc(b) Goods & Services Tax.Auditing –(a) Auditing Concepts and Methods(b) Internal & External Audit of CompaniesCommercial Laws –(a) Contract Act(b) Companies Act(c) Sales of Goods Act(d) Negotiable Instrument Act(e) Consumer Protection Act(f) RTI ActBasic Computers(a) Operating System(b) Browsers(c) Email(d) Memory(Internal, External, portable)(e) Chats(f) Office (Word, PowerPoint, Excel)(g) NetworksII. FCI Manager (Technical) (Post Code-E): This post has categories for specialised persons from Agriculture, Biotechnology, Entomology, Chemistry fieldAgriculture(a) Statistics of Indian Agriculture (Cereals & Pulses)(b) Food & Agriculture Microbiology(c) Nutrition (Animal & Plant)(d) Postharvest care of Cereals & Pulses(e) Food grain Protection(f) Agriculture ExtensionBiotechnology(a) Microbes: Beneficial & Harmful(b)Genetic Engineering,(c) Biotechnological Principles(d) Economic Biotechnology(e) Pathogens & Control(f) Recent trendsEntomology(a) Basic Entomology(b)Economic Entomology(c) Beneficial and harmful insects(d) Integrated Post Management (IPM)(e) Storage Grain Insect pest(f) Vertebrate PestsChemistry–(a) Physical Chemistry: Structure of Atoms, Chemical Bonding, Radioactivity(b) Inorganic Chemistry, Periodic Table, Basics Metals & Non-metals(c) Organic Chemistry, Basics of alkanes, alkenes, alkynes, alcohols, aldehydes and acids(d) Biochemistry (Carbohydrates, Proteins & Fats)Food-(a) PFA Act, 1964(b) Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006/Food Safety and Standards Regulations 2011(c) Right to Information Act, 2005III. FCI Manager Syllabus (Civil Engineering) (Post Code-F): This post has categories for specialised persons from Engineering, constructions, building, Surveying, Soil Engineering, DesignEngineering Materials & Construction Technology:(a) Selection of site for the construction(b) Engineering Materials & Construction Technology(c) Planning and orientation of buildings, acoustics(d) Ventilation and air conditioning(e) Building and highway materials, Stones, Bricks timber, Lime, Cement Mortar, Plain and reinforced Cement Concrete, Bitumen, AsphaltBuilding Materials:(a) Stone, Lime, Glass, Plastics, Steel, FRP, Ceramics, Aluminium, Fly Ash, Basic Admixtures,(b) Timber, Bricks and Aggregates Classification, properties and selection criteria, Cement etcConstruction Practice, Planning and Management:(a) Construction Planning(b) Equipment, site investigation(c) Tendering Process and Contract Management(d) Quality Control, Productivity, Operation Cost(e) Land acquisition, Labor safety and welfareSurveying:(a) Surveying(b) Leveling, temporary and permanent adjustments of levels and Theodolite(c) Use of theodolite(d) Tachometry(e) Trigonometrically and Triangulation survey(f) Contours and contouring(g) Computations of areas and volumesSoil/Geotechnical Engineering:(a) Classification of soil(b) Field identification tests(c) Water content, specific gravity, voids ratio, porosity, Soil permeability and its determination in the laboratory and field(d) Darcy’s law, Flow nets its Characteristics(e) Local and general shear failures(f) Plate load test(g) Stability of simple slopesHighway and bridges:(a) Classification of road land width(b) Flexible pavements(c) WBM courses, sub base, sand bitumen base curse, crushed cement concrete base / sub-base course(d) Prime and tack coats(e) surface dressing(f) Asphaltic concrete, seal coatsStructural Analysis:(a) Strength of materials(b) Bending moments and shear force(c) Suspended Cables(d) Concepts and use of Computer Aided DesignDesign of steel structures:(a) Principles of working stress methods(b) Design of tension and compression members(c) Design of beams and beam column connections, built-up sections, Girders, Industrial roofs(d) Principles of Ultimate load designDesign of Concrete and Masonry Structures:(a) Principles of working stress methods(b) Design of tension and compression members(c) Design of beams and beam column connections, built-up sections, Girders, Industrial roofs(d) Principles of Ultimate load designEstimating, Costing and Valuation:(a) estimate, analysis of rates, earthwork(b) Brick , RCC work shuttering, Painting, Flooring, Plastering flexible pavements, Tube well, isolates and combined footings, Steel Truss, Piles etc(c) Valuation- Value and cost, scrap value, salvage value, assessed value, sinking fund, depreciation and obsolescence, methods of valuationIV. FCI Manager syllabus (Electrical Mechanical Engineering) (Post Code-G):(a) Thermodynamics(b) Heat Transfer, Refrigeration and Air-conditioning(c) Theory of Machines, Machine Design(d) Strength of Materials, Engineering Materials(e) Production Engineering , Industrial Engineering(f) Production Planning and Control(g) Material handling(h) Electrical Circuits, Network theorems, EM Theory(g) Strength of Materials, Engineering Materials(i) Electrostatics, Material Science (Electric Materials), Electrical Measurements,(j) Elements of Computation Power Apparatus and Systems (Power System: Power generation; Thermal, Hydro, Nuclear & Solar power production and Transmissions)(k) Electro mechanics, Control Systems, Electronics and Communications, Estimation and costing, Use of computersV. FCI Manager syllabus (Hindi) (Post Code-H):Paper 3 (Duration-90 minutes) (120 Marks) -:120 Multiple Choice Questions on General Hindi, General English, General Awareness, General Intelligence, Computer Awareness, Management and Current Affairs for candidates applying for the Post Code H Manager (Hindi).Paper 4 (Duration-90 minutes) (120 Marks) (Subjective Test) -:i. 01 Passage for translation from Hindi to English (30 Marks)ii. 01 Passage for translation from English to Hindi (30 Marks)iii. 01 essay in Hindi (30 Marks)iv. 01 Precis Writing in English (30 Marks).For appearing in Paper-IV Manager (Hindi) candidate should be able to use the following keyboard layouts:1. Inscript2. Remington (GAIL)All the best!

Hi..hope you are clear about yourself what you want to be in coming 6 to 7 year.It is really good to start for NDA at this age since you have much more time to prepare for the same. Just concentrate on your syllabus and more importantly Mathematics, English and Grammar(Such as vocabulary & phrases specially Parts of Speech) which will help you a lot.Also find the syllabus and pattern in full details as it is mention in NDA site.NATIONAL DEFENCE ACADEMY AND NAVAL ACADEMY EXAMINATION Paper I MATHEMATICS (Maximum marks - 300)1. AlgebraConcept of a set, operations on sets, Venn diagrams. De Morgan laws. Cartesian product, relation, equivalence relation.Representation of real numbers on a line.Complex numbers - basic properties,modulus, argument, cube roots of unity.Binary system of numbers. Conversion of anumber in decimal system to binary system and vice-versa. Arithmetic, Geometric andHarmonic progressions. Quadratic equations with real coefficients. Solution of linear inequations of two variables by graphs. Permutation and Combination. Binomial theorem and its application. Logarithms and their applications.2.Matrices and DeterminantsTypes of matrices, operations on matrices Determinant of a matrix, basic properties of determinant. Adjoint and inverse of a square matrix, Applications - Solution of a system of linear equations in two or three unknowns by Cramers rule and by Matrix Method.3.TrigonometryAngles and their measures in degrees and in radians. Trigonometrical ratios. Trigonometric identities Sum and difference formulae. Multiple and Sub-multiple angles. Inverse trigonometric functions. Applications - Height and distance, properties of triangles.4.Analytical Geometry of two and three dimensionsRectangular Cartesian Coordinate system. Distance formula. Equation of a line in various forms. Angle between two lines. Distance of a point from a line. Equation of a circle in standard and in general form.Standard forms of parabola, ellipse and hyperbola. Eccentricity and axis of a conic.Point in a three dimensional space, distance between two points. Direction Cosines and direction ratios. Equation of a plane and a linein various forms. Angle between two lines and angle between two planes. Equation of a sphere.5.Differential CalculusConcept of a real valued function - domain, range and graph of a function. Composite functions, one to one, onto and inverse functions. Notion of limit, Standard limits - examples. Continuity of functions - examples, algebraic operations on continuous functions.6.Statistics and ProbabilityStatistics Classification of data, Frequency distribution, cumulative frequency distribution - examples Graphical representation - Histogram, Pie Chart, Frequency Polygon - examples. Measures of Central tendency - mean, median and mode. Variance and standard deviation - etermination and comparison. Correlation and regression. Probability Random experiment, outcomes and associated sample space, events, mutually exclusive and exhaustive events, impossible and certain events. Union and Intersection of events. Complementary, elementary and composite events. Definition of probability - classical and statistical - examples. Elementary theorems on probability - simple problems. Conditional probability, Bayes theorem - simple problems. Random variable as function on a sample space. Binomial distribution, examples of random experiments giving rise to Binominal distribution.Paper II GENERAL ABILITY TEST (Maximum marks - 600)Part A - ENGLISH (Maximum marks - 200)The question paper in English will be designed to test the candidates understanding of English and workman like use of words. The syllabus covers various aspects like Grammar and usage, vocabulary, comprehension and cohesion in extended text to test the candidates proficiency in English.Part B - GENERAL KNOWLEDGE (Maximum marks - 400)The question paper on General Knowledge will broadly cover the subjects Physics, Chemistry, General Science, Social Studies, Geography and Current Events. The syllabus given below is designed to indicate the scope of these subjects included in this paper. The topics mentioned are not to be regarded as exhaustive and questions on topics of similar nature not specifically mentioned in the syllabus may also be asked.Candidates answers are expected to show their knowledge and intelligent understanding of the subject.Section A (Physics)Physical Properties and States of Matter, Mass, Weight, Volume, Density and Specific Gravity, Principle of Archimedes, Pressure Barometer.Motion of objects, Velocity and Acceleration,Newtons Laws of Motion, Force and Momentum, Parallelogram of Forces, Stability and Equilibrium of bodies, Gravitation,elementary ideas of work, Power and Energy.Effects of Heat, Measurement of temperature and heat, change of State and Latent Heat,Modes of transference of Heat.Sound waves and their properties, Simple musical instruments.Rectilinear propagation of Light, Reflection and refraction. Spherical mirrors and Lenses.Human Eye.Natural and Artificial Magnets, Properties of a Magnet, Earth as a Magnet.Static and Current Electricity, conductors and Non-conductors, Ohms Law, Simple Electrical Circuits, Heating, Lighting and Magnetic effects of Current, Measurement of Electrical Power, Primary and Secondary Cells, Use of X-Rays. General Principles in the working of the followingSimple Pendulum, Simple Pulleys, Siphon,Levers, Balloon, Pumps, Hydrometer,Pressure Cooker, Thermos Flask,Gramophone, Telegraphs, Telephone,Periscope, Telescope, Microscope, Mariners Compass; Lightening Conductors, Safety Fuses.Section B (Chemistry)Physical and Chemical changes. Elements, Mixtures and Compounds, Symbols, Formulae and simple Chemical Equations, Law of Chemical Combination (excluding problems).Properties of Air and Water.Preparation and Properties of Hydrogen,Oxygen, Nitrogen and Carbondioxide,Oxidation and Reduction.Acids, bases and salts.Carbon - different forms.Fertilizers - Natural and Artificial Material used in the preparation of substances like soap, Glass, Ink, Paper,Cement, Paints, Safety Matches, and GunPowder.Elementary ideas about the Structure of Atom, Atomic, Equivalent and Molecular Weights, Valency.Section C (General Science)Difference between the living and non- living.Basis of Life - Cells, Protoplasms and Tissues.Growth and Reproduction in Plants and Animals.Elementary knowledge of human Body and its important organs. Common Epidemics, their causes and prevention. Food - Source of Energy for man.Constituents of food, Balanced Diet.The Solar System - Meteors and Comets,Eclipses.Achievements of Eminent Scientists.Section D (History, Freedom Movement etc.)A broad survey of Indian History, with emphasis on Culture and Civilization. Freedom Movement in India.Elementary study of Indian Constitution and Administration.Elementary knowledge of Five Year Plans of India. Panchayati Raj, Co-operatives and Community Development. Bhoodan Sarvodaya, National Integration and Welfare State, Basic Teachings of Mahatma Gandhi. Forces shaping the modern world;Renaissance, Exploration and Discovery; War of American Independence. French Revolution, Industrial Revolution and Russian Revolution. Impact of Science and Technology on Society. Concept of one World, United Nations, Panchsheel, Democracy. Socialism and Communism. Role of India inthe present world.Section E (Geography)The Earth, its shape and size. Latitudes and Longitudes, Concept of time. International Date Line. Movements of Earth and their effects.Origin of Earth. Rocks and their classification;Weathering - Mechanical and Chemical,Earthquakes and volcanoes.Ocean Currents and TidesAtmosphere and its composition;Temperature and Atmospheric Pressure,Planetary Winds, cyclones and Anti-cyclones;Humidity; Condensation and Precipitation;Types of Climate. Major Natural regions of the World. Regional Geography of India - Climate,Natural vegetation. Mineral and Powerresources; location and distribution of agricultural and industrial activities. Important Sea ports and main sea, land and air routes of India. Main items of Imports and Exports of India.Section F (Current Events)Knowledge of Important events that have happened in India in the recent years. Current important world events.Prominent personalities - both Indian and International including those connected with cultural activities and sports.Kindly NoteOut of maximum marks assigned to part B of this paper, questions on Sections A, B, C, D,E and F will carry approximately 25%, 15%,10%, 20%, 20% and 10% weightages respectively.Intelligence and personality test The SSB procedure consists of two stageSelection process - stage I and stage II. Only those candidates who clear the stage I are permitted to appear for stage II. The detailsare :(a) Stage I comprises of Officer Intelligence Rating (OIR) tests are Picture Perception * Description Test (PP&DT). The candidates will be shortlisted based on combination of performance in OIR Test and PP&DT.(b) Stage II Comprises of Interview, Group Testing Officer Tasks, Psychology Tests and the Conference. These tests are conducted over 4 days. The details of these tests are given on the website Join Indian Army.. The personality of a candidate is assessed by three different assessors viz The Interviewing Officer (IO), Group Testing Officer (GTO) and the Psychologist.There are no separate weightage for eachtest. The mks are 22 allotted by assessors only after taking into consideration the performance of the candidate holistically in all the test. In addition, marks for Conference are also allotted based on the initial performance of the Candidate in the three techniquesand decision of the Board. All these have equal weightage.The various tests of IO, GTO and Psychare designed to bring out the presence/absenceof Officer Like Qualities and their trainability in a candidate. Accordingly candidates are Recommended or Not Recommended at the SSBHappy Learning And Best Wishes!!!

Let’s take a look at fifteen relevant research papers on the religion-intelligence nexus that were published AFTER Zuckerman and co., shall we, folks?Azarvan, A. (2013). Are Highly Theistic Countries Dumber? Critiquing the Intelligence-Religiosity Nexus Theory. Catholic Social Science Review, 18, 151-168.Recent research suggests that higher-IQ countries have significantly more atheists, supposedly because higher intelligence confers a greater ability to apprehend the assumed irrationality of theistic belief. In this quantitative study, an alternative explanation is offered to explain the apparent relationship between intelligence and theism. It is theorized that higher education in free societies brings greater exposure to, and eases the acceptance of, such unconventional views as atheism. This exposure, in and of itself, augments the likelihood that one will reject belief in God. In addition, it is argued on the basis of the Christian ascetic tradition that materialism also produces higher levels of disbelief. OLS regression analysis of 99 countries confirms both theories, while revealing no evidence of an inverse link between intelligence and theism. Findings also show that disbelief is significantly lower in countries that are traditionally Roman Catholic, as well as in those that have not experienced communist rule.Cribari-Neto, F., & Souza, T. C. (2013). Religious belief and intelligence: Worldwide evidence. Intelligence, 41(5), 482-489.Is there a positive impact of intelligence on religious disbelief after we account for the fact that both average intelligence and religious disbelief tend to be higher in more developed countries? We carry out four beta regression analyses and conclude that the answer is yes. We also compute impact curves that show how the effect of intelligence on atheism changes with average intelligence quotients. The impact is stronger at lower intelligence levels, peaks somewhere between 100 and 110, and then weakens. Bootstrap standard errors for our point estimates and bootstrap confidence intervals are also computed.Ganzach, Y., & Gotlibovski, C. (2013). Intelligence and religiosity: Within families and over time. Intelligence, 41(5), 546-552.We study the effect of intelligence (General Mental Ability) on religiosity using research designs that allow for stronger causal inferences compared to previous research in this area. First, we examine how between-siblings differences in intelligence are related to differences in their religiosity. Second, we examine how intelligence is related to changes in religiosity over time. The results of both designs suggest that intelligence has a strong negative effect on religiosity. In addition, our results also suggest that intelligence interacts with age in determining religiosity: the more intelligent the person, the stronger the negative effect of age on religiosity.Carl, N. (2014). Verbal intelligence is correlated with socially and economically liberal beliefs. Intelligence, 44, 142-148.Research has consistently shown that intelligence is positively correlated with socially liberal beliefs and negatively correlated with religious beliefs. This should lead one to expect that Republicans are less intelligent than Democrats. However, I find that individuals who identify as Republican have slightly higher verbal intelligence than those who identify as Democrat (2–5 IQ points), and that individuals who supported the Republican Party in elections have slightly higher verbal intelligence than those who supported the Democratic Party (2 IQ points). I reconcile these findings with the previous literature by showing that verbal intelligence is correlated with both socially and economically liberal beliefs (β = .10–.32). My findings suggest that higher intelligence among classically liberal Republicans compensates for lower intelligence among socially conservative Republicans.Dutton, E., & Lynn, R. (2014). Intelligence and religious and political differences among members of the US academic elite. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, 10.Many studies have found inverse correlations between intelligence and religiosity, intelligence and political conservatism, and intelligence and political extremism. Other studies have found that academics tend to be significantly less religious and more liberal than the general population. In this article, we argue that interdisciplinary differences in religiosity and political perspective among academics are predicted by interdisciplinary differences in intelligence between academics. Once personality factors correlating with religiosity have been substantially controlled for, physicists, who have higher average intelligence, are less religious than are social scientists, who have lower average intelligence. Physical scientists are also less politically extreme than are social scientists.Ritchie, S. J., Gow, A. J., & Deary, I. J. (2014). Religiosity is negatively associated with later-life intelligence, but not with age-related cognitive decline. Intelligence, 46, 9-17.A well-replicated finding in the psychological literature is the negative correlation between religiosity and intelligence. However, several studies also conclude that one form of religiosity, church attendance, is protective against later-life cognitive decline. No effects of religious belief per se on cognitive decline have been found, potentially due to the restricted measures of belief used in previous studies. Here, we examined the associations between religiosity, intelligence, and cognitive change in a cohort of individuals (initial n = 550) with high-quality measures of religious belief taken at age 83 and multiple cognitive measures taken in childhood and at four waves between age 79 and 90. We found that religious belief, but not attendance, was negatively related to intelligence. The effect size was smaller than in previous studies of younger participants. Longitudinal analyses showed no effect of either religious belief or attendance on cognitive change either from childhood to old age, or across the ninth decade of life. We discuss differences between our cohort and those in previous studies – including in age and location – that may have led to our non-replication of the association between religious attendance and cognitive decline.Ganzach, Y., & Gotlibovski, C. (2014). Individual differences and the effect of education on religiosity. Learning and Individual Differences, 36, 213-217.We study the complex relationships between education and religiosity by examining the effects of various individual differences on both these variables. We show that omitting individual differences, particularly intelligence, may lead to dramatic changes in the sign of the effect of education on religiosity. These findings may explain previous conflicting reports about the relationship between education and religiosity.Their Discussion section reports:Our data indicate that in cross-sectional studies, the estimated effect of education on religiosity is very sensitive to the type of controls that are entered into the model. The zero-order correlation between education and religiosity is negative. However, in a model that includes a wide range of antecedents of both education and religiosity, the effect of education on religiosity appears to be small and non-significant. Yet, when sex and ethnicity as well as temperamental antecedents associated with conformity, are omitted from the model, the effect of education appears to be positive (Model 3). On the other hand when intellectual antecedents are omitted, the effect of education appears to be negative (Model 4).Interestingly enough, intelligence is the most essential variable to control for. For example, when only intelligence is controlled for, the relationship between education and religiosity changes dramatically; whereas the zero-order correlation between education and religiosity is −0.14, the partial correlation (controlling for intelligence) between the two is +0.06 (both significantly different, p b 0.0001). On the other hand, the other antecedents in our models are less essential as controls, and have a smaller impact on the estimation of the effect of education. For example, controlling for the two variables with the highest [predictive power] in the full religiosity model (Model 2) – black ethnicity and religious background – has only a small impact on the effect of education. The relevant partial [mediating] correlations are −0.10 and −0.13, respectively, rather similar to the negative zero-order correlation between education and intelligence. Thus, we believe that the omission of intelligence in previous studies that examined the relationship between education and religiosity in the economics and sociological literature is the most serious cause for biases in the estimation of the effect of education on religiosity.Dutton, E. (2014). Nyborg's 'The Intelligence-Religiosity Nexus' and the Benefits of Consilience. Open Differential Psychology.A critique of Nyborg's (2009) analysis of the relationship between IQ and religiousness is presented. It is argued that its problems, although relatively minor, could have been avoided if Wilson's (1998) consilience model were followed. In particular, it presents a number of errors of categorization (which impact its results) that could have been avoided if a Religious Studies expert had been involved in the review process.Souza, T. C., & Cribari-Neto, F. (2015). Intelligence, religiosity and homosexuality non-acceptance: Empirical evidence. Intelligence, 52, 63-70.Our main goal is to explain the proportion of homosexuality non-acceptance, i.e., the proportion of people for whom homosexuality can never be justified. To that end, we use data on 52 countries and consider the beta regression model which is tailored for rates and proportions. We use several conditioning variables, such as average intelligence, per capita income, an indicator as to whether the country is Muslim, an income inequality index and a religious diversity index. It is noteworthy that homosexuality non-acceptance negatively correlates with average intelligence (− 0.58) and with religious disbelief (− 0.52). The estimated regression coefficients corresponding to such covariates are − 0.0207 and − 12.3636, respectively. They are both negative and statistically significant. The implication is that homosexuality non-acceptance tends to decrease when average intelligence or religious disbelief increases. We construct impact curves that measure such impacts and show how their strengths change with the relevant conditioning variables. The estimated impacts are almost always stronger for Muslim nations; they can be nearly twice as strong for such countries. The estimated impacts are also stronger when average intelligence and the prevalence of religious disbelievers are small. Bootstrap confidence intervals are also computed.Sacher, S. G. (2015). An investigation of the link between spirituality and intelligence. Doctoral dissertation, University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon.Self-rated religiosity has been studied alongside intelligence for nearly 100 years. The predominant finding is a negative relationship between measures of self-rated religiosity and individual measures of intelligence. That is, as intelligence increases, the degree of self-rated religiosity decreases; as intelligence scores decrease, self-rated religiosity tends to increase. Spirituality has been studied intermittently as a separate theoretical construct since the 1970’s and there has been a recent empirical drive to consider and refer to these concepts separately. Valid and reliable measures of intelligence have not yet been examined alongside empirically validated, individual, self-rated measures of spirituality. In this study, 44 undergraduate students from the University of Saskatchewan completed the Shipley-2 abbreviated test of intelligence and the Spiritual Well Being Questionnaire (SWBQ). Due to the nature of religiosity relative to spirituality, as well as individual differences in characteristic propensities to engage in logical reasoning, it was hypothesized that when compared to past research examining measured intelligence relative to self-endorsed measures of religiosity, a relatively weak relationship would be observed. The nature and strength of the relationship between self-rated measures of spirituality and measured intelligence was nearly identical to a recent meta-analysis study examining the relationship between self-rated religiosity and measured intelligence. However, a relatively strong negative relationship was observed between the transcendent factor of the SWBQ – the factor most closely associated with notions of a God, religion, or religiosity – and intelligence. This finding supports the hypothesis and suggests that perhaps it is the notion of a God or other sentient being that is driving or inflating the widely observed negative relationship between self-rated religiosity and intelligence.Sickles, J., Huskey, A., Schrantz, K., & Lack, C. W. (May 2015). The Relationship between Intelligence and Religiosity: A Critical Review of the Literature. Journal of Scientific Psychology.They report:Although this area of research lacks conclusive findings, existing studies do generate new directions for research and hypotheses about the relationships among the variables of intelligence, religiosity, and fundamentalism. For example, fundamentalist religious beliefs appear to hamper an American’s ability to take full advantage of education opportunities, particularly at the collegiate level (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992; Burton, Johnson, & Tamney, 1989; Darnell & Sherkat, 1997). This could be by choice (e.g., a person’s chosen religious institution discourages higher learning) or because of a lack of skills necessary to succeed in higher education (e.g., a person is homeschooled using a curriculum that neglected development of math or science skills that become highly important in college entrance exams). Another mediating factor contributing to low levels of educational attainment among those with fundamentalist religious beliefs might be a negative attitude toward scientific findings that many view as contradictory to the teaching of the Christian Bible.Our assertion, based on the above-reviewed studies, is that any noted intelligence differences seen between people of varying religious beliefs is most likely the result of educational differences that are in turn the result of holding fundamentalist religious beliefs, rather than the result of an innate difference in intelligence. Therefore, controlling for levels of fundamentalist beliefs are likely to make any differences between theists and non-theists disappear. In other words, if groups of theists and non-theists of the same educational and socioeconomic levels were compared on standard, individually administered intelligence tests, we hypothesize that there would likely be no significant group differences. But, while type and quality of education is likely to play a role in any potentially observed IQ differences, there are other variables in the reviewed studies (the personality factor of openness, for example) that should also be assessed in future research. Researchers should not limit their studies to examining only a narrow definition of religiosity, nor should new studies use measures that are of questionable value in assessing intelligence. Instead, a variety of demographic, religious, cognitive, and personality variables needs to be assessed to find out which (alone or in combination) are more related to any observed differences in intelligence. Importantly, researchers should administer individual measures of intelligence that are modern, valid, and well-constructed. Well-designed studies in this area are necessary to clarify how (or even if) religiosity and intelligence are related.Webster, G. D., & Duffy, R. D. (2016). Losing faith in the intelligence–religiosity link: New evidence for a decline effect, spatial dependence, and mediation by education and life quality. Intelligence, 55, 15-27.Research has shown negative intelligence–religiosity associations among both persons (Zuckerman, Silberman, & Hall [Personality and Social Psychology Review 17 (2013) 325–354]) and countries (Lynn, Harvey, & Nyborg [Intelligence 37 (2009) 11–15]). Nevertheless, it remains unclear if these associations are stable over time or explained by education, quality of human conditions (QHC), or spatial dependence. In Study 1, we re-analyzed Zuckerman et al.'s meta-analysis, and after controlling for sample differences, the negative intelligence–religiosity link declined over time. The intelligence–religiosity link was non-significant among samples using men, pre-college participants, grade point average, and those collected after 2010. Education also partially mediated the intelligence–religiosity link. In Study 2, we re-analyzed Lynn et al.'s data from 137 countries and found that QHC positively moderated and partially mediated the positive relation between IQ and disbelief in God; this link became non-significant after controlling for spatial dependence (i.e., the extent to which adjacent countries reflect statistically non-independent observations). Although the negative intelligence–religiosity link appears more robust across people than countries, multiple variables moderate or mediate its strength, and hence, limit its generalizability across time, space, samples, measures, and levels of analysis.Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2017). Students in countries with higher levels of religiosity perform lower in science and mathematics. Intelligence, 62, 71-78.We compared the relation between educational performance scores in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) on the one hand, and religiosity, as measured with the World Values Survey and the European Social Survey, on the other hand. We found that higher levels of religiosity (at national level) were associated with lower educational performance in science and mathematics (rs ranging from −0.65 to −0.74). One of the unique contributions of our data set is the ability to examine these trends by sex. Interestingly, even though women reported considerably higher levels of religiosity than men, this gap was not related to sex differences in educational performance. This latter finding constrains conclusions about the possible causal pathways between education, religiosity, and intelligence. Further, the mediating role of human development and time spent on religious education appear to account for the relation between education and religiosity. One possibility is that the relation between education and religiosity at the national level is related to overall levels of economic and human development, including investment in secular education.Dutton, E., & Van der Linden, D. (2017). Why is Intelligence Negatively Associated with Religiousness?. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 1-12.We present three models which attempt to explain the robust negative association between religion and intelligence: the Irrationality of Religion Model, the Cultural Mediation Hypothesis, and the Savanna-IQ Interaction Hypothesis. We highlight problems with each of them and propose that the negative religion-IQ nexus can be understood through substantially revising the Savanna-IQ Interaction Hypothesis. We argue that religion should be regarded as an evolved domain or instinct. Intelligence, by contrast, involves rising above our instincts. It follows that an inclination toward the non-instinctive will thus be an aspect of intelligence because it will help us to solve problems. Thus, intelligence will involve being attracted to evolutionary mismatch, to that which we would not be instinctively evolved to be attracted to. It is this, we argue, that is behind the negative religion-intelligence nexus. We respond to potential criticisms of our model and we examine how this model can be further tested.Ultimately, there is a relatively consistent but overall weak, negative relationship between intelligence and “religiosity”, and, this can largely be seen to depend upon how each is measured, and upon what is and is not controlled for, statistically, in the analyses. In other words, it is a highly contextualized relationship, and one that is not consistent or strong enough to globally explain the differences between theists and atheists, in terms of explaining “how or why” a person is an atheist or a theist. Better explanations exist that don’t include IQ, critical thinking, etc.PostscriptSee: Lewis, G. J., Ritchie, S. J., & Bates, T. C. (2011). The relationship between intelligence and multiple domains of religious belief: Evidence from a large adult US sample. Intelligence, 39(6), 468-472.High levels of religiosity have been linked to lower levels of intelligence in a number of recent studies. These results have generated both controversy and theoretical interest. Here in a large sample of US adults we address several issues that restricted the generalizability of these previous results. We measured six dimensions of religiosity (rather than just one or two), along with a multi-scale instrument to assess general intelligence. We also controlled for the influence of the personality trait openness on facets of religious belief and practice. The results indicated that lower intelligence is most strongly associated with higher levels of fundamentalism, but also modestly predicts central components of religiosity such as a sense of religious identification and private religious practice. Secondly, we found that a higher level of openness – often assumed to lead to lower religiosity – is weakly associated with reduced fundamentalism but with increased religious mindfulness, private religious practice, religious support, and spirituality. These new results provide a framework for understanding the links between reasoning and faith.