[kermitdekikker]

Sometimes bias is important, especially when asking ambiguous questions. Are you asking for IQ scores by racial group regardless of their background or corrected for confounders?

The answers by chatGPT on IQ by race are factually correct by one reading. IQ is for "blacks" can be lower than for "whites" (last answer by chatGPT), but this does not mean that this is because of skin color or genetics. Instead, many studies have shown that when correcting for socio-economic factors (e.g., wealth, quality of education, lead in drinking water) there is no difference, which is what chatGPT hints at in the answers 4 and 5.

Similarly, by asking about the correlation between SAT scores and IQ you seem to hint at the fact that lower SAT scores mean a lower IQ. However, there is no perfect correlation and if you read up on meta-analyses you will find that the other explaining factors are related to socio-economic factors and not genetics.

Precisely because some people on purpose or not on purpose don't consider these confounders, it is best to consider confounders in replying to these questions

[nhchris]

> many studies have shown that when correcting for socio-economic factors (e.g., wealth, quality of education, lead in drinking water) there is no difference

Could you share these studies? Though I worry correcting for "quality of education" involves grouping by schools that use the SAT as admission criterion, which is close to correcting for intelligence itself.

One could also flip it around - if IQ is "fairly" rewarded by income, then one would expect the differences to disappear if you correct for income. It's basically saying that people of equal IQ get, on average, equal income. Unless one holds a truly extreme blank-slatist view of people, that implies discrimination is negligible.