Harvard undergrads from the 1930's are not a representative sample of any group other than that specific group. The sample is in no way random or representative of the general population in the least bit. I can't believe that anyone thinks that this study has any meaning towards the population in general.
I'm sorry if that's overly cynical, but why is it so hard for Harvard academics to understand that the factors affecting people from the Mid-Western middle class, Southern urban poor, New England suburban wealthy, etc. are all very different? Not to mention the factors affecting various cultures internationally.
This is a study of similar people with relatively similar genetics, backgrounds, upbringing, values, wealth, intelligence, and overall lifestyle. How is this of any value to people who aren't like them?
EDIT: I'm realizing that the study's conclusions might be getting exaggerated in the media. I haven't read the actual study, so I'm not sure if the authors are claiming anything as significant as the media is.
I'm sorry if that's overly cynical, but why is it so hard for Harvard academics to understand that the factors affecting people from the Mid-Western middle class, Southern urban poor, New England suburban wealthy, etc. are all very different? Not to mention the factors affecting various cultures internationally.
This is a study of similar people with relatively similar genetics, backgrounds, upbringing, values, wealth, intelligence, and overall lifestyle. How is this of any value to people who aren't like them?
EDIT: I'm realizing that the study's conclusions might be getting exaggerated in the media. I haven't read the actual study, so I'm not sure if the authors are claiming anything as significant as the media is.