• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Study finds Fox News viewers' average IQ is slightly above retardation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zet

7,690
Posts
16
Years
Study shows that the Americans who watch Fox News have an average IQ of 80, whereas the national average is 100. Researchers were not "shocked" by findings.

Birmingham, Alabama (PRWEB) December 04, 2012
The results of a 4 year study show that Americans who obtain their news from Fox News channel have an average IQ of 80, which represents a 20 point deficit when compared to the U.S. national average of 100. IQ, or intelligence quotient, is the international standard of assessing intelligence.
Researchers at The Intelligence Institute, a conservative non-profit group, tested 5,000 people using a series of tests that measure everything from cognitive aptitude to common sense and found that people who identified themselves as Fox News viewers and 'conservative' had, on average, significantly lower intelligent quotients. Fox Viewers represented 2,650 members of the test group.
One test involved showing subjects a series of images and measuring their vitals, namely pulse rate and blood pressure. The self-identified conservatives' vitals increased over 35% when shown complex or shocking images. The image that caused the most stress was a poorly edited picture of President Obama standing next to a "ghostly" image of a child holding a tarantula.
Test subjects who received their news from other outlets or reported they do not watch the news scored an average IQ of 104, compared to 80 for Fox News viewers.
Lead researcher, P. Nichols, explains, "Less intelligent animals rely on instinct when confronted by something which they do not understand. This is an ancient survival reaction all animals, including humans, exhibit. It's a very simple phenomenon, really; think about a dog being afraid of a vacuum cleaner. He doesn't know what a vacuum is or if it may harm him, so he becomes agitated and barks at it. Less intelligent humans do the same thing. Concepts that are too complex for them to understand, may frighten or anger them."
He continues, "Fox News' content is presented at an elementary school level and plays directly into the fears of the less educated and less intelligent."
The researchers said that an IQ of 80 is well above the score of 70, which is where psychiatrists diagnose mental retardation. P. Nichols says an IQ of 80 will not limit anyone's ability to lead happy, fulfilling lives.
The study did not conclude if Fox News contributed to lowering IQ or if it attracts less intelligent humans.
P. Nichols concludes that he wasn't shocked by the studies' results, rather how dramatic their range. "Several previous studies show that self-identified conservatives are less intelligent than self-identified moderates. We have never seen such a homogeneous group teetering so close to special needs levels."

source: http://news.yahoo.com/intelligence-institute-study-shows-fox-news-viewers-iq-034622242.html

An interesting read, though I wouldn't mind seeing a study if watching Fox News does lower your intelligence. Though I suppose you would see the same thing if x person watches x show.
 

Aeon.

Carrion
358
Posts
11
Years
  • Age 29
  • Seen Jun 22, 2016
Researchers were not "shocked" by findings.
I wouldn't be either. With such hits as Bill O'Reilly asking how the moon got there, this isn't surprising at all. Would like to see if it affects intelligence, my grandmother would have it on 24/7 when I was living with her... no joke.
 

Pizzey

Shutter-Shaded Minccino
19
Posts
13
Years
I laughed at the fact they basically compared Fox viewers to dogs xD

It'd be cool if they did a study to find which news channel had the highest average IQ rating. I wanna know what the average is for Jon Stewart's and Stephen Colbert's shows too :D
 

Sydian

fake your death.
33,379
Posts
16
Years
First thing's first, "mental retardation" is an outdated term. The disability is known as "intellectual disability" now. End the R word, people.

Anyway, I'm kind of offended. I watch Fox (not excessively) since it's just the only news station I know the channel number for. I also watch HLN, but that channel is more for if you want to cry over lost/murdered children. But of course I know this report isn't trying to say "hey sydian you're dumb" but still it's kind of like...yeesh. And I feel offended for people I know that use Fox as an outlet to get their news. It's just the easiest news channel to get to. :( Simple as! lmao Maybe it's time to learn new channel numbers.
 

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
Uhh, I can't find anything that says this is a thing and the Huffington Post linked at the bottom is something entirely different. Sounds like a hoax to me.

But Syd Fox is very well-known as a terrible, terrible news station. It was rejected as a news station in Canada because they have a higher standard than us and said Fox tells too many lies to be considered a news station. They also had to identify their channel as "entertainment" instead of news to get around US laws regarding news channels telling the truth.
 
17,600
Posts
19
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 1, 2024
Uhh, I can't find anything that says this is a thing and the Huffington Post linked at the bottom is something entirely different. Sounds like a hoax to me.

But Syd Fox is very well-known as a terrible, terrible news station. It was rejected as a news station in Canada because they have a higher standard than us and said Fox tells too many lies to be considered a news station. They also had to identify their channel as "entertainment" instead of news to get around US laws regarding news channels telling the truth.
Is Fox Philly the same thing as Fox? Or is that a completely different thing?
 

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
They're under the same umbrella but generally it's not the local stations that are bad. Stations showing local news don't have much room for spin. It's the international stations that are terrible, haha.
 

Sydian

fake your death.
33,379
Posts
16
Years
But Syd Fox is very well-known as a terrible, terrible news station. It was rejected as a news station in Canada because they have a higher standard than us and said Fox tells too many lies to be considered a news station. They also had to identify their channel as "entertainment" instead of news to get around US laws regarding news channels telling the truth.

I'm aware of that. I really only use it for local things, is what I should have clarified. I get most of my actual world news from here on PC, tbh. That being said, it's sad that a Pokemon forum's small news discussion section is a better news source than Fox...
 

Khawill

<3
1,567
Posts
11
Years
Dude this is from yahoo news, literally the second worst news source next to fox. I'm surprised they were not in this survey to be honest. I don't even think this is reliable either, considering both Fox and Yahoo tell the news of fiction!
 
17,600
Posts
19
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 1, 2024
They're under the same umbrella but generally it's not the local stations that are bad. Stations showing local news don't have much room for spin. It's the international stations that are terrible, haha.
Oh, good. Because I've always found Fox Philly to be fairly liberal, informational, and trust-worthy news sources.

Dude this is from yahoo news, literally the second worst news source next to fox. I'm surprised they were not in this survey to be honest. I don't even think this is reliable either, considering both Fox and Yahoo tell the news of fiction!
Except Yahoo News is just a news aggregator, which isn't necessarily a source. The source of this study is the Huffington Post.
 

Khawill

<3
1,567
Posts
11
Years
Another study has concluded that people who only watch Fox News are less informed than all other news consumers.

Researchers at Fairleigh Dickinson University updated a study they had conducted in late 2011. That study only sampled respondents from New Jersey, where the university is located. This time, the researchers conducted a nationwide poll.

The poll asked questions about international news (Iran, Egypt, Syria and Greece were included) and domestic affairs (Republican primaries, Congress, unemployment and the Keystone XL pipeline.)

The pollsters found that people were usually able to answer 1.8 out of 4 questions on foreign news, and 1.6 of 5 questions on domestic news, and that people who don't watch any news were able to get 1.22 of the questions on domestic policy right.

As the study explained, though, people who watched only Fox News fared worse:

The largest effect is that of Fox News: all else being equal, someone who watched only Fox News would be expected to answer just 1.04 domestic questions correctly -- a figure which is significantly worse than if they had reported watching no media at all. On the other hand, if they listened only to NPR, they would be expected to answer 1.51 questions correctly; viewers of Sunday morning talk shows fare similarly well. And people watching only "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" could answer about 1.42 questions correctly.
Other networks also did badly in some sections; MSNBC viewers and Fox News viewers both fared worse in answering international questions than people who watched no news.

People who only listened to NPR or watched Sunday morning talk shows or "The Daily Show" did the best in the study.

This is what the Huffington post says, it is not the same I formation as what Yahoo says, so Yahoo is making up fiction about a fictional news channel. I must say, I have my fair share of laughs when watching fox news :D
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
Uhh, I can't find anything that says this is a thing and the Huffington Post linked at the bottom is something entirely different. Sounds like a hoax to me.

But Syd Fox is very well-known as a terrible, terrible news station. It was rejected as a news station in Canada because they have a higher standard than us and said Fox tells too many lies to be considered a news station. They also had to identify their channel as "entertainment" instead of news to get around US laws regarding news channels telling the truth.
Canada carries the American FOX News Channel feed. And there is an actual Canadian equivalent called SUN News Network.

The CRTC allowed FOX to air here, but did not allow them to make a "FOX News North". I would assume it isn't because of of the reasons you described but because it is the CRTC and they would want Canadian-ownership. And that's what happened. Home-grown Québecor Média then launched SUN.

What I think you're referring to is that SUN was rejected as a mandatory channel (like say CBC or CTV's news channels). CRTC's stance was that it isn't unique enough from the existing news and analysis channels and that being included in "information programming" packages would be sufficient.

That aside, I believe the report because it apparently came from a conservative group. So, I don't believe it is biased since it is impacting themselves. XD I'm more inclined to think it more attracts that kind of person though due to its bombastic tabloid-like nature rather than makes them more uninformed. It probably doesn't help, but I don't think it necessarily hinders. Kinda stagnant.

In short, if your single source of information is something like FOX or MSNBC, then you're living in a bubble.

And people watching only "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" could answer about 1.42 questions correctly.

People who only listened to NPR or watched Sunday morning talk shows or "The Daily Show" did the best in the study.
I love The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. But even Stewart and Colbert say they hope their viewers don't treat them as a news source - let alone their single news source. So, that is both impressive and surprising.

Maybe its the context of the question? Maybe they only *watch* Stewart from the options listed, but they actually *read* their news online? (CNN, Huffington, whatever)
 
Last edited:

Ivysaur

Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
21,082
Posts
17
Years
There are news sources, like CNN or The New York Times or the Washington Post.

Then there are infotainment outlets, like MSNBC, The Colbert Report, HuffPost or Mother Jones which are good to get jokes and "interesting" news, but certainly not enough to get a full picture of anything.

And then there is Rupert Murdoch and his toxic sources of crap and misinformation: Fox, The New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Sun, The Times, The Australian... If you value your mental health and/or are not a die-hard fan of Republicans/Conservatives who wants to live in his own cozy bubble, stay away from them.
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
There are news sources, like CNN or The New York Times or the Washington Post.

Then there are infotainment outlets, like MSNBC, The Colbert Report, HuffPost or Mother Jones which are good to get jokes and "interesting" news, but certainly not enough to get a full picture of anything.

And then there is Rupert Murdoch and his toxic sources of crap and misinformation: Fox, The New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Sun, The Times, The Australian... If you value your mental health and/or are not a die-hard fan of Republicans/Conservatives who wants to live in his own cozy bubble, stay away from them.
I agree with most of that later statement. Best to avoid the bulk of that. But WSJ always seemed a bit more... normal to me, compared to the rest. Just more finance-focused. I know its still Murdoch and that's iffy. I think? I don't read it XD But that's been my impression. Because I hear it referenced a lot

Still shouldn't be a single source of news though.
 
Last edited:

PiemanFiddy

Dark-Type Gym Leader
194
Posts
11
Years
I find it funny, but I still watch FOX occasionally. Not that they're dishonest ALL the time, I mean come on.

It's like that incident with Nicolas Cage. He did bad acting in ONE movie, and now everyone thinks he sucks in every other movie. That's not how it works -_-
 
22,952
Posts
19
Years
WSJ is actually not all that bad. It's probably the most neutral of Murdoch's holdings. It's still conservative-leaning, but I think a big part of that is because of its finance and business-centric orientation.

Regarding Fox, the local affiliates are not all that bad, especially in a liberal-leaning market, but its the cable news channel itself that is quite off-balance, and it's not surprising (although a bit insulting because a few individuals I know who use Fox News are otherwise wholly rational on other matters not concerning world news and politics) that viewer IQs for the Fox News cable network are so low.
 

HackChu

I need a haircut...
674
Posts
17
Years
Fox news eh? That's not a shock at all, and I'm not surprised that the researchers weren't either. Just goes to show that the American populace for the most part really are sheeple, in every sense of that word. (And yes, I'm asserting that most Americans watch Fox news)

Great find Zet.
 

ruby

[span="howdy;partner"][/span]
1,390
Posts
20
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Mar 27, 2024
I find it funny, but I still watch FOX occasionally. Not that they're dishonest ALL the time, I mean come on.

It's like that incident with Nicolas Cage. He did bad acting in ONE movie, and now everyone thinks he sucks in every other movie. That's not how it works -_-

Uh, it's a bit different for a news channel. o_o'

I don't see how anybody can defend the local channels or just watch the main one 'occasionally', of which both have been said in here, when the umbrella which even you have aknowledged they fall under has been proven countless times over to be untrustworthy.

It being the only source of news easy to access is not a valid excuse. I find it hilarious that anyone could even think that was acceptable as they posted about it on the internet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top