First the link to this week’s complete list as HTML and as PDF.
In de Mel the effects for women dissipate after ten months. They do so too for men and there is no discernible difference after 12, 15, 18, and 62 months. There is one at 22, 25, 30, 35, and 68 months but these inconsistent results seem spurious and random and can hardly be said to result from the intervention. On top of that the intervention group for men is significantly better educated than control while that for women (with no effect) isn’t. In all a total non-result.
Looking at figures 1 and 2 of Evans 2009 I see no predictive value whatever. Still his result is important: “Childhood poverty no longer predicts young adults’ working memory capacity once chronic stress exposure is partialed from the covariance between childhood poverty and adult working memory.” Just throwing money at poor people is not the best answer to all ills.
Seeing that they base their upper-class assignation not on objective criteria like education, income, and property but rather on visible use of status symbols, Piff’s results surprise me not one bit. Perhaps I too am serotonin deprived, but seeing lying and cheating described as “adroit and good at games”, positive attributes to my understanding of the language, in the abstract of Takahashi while honesty seems to be placed next to stupidity made me angry. Reading the whole article I find my personal values corroborated though. I also find my mistrust of all persons taking strong precautions against thieves themselves confirmed.