Want this question answered?
No, there is no direct correlation between stomach size and brain size. Brain size is determined by a variety of factors, including genetics, nutrition, and development. The size of a person's stomach is unrelated to their brain size or cognitive abilities.
Well, to a degree I guess so. An eastern bluebird will not have the intelligence of a German sherpard. A white tail deer will not thave the intelligence of a human. But between animals of the same species, brain size is not a consideration.
People with bigger feet have higher intelligence, and people with smaller feet have lower intelligence. In other words, foot size is correlated with intelligence. However, it's clear that if I could have made my feet bigger it would not have made me more intelligent. In other words, in increase in foot size is not a cause of greater intelligence. That's what 'correlation does not imply causation' means.
increased brain cavity size
There is no such term. The regression (or correlation) coefficient changes as the sample size increases - towards its "true" value. There is no measure of association that is independent of sample size.
Very, very vaguely, relative brain size appears to have a positive correlation with intelligence.
No, there is no direct correlation between stomach size and brain size. Brain size is determined by a variety of factors, including genetics, nutrition, and development. The size of a person's stomach is unrelated to their brain size or cognitive abilities.
Please look into the research of Phillip K. Rushton. His research can be found in the Journal of the American Psychological Association.
Well, to a degree I guess so. An eastern bluebird will not have the intelligence of a German sherpard. A white tail deer will not thave the intelligence of a human. But between animals of the same species, brain size is not a consideration.
No, brain size doesn't matter how smart you are.
Human intelligence is attributed to having a large brain and also having a large ratio of brain size to body size.
It's not only economists that offer this warning. It's true anywhere that correlation coefficients are to be interpreted. Let me offer an example from psychology. In many populations there's a significant correlation between the shoe sizes of people and their intelligence quotients. But no-one would say that increasing a person's shoe size would increase their intelligence!
No
People with bigger feet have higher intelligence, and people with smaller feet have lower intelligence. In other words, foot size is correlated with intelligence. However, it's clear that if I could have made my feet bigger it would not have made me more intelligent. In other words, in increase in foot size is not a cause of greater intelligence. That's what 'correlation does not imply causation' means.
Absolutely NOT!
yes edit: Actually no it doesn't, it correlates to the size of the person that the brain is carrying out functions for. A 6ft tall man may have a larger brain than a 5ft tall woman it doesn't me she is any less intelligent simply that she is smaller however many do believe that brain size is an indication of intelligence but that is not true
Finding the size of your brain is possible using a 3D scanning technology, such as a CAT scan. However, note that there is no correlation between the size of one's brain and their intelligence, for the most part. In the 1700's, phrenology, or the analysis of one's cranium's contours, bumps, and ridges in an effort to determine the size of the brain inside and thus someone's intelligence [it was presumed in that time period that a bigger brain meant more intelligence], was popular; however, the practice slowly declined as the credibility of the results was called into question. Assumedly the brain had 22 sections, each one responsible for a different function. This belief has been replaced by more modern theories. In addition, many famous people had their brains weighed during post-mortem autopsies. For example, Otto Van Bismarck's brain was found to weigh as astounding 2200 grams [4.85 pounds]. However, this technique has proven to be inaccurate, as the brain swells with fluid [edema] after death.