Grade B-Overall comments· Please double-check that ther.docx

Grade: B-
Overall comments
· Please double-check that there is no unnecessary summarizing
of the four articles/chapters. Ideally, per article/chapter, it’s
best to state the causal claim you critique in 1-2 sentences in
the very beginning of the paragraph, and then spend the rest of
the paragraph explaining why/how the critical thinking tool at
hand applies to the causal claim. As a result, your paper should
have a total of four paragraphs.
· For each of the four paragraphs in your article, make sure that
you state the claim first, and then talk about the critical
thinking tool—not the other way around.
· The page limit is 2 pages. If you end up exceeding this as you
revise your paper, you can cut down on paper length
significantly by minimizing the amount of space you devote to
summarizing the articles. Also, if you state your name, name of
the course, and so on in the text of the paper, get rid of all of
that and instead simply put down your full name in the header
of the paper. Finally, remove any introduction and/or
conclusion in the paper. It’s only necessary to have four
paragraphs (one paragraph per article/chapter).
· Make sure that you use wording that implies less certainty
(e.g., may, might, possibly, perhaps, likely), rather than stating
that a claim is definitively wrong or misleading. For example,
instead of stating “This claim is incorrect because it suffers
from ambiguous causality,” state “This claim in potentially
incorrect because it may suffer from ambiguous causality.” This
is because you are not conducting your own studies to back up
your claim or citing well-established studies. Rather, you are
simply raising various possibilities as to why the claim per
article/chapter might be wrong/misleading.

Specific comments for first article: “1. Ericsson et al. (2007,
HBR) – Deliberate practice”
· Please double-check that the claim you are addressing for this
article is the following: The author claims that deliberate
practice can be adapted to developing business and leadership
expertise.
· Please double-check that the critical thinking tool you are
using for this article is the following: Lack of practical utility.
· Your paragraph about this first article should include one or
more of the following discussion points (but not necessarily all
of them):
· Have you considered the possibility that there are not many
opportunities to engage in deliberate practice in certain jobs?
The very long and stressful work hours in a job may not allow
the individual to engage in much deliberate practice (e.g.,
investment banker).
· What if you are a working parent of multiple children, and
your spouse works too? Would that impact your ability and/or
motivation to engage in deliberate practice?
· Have you considered the possibility that deliberate practice in
certain jobs would not be appropriate because it could lead to
dire negative consequences? For example, a surgeon does not
have the luxury of practicing deliberately on his patients. It
would be more important to successfully complete the surgery
by relying on the surgeon’s existing strengths rather than trying
to improve on his weaknesses (which likely lead to mistakes,
some of which can be fatal).
Specific comments for second article: “2. Gladwell (Dec 15,
2008) – Predicting performance”
article is the following: The author claims that predicting
quarterback performance in the NFL is inherently unpredictable

(i.e., the profession should keep the gates wide open).
using for this article is the following: Misinterpretation of
evidence
· Your paragraph about this second article should include one or
of them)::
· Could it be that quarterback performance in the NFL only
seems unpredictable because scouts (such as Shonka) are
assessing college players in an unstructured manner? For
example, did the scout apply the same criteria (i.e., ask the
same questions) to each college player assessed? Did he exhibit
any instances of favoritism or favorable cognitive biases toward
certain players?
· Could it be that scouts incorrectly believe that NFL
quarterback performance is unpredictable because they are
ignoring the effects of range restriction? In the article, the scout
appears to only observe college players who have the potential
to join the NFL and, therefore, who are perhaps all similarly
leveled in their very high skills. At the same time, the scout is
overlooking those who may be less talented and not on most
teams’ scouting report. As a result of this range restriction, the
true correlation between college performance and NFL
performance is highly deflated from the scout’s perspective,
making it appear that NFL quarterback performance is
inherently unpredictable.
· Could it be that scouts were simply not fully using the
information available to them, and this is why they mistakenly
think that NFL quarterback performance is unpredictable? For
instance, the article states that when the spread offense broke
down and the college quarterback was under pressure, the
college player faced a similar situation that he would in the
NFL. So, scouts observe these types of plays to better predict
how one would perform under the pressure similar in the NFL.
Latest feed back for revised version:Regarding the paragraph

for the second article (where you are required to use the
misinterpretation of evidence argument), please incorporate and
further polish the range restriction argument. That is, please
make it clearer how in reality there could be a (strong) positive
correlation between X (college quarterback performance) and Y
(and NFL quarterback performance), such that there is a group
of data points scattered around a roughly 45-degree linear line.
But even if this is the case, zooming in on a small ucpper right
part of the scatterplot (thereby restricting the range of X and Y)
would misleadingly suggest a weak positive or zero correlation.
If this is what the scouts are doing by focusing only on the top,
elite, or cream-of-the-crop college quarterback players, then
their claim that NFL quarterback performance is unpredictable
may be suffering from range restriction. 4/26/2018
Specific comments for third article: “3. Gladwell (2008,
Outliers) – Practical intelligence”
article is the following: The author claims that IQ alone cannot
explain who succeeds and who does not and that job knowledge
also counts above and beyond IQ.
using for this article is the following: Narrative fallacy
· Your paragraph about this third article should include all of
the following discussion points:
· By telling a vivid and entertaining story, the author is leading
the readers to believe his claims are true because it applies to
the story.
· The author almost exclusively relies on story-telling
(involving two unusual individuals) rather than primarily
relying on rigorous scientific evidence (e.g., tables, numbers,
presentation of multiple studies, meta-analyses).
· The story presented in the article can be considered to be an
extreme case due to each individual’s high IQ and might not
apply to an average person with high or low (but still pretty

non-extreme) IQ. In other words, don't you think it's odd that he
just had to pick two super-duper geniuses (i.e., extreme
outliers) to tell his story?
Specific comments for fourth article: “4. Gladwell (2002) -
Talent myth”
article is the following: The author claims that the talent mind-
set caused Enron’s decline
using for this article is the following: Ambiguous causality—
specifically, the third/confound variable argument
· Your paragraph about this fourth/last article should include all
of the following discussion points:
· Discuss how the potential confound variable you identify led
to both the talent mindset and Enron’s decline. You need to
devote 2-3 sentences per linkage.
· Explicitly describe how “C” (a third/confound variable) might
have caused “A” (the talent mindset). For instance (you don’t
have to use this example by the way—it’s just an illustration),
poor leadership by top management could have caused the
company to focus on the (natural) talent of individuals. Instead
of rewarding their hardest workers, Enron highlighted people
who had a higher IQ or were better educated. With this
happening, the company stopped doing performance evaluations
based on pure performance; there was a lot of unnecessary
background information added to the equation.
have caused “B” (the decline of Enron). For example (you don’t
have to use this example), poor leadership by top management
may have led to committing fraud and several acts of
corruption, which could have primarily led to the downfall of
Enron. Think about this, and I suggest you incorporate this
discussion into your paragraph here.
· If you argued that the potential confound variable (“C”) led to

the talent mindset (“A”), which in turn led to Enron’s decline
(“B”), then this is not the correct application of the
third/confound variable argument. Instead, you need to show
how C led to A and how C led to B, separately.
· I would suggest that you still acknowledge that A could have
had at least a small bit of effect on B. That is, the talent mind-
set could have had a small effect on the downfall of Enron. Just
because there is likely a “C” affecting both A and B, this does
not necessarily mean there is zero relationship between A and B
(A’s effect on B may be highly inflated, but not completely
explained away, by the presence of C).
Latest feed back for revised version : Regarding the paragraph
for the fourth article (where you are required to use the
confound variable argument), please make sure and double-
check that you’re devoting about 2-3 sentences to talk about
how the confound variable (“C”) could’ve led to the talent
mindset (“A”), and another separate 2-3 sentences discussing
how “C” could’ve led to Enron’s decline (“B”). These two
groups of sentences should be making separate/distinct
arguments; for example, it is incorrect to say that C could’ve
led to A, which in turn led to B.
Final comments
· In conclusion, the purpose of this key assignment is for you to
practice your critical thinking skills. That is, for each
article/chapter, your job is to write a paragraph where you
identify a causal claim and then critique the claim by using a
critical thinking tool.
· Once again, the written instructions for the assignment can be
found on the last seven slides in the “Personality (session
B).pptx” slide deck. And, for additional details on how to apply
each critical thinking tool we learned in class, please see the
slide deck named “2_Critical thinking.pptx.”

3
Sheet1Group ProjectTimesheetName:Group
Leader:Project:Corporate / Individual(circle the project that
applies)Instructions:Each time you work on the project, keep
track of your time spent that day. If you performed multiple
tasks on the same day, use separate lines for each task.For
expample, if you spent an hour calculating depreciation on
February 2, and an hour on the balance sheet on that day, make
2 entries for February 2. By the due date of the project (end of
part 2 for corporate project), each student should submit his/her
timesheet to me by email. This will be part of your grade on the
project and is NOT optional.DateDescription of workTime spent
(Express in terms of hours - e.g. 40 minutes would be .67 hrs
(40/60)Total time- 0
Sheet2
Sheet3
ACCT 3531
Spring 2018
Ron Unger
Corporate Income Tax Project
Instructions:
Given the income statement and balance sheets of Fannie’s
Famous Fudge Inc. for calendar year 2017:
1. Use the book depreciation schedule to calculate the tax
depreciation and accumulated tax depreciation (cost recovery)
for each asset placed in service prior to 2017.
a. Calculate the tax gain/loss for each asset sold in 2017. Use

total tax accumulated depreciation calculated in #1. Assume
assets sold at same time as replacements are purchased.
b. Calculate the book/tax difference
c. Calculate tax depreciation expense for all assets placed in
service in 2017. Use section 179 depreciation for all assets
except for new vehicle and real estate. Business usage of new
vehicle is 80%. Total miles travelled in 2017 8,000, total
commuting miles 500. Van is 100% business use – total mileage
for 2017 = 21,100 miles.
d. Calculate the book/tax difference
2. Calculate all other permanent/temporary book/tax
differences. Note the following: direct bad debts write-offs for
2017 = $0. Officers’ salaries include $10,000 bonus accrued
on 12/31/16 to >50% shareholder which was paid to her on
January 5, 2018.
3. Calculate tax expense per book, tax to be paid this year with
the tax return and deferred tax liability/asset. Show your
calculations (refer to Deferred Tax Worksheet)
4. Revise income statement and balance sheet using additional
information calculated in #5.
5. Use the above information to complete Fannie’s income tax
return for 2017 using the following forms, available at
www.irs.gov :
a. Form 1120, Pp. 1 & 5 (complete Schedules L, M-1 and M-2
on p. 5)
b. Schedule D (MAKE SURE IT’S THE SCHEDULE D FOR
FORM 1120)
c. Form 4562 Pp. 1 & 2 (fill out sections A & B for both
vehicles)
d. Form 4797 (Pp. 1&2)

6. Show supplementary schedules for the following:
a. Form 1120 page 1, line 25 “Other Deductions”
b. Any other item that you feel needs further detail display
Note:
Please form groups of 3-5 students and appoint one person as
group leader.
Due dates:
Friday 2/2/18 by midnight – Group leader to email to me list of
group members.
Friday 3/2/18 by midnight–Group leader to email to me
completed tax depreciation schedule, adjusted income statement
and balance sheet reflecting income tax accrual, expense and
deferred tax liability or asset (#1-6 above).
Friday 3/30/18 by midnight – Group leader to email to me
completed tax return (#7 and #8 above) and Group Member
Evaluation form.
Depreciation (BOOK)Dep ExpAccumulated depreciationDep
ExpAccumulated depreciationDep ExpAccumulated
depreciationDep ExpAccumulated depreciationNBVAssetDate
placed in
ServiceCostLifeMethod201412/31/14201512/31/15201612/31/16
201712/31/17Computers08/01/1438,5004SL4,0104,0109,62513,
6359,62523,2603,20826,46912,031Store
fixtures08/01/1412,60015SL3503508401,1908402,0308402,8709
,730Chevy S-10
van08/01/1448,2006SL3,3473,3478,03311,3818,03319,4148,033
27,44720,753Stoves and
ovens08/01/1416,1008SL8398392,0132,8512,0134,8641,1746,0
3810,063New computers05/01/1745,3004SL- 0- 0-
07,5507,55037,750Worktables02/01/173,0007SL- 0- 0-

03933932,607New stoves and ovens08/01/1722,4008SL- 0- 0-
01,1671,16721,233Tesla X06/01/17125,0006SL- 0- 0-
09,7229,722115,278New
Warehouse09/01/17200,00030SL22222,222197,778New
Land09/01/1730,00030,000Building08/01/14425,00030SL5,903
5,90314,16720,06914,16734,23614,16748,403376,597Land08/0
1/1450,000- 0- 0- 0-
050,000Warehouse08/01/1488,00030SL1,2221,2222,9334,1562,
9337,0892,4449,53378,467Land08/01/1412,00012,0001,116,100
15,67115,67137,61153,28237,61190,89350,921141,814974,286
SOLD IN 2017(154,600)(42,040)Balance @
12/31/17961,50099,774861,726Sale of assets (per
books)ComputersStoves and ovensWarehouseLandTotalSales
price8,00015,000110,00018,000151,000Net book
value12,03110,06378,46712,000112,560Gain/loss(4,031)4,9383
1,5336,00038,440
&LBOOK DEPRECIATION
Depreciation (TAX)*NOTE: YOU NEED TO CHOOSE
RECOVERY PERIODS AND DEPRECIATION METHODS
BASED ON TYPE OF ASSET. THEN, CALCULATE TAX
DEPRECIATION FOR THE LIFE OF EACH ASSET.Dep
ExpAccumulated depreciationDep ExpAccumulated
depreciationDep ExpAccumulated depreciationDep
ExpAccumulated depreciationNBVAssetDate placed in
ServiceCostRecovery
Period*Method*201412/31/14201512/31/15201612/31/1620171
2/31/17Computers08/01/1438,500- 0- 0- 0- 038,500Store
fixtures08/01/1412,600- 0- 0- 0- 012,600Chevy S-10
van08/01/1448,200- 0- 0- 0- 048,200Stoves and
ovens08/01/1416,100- 0- 0- 0- 016,100New
computers05/01/1745,300- 0- 0- 0-
045,300Worktables02/01/173,000- 0- 0- 0- 03,000New stoves
and ovens08/01/1722,400- 0- 0- 0- 022,400Tesla
X06/01/17125,000- 0- 0- 0- 0125,000New
Warehouse09/01/17200,000- 0200,000New
Land09/01/1730,00030,000Building08/01/14425,000- 0- 0- 0-

0425,000Land08/01/1450,000- 0- 0- 0-
050,000Warehouse08/01/1488,000- 0- 0- 0-
088,000Land08/01/1412,00012,0001,116,100- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0-
0- 01,116,100SOLD IN 2017(154,600)- 0Balance @
12/31/17961,500- 0961,500SALE OF ASSETS (PER TAX
RETURN)ComputersStoves and
ovensWarehouseLandTotalSales
price8,00015,000110,00018,000151,000Net book
value38,50016,10088,00012,000154,600Gain/loss(30,500)(1,10
0)22,0006,000(3,600)
&LTAX DEPRECIATION
Income statementFanny's Famous Fudge IncStatement of
incomeYear ended 12/31/17RevenuesSales revenue$
2,100,000Cost of Goods Sold$ (1,260,000)Gross Profit$
840,000Phila School District-Bond interest income12,000Gain
on sale of fixed assets38,440Total
revenue890,440ExpensesSalaries, officers225,000Salaries,
other120,000Advertising8,100Repairs and
maintenance3,200Taxes and licenses55,600Interest
expense7,500Depreciation expense50,921Political contributions
- Fudge Makers Lobby5,000Officers' life insurance5,500Bad
debt expense3,600Meals and
entertainment4,800Accounting6,000Automobile and truck
expense18,500Bank charges600Insurance15,200Janitorial
expense3,200Legal fees10,000Office
expense4,650Telephone5,200Utilities9,800Security6,500Oven
repair2,100Shipping2,000Total expenses572,971Net income
before income taxes317,469Income tax expenseNet income$
317,469USE SPACE BELOW TO CALCULATE BOOK/TAX
DIFFERENCES, TAX EXPENSE PER BOOKS, TAX PAYABLE
AND DEFERRED TAX LIABILITY OR ASSET.
Ron Unger:
Calculate tax expense in space below and fill in here.
Balance sheetsFanny's Famous Fudge IncBalance
SheetsDecember 31, 2017 and 201620172016Assets:Current
assetsCash$ 229,950$ 275,000Accounts

receivable122,50086,000Less: allowance for doubtful
accounts(6,550)(5,000)115,95081,000Merchandise
Inventory177,000125,000Total current
assets522,900481,000Fixed assetsProperty and equipment, net
of accumulated depreciation861,726599,507Other
assets:Deferred Tax Asset- 0Total assets$ 1,384,626$
1,080,507Liabilities and Shareholders' EquityLiabilities:Current
liabilities:Accounts payable$ 61,750$ 34,600Current
maturities of long-term debt85,50066,000Income taxes payable-
0Deferred taxes payableOfficer salaries payable10,000- 0Total
current liabilities157,250100,600Mortgage
payable125,000195,000Total
liabilities282,250295,600Shareholders' EquityCommon
stock5,0005,000Retained earnings1,097,376779,907Total
shareholders' equity1,102,376784,907Total libilities and
shareholders' equity$ 1,384,626$ 1,080,50700NOTE: ONCE
YOU CALCULATE INCOME TAX EXPENSE, TAX
LIABILITY AND DEFERRED TAX (ASSET OR LIABILTY),
YOU WILL NEED TO ADJUST ALL OR SOME OF THE 2017
BALANCE SHEET ITEMS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED.
Grade: B-
Overall comments
· Please double-check that there is no unnecessary summarizing
of the four articles/chapters. Ideally, per article/chapter, it’s
best to state the causal claim you critique in 1-2 sentences in
the very beginning of the paragraph, and then spend the rest of
the paragraph explaining why/how the critical thinking tool at
hand applies to the causal claim. As a result, your paper should
have a total of four paragraphs.
· For each of the four paragraphs in your article, make sure that
you state the claim first, and then talk about the critical
thinking tool—not the other way around.

· The page limit is 2 pages. If you end up exceeding this as you
revise your paper, you can cut down on paper length
significantly by minimizing the amount of space you devote to
summarizing the articles. Also, if you state your name, name of
the course, and so on in the text of the paper, get rid of all of
that and instead simply put down your full name in the header
of the paper. Finally, remove any introduction and/or
conclusion in the paper. It’s only necessary to have four
paragraphs (one paragraph per article/chapter).
· Make sure that you use wording that implies less certainty
(e.g., may, might, possibly, perhaps, likely), rather than stating
that a claim is definitively wrong or misleading. For example,
instead of stating “This claim is incorrect because it suffers
from ambiguous causality,” state “This claim in potentially
incorrect because it may suffer from ambiguous causality.” This
is because you are not conducting your own studies to back up
your claim or citing well-established studies. Rather, you are
simply raising various possibilities as to why the claim per
article/chapter might be wrong/misleading.
Specific comments for first article: “1. Ericsson et al. (2007,
HBR) – Deliberate practice”
article is the following: The author claims that deliberate
practice can be adapted to developing business and leadership
expertise.
using for this article is the following: Lack of practical utility.
· Your paragraph about this first article should include one or
of them):
· Have you considered the possibility that there are not many
opportunities to engage in deliberate practice in certain jobs?
The very long and stressful work hours in a job may not allow
the individual to engage in much deliberate practice (e.g.,

investment banker).
· What if you are a working parent of multiple children, and
your spouse works too? Would that impact your ability and/or
motivation to engage in deliberate practice?
· Have you considered the possibility that deliberate practice in
certain jobs would not be appropriate because it could lead to
dire negative consequences? For example, a surgeon does not
have the luxury of practicing deliberately on his patients. It
would be more important to successfully complete the surgery
by relying on the surgeon’s existing strengths rather than trying
to improve on his weaknesses (which likely lead to mistakes,
some of which can be fatal).
Specific comments for second article: “2. Gladwell (Dec 15,
2008) – Predicting performance”
article is the following: The author claims that predicting
quarterback performance in the NFL is inherently unpredictable
(i.e., the profession should keep the gates wide open).
using for this article is the following: Misinterpretation of
evidence
· Your paragraph about this second article should include one or
of them)::
· Could it be that quarterback performance in the NFL only
seems unpredictable because scouts (such as Shonka) are
assessing college players in an unstructured manner? For
example, did the scout apply the same criteria (i.e., ask the
same questions) to each college player assessed? Did he exhibit
any instances of favoritism or favorable cognitive biases toward
certain players?
· Could it be that scouts incorrectly believe that NFL
quarterback performance is unpredictable because they are
ignoring the effects of range restriction? In the article, the scout

appears to only observe college players who have the potential
to join the NFL and, therefore, who are perhaps all similarly
leveled in their very high skills. At the same time, the scout is
overlooking those who may be less talented and not on most
teams’ scouting report. As a result of this range restriction, the
true correlation between college performance and NFL
performance is highly deflated from the scout’s perspective,
making it appear that NFL quarterback performance is
inherently unpredictable.
· Could it be that scouts were simply not fully using the
information available to them, and this is why they mistakenly
think that NFL quarterback performance is unpredictable? For
instance, the article states that when the spread offense broke
down and the college quarterback was under pressure, the
college player faced a similar situation that he would in the
NFL. So, scouts observe these types of plays to better predict
how one would perform under the pressure similar in the NFL.
Specific comments for third article: “3. Gladwell (2008,
Outliers) – Practical intelligence”
article is the following: The author claims that IQ alone cannot
explain who succeeds and who does not and that job knowledge
also counts above and beyond IQ.
using for this article is the following: Narrative fallacy
· Your paragraph about this third article should include all of
the following discussion points:
· By telling a vivid and entertaining story, the author is leading
the readers to believe his claims are true because it applies to
the story.
· The author almost exclusively relies on story-telling
(involving two unusual individuals) rather than primarily
relying on rigorous scientific evidence (e.g., tables, numbers,
presentation of multiple studies, meta-analyses).

· The story presented in the article can be considered to be an
extreme case due to each individual’s high IQ and might not
apply to an average person with high or low (but still pretty
non-extreme) IQ. In other words, don't you think it's odd that he
just had to pick two super-duper geniuses (i.e., extreme
outliers) to tell his story?
Specific comments for fourth article: “4. Gladwell (2002) -
Talent myth”
article is the following: The author claims that the talent mind-
set caused Enron’s decline
using for this article is the following: Ambiguous causality—
specifically, the third/confound variable argument
· Your paragraph about this fourth/last article should include all
of the following discussion points:
· Discuss how the potential confound variable you identify led
to both the talent mindset and Enron’s decline. You need to
devote 2-3 sentences per linkage.
have caused “A” (the talent mindset). For instance (you don’t
have to use this example by the way—it’s just an illustration),
poor leadership by top management could have caused the
company to focus on the (natural) talent of individuals. Instead
of rewarding their hardest workers, Enron highlighted people
who had a higher IQ or were better educated. With this
happening, the company stopped doing performance evaluations
based on pure performance; there was a lot of unnecessary
background information added to the equation.
have caused “B” (the decline of Enron). For example (you don’t
have to use this example), poor leadership by top management
may have led to committing fraud and several acts of
corruption, which could have primarily led to the downfall of

Enron. Think about this, and I suggest you incorporate this
discussion into your paragraph here.
· If you argued that the potential confound variable (“C”) led to
the talent mindset (“A”), which in turn led to Enron’s decline
(“B”), then this is not the correct application of the
third/confound variable argument. Instead, you need to show
how C led to A and how C led to B, separately.
· I would suggest that you still acknowledge that A could have
had at least a small bit of effect on B. That is, the talent mind-
set could have had a small effect on the downfall of Enron. Just
because there is likely a “C” affecting both A and B, this does
not necessarily mean there is zero relationship between A and B
(A’s effect on B may be highly inflated, but not completely
explained away, by the presence of C).
Final comments
· In conclusion, the purpose of this key assignment is for you to
practice your critical thinking skills. That is, for each
article/chapter, your job is to write a paragraph where you
identify a causal claim and then critique the claim by using a
critical thinking tool.
· Once again, the written instructions for the assignment can be
found on the last seven slides in the “Personality (session
B).pptx” slide deck. And, for additional details on how to apply
each critical thinking tool we learned in class, please see the
slide deck named “2_Critical thinking.pptx.”
3
Critical thinking training
1

Source:
Rick Ligthelm
© 2017 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material
solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
distribution in any manner. This document may not be copied,
scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a
website, in whole or part.
Critical thinking tools
Can be grouped into four:
Tool #1: Ambiguous causality 模糊因果
Tool #2: Trivial magnitude 微不足道
Tool #3: Misinterpretation of evidence 误解证据
Tool #4: Lack of practical utility 缺乏实用性
2

Tool #1: Ambiguous causality
Tool #1: You say that A causes B. But, could it be the case that
A does not cause B (or that A has only a small effect on B),
because evidence more strongly supports an alternative model
of the relationship between A and B? There are mainly two
types of such alternative models:
Reverse causality: B causes A instead of the other way around.
Buying expensive suits (A) will make you rich (B).
Playing basketball (A) makes you over 6”6 tall (200cm) (B).
Supreme confidence (A) makes you a competent employee (B).
3

Confound (i.e., “third”) variable: C causes both A and B.
Eating fat makes you fat. A possible “C” is _________.
Egalitarian policies (e.g., same pay) improves unit performance
(e.g., firm revenue). A possible “C” is _________.
Job satisfaction is positively correlated with job performance. A
possible “C” is _________.
4
Confound (i.e., “third”) variable: C causes both A and B.
Advanced examples of using Tool #1 (either model applies):
Our research team identified 11 companies that became good
(i.e., average) to great (i.e., outperforming the market average
by multiples over many years). From these 11 companies, we

distilled 7 characteristics that make good companies great.
We asked each employee to rate both their manager’s charisma
and one’s own performance. As a result, we found that
employees with charismatic managers tend to outperform other
employees.
5
Tool #2: Trivial magnitude
Tool #2: Even if A does cause B, what is the magnitude of this
relationship? Is it large enough to be important?
Is it large enough? A correlation refers to the strength of the
relationship between two variables.
Perfect positive relationship (i.e., upper limit): 1
Perfect negative relationship (i.e., lower limit): -1
Rule of thumb: r = .10 is weak, .30 is moderate, and .50 is
strong in the organizational behavior context. But ultimately the
question of whether .30 or even .50 is large enough depends on
the context (e.g., cost to implement the newly proposed training
program).
You have to square the r value to be able to say that a predictor

explains x% of the variance in the dependent variable.
6
7
This virtually never happens in OB research. Perhaps the
correlation gets pretty close to 1 (e.g., .995) in certain
literatures in physics that rely on high precision measurement
and extremely controlled (i.e., sanitized) lab experiments.

8
On average, in the social sciences (including education, OB,
social psychology), the typical correlation is around .20 to .30.
9

xx
10
Which of the predictors would you say have trivial magnitudes
based on their correlations you see below?
The screenshot of Schmidt & Hunter (1998, psych bulletin)
table 1.

Another example of trivial magnitude:
Deliberate practice: “practice that focuses on tasks beyond your
current level of competence and comfort. You will need a well-
informed coach not only to guide you through deliberate
practice but also to help you learn how to coach yourself”
(Ericsson et al., 2007, HBR).
Proponents, including Malcolm Gladwell (author of Outliers),
argue that deliberate practice accounts for performance
differences even among elite performers.
So, let’s look at the hard evidence to evaluate Gladwell’s claim.
11
xx
12

Overall, deliberate practice accounted for 18% of the variance
in sports performance. However, the contribution differed
depending on skill level.
Most important, deliberate practice accounted for only 1% of
the variance in performance among elite-level performers.
This finding is inconsistent with [Gladwell’s] claim that
deliberate practice accounts for performance differences even
among elite performers.
Tool #3: Misinterpretation of evidence
Tool #3: You say that A causes B, and the magnitude of this
relationship is non-trivial. In doing so, you cite these various
studies as your evidence. However, I remain skeptical because
you might have failed to interpret the evidence correctly. For
instance:
You confused a positive correlation with a negative one (or vice
versa).
Your citations consist of anecdotes (i.e., “anecdotal evidence”)

rather than experiments or statistical analyses of data.
You failed to mention the caveat that your claim is based on one
or few studies, as opposed to an entire body of findings (e.g.,
meta-analyses).
You only look at linear trends, while ignoring non-linear trends,
heteroskedasticity, and other informative information from the
data.
13
14

Larger variance among the lower annual salary countries means
more risk/uncertainty as to how happy you’ll be. Smaller
variance among the higher annual salary countries mean a better
guarantee of happiness.
studies as your evidence. However, I still remain skeptical
because you might have failed to interpret the evidence
incorrectly.
Another exercise: Planes that survive and come back from battle
tend to have most bullet holes near their ‘bellies,’ so we should
reinforce those areas to increase their defenses against enemy
fire. What do you think officer? (Answer on next bullet point)
The misinterpretation is based on an incorrect understanding of
the correlation’s sign.
15

Answer: Bullet holes around the belly positively relates to
survival, not negatively.
16
studies as your evidence. However, I still remain skeptical
because you might have failed to interpret the evidence
incorrectly.
Yet another exercise: We collected data on 16,422 newcomer
players in Major League Baseball and 3,649 players in the
National Basketball Association—belonging to 135 batter
cohorts (from year 1871 to 2005), 135 pitcher cohorts (1871-
2005), and 60 basketball cohorts (1946-2005). Results indicated
that allocating varying amounts of opportunities does not lead
to the emergence of star performers. (Answer on next bullet
points)
Range restriction refers to the artificial reduction of a predictor
or outcome’s variance. It tends to deflate (i.e., attenuate)
correlations, thus often explaining why a relationship is found
to be weak or non-existent.
Often occurs when the sample is too narrow/specialized and/or
small.

17
Caveat: It could be that this null correlation was obtained from
data collected in a unique context that suppresses X from
causing Y (e.g., lifting weights lead to muscle growth, but if
you limit data collection period to 2 days, you’ll get zero
correlation).
18

Graphical illustration of range restriction
Tool #4: Lack of practical utility
19
relationship is non-trivial. Also, you do not misinterpret the
underlying evidence. That’s all great. But I’m still skeptical
because the relationship between A and B seems to lack
practical utility. There are mainly two forms of this criticism:
Some findings are so obvious or vague that they don’t translate
to practical actions. Or, in the least, their usefulness only
applies to very limited circumstances.
For example, hindrance stressors (i.e., stressors that tend to be
appraised as thwarting progress) negatively impacts job
and, therefore, uninformative.

20
practical utility. For instance, some findings are so obvious or
vague that they don’t translate to practical actions. Or, in the
least, their usefulness only applies to very limited
circumstances.
An exercise: Goal setting theory states that assigning employees
(1) specific and (2) difficult goals will result in higher levels of
performance than assigning no goals, easy goals, or do-your-
best goals. E.g.,
Sign up 30 new gym members this month.
Raise $50,000 for a charity by June 20, 2017.
Reduce employee theft by 50% in the next financial year.
Finish the landscaping project within 1 week.
In what ways might goal setting not be very useful for a
manager?

Goal: A certain outcome or level of proficiency to obtain within
a specified time period.
21
practical utility. For instance, some findings are so obvious or
vague that they don’t translate to practical actions. Or, in the
least, their usefulness only applies to very limited
circumstances.
An exercise: Goal setting theory states that assigning employees
(1) specific and (2) difficult goals will result in higher levels of
performance than assigning no goals, easy goals, or do-your-
best goals.
In what ways might goal setting not be very useful for a
manager?
What constitutes “specific” and “difficult” may not be clear in
advance, but instead only in hindsight (i.e., depending on the
outcome). This is especially so in high-complexity jobs (i.e.,
cannot be easily scripted). (Next slide for graphical illustration)

Drills for critical thinking in OB
22
If goals are used in highly repetitive task situations, and if
employees are more or less similar in terms of knowledge,
skills, and abilities, then it may be reasonable to predict goal
difficulty for someone else in advance. Otherwise, experience
and intuition developed through trials and errors may be needed
to truly find the “right balance” for oneself.
Another quick exercise: Replace the x-axis with
conscientiousness (a personality trait). Assume the same non-
linear trend in the figure. Would you use the resulting
information to hire employees among applicants? Would you
apply the same criticism based on lack of practical utility (i.e.,
finding the “right balance” is obvious only in hindsight)?

My reasoning on the follow-up exercise: No, because I could
measure existing employees’ levels of conscientiousness and
then use that to predict their job performance. The
conscientiousness score (or score range) that predicts the
highest level of job performance would be the “right balance”.
There is no need for involving subjective judgment (e.g.,
regarding how specific and difficult something is).
23
underlying evidence. But I still remain skeptical because I’m
concerned that the relationship between A and B may lack
practical utility. There are mainly two forms of this criticism:
Some findings are so obvious or vague that they don’t translate
to practical actions.
The finding is redundant with prior research (“old wine in new
bottles”).
The definitions are highly similar or essentially identical when
examined closely.
When measured, the concept correlates very highly with one or
more other existing concepts (Cole et al., 2012; Harter &
Schmidt, 2008).

Examples of concepts that demonstrate signs of redundancy—
both conceptually and empirically:
Various leadership styles redundant with each other
Engagement and motivation
Emotional intelligence redundant with cognitive intelligence
Organizational commitment redundant with job satisfaction
24

For example, Le, Schmidt, Lauver, and Harter (2007) showed
that after the appropriate corrections for measurement error, the
lower bound correlation between job satisfaction and
organizational commitment was .92, and this value was the
same whether the corrections were made via structural equations
modeling methods or a newer method derived from
generalizability theory. Moreover, Harrison, Newman, and Roth
(2006) pointed out that the pattern of correlations found in
individual studies and in meta-analyses makes it ‘‘reasonable to
treat job satisfaction and attitudinal [organizational]
commitment as specific reflections of a general attitude, as each
is a fundamental evaluation of one’s work experiences’’
(emphasis in original). Also see Harter & Schmidt (2008)
published in Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
For counterproductive work behaviors, see Hershcovis (2011,
JOB).
Pop quiz on critical thinking tools (not graded)
“Playing the computer game Starcraft increases one’s IQ. That
is, we found that people with higher IQs tend to play more
Starcraft. Thus, we recommend that employees play more
Starcraft to boost their IQ and therefore their job performance.”
This is potentially a misleading statement because it ignores the
possibility of ____ caused by ____. Fill in the two blanks by
choosing two of the following options:
(a) Lack of practical utility; (b) misinterpretation of evidence;
(c) self-selection; (d) trivial magnitude; (e) reverse causality;
(f) redundancy
What is the general effect of range restriction on correlations?
(a) inflation; (b) deflation; (c) more practical; (d) less practical;
(e) none of the above.
“I’d recommend that you smile less as a leader. One time, I had
a leader who never smiled, and he was super effective.” This is

a dubious claim because it relies on:
(a) Trivial magnitude; (b) one study only; (c) anecdote; (d)
intuition; (e) goal-setting theory.
Z302 – Spring 2013 Time Management Fundamentals
Pop quiz on critical thinking tools (not graded) [continued]
Which of the following is NOT one of the main critical thinking
tools that you should apply to a claim put in front of you?
(a) Trivial magnitude; (b) misinterpretation of evidence; (c)
lack of practical utility; (d) ambiguous causality; (e) value
compatibility.
“In our research, we found a .30 correlation between managerial
feedback and employee job satisfaction.” This is traditionally
seen as a _____ correlation, and it means that managerial
feedback explains _____% of the variance in employee job
satisfaction. Fill in the two blanks by choosing two of the
following options:
(a) weak; (b) strong; (c) moderate; (d) trivial; (e) 30; (f) 9; (g)
3; (h) .30
Draw a figure to represent heteroskedasticity.

Pop quiz on critical thinking tools (not graded) [continued]
Joe said, “The consultant talked a lot about the importance of
creating new policies to reduce workplace incivility. But I read
this meta-analysis showing that workplace incivility has a .91
correlation with with workplace aggression, against which we
already have company policies.” Joe’s concern is essentially
based on _______
(a) redundancy with prior research; (b) self-selection; (c)
confound (i.e., “third”) variable; (d) vague findings; (e) obvious
findings.
Which of the following correctly uses the confound variable
argument to critique the claim that A causes B?
(a) C causes A; (b) C causes A and B; (c) C causes B; (d) C
causes A, which in turn causes B; (e) all of the above.
True or false: The typical correlation in the social sciences is
around .40 to .50.
True or false: A meta-analysis is a study of studies conducted to
summarize the findings (e.g., correlations) in a research area.
Why do people (i.e., consumers of research) buy into sloppy
arguments?
28

Source:
Rick Ligthelm
Causes of uncritical thinking
Mental shortcuts (i.e., minimization of effort; cognitive biases).
People use and crave them (e.g., Mike Chang’s “six pack
shortcuts”).
Similar to me error: Similarity leads to attraction, so we tend to
favor those who are similar to us.
“I went to UD. The presenter also went to UD. I like what what
he’s saying.”
Halo error: If an employee receives a high score on one
characteristic, she also receives a high score on other
characteristics, even though her true scores may not be even
across all of those characteristics.
“The pharmaceutical sales rep is good-looking and, therefore,
what she is saying must be true. I will sign the contract and
prescribe these drugs to my patients.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQZ2UeOTO3I (3:40-5:30)
29

Sources: Black Swan by Nassim Taleb (2007); Thinking, Fast
and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (2011); Cascio & Aguinis (2011)
Confirmation bias: The tendency to search for, readily accept,
and/or recall information that is consistent with your beliefs.
Also, the tendency to discredit or ignore information that is not
consistent with your beliefs. Illustration:
Cult leader says: “The Martian gods have told us that the world
will end on Dec. 31, 2012! We must begin performing the ritual
Martian dance so that we will shoot straight up into Mars
heaven when Earth explodes.”
[The planet Earth continues to exist just fine into the year
2013.]
Cult members ask the cult leader: “Hey man, what happened?
We thought the world was supposed to end yesterday.”
Cult leader states: “The gods were so pleased with our dancing
that they decided to spare us! This is proof that the gods are
kind and generous!”
Cult members: “Yay!”

30
Fundamental attribution error: Takes place when a supervisor
attributes poor performance to an employee’s dispositional
tendencies (e.g., personality, abilities) instead of the situation
(e.g., poor equipment).
Causes of worldwide obesity: People all over the world deciding
to get lazy all at the same time vs. significant change in the
global food supply post-WW2.
Self-serving bias: Attribute bad events to external factors, while
attributing good ones to internal factors. For instance, if Eugene
suffers heavily from self-serving bias, he would say things such
as the following:
Eugene says: “I bombed that test because the professor is such a
jerk and won’t help me.”
Eugene says in an alternate reality: “I aced that test because I’m

like so smart.”
31
Hindsight bias: The tendency to think that you totally saw an
event happening—but only after the event has occurred and
even if you had no basis for predicting the event before its
occurrence. AKA: “I knew it all along.” “Creeping
determinism.”
History is pretty much one giant set of hindsight biases.
An economist argues in 2008: “I’ve been telling the media and
policy-makers that a financial crash was coming. All the
economic indicators were there. More importantly, the system is
set up in a way that crashes are inevitable. Yet, people did not
listen to me. Invest in gold.”

A skeptic: “Hey, I’ve been listening to your predictions for
quite some time, and you always say a crash is coming, though
never precisely when. So, you’re basically like a doomsday
prophet who has to be right just once. Anybody can do that and
it requires no exceptional skill.”
32
Representativeness heuristics: Guessing an event’s probability
based on its similarity with a description of the event, while
ignoring base rates (e.g., Is Tom W a computer science major)?
Availability heuristics: Guessing an event’s probability based
on how easily one can recall examples of the event (e.g.,
suicides at Cornell U.).
33

People love telling and listening to stories (i.e., anecdotes)
because they are more entertaining than statistics and
experiments. Stories can provide the illusion of order to what
may be random, and people prefer order to chaos.
This is also known as the narrative fallacy.
34

People love telling and listening to stories because they are
more entertaining than statistics, experiments, and lectures.
Stories can provide the illusion of order to what is purely
random, and people prefer order to chaos. For example:
Centralization versus decentralization among intelligence
agencies
Pearl Harbor (Dec 7, ‘41): Seen as due to decentralization.
Arguments and competitions between Army vs. Navy. Led to the
creation of CIA.
Bay of Pigs Invasion (Apr ‘61): Seen as due to centralization
(e.g., “groupthink”). Not enough arguments and competition.
FBI and CIA made to compete with each other.
Twin tower attacks (Sep 11, 2001): Seen as due to
decentralization. Led to the creation of the Terrorist Threat
Integration Center (which combines the anti-terrorist activities
of both the FBI and CIA).
35
“Why was the Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor so unresponsive to
signs of an impending Japanese attack? Because, in the week
before December 7, 1941, they had checked out seven reports of
Japanese submarines in the area–and all seven were false.”

Intelligence agency failures described by Malcolm Gladwell
(http://gladwell.com/connecting-the-dots/). Search term is:
centraliz
People love telling and listening to stories because they are
more entertaining than statistics and experiments. Stories can
provide the illusion of order to what may be random, and people
prefer order to chaos. Another example:
What was the secret behind Victor Niederhoffer’s financial
success?
The probability may not be different from a coin flipping
experiment / scam.
36
Second illustration (http://gladwell.com/blowing-up/). Search
term is: luck

To boost ratings, the media is incentivized to take serious
research and translate it to entertaining tidbits (that are
unfortunately misleading).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw (5:36-7:48
&14:05-14:57)
37
Distorted incentives affecting producers of research
$: Funding from an entity w/ a clear agenda
Coca Cola helps Chicago get fit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zBcT5lvY7w
Tenure and promotion pressures, as well as desire for fame,
etc.:

File drawer problem: The suspected tendency of researchers to
cherry pick what to submit for research, as well as the tendency
of reviewers and editors to cherry pick what research they will
accept for publication.
Outright fraud, though presumably rare (e.g., making up data)
38
Other things that producers of research do
Various forms of sloppy, imprecise, and uncritical thinking by
producers of research
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw (9:55-
11:57)
Rationalizations if they mess up (we’re only human!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuTuWCSTnkE

In short, science and the communication of it is riddled with
problems. The antidote is to use the critical thinking tools to
voice your skepticism.
But, do so in a polite and diplomatic manner to avoid creating
haters.
39
Pop quiz on the causes of uncritical thinking (not graded)
Which of the following is a cause of uncritical thinking?
(a) Mental shortcuts; (b) various biases/heuristics; (c) the
preference for stories; (d) oversimplification by the media; (e)
all of the above
“We identified 11 companies that became good (i.e., average) to
great (i.e., outperforming the market average by multiples over
many years). From these 11 companies, we distilled 7
characteristics that make good companies great.” This research
team is most likely suffering from the following cause of
uncritical thinking:
(a) Halo error; (b) confirmation bias; (c) hindsight bias; (d)
self-serving bias; (e) funding from an entity with an agenda

Stories can provide the illusion of order to what is purely
random, and people prefer order to chaos. This statement refers
to:
(a) Narrative fallacy; (b) file drawer problem; (c) distorted
incentives; (d) goal-setting theory; (e) decentralization
Illustration of applying critical thinking
41
Source:
Rick Ligthelm
Illustration
42
How does all the material so far help me practically?
Narrow down your future actions from a variety of options!
Apply the critical thinking tools to eliminate dubious options.

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no
matter how improbable, must be the truth.” – Sherlock Holmes –
Conduct cost-benefit analyses to weigh remaining options.
Especially if you have many options left after step #1, and if
you want to prioritize among the remaining options and perhaps
further eliminate options.
Illustration
43
If you want to get in better shape, you’ll notice that there are so
many options out there, such as:
Running
Caloric restriction

Weightlifting
Intermittent fasting
Elimination of processed carbs
Low fat diet
Low carb diet
Green coffee bean pills
Steroids (Don’t do it kids)
Illustration
44
Apply the critical thinking tools to eliminate dubious options.
Intermittent fasting removed because of ambiguous causality
(e.g., caloric restriction may lead to both intermittent fasting
and weight loss)
Green coffee bean pills removed because of trivial magnitude

(e.g., “clinical studies revealed that the relationship is close to
nill”).
Low fat diet removed because of misinterpretation of evidence
(e.g., Ancel Keys’ seven countries studies)
Low carb diet removed because of lack of practical utility (e.g.,
“I’m on a budget, and carbs are cheap”).
For example, look for meta-analyses. Don’t rely on one or few
studies.
Illustration
45
There are two key criteria you can consider in your cost-benefit

analyses.
First, consider the causes of uncritical thinking, and then either
eliminate or reduce the importance of one or more remaining
options.
E.g., “I really want steroids to be the solution. But I realize I’ve
been engaging in confirmation bias by only recalling instances
when people got in shape with the use of steroids—but not those
who didn’t despite its use or those who actually gained more
weight while on it.”
Illustration
46
There are two key criteria you can consider in your cost-benefit
analyses.

Second, options that involve removing potentially harmful
things should be weighed more heavily than options that involve
adding potentially beneficial things because new things often
come with side effects (i.e., iatrogenesis)
E.g., “I have a funny left ankle. So, even if running offers
tremendous benefits for getting in shape, it would not be worth
it for me.”
OUTLIERS

68
CHAPTER THREE
The Trouble with
Geniuses, Part 1
"KNOWLEDGE OF A BOY'S IQ IS OF
LITTLE HELP IF yc)u ARE FACED WITH
A FORMFUL OF CLEVER BOYS."
1.
In the fifth episode of the 2008 season, the American tele-
vision quiz show I vs. loo had as its special guest a man
named Christopher Langan.
The television show l vs. loo is one of many that
sprang up in the wake of the phenomenal success of Who
Wants to Be a Millionaire. It features a permanent gallery
of one hundred ordinary people who serve as what is called
the "mob." Each week they match wits with a special
invited guest. At stake is a million dollars. The guest has
to be smart enough to answer more questions correctly
than his or her one hundred adversaries-and by that
standard, few have ever seemed as superbly qualified as
Christopher Langan.
"Tonight the mob takes on their fiercest competition
yet," the voice-over began. "Meet Chris Langan, who many

OUTLIERS
call the smartest man in America." The camera did a slow
pan of a stocky, muscular man in his fifties. "The aver-
age person has an IQ of one hundred," the voice-over
continued. "Einstein one fifty. Chris has an IQ of one
ninety-five. He's currently wrapping his big brain around
a theory of the universe. But will his king-size cranium
be enough to take down the mob for one million dollars?
Find out right now on One versus One Hundred."
Out strode Langan onto the stage amid wild applause.
"You don't think you need to have a high intellect to
do well on One versus One Hundred, do you?" the show's
host, Bob Sager, asked him. Sager looked at Langan oddly,
as if he were some kind of laboratory specimen.
"Actually, I think it could be a hindrance," Langan
replied. He had a deep, certain voice. "To have a high
IQ, you tend to specialize, think deep thoughts. You
avoid trivia. But now that I see these people" -he glanced
at the mob, the amusement in his eyes betraying just how
ridiculous he found the proceedings- "I think I'll do
okay."
Over the past decade, Chris Langan has achieved a
strange kind of fame. He has become the public face of
genius in American life, a celebrity outlier. He gets invited
on news shows and profiled in magazines, and he has been
the subject of a documentary by the filmmaker Errol Mor-
ris, all because of a brain that appears to defy description.

The television news show 20/20 once hired a neuro-
psychologist to give Langan an IQ test, and Langan's score
was literally off the charts-too high to be accurately
measured. Another time, Langan took an IQ test specially
designed for people too smart for ordinary IQ tests. He
THE TROUBLE WITH GENIUSES, PART I
got all the questions right except one.'' He was speaking
at six months of age. When he was three, he would listen
to the radio on Sundays as the announcer read the comics
aloud, and he would follow along on his own until he had
taught himself to read. At five, he began questioning his
grandfather about the existence of God-and remembers
being disappointed in the answers he got.
In school, Langan could walk into a test in a foreign-
language class, not having studied at all,. and if there
were two or three minutes before the instructor arrived,
he could skim through the textbook and ace the test. In .
his early teenage years, while working as a farmhand, he
started to read widely in the area of theoretical physics. At
sixteen, he made his way through Bertrand Russell and
Alfred North Whitehead's famously abstruse masterpiece
Principia Mathematica. He got a perfect score ·on his SAT,
even though he fell asleep at one point during the test.
"He did math for an hour," his brother Mark says of
Langan's summer routine in high school. "Then he did
French for an hour. Then he studied Russian. Then he
would read philosophy. He did that religiously, every day."
Another of his brothers, Jeff, says, "You know, when
Christopher was fourteen or fifteen, he would draw things
just as a joke, and it would be like a photograph. When he
was fifteen, he could match Jimi Hendrix lick for lick on

a guitar. Boom. Boom. Boom. Half the time, Christopher
didn't attend school at all. He would just show up for tests
:.<The super IQ test was created by Ronald K. Hoeflin, who is
himself
someone with an unusually high IQ. Here's a sample question,
from
the verbal analogies section. "Teeth is to Hen as Nest is to ?" If
you
want to know the answer, I'm afraid I have no idea.
71
OUTLIERS
and there was nothing they could do about it. To us, it was
hilarious. He could brief a semester's worth of textbooks
in two days, and take care of whatever he had to take care
of, and then get back to whatever he was doing in the first
place."'' ·
On the set of 1 vs. 100, Langan was poised and confi-
dent. His voice was deep. His eyes were small and fiercely
bright. He did not circle about topics, searching for the
right phrase, or double back to restate a previous sentence.
* To get a sense of what Chris Langan must hive been like
growing
up, consider the following description of a child named "L,"
who had
an IQ in the same 200 range as Langan's. It's from a study by
Leta
Stetter Hollingworth, who was one of the first psychologists to
study

exceptionally gifted children. As the description makes obvious,
an
IQ of 200 is really, really high: "Young L's erudition was
astonishing.
His passion for scholarly accuracy and thoroughness set a high
stand-
ard for accomplishment. He was relatively large, robust and
impres-
sive, and was fondly dubbed 'Professor.' His attitudes and
abilities
were appreciated by both pupils and teachers. He was often
allowed
to lecture (for as long as an hour) on some special topic, such as
the
history of timepieces, ancient theories of engine construction,
math-
ematics, and history. He constructed out of odds and ends
(typewriter
ribbon spools, for example) a homemade clock of the pendular
type to
illustrate some of the principles of chronometry, and this clock
was
set up before the class during the enrichment unit on 'Time and
Time
Keeping' to demonstrate some of the principles of chronometry.
His
notebooks were marvels of scholarly exposition.
"Being discontented with what he considered the inadequate
treatment of land travel in a class unit on 'Transportation,' he
agreed
that time was too limited to do justice to everything. But he
insisted
that 'at least they should have covered ancient theory.' As an
extra and
voluntary project, 'he brought in elaborate drawings and

accounts
of the ancient theories of engines, locomotives etc.' ... He was
at that
time ro years of age."
72
THE TROUBLE WITH GENIUSES, PART I
For that matter, he did not say um, or ah, or use any form
of conversational mitigation: his sentences came marching
out, one after another, polished and crisp, like soldiers on
a parade ground. Every question Saget threw at him, he
tossed aside, as if it were a triviality. When his winnings
reached $150,000, he appeared to make a mental calcula-
tion that the risks of losing everything were at that point
greater than the potential benefits of staying in. Abruptly,
he stopped. "I'll take the cash," he said. He shook Saget's
hand firmly and was finished- exiting on top as, we like
to think, geniuses invariably do.
73
OUTLIERS

CHAPTER FOUR
The Trouble with
Geniuses, Part 2
''AFTER PROTRACTED NEGOTIATIONS,
IT WAS AGREED THAT ROBERT WOULD BE
PUT ON PROBATION."
1.
Chris Langan's mother was from San Francisco and was
estranged from her family. She had four sons, each with
a different father. Chris was the eldest. His father disap-
peared b_efore Chris was born; he was said to have died in
Mexico. His mother's second husband was murdered. Her
third committed suicide. Her fourth was a failed journal-
ist named Jack Langan.
"To this day I haven't met anybody who was as poor
when they were kids as our family was," Chris Langan
says. "We didn't have a pair of matched socks. Our shoes
had holes in them. Our pants had holes in them. We only
had one set of clothes. I remember my brothers and I going
into the bathroom and using the bathtub to wash our only
set of clothes and we were bare-assed naked when we were
doing that because we didn't have anything to wear.''
Jack Langan would go on drinking sprees and disappear.

9 I
OUTLIERS
He would lock the kitchen cabinets so the boys couldn't get
to the food. He used a bullwhip to keep the boys in line.
He would get jobs and then lose them, moving the family
on to the next town. One summer the family lived on an
Indian reservation in a teepee, subsisting on government-
surplus peanut butter and cornmeal. For a time, they lived
in Virginia City, Nevada. "There was only one law offi-
cer in town, and when the Hell's Angels came to town, he
would crouch down in the back of his office," Mark Langan
remembers. "There was a bar there, I'll always remember. It
was called the Bucket of Blood Saloon."
When the boys were in grade school, the family moved
to Bozeman, Montana. One of Chris's brothers spent time
in a foster home. Another was sent to reform school.
"I don't think the school ever understood just how
gifted Christopher was," his brother Jeff says. "He sure as
hell didn't play it up. This was Bozeman. It wasn't like it is
today. It was a small hick town when we were growing up.
We weren't treated well there. They'd just decided that my
family was a bunch of deadbeats." To stick up for himself
and his brothers, Chris started to lift weights. One.day,
when Chris was fourteen, Jack Langan got rough with the
boys, as he sometimes did, and Chris knocked him out
cold. Jack left, never to return. Upon graduation from
high school, Chris was offered two full scholarships, one
to Reed College in Oregon and the other to the Univer-
sity of Chicago. He chose Reed.

"It was a huge mistake," Chris recalls. "I had a real
case of culture shock. I was a crew-cut kid who had been
working as a ranch hand in the summers in Montana,
and there I was, with a whole bunch of long-haired city
92
THE TROUBLE WITH GENIUSES, PART 2
kids, most of them from New York. And these kids had
a whole different style than I was used to. I couldn't get
a word in edgewise at class. They were very inquisitive.
Asking questions all the time. I was crammed into a dorm
room. There were four of us, and the other three guys had
a whole different other lifestyle. They were smoking pot.
They would bring their girlfriends into the room. I had
never smoked pot before. So basically I took to hiding in
the library."
He continued: "Then I lost that scholarship .... My
mother was supposed to fill out a parents' financial state-
ment for the renewal of that scholarship. She neglected to
do so. She was confused by the requirements or whatever.
At some point, it came to my attention that my scholar-
ship had not been renewed. So I went to the office to ask
why, and they told me, Well, no one sent us the financial
statement, and we allocated all the scholarship money and
it's all gone, so I'm afraid that you don't have a scholar-
ship here ,anymore. That was the style of the place. They
simply didn't care. They didn't give a shit about their stu-
dents. There was no counseling, no mentoring, nothing."
Chris left Reed before the final set of exams, leaving
him with a row of Fs on his transcript. In the first semes-
ter, he had earned As. He went back to Bozeman and

worked in construction and as a forest services firefighter
for a year and a half. Then he enrolled at Montana State
University.
"I was taking math and philosophy classes," he recalled.
"And then in the winter quarter, I was living thirteen miles
out of town, out on Beach Hill Road, and the transmis-
sion fell out of my car. My brothers had used it when I was
93
OUTLIERS
gone that summer. They were working for the railroad
and had driven it on the railroad tracks. I didn't have the
money to repair it. So I went to my adviser and the dean in
sequence and said, I have a problem. The transmission fell
out of my car, and you have me in a seven-thirty a.m. and
eight-thirty a.m. class. If you could please just transfer me
to the afternoon sections of these classes, I would appreci-
ate it because of this car problem. There was a neighbor
who was a rancher who was going to take me in at eleven
o'clock. My adviser was this cowboy-looking guy with a
handlebar mustache, dressed in a tweed jacket. He said,
'Well, son, after looking at your transcript at Reed Col-
lege, I see that you have yet to learn that everyone has to
make sacrifices to get an education. Request denied.' So
then I went to the dean. Same treatment.''
His voice grew tight. He was describing things that
had happened more than thirty years ago, but the mem-
ory still made him angry. "At that point I realized, here
I was, knocking myself out to make the money to make
my way back to school, and it's the middle of the Montana

winter. I am willing to hitchhike into town every day, do
whatever I had to do, just to get into school and back, and
they are unwilling to do anything for me. So bananas.
And that was the point I decided I could do without the
higher-education system. Even if I couldn't do without it,
it was sufficiently repugnant to me that I wouldn't do it
anymore. So I dropped out of college, simple as that."
Chris Langan's experiences at Reed and Montana State
represented a turning point in his life. As a child, he had
dreamt of becoming an academic. He should have gotten a
PhD; universities are institutions structured, in large part,
94
for people with his kind of deep intellectual interests and
curiosity. "Once he got into the university environment, I
thought he would prosper, I really did," his brother Mark
says. "I thought he would somehow find a niche. It made
absolutely no sense to me when he left that."
Without a degree, Langan floundered. He worked in
construction. One frigid winter he worked on a clam boat
on Long Island. He took factory jobs and minor civil ser-
vice positions and eventually became a bouncer in a bar
on Long Island, which was his principal occupation for
much of his adult years. Through it all, he continued to
read deeply in philosophy, mathematics, and physics as he
worked on a sprawling treatise he calls the "CTMU" -the
"Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe.'' But without
academic credentials, he despairs of ever getting published
in a scholarly journal.
"I am a guy who has a year and a half of college," he

says, with a shrug. "And at some point this will come to
the attention of the editor, as he is going to take the paper
and send ,it off to the referees, and these referees are going
to try and look me up, and they are not going to find me.
And they are going to say, This guy has a year and a half
of college. How can he know what he's talking about?"
I tis a heartbreaking story. At one point I asked Langan-
hypothetically-whether he would take a job at Harvard
University were it offered to him. "Well, that's a difficult
question," he replied. "Obviously, as a full professor at
Harvard I would count. My ideas would have weight and
I could use my position, my affiliation at Harvard, to pro-
mote my ideas. An institution like that is a great source of
intellectual energy, and if I were at a place like that, I could
9 5
OUTLIERS
absorb the vibration in the air." It was suddenly clear how
lonely his life has been. Here he was, a man with an insa-
tiable appetite for learning, forced for most of his adult life
to live in intellectual isolation. "I even noticed that kind of
intellectual energy in the year and a half I was in college,"
he said, almost wistfully. "Ideas are in the air constantly.
It's such a stimulating place to be.
"On the other hand," he went on, "Harvard is basically
a glorified corporation, operating with a profit incentive.
That's what makes it tick. It has an endowment in the bil-
lions of dollars. The people running it are not necessarily
searching for truth and knowledge. They want to be big

shots, and when you accept a paycheck from these people,
it is going to come down to what you want to do and what
you feel is right versus what the man says you can do to
receive another paycheck. When you're there, they got a
thumb right on you. They are out to make sure you don't
step out of line."
2.
What does the story of Chris Langan tell us? His explana-
tions, as heartbreaking as they are, are also a little strange.
His mother forgets to sign his financial aid form and-just
like that-no scholarship. He tries to move from a morn-
ing to an afternoon class, something students do every
day, and gets stopped cold. And why were Langan's teach-
ers at Reed and Montana State so indifferent to his plight?
Teachers typically delight in minds as brilliant as his.
Langan talks about dealing with Reed and Montana State
as if they were some kind of vast and unyielding govern-
ment bureaucracy. But colleges, particularly small liberal
arts colleges like Reed, tend not to be rigid bureaucracies.
Making allowances in the name of helping someone stay
in school is what professors do all the time.
Even in his discussion of Harvard, it's as if Langan has
no conception of the culture and particulars of the institu-
tion he's talking about. When you accept a paycheck from
these people, it is going to come down to what you want
to do and what you feel is right versus what .the man says
you can do to receive another paycheck. What? One of the
main reasons college professors accept a lower paycheck
than they could get in private industry is that university
life gives them the freedom to do what they want to do and

what they feel is right. Langan has Harvard backwards.
When Langan told me his life story, I couldn't help
thin_king of the life of Robert Oppenheimer, the physicist
who famously headed the American effort to develop the
nuclear bomb during World War II. Oppenheimer, by all
accounts, was a child with a mind very much like Chris
Langan''s. His parents considered him a genius. One of
his teachers recalled that "he received every new idea as
perfectly beautiful." He was doing lab experiments by
the third grade and studying physics and chemistry by
the fifth grade. When he was nine, he once told one of his
cousins, "Ask me a question in Latin and I will answer
you in Greek."
Oppenheimer went to Harvard and then on to Cam-
bridge University to pursue a doctorate in physics. There,
Oppenheimer, who struggled with depression his entire
life, grew despondent. His gift was for theoretical physics,
and his tutor, a man named Patrick Blackett (who would
97
OUTLIERS
win a Nobel Prize in 1948), was forcing him to attend to
the minutiae of experimental physics, which he hated. He
grew more and more emotionally unstable, and then, in
an act so strange that to this day no one has properly made
sense of it, Oppenheimer took some chemicals from the
laboratory and tried to poison his tutor.
Blackett, luckily, found out that something was amiss.

Grade B-Overall comments· Please double-check that ther.docx

Grade B-Overall comments· Please double-check that ther.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Grade B-Overall comments· Please double-check that ther.docx

Similar to Grade B-Overall comments· Please double-check that ther.docx (12)

More from whittemorelucilla

More from whittemorelucilla (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Grade B-Overall comments· Please double-check that ther.docx