Intelligent soldiers most likely to die in battle

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by Bushmills, Mar 1, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. In other news; pretty average university in Scotland wastes time and taxpayers' money on pointless study. Next week a study entitled; A Freudian Perspective on Glazed Doughnuts.
  2. If it's Scotland wouldn't that be deepfried glazed doughnuts?
  3. That is a whole other study. But I'm sure a government grant shall be forthcoming so don't fret.
  4. Nothing new here - another famous Arrse poster came to the same conclsuion all by themselves:

  5. This has to be total bollocks.
    Tropper was not slotted ....

    Oh hold on!
  6. 'Flamed To A Quentin; Inebriation And The Internet' :)
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Safer than drunken sex or driving though.:=)

    from the article though it does indicate that wartime officers were pretty smart.

    The overwhelming majority of thewar deaths, as might be
    expected, occurred during 1942–1945. This was a period
    when the Army was engaged in heavy fighting in the Middle
    East, Italy and north-west Europe. But whywas the mean IQ of
    the dead soldiers higher than those who survived?

    the majority of war deaths in this study (60%) belong to the
    ‘less skilled’ other ranks, who have a lower mean IQ score
    (95.33) than the ‘presumptive survivors’ (97.42), the IQ of the
    war dead is inflated by the minority of ‘more skilled’ other
    ranks, NCOs and officers.
    This seems to be partly a result of the
    increasingly technological nature of warfare which meant
    that more skilled soldiers were required on the frontline. In
    this respect, troops in the more technical arms, such as the
    Royal Armoured Corps, the Royal Engineers, and the Royal
    Corps of Signals, make up 13% of the war deaths in this study,
    but have a mean IQ score of 105.4.
    It also seems to be partly
    related to military rank. Officers and NCOs, who comprise 27%
    of the fatalities and have respective mean IQ scores of 106.7
    and 121.89, were expected to fulfil leadership roles and thus
    would have been more likely to expose themselves to greater
    . Furthermore, there might be some link to the welldocumented
    relationship between mental ability test scores
    and job performance (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). It is possible
    that, in general, higher IQ soldiers displayed greater combat
    motivation and therefore put themselves in more life
    threatening situations
  8. Bundy! *wanders off, muttering disgustedly* Fucking Bundy!
  9. If you drink anything else up here they think you have "joined gay pride"!
  10. If you're intelligent enough to reconcile and know for yourself exactly why you're fighting and why you're there, you've already taken the risk on joining and, after that, you've got a job to do. If you don't get it done, your side is going to lose. No half-measures, you can't commit then try to stand at the back.
  11. In my opinion it is a flawed piece of research.

    Did they look at RAF or Royal Navy casualties? Did they look at civilian casualties?
  12. Fuckoff! I'm still here aren't I?
    • Like Like x 3
  13. Could be on to something here. There was a thread a while back regarding casualty stats for Bosnia and there wasn't a Scottish capbadge to be seen!
    • Like Like x 1