[gwern]

> Which is fair. But "is a myth so far" suggests disproof, not proof that it's not currently true. As they repeatedly show, it would be very difficult for them to prove that, since they'd have to usefully measure delta in intelligence.

The burden of proof should be on anyone who claims to have an intelligence boosting method. The field is littered with hucksters who have claimed to succeeded; this was true in the '60s when Jensen first wrote on it, and it's still true now. It's the cold-fusion of psychology (something which is theoretically possible, would be immensely valuable practically, and has never panned out when examined rigorously).

Anyway, Haier's paper is not intended to be comprehensive, and we can point to some examples of investigating claimed intelligence increases and seeing that they indeed turn in the predicted null effect on intelligence: te Nijenhuis et al 2007, te Nijenhuis et al 2014, etc. See my other comment with link to citations & fulltexts.