The one reproduced in the article doesn't show the density of points, so it's hard to conclude anything from it. Figure 4 from the Nuhfer et al. paper does seem, to me at least, to support DK's conclusions.
It does show the lack of extreme values for higher-skilled people, surely this has some statistical significance ?
Especially in a situation where you would expect the distributions to be of the same type ?
Unless they had messed up in failing to normalize the number of points per group, and so this might come from the law of large numbers failing + sheer randomness failing to create extreme values on higher-qualified, but lower population groups ?
