Article

Group Differences in IQ Are Best Understood as Environmental in Origin

University of Michigan.
American Psychologist (Impact Factor: 6.87). 09/2012; 67(6):503-4. DOI: 10.1037/a0029772
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Responds to the comments by J. P. Rushton (see record 2012-24333-012); M. A. Woodley and G. Meisenberg (see record 2012-24333-013); and J. D. Mayer, D. R. Caruso, A. T. Panter, and P. Salovey (see record 2012-24333-014) on the present authors' original article, "Intelligence: New findings and theoretical developments" (see record 2011-30298-001). Here, the authors address the concerns raised by Rushton and by Woodley and Meisenberg, and conclude by agreeing with Mayer et al's claim that many types of abilities can be thought of as intelligence of a kind. They note, however, that it has proved hard to show that measures of emotional intelligence or social intelligence contribute to behavior we would want to call intelligent over and above their correlation with conventional IQ tests. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).

0 Bookmarks
 · 
133 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Some people are cleverer than others. I think it would be a good thing if more biologists began with that observation as the starting point for their research. Why? Because it is a prominent and consistent way in which people differ from each other; because the measurements we make of people's cleverness produce scores that are correlated with important life outcomes; because it is interesting to discover the mechanisms that produce these individual differences; and because understanding these mechanisms might help to ameliorate those states in which cognitive function is low or declining.
    Current biology: CB 08/2013; 23(16):R673-6. DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2013.07.021 · 10.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A meta-analysis of 63 studies showed a significant negative association between intelligence and religiosity. The association was stronger for college students and the general population than for participants younger than college age; it was also stronger for religious beliefs than religious behavior. For college students and the general population, means of weighted and unweighted correlations between intelligence and the strength of religious beliefs ranged from -.20 to -.25 (mean r = -.24). Three possible interpretations were discussed. First, intelligent people are less likely to conform and, thus, are more likely to resist religious dogma. Second, intelligent people tend to adopt an analytic (as opposed to intuitive) thinking style, which has been shown to undermine religious beliefs. Third, several functions of religiosity, including compensatory control, self-regulation, self-enhancement, and secure attachment, are also conferred by intelligence. Intelligent people may therefore have less need for religious beliefs and practices.
    Personality and Social Psychology Review 08/2013; 17(4). DOI:10.1177/1088868313497266 · 7.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: US National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results from 1971 to 2008 enable four different effects to be distinguished: Cohort rise effects, gap-narrowing between ethnic groups, trends due to demographic changes in by NAEP listed or not listed ethnic groups. NAEP means and percentiles in reading and mathematics were transformed to conventional IQs and SDs. The total increase from 1971 to 2008 was in the scale of 4.34 IQ points (dec = 1.17 IQ per decade). The ability distribution became more homogenous (down from SD = 15.00 in 1971 to SD = 13.56 in 2008). Increases were larger for younger students (9-year olds: 2.02 IQ per decade; 13-year olds: 1.20; 17-year olds: 0.30); larger at the lower ability level (10th percentile dec = 1.79 vs. 90th percentile dec = 1.03). The largest increase was for Blacks (Whites dec = 1.29 IQ, Hispanics 2.27, Blacks 3.04). White–Hispanic-differences were reduced from 11.59 to 8.46 IQ, White–Black from 16.33 to 9.94 IQ. If the racial composition of the population had not changed, the mean gain for the 17-year-old group would have been 2.47 IQ points higher. Had the gap between Whites and the two other groups not narrowed, the mean gain would have been 1.70 IQ points lower. Demographic change has accounted for a loss of 2.47 IQ points and according to cognitive human capital theory $2001 GDP per capita per year, but total ethnic gap-narrowing has provided a gain of $1377.
    Intelligence 11/2013; 41(6):821–831. DOI:10.1016/j.intell.2013.06.016 · 2.67 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
53 Downloads
Available from
Jun 1, 2014