Misplaced Pages

Race and intelligence: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:41, 18 February 2007 view sourceWD RIK NEW (talk | contribs)1,128 edits rv to last version by JK, please don't remove large sections of this or any other article without discussion and consensus first; not that i agree or disagree w/ change, but it's not productive← Previous edit Revision as of 20:47, 18 February 2007 view source Kevin Murray (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users14,679 edits reworked edits for less objectionable editing - trying to move back to protected article which has been changed without consensus reachedNext edit →
Line 4: Line 4:
{{totally-disputed}} {{totally-disputed}}
{{worldwide}} {{worldwide}}
], groups differ in where their members cluster along the IQ scale.]]
'''Race and intelligence''' are broad terms with many meanings that are often used to describe and measure human beings. The possibility of a relationship between ] and ] has been a topic of considerable speculation, study, and debate, especially since the 19th century.<ref>'''' Audrey Smedley and Brian D. Smedley</ref> The contemporary debate focuses on the nature, causes, and importance of racial and ethnic differences in ] scores and other measures of cognitive ability. In the 19th and early 20th centuries research on race and intelligence was often used to argue that one race was superior to another, justifying poor outcomes and treatment for the "inferior race".<ref>''], ], and the Metaphysics of Race'' Rutledge M. Dennis The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 64, No. 3, Myths and Realities: African Americans and the Measurement of Human Abilities (Summer, 1995), pp. 243-252</ref> Some early opinions about the differences among races grew out of ]s about non-whites developed during the period of ] and ].<ref> Produced By: Tim McCaskell Toronto District School Board</ref><ref>Jalata, Asafa 1954- "Race and Ethnicity in East Africa (review)" Africa Today - Volume 48, Number 4, Winter 2001, pp. 134-136 Indiana University Press</ref><ref>The Invention of the White Race By Chantal Mouffe, Theodore (Theodore W.) Allen</ref><ref> by James Crawford<blockquote>Indians were seen as a homogeneous group of savages despite the fact that individual groups varied extensively and had several well developed social systems. Black people were also portrayed as savage, uncivilized and having low intelligence. By creating these social constructs, expansion into North America was justified.</blockquote></ref> '''Race and intelligence''' are broad terms with many meanings that are often used to describe and measure human beings. The possibility of a relationship between ] and ] has been a topic of considerable speculation, study, and debate, especially since the 19th century.<ref>'''' Audrey Smedley and Brian D. Smedley</ref> The contemporary debate focuses on the nature, causes, and importance of racial and ethnic differences in ] scores and other measures of cognitive ability. In the 19th and early 20th centuries research on race and intelligence was often used to argue that one race was superior to another, justifying poor outcomes and treatment for the "inferior race".<ref>''], ], and the Metaphysics of Race'' Rutledge M. Dennis The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 64, No. 3, Myths and Realities: African Americans and the Measurement of Human Abilities (Summer, 1995), pp. 243-252</ref> Some early opinions about the differences among races grew out of ]s about non-whites developed during the period of ] and ].<ref> Produced By: Tim McCaskell Toronto District School Board</ref><ref>Jalata, Asafa 1954- "Race and Ethnicity in East Africa (review)" Africa Today - Volume 48, Number 4, Winter 2001, pp. 134-136 Indiana University Press</ref><ref>The Invention of the White Race By Chantal Mouffe, Theodore (Theodore W.) Allen</ref><ref> by James Crawford<blockquote>Indians were seen as a homogeneous group of savages despite the fact that individual groups varied extensively and had several well developed social systems. Black people were also portrayed as savage, uncivilized and having low intelligence. By creating these social constructs, expansion into North America was justified.</blockquote></ref>


Line 25: Line 24:
== Background information == == Background information ==
=== History === === History ===
] has said that the question of whether IQ differences between Blacks and Whites have a genetic basis goes back at least a thousand years, to the time when the ] invaded Europe. The Moors speculated that Europeans might be congenitally incapable of abstract thought.<ref>Cicero warned the Romans not to purchase the British as slaves because they were so difficult to train (Sowell, 1994, p. 156); though Caesar did feel they "had a certain value for rough work," (Churchill, 1974, p. 2.)</ref> By the 19th century most Europeans probably believed that they were congenitally superior to Africans in intellectual skills.<ref> by ]</ref> In the 19th and early 20th century research on race and intelligence was often used to confirm that one race was 'superior' to another<ref>''Social Darwinism, Scientific Racism, and the Metaphysics of Race'' Rutledge M. Dennis The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 64, No. 3, Myths and Realities: African Americans and the Measurement of Human Abilities (Summer, 1995), pp. 243-252</ref>. Francisco Gil-White, author of ''Resurrecting Racism: The Modern Attack on Black People Using Phony Science'' and ] author of ''The Mismeasure of Man'' have suggested that some modern research has similar motives. Researchers such as Amanda Thompson and Elazar Barkan have suggested that "]" has been used to perpetuate the idea of the intellectual inferiority of ] and that it was used to justify slavery and segregated education in America.
{{main|Race and intelligence (history)}}
{{Seealso|Scientific racism}}
{{Seealso|Race (historical definitions)}}


==Slavery==
The Moors speculated that Europeans might be congenitally incapable of abstract thought. By the 19th century most Europeans probably believed that they were congenitally superior to Africans in intellectual skills. In the 19th and early 20th century research on race and intelligence was often used to confirm that one race was 'superior' to another. Francisco Gil-White, author of Resurrecting Racism: The Modern Attack on Black People Using Phony Science and Stephen Jay Gould author of The Mismeasure of Man have suggested that some modern research has similar motives. Because the Atlantic slave trade raised moral questions from its inception scientific theories about the mental capacities of Black people were provided to justify the enslavement of Africans. Scientific arguments about the mental inferiority of Black people were instrumental in keeping slavery alive as in institution in the United States. It was widely regarded that Black people lacked the mental capacity to handle freedom. The writings of Sir Francis Galton, a British psychologist, spurred interest in the study of mental abilities, particularly as they relate to heredity and eugenics. Galton estimated from his field observations in Africa that the African people were 'two grades' below Anglo-Saxons' position in the normal frequency distribution of general mental ability his work was seen as scientific validation of Africans' mental inferiority compared with Anglo-Saxons.
] wrote on ] and ] in the 19th C.]]
] ] was a prominent 20th C. critic of claims that intelligence differed among races.]]
Because the ] raised moral questions from its inception scientific theories about the mental capacities of Black people were provided to justify the enslavement of Africans. According to Alexander Thomas and Samuell Sillen during this time period the Black man was described as uniquely fitted for bondage because of what researchers at the time called "his primitive psychological organization."<ref>] and ] (1972).'' Racism and Psychiatry''. New York: Carol Publishing Group. </ref> Hence, a well-known physician of the ante-bellum South, Samuel Cartwright of Louisiana, had a psychiatric explanation for runaway slaves. He diagnosed their attempts to gain freedom as a mental illness and coined the term "]" to describe it.<ref>Samual A. Cartwright, , '']—Southern and Western States'', Volume XI, New Orleans, 1851</ref>


Scientific arguments about the mental inferiority of Black people were instrumental in keeping slavery alive as in institution in the United States. It was widely regarded that Black people lacked the mental capacity to handle freedom. ] ] arguing for the extension of slavery in 1844 said "Here (scientific confirmation) is proof of the necessity of slavery. The African is incapable of self-care and sinks into lunacy under the burden of freedom. It is a mercy to give him the guardianship and protection from mental death."
The opinion that there are differences in the brain sizes and brain structures of different racial and ethnic groups was widely held and studied during the 19th century and early 20th century. Average ethnic and racial group differences in IQ were first directly observed when analyzing the data from standardized mental tests administered on large scales during World War I.


The writings of Sir ], a British psychologist, spurred interest in the study of mental abilities, particularly as they relate to ] and ].<ref></ref> Galton estimated from his field observations in Africa that the African people were 'two grades' below Anglo-Saxons' position in the normal frequency distribution of general mental ability his work was seen as scientific validation of Africans' mental inferiority compared with Anglo-Saxons.<ref></ref>
The association of hereditarianism with Nazi Germany created an modern academic environment that has been very skeptical of suggestions that there are racial or ethnic differences in measures of intellectual or academic ability and that these differences are primarily determined by genetic factors. In 1961, the psychologist Henry Garrett coined the term equalitarian dogma to describe the then politically fashionable view that there were no race differences in intelligence, or if there were, they were purely the result of environmental factors. Reports on Jensen's article appeared in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News & World Report, and The New York Times Magazine. Press attention returned to the issue of race and intelligence in 1994 with the publication of The Bell Curve, which included two chapters on the subject of racial difference in intelligence and related life outcomes. In response to The Bell Curve, Stephen Jay Gould updated The Mismeasure of Man in 1996. Among other things, he criticized the IQ test as a measure of intelligence, citing what he perceived as inherent racial and social biases as well as systematic flaws in the testing process.


==Immigration and segregation==
===Race===
The scientific debate on the contribution of ] to individual and group differences in intelligence can be traced to at least the mid-19th century.<ref>{{AYref|Degler|1992}}; {{AYref|Loehlin et al.|1975}}</ref> ] wrote in his '']'' (VII, ''On the races of Man''):
{{Main|Race}}
"Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties."
:''See also: ], ]''


Lewis Terman wrote in ''The measurement of intelligence'' in 1916 <blockquote>"(Black and other ethnic minority children) are uneducable beyond the nearest rudiments of training. No amount of school instruction will ever make them intelligent voters or capable citizens in the sense of the world…their dullness seems to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stock from which they come…Children of this group should be segregated in special classes and be given instruction which is concrete and practical. They cannot master abstractions, but they can be made efficient workers…There is no possibility at present of convincing society that they should not be allowed to reproduce, although from a eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their unusual prolific breeding."</blockquote>
Racial distinctions are generally made on the basis of skin color, facial features, inferred ancestry, national origin and self-identification in the United States. In an ongoing debate, some geneticists argue race is neither a meaningful concept nor a useful ] device,<ref>{{AYref|Wilson et al.|2001}}, {{AYref|Cooper et al.|2003}} (given in {{AYref|Bamshad et al.|2004}}'s summary, p.599)</ref> and even that genetic differences among groups are biologically meaningless,<ref>{{AYref|Schwartz|2001}}, {{AYref|Stephens|2003}} (given in {{AYref|Bamshad et al.|2004}}'s summary, p. 599)</ref> on the basis that more genetic variation exists within such races than among them,<ref>It is well established that within-population genetic diversity is greatest within Sub-Saharan Africa, and decreases with distance from Africa. One study estimates that only 6.3% of the total human genetic diversity is explained by race. This value is comparable to other reports which find that on average approximately 85% of genetic variation occurs within populations. In a hypothetical situation with two populations and a single ] with two ]s, this is equivalent to allele frequencies of 30% + 70% in one population and 70% + 30% in the other. Thus, using this single gene to classify individuals into populations would result in a 30% misclassification rate.</ref> and that racial traits overlap without discrete boundaries.<ref>{{AYref|Sternberg et al.|2005}}, {{AYref|Suzuki and Aronson|2005}}, {{AYref|Smedley and Smedley|2005}}, {{AYref|Helms et al.|2005}}, . Lewontin, for example argues that there is no biological basis for race on the basis of research indicating that more genetic variation exists within such races than between them {{AYref|Lewontin|1972}}. <br><br> Some critics of race may not consider this a problem for race and intelligence inquiries. ], who praises ]'s genetics research over the decades for "demolishing scientists' attempts to classify human populations into races in the same way that they classify birds and other species into races"({{AYref|Diamond|2000}}), also argues "in mental ability New Guineans are probably genetically superior to Westerners" due to that intelligence was likely selected for in hunter-gatherer ] societies where the challenges were tribal warfare and food procurement, compared with high population density European civilizations where the major survival pressure was on genes for resisting ]s (], p.21).</ref> Concordant with this, a survey of cultural and physical anthropologists done in 1999<ref name=lieberman>http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Lieberman2001CA.pdf</ref> found that the concept of race was rejected by 69% of physical anthropologists and 80% of cultural anthropologists.
Other geneticists, in contrast, argue that categories of self-identified race/ethnicity or ] are both valid and useful,<ref>{{AYref|Risch et al.|2002}}, {{AYref|Bamshad|2005}}. ] argues: "One could make the same arguments about sex and age! . . you can undermine any definitional system. . . In a recent study. . . we actually had a higher discordance rate between self-reported sex and markers on the X chromosome between genetic structure versus self-description, 99.9% concordance. . . So you could argue that sex is also a problematic category. And there are differences between sex and gender; self-identification may not be correlated with biology perfectly. And there is sexism. And you can talk about age the same way. A person's chronological age does not correspond perfectly with his biological age for a variety of reasons, both inherited and non-inherited. Perhaps just using someone's actual birth year is not a very good way of measuring age. Does that mean we should throw it out? . . . Any category you come up with is going to be imperfect, but that doesn't preclude you from using it or the fact that it has utility" ({{AYref|Gitschier|2005}}).</ref> that these categories correspond with clusters ],<ref>{{AYref|Harpending and Rogers|2000}}, {{AYref|Bamshad et al.|2003}}, {{AYref|Edwards|2003}}, {{AYref|Bamshad et al.|2004}}, {{AYref|Tang et al.|2005}}, {{AYref|Rosenberg et al.|2005}}: "If enough markers are used... individuals can be partitioned into genetic clusters that match major geographic subdivisions of the globe".</ref> and that this correspondence implies that genetic factors might contribute to unexplained phenotypic variation between groups.<ref name="Mountain and Risch">{{AYref|Mountain and Risch|2004}}</ref>


The opinion that there are differences in the brain sizes and brain structures of different racial and ethnic groups was widely held and studied during the 19th century and early 20th century.<ref>{{AYref|Broca|1873}}, {{AYref|Bean|1906}}, {{AYref|Mall|1909}}, {{AYref|Morton|1839}}, {{AYref|Pearl|1934}}, {{AYref|Vint|1934}}</ref> Average ethnic and racial group differences in IQ were first directly observed when analyzing the data from standardized mental tests administered on large scales during ].
Worldwide, human populations are geographically bounded into five less than perfectly distinct continental areas: the Americas, Eurasia (including Europe, North Africa and West Asia), East Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Pacific Islands (including Australia).<ref>{{AYref|Risch et al.|2002}}</ref> At least in the ], self-identified racial labels correspond to geographic regions of genetic ancestry, with only a small number of individuals showing genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity.<ref>{{AYref|Tang et al.|2005}}</ref> People labeled '']'' have most of their ancestors from sub-Saharan Africa, '']'' from Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, and '']'' from the north-western Pacific Rim. '']'' form a genetically diverse group that includes many recent U.S. immigrants of mixed ancestry, and are more often called an ].


Foremost amongst those researching this was ] of the ], who devised his ] as early as 1919, applying it in his study of the ] in the ] region and ] of Australia (1929) and later the ] tribesmen of southern Africa (1934). He also used it to assess the results of pre-frontal brain surgery on mental performance, publishing his results in 1931.<ref>Porteus,
It is well known that many ]s vary in frequency across (and within) human populations. Most of this variation is ], but a significant number show evidence of recent ].<ref>According to a recent review by {{AYref|Sabeti et al.|2006}}, seven large-scale studies of positive selection in the human genome have been published. The "advantageous traits" that were being selected for are mostly unknown, but some make inferences based on the known functions of those genes in the regions that show signs of selection.</ref> These include genes involved in brain development and other neuronal functions, which have variants that have spread to high frequencies under selective pressure and now occur in substantially different frequencies in different global populations.<ref name="brain alleles">{{AYref|Mekel-Bobrov et al.|2005}}, {{AYref|Evans et al.|2005}}, {{AYref|Voight et al.|2006}}, {{AYref|Wang et al.|2005}}, {{AYref|Harpending and Cochran|2002}}. The neural ] gene studied in Harpending and Cochran, previously found to occur in substantially different worldwide frequencies, is also tied to behavior, with bearers displaying greater novelty-seeking behavior and being at increased risk for ]. Harpending and Cochran suggest this gene "may be a model system for understanding the relationship between genetic variation and human cultural diversity," noting high frequencies in South American Indians, such as the ] (sometimes referred to as "the Fierce People"), intermediate frequencies in Europeans and Africans, and very low frequencies in East Asians and ] (sometimes referred to as "the Harmless People"). <br>See the NYTimes' (September 8, 2005), and (March 7, 2006) for discussion of Mekel-Bobrov et al. and Evans et al., and Voight et al.</ref> The actual functions of these genes, and their effect, if any, on IQ is unknown. (Discussed ].)
Stanley. ''The Psychology of a Primitive People'', 1931.</ref>


W.O. Brown, writing in ''The Journal of Negro History'' in 1931, wrote regarding early intelligence tests:
The political, social and cultural structure of the United States is still weighted by race. It was only in the 1960s that racial discrimination became illegal in many areas of public and private life, including employment and housing, and some consider discrimination to remain prevalent. The national and state governments of the United States employ racial categorization in the census, law enforcement, and innumerable other ways. Many political organizations intend to represent the interests of specific racial groups. See the articles ] and ] for further discussion.


<blockquote>''After the World War and during the severe agitation for the restriction of immigration, aimed especially at the Southeastern Europeans, tests came into a new usage...the tests revealed the inferior intelligence of various racial and nationality groups...The Southeastern Europeans and the Negroes especially came of badly in these tests...The results of the tests elevated their dogma of racial inequality from a mere prejudice to the dignity of a scientifically validated opinion.''<ref> W. O. Brown, The Journal of Negro History, Vol. 16, No. 1. (Jan., 1931), pp. 49</ref></blockquote>
====Race as a social construct====

], Elena L. Grigorenko, and Kenneth K. Kidd write that the overwhelming portion of the literature on intelligence, race, and genetics is based on folk taxonomies rather than scientific analysis. Race, they write fits into no known genetic pattern. Race is a socially constructed concept, not a biological one. This concept of race serves a social rather than a biological purposes. Different types of parentage have, at various times and places, given rise to racial labeling (e.g., “Aryan race,” “German race,” and “Jewish race”). Hence race is a highly inconsistent concept. In contemporary North American society, Blacks and coloreds are considered to be one “race,” since any individual who possess any degree of nonwhiteness is automatically grouped in the Black category.<ref> Robert J. Sternberg, Elena L. Grigorenko, and Kenneth K. Kidd Yale University</ref> (see: ]) In other countries different racial grouping are often employed.
Beginning in the 1930s, race difference research and ] — the belief that ] are the primary cause of differences in intelligence among human groups — began to fall out of favor in psychology and anthropology after major internal debates.<ref>According to historian of psychology Graham Richards there was widespread critical debate within psychology about the conceptual underpinnings of this early race difference research ({{AYref|Richards|1997}}). These include Estabrooks (1928) two papers on the limitations of methodology used in the research; Dearborn and Long’s (1934) overview of the criticisms by several psychologists (Garth, Thompson, Peterson, Pinter, Herskovits, Daniel, Price, Wilkerson, Freeman, Rosenthal and C.E. Smith) in a collection they edited and Klineburg, who wrote three major critiques, one in 1928, and two in 1935. Richards also notes that with over a 1000 publications within psychology during the interwar years there had been a large internal debate. Towards the end of the time period almost all those publishing, including most of those who began with a pro-race differences stance, were firmly arguing against race differences research. Richards regards the scientific controversy to be dead at this point, although he also suggests reasons for its re-emergence in the late nineteen sixties.</ref> In anthropology this occurred in part due to the advocacy of ], who in his 1938 edition of ''The Mind of Primitive Man'' wrote, "there is nothing at all that could be interpreted as suggesting any material difference in the mental capacity of the bulk of the Negro population as compared with the bulk of the White population."<ref>{{AYref|Boas|1938}}</ref> The hereditarian position was challenged by Boas' claim that cranial vault size had increased significantly in the U.S. from one generation to the next, because racial differences in such characteristics had been among the strongest arguments for a genetic role.

==Modern work==
] (pictured) and ] started the contemporary debate with '']'' in 1994.]]
]'', updated in 1996, ] criticized many aspects of IQ research.]]
Inspired by the American eugenics movement, ] implemented the ] in which roughly 200,000 mentally and physically disabled Germans were killed, and about 400,000 sterilized. The association of hereditarianism with ] created an modern academic environment that has been very skeptical of suggestions that there are racial or ethnic differences in measures of intellectual or academic ability and that these differences are primarily determined by genetic factors.<ref>{{AYref|Garrett|1961}}; {{AYref|Lynn|2001}}, pp. 45–54</ref>

In 1961, the psychologist ] coined the term ''equalitarian dogma'' to describe the then politically fashionable view that there were no race differences in intelligence, or if there were, they were purely the result of environmental factors. Those who questioned these views often put their careers at risk.<ref>{{AYref|Lynn|2001}} pp. 67–69</ref>{{Off-topic-inline}}<!--Talking about this idea as Dogma without talking about what the idea was. This is a criticism-fork. This section should focus on the history, not what people said about the history.-->

The contemporary scholarly debate on race and intelligence may be traced{{POV-statement}} to ]'s 1969 publication in the ''Harvard Educational Review'' of "How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?"<ref>{{AYref|Jensen|1969}}</ref> In this paper, he wrote on some of the major issues that characterize the genetic hypothesis<ref name=mackenzie>''Explaining Race Differences in IQ: The Logic, the Methodology, and the Evidence'' American Psychologist, November 1984, Brian Mackenzie. Mackenzie writes of Jensen's hereditarian position as a "genetic model", in contrast to a "jointly genetic/environmental" model. Jensen often uses the term "partly-genetic" to describe his position, even though his views aren't seen as congruent with the "jointly genetic/environmental" model described by Mackenzie.</ref> of racial IQ differences, and on compensatory educational programs. Reports on Jensen's article appeared in '']'', '']'', '']'', '']'', and '']''.

In the 1980's Nobel Prize winner for his work on the development of transistors, ], postulated that the higher rate of reproduction among US African Americans was having what he termed a "]" effect (meaning an opposite of ]), ; especially as influenced by welfare subsidies (e.g., ]), which he opined, unintentionally encouraged childbearing by less productive mothers. <ref>George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, 1992 Executive Intelligence Review, Chapter 11</ref>. He described this work as the most important work of his career, even though it severely tarnished his reputation. Shockley's published writings on this topic, were largely based on the research of ]. Shockley also proposed that individuals with IQs below 100 be paid to undergo voluntary sterilization <ref>George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, 1992 Executive Intelligence Review, Chapter 11</ref>. He was subsequently criticized by the media; however his involvement brought public recognition to several controversial topics. <ref>{{This paragraph includes excerpts from ]; however editors of this page have expressed concern over the lack of citations at that article. A request for citation has been placed there. Please refer to discussion page before further editing etc}}</ref>

Press attention returned to the issue of race and intelligence in 1994 with the publication of '']'', which included two chapters on the subject of racial difference in intelligence and related life outcomes. In response to ''The Bell Curve'', ] updated '']'' in 1996.<ref>{{AYref|Gould|1996}}</ref> Among other things, he criticized the IQ test as a measure of intelligence, citing what he perceived as inherent racial and social biases as well as systematic flaws in the testing process.

===Race===
{{Main|Race}}
:''See also: ], ]''


===Intelligence testing=== ===Intelligence testing===
Line 66: Line 84:
{{main|Race and intelligence (Research)}} {{main|Race and intelligence (Research)}}


[[Image:Two Curve Bell.jpg|thumb|250px|These are ''idealized''
] comparing the IQs of ] and ] in the US in 1981.<ref>The 1981 normalization of the ]</ref> Source: by Gottfredson]]

'''Race and intelligence research''' tries to measure the gaps between different races or ethnicities and to find the causes for these gaps. The gaps found between the average measures of races or ethnicities varies depending on methods used for racial grouping{{fact}}, the method and setting used to test intelligence<ref>Carraher, Carraher, and Schliemann (1985) studied a group of Brazilian street children. The investigation found that the same children who are able to do the mathematics needed to run their street businesses were often unable to do mathematics in a formal setting. See: ''Street Mathematics and School Mathematics'' By Terezinha Nunes, David William Carraher, Analucia Dias Schliemann ISBN 0521388139</ref>{{dubious}}, the health and economic situation of the test takers{{fact}}, the interplay between the culture of the person taking the test and the culture of those who made the test{{fact}}, and the period in history when the test was performed.{{fact}}{{POV-statement}} '''Race and intelligence research''' tries to measure the gaps between different races or ethnicities and to find the causes for these gaps. The gaps found between the average measures of races or ethnicities varies depending on methods used for racial grouping{{fact}}, the method and setting used to test intelligence<ref>Carraher, Carraher, and Schliemann (1985) studied a group of Brazilian street children. The investigation found that the same children who are able to do the mathematics needed to run their street businesses were often unable to do mathematics in a formal setting. See: ''Street Mathematics and School Mathematics'' By Terezinha Nunes, David William Carraher, Analucia Dias Schliemann ISBN 0521388139</ref>{{dubious}}, the health and economic situation of the test takers{{fact}}, the interplay between the culture of the person taking the test and the culture of those who made the test{{fact}}, and the period in history when the test was performed.{{fact}}{{POV-statement}}


=== Explanations ===
{{main|Race and intelligence (Explanations)}}
The consensus among intelligence researchers is that IQ differences between individuals of the same race reflect (1) real, (2) functionally/socially significant, and (3) substantially genetic differences in the ]. A consensus also exists for the view that average IQ differences between races reflect (1) real and (2) significant differences in the same ''g'' factor.{{ref|consensus-gottfredson}} However, it is a matter of debate whether IQ differences between races in the U.S. are (3a) entirely environmental or (3b) partly genetic. Several published consensus statements agree that the large differences between the average IQ scores of Blacks and Whites in the U.S. cannot be attributed to biases in test construction, nor can they be explained just by simple differences in socio-economic status. It should be noted that most research has been done in the US and a few other developed nations. That research cannot directly be generalized to the world as a whole. Blacks in the US do not constitute a random sample from Africa, and environmental conditions differ among nations. IQ tests done in developing countries are likely to have been affected by conditions associated with poverty that are common in the developing world, such as nutritional deficiencies and the impact of diseases (e.g., HIV, anemia or chronic parasites that may affect IQ test scores).

Regarding the IQ gaps in the U.S., it has also been suggested that Black culture disfavors academic achievement and fosters an environment that is damaging to IQ (Boykin, 1994). Likewise, it is argued that a persistence of racism reinforces this negative effect. John Ogbu (1978, 1994) has developed a hypothesis that the condition of being a "caste-like minority" affects motivation and achievement, depressing IQ. Many anthropologists have argued that intelligence is a cultural category; some cultures emphasize speed and competition more than others, for example. Even proponents of the view that the IQ gap is caused partly by genetic differences recognize that non-genetic factors are likely involved. Non-genetic biological factors that affect IQ have been proposed. Increased rates of low birth weight babies and lower rates of breastfeeding in Blacks as compared to Whites are some factors of many that have been proposed to affect the IQ gap. The ] is often cited as evidence that average IQ scores have changed greatly and rapidly, for reasons poorly understood, noting that average IQ in the US may have been below 75 before the start of this effect, and thus some argue that the IQ gap between races could change in the future or is changing, especially if the effect started earlier for Whites.


Arthur Jensen and others have concluded that the IQ gap is partly genetic. They argue that while plausible environmental explanation for the lower mean IQ in Blacks in the U.S. can be offered in many cases, these explanations are less capable of explaining the higher average IQ of East Asians than Whites, and that overall the culture-only hypothesis is not "progressive" but "degenerating" (see ]; Rushton & Jensen, 2005). To support these claims, they most often cite: (1) worldwide Black-White-East Asian differences in IQ, reaction time, and brain size; (2) correlation between the extent to which IQ subtests measure g, the magnitude of Black-White-East Asian average IQ differences on those subtests (called ''Spearman's hypothesis''), and measures of those subtests' heritability; and (3) the rising heritability of IQ with age (within races) and the disappearance by adulthood of shared environmental effects on IQ (e.g., family income, education, and home environment). Other evidence, such as transracial adoption, racial admixture studies, "life-history" traits, and evolutionary explanations are also debated. The critics have counter arguments to all of this and a definite answer may not be possible until intelligence is directly linked to specific genes.


=== Test data=== === Test data===
{{main|Race and intelligence (test data)}} {{main|Race and intelligence (test data)}}

).<ref>Average IQ score plotted for each group. The normalization average of 100 is shown as a dotted line. Dozens of individual studies are represented. Data taken from review by {{AYref|Lynn|2006}}.</ref>]]
).<ref>Average IQ score and year of publication are plotted for each group. The normalization average of 100 is shown as a dotted line. Dozens of individual studies are represented. Data taken from review by {{AYref|Lynn|2006}}.</ref>]]


The modern controversy surrounding intelligence and race focuses on the results of IQ studies conducted during the second half of the 20th century, mainly in the United States and some other industrialized nations. In almost every testing situation where tests were administered and evaluated correctly, a difference of approximately one ] was observed in the US between the mean IQ score of Blacks and Whites. Attempted world-wide compilations of average IQ by race generally place Ashkenazi Jews at the top, followed by East Asians, Whites, other Asians, Arabs, Blacks and Australian Aborigines. See ] for an attempted compilation of average IQ for different nations and a discussion of associated measurement problems. The IQ scores vary greatly among different nations for the same group. Blacks in Africa score much lower than Blacks in the US. Some reports indicate that the Black–White gap is smaller in the UK than in the U.S.{{ref|IQ}} Many studies also show large differences in IQ between different groups of Whites. For example, in Northern Ireland the IQ gap between Protestants and Catholics are as large as that between Blacks and Whites in the US. <!--Richard Lynn et al.,"Home Background, Intelligence, Personality and Education as Predictors of Unemployment in Young People," Personality and Individual Differences (1984), 5:549-57.--> For example, in Israel, large gaps in test scores and achievement separate Ashkenazi Jews from other groups such as the ].{{ref|jewish-IQ-gap}} The modern controversy surrounding intelligence and race focuses on the results of IQ studies conducted during the second half of the 20th century, mainly in the United States and some other industrialized nations. In almost every testing situation where tests were administered and evaluated correctly, a difference of approximately one ] was observed in the US between the mean IQ score of Blacks and Whites. Attempted world-wide compilations of average IQ by race generally place Ashkenazi Jews at the top, followed by East Asians, Whites, other Asians, Arabs, Blacks and Australian Aborigines. See ] for an attempted compilation of average IQ for different nations and a discussion of associated measurement problems. The IQ scores vary greatly among different nations for the same group. Blacks in Africa score much lower than Blacks in the US. Some reports indicate that the Black–White gap is smaller in the UK than in the U.S.{{ref|IQ}} Many studies also show large differences in IQ between different groups of Whites. For example, in Northern Ireland the IQ gap between Protestants and Catholics are as large as that between Blacks and Whites in the US. <!--Richard Lynn et al.,"Home Background, Intelligence, Personality and Education as Predictors of Unemployment in Young People," Personality and Individual Differences (1984), 5:549-57.--> For example, in Israel, large gaps in test scores and achievement separate Ashkenazi Jews from other groups such as the ].{{ref|jewish-IQ-gap}}
Line 90: Line 98:
===Interpretations=== ===Interpretations===
{{main|Race and intelligence (interpretations)}} {{main|Race and intelligence (interpretations)}}
] comparing the IQs of ] and ] in the US in 1981<ref>The 1981 normalization of the ]</ref> annotated with training and career prospects from the ]<ref>Source: by Gottfredson</ref>]]


Given the observed differences in IQ scores between certain groups, a great deal of debate revolves around the significance of these observations. Some believe that these differences indicate a natural genetic hierarchy of races, with East Asians being the most genetically superior, Whites slightly below, and Blacks the most genetically inferior, and suggest that attempts to close the gaps are doomed to fail. Others believe that these differences are direct evidence of the social oppression of minority groups. Given the observed differences in IQ scores between certain groups, a great deal of debate revolves around the significance of these observations. Some believe that these differences indicate a natural genetic hierarchy of races, with East Asians being the most genetically superior, Whites slightly below, and Blacks the most genetically inferior, and suggest that attempts to close the gaps are doomed to fail. Others believe that these differences are direct evidence of the social oppression of minority groups.


==Media portrayal==
]


] as thinly veiled version of the type of portrayals used in ] to lampoon the supposed stupidity of Black people.<ref
name="Williams">Patricia J. Williams: {{cite web
| title= Racial Ventriloquism
| publisher=The Nation
| url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/19990705/williams
| accessdate=June 11
| accessyear=2006
| date=June 17, 1999
}}
</ref>]]

{{Main|Race and intelligence (Media portrayal)}}
{{Seealso|Acting white}}
Race and intelligence are sometimes portrayed as related in ]. People of various races have been portrayed as more or less intelligent in media such as films, books, and newspapers. Likewise, reporting on research into race and intelligence has been criticized: either for giving scientific theories of race too much credit, or for rejecting the theories of some researchers in the name of racial harmony.

Critics of contemporary media have highlighted portrayals of minorities as less intelligent<ref></ref> (or in the case of Asians, on occasion more intelligent<ref></ref>) in films and movies.
Entman and Rojeki assert that media images of Blacks may have profound effects on the perceptions by both Blacks and Whites about black intellectual potential.<ref>Entman, Robert M. and Andrew Rojecki The Black Image in the White Mind: Media and Race in America. 2001</ref>

Even so-called positive images of Black people can lead to stereotypes about intelligence. In ''Darwin's Athletes: how sport has damaged Black America and preserved the myth of race'' ] writes that the prominence of African-American athletes encourages a de-emphasis on academic achievement in black communities.<ref>''Darwin's Athletes: how sport has damaged Black America and preserved the myth of race'' By ] ISBN 0395822920</ref>Film director ] explains that these images have negative impacts "In my neighborhood, we looked up to athletes, guys who got the ladies, and intelligent people," said Lee. " If you're intelligent, you're called a white guy or girl."<ref></ref>

Blacks are not the only ethnic group in the US to be stereotyped as stupid. Shortly after the large waves of immigration in the 19th century and number of immigrant groups such as the Irish were stereotyped as being more closely related to apes or dogs<ref>Early ] ]'s 1852 book Comparative ]; or, Resemblances between men and animals saw Irishmen as dog-like.</ref> and therefore intellectually inferior. This changed after the definition of "white" was expanded to include the Irish.<ref>''Deconstructing Whiteness: Irish Women in Britain'' Mary J. Hickman, Bronwen Walter Feminist Review, No. 50, The Irish Issue: The British Question (Summer, 1995), pp. 5-19 doi:10.2307/1395487</ref> Unlike other racial stereotypes of intelligence, the 19th century psudo-scientific ideas about of Irish stupidity and inferiority are not supported by most ] proponents of modern race research. Other stereotypes, of Blacks, Jews and Asians endure to this day<ref></ref> as do the findings of Hereditarian researchers about these groups.

Other important aspects of the media portrayal of race and intelligence include recent books asserting a genetic cause to group differences, as well as various surveys and consensus statements made by various groups of scientists.


== Controversies == == Controversies ==
Line 125: Line 107:
{{clean-up|January 2007}} {{clean-up|January 2007}}


===White supremacist interpretations ===
Race and intelligence research is sometimes used by white supremacist organizations to support their theories of white superiority. Like racists in the past, they suggest that the low IQ scores of black people justify segregation and laws against ].


The ] states that: "Race science has potentially frightening consequences, as is evident not only from the horrors of Nazi Germany, but also from the troubled racial history of the United States. If ] groups had their way, the United States would return to its dark days. In publication after publication, ]s are using this "science" to legitimize ].
In Calling Our Nation, the ] ] publishes a piece by a New York psychologist surveying the work of Jensen, Garrett and numerous others. ], the publication of former physics professor ] and his neo-Nazi ], runs a similar piece that concludes that "it is the Negro's deficiency ... which kept him in a state of savagery in his African environment and is now undermining the civilization of a racially mixed America."<ref></ref>


Louis Andrews through his company runs Washington Summit Publishers, which reprints a range of classical and modern racist tracts, along with books on eugenics, the discredited "science" of breeding better humans. Andrews has written widely on such matters related to race and intelligence.<ref></ref>
===Utility of research=== ===Utility of research===
{{Main|Race and intelligence (Utility of research)}} {{Main|Race and intelligence (Utility of research)}}
Line 163: Line 139:
Finally, ] may one day be able to select or change directly ]s found to influence intelligence or racially identifying traits (such as skin color; see gene ]), making them susceptible to biotechnological intervention.<ref>] argues "current debates about whether some of the differences among ethnic and racial groups are cultural or biological will soon become irrelevant, given the coming " ({{AYref|Stock|2002}}, p. 194; race and intelligence discussed on pp. 44-47).</ref> Finally, ] may one day be able to select or change directly ]s found to influence intelligence or racially identifying traits (such as skin color; see gene ]), making them susceptible to biotechnological intervention.<ref>] argues "current debates about whether some of the differences among ethnic and racial groups are cultural or biological will soon become irrelevant, given the coming " ({{AYref|Stock|2002}}, p. 194; race and intelligence discussed on pp. 44-47).</ref>


==Appendix - IQ Data from various sources==

'''NOTE:''' The information in the following tables is referenced to credible sources; however, it should be noted that some of these studies liberally synthesized their results from different sources and test methods. In general comparisons should only be made between similar primary sources, but this is not always possible given the wide variety of IQ tests, the fluid and debatable nature of racial categorization, and the lack of large scale representative data sets. Among the factors that invalidate comparisons across the studies are environment of the test subjects as well as inherent biases in the test procedures.


<BR CLEAR=right>
{|Class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"}
!bgcolor="efefef"|Richard Lynn, "Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis" 2006 Table 16.2 (indigenous populations)
!bgcolor="efefef"|Average IQ
|-
|Arctic Peoples||91
|-
|East Asians||105
|-
|Europeans||99
|-
|Native Americans (north & south)||86
|-
|Southern Asian & Northern Africans||84
|-
|Bushmen (southern Africa)||54
|-
|Africans (subsaharan)||67
|-
|Australians (aboriginals)||62
|-
|Southeast Asians||87
|-
|Pacific Islanders||85
|-
{|Class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"}
!bgcolor="efefef"|Vinko Buj, Personnal. & Individual Differences, Vol. 2, 1981 , pp. 168 to 169 (variances modern Europe)
!bgcolor="efefef"|Average IQ
|-
|Dutch (Amsterdam)||109.4
|-
|Germans (Hamburg)||109.3
|-
|Swedes (Stockholm)||105.8
|-
|Italians (Rome)||103.8
|-
|Austrians (Vienna)||103.5
|-
|Norwegians (Oslo)||101.8
|-
|Danes (Copenhagen)||100.7
|-
|Bulgarians (Sophia)||96.3
|-
|Poland (Warsaw)||108.3
|-
|Yugoslavia (Zagreb)||105.7
|-
|Switzerland (Zurich)||102.8
|-
|Portugal (Lisbon)||102.6
|-
|Great Britain (London)||102
|-
|Hungary (Budapest)||100.5
|-
|Czechoslovakia (Bratislava)||100.4
|-
|Spain (Madrid)||100.3
|-
|Belgium (Brussels)||99.7
|-
|Greece (Athens)||99.4
|-
|Ireland (Dublin)||99.2
|-
|Finland (Helsinki)||98.1
|-
|France (Paris)||96.1
|-
{|Class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"}
!bgcolor="efefef"|Linda S. Gottfredson, School of Education, University of Delaware“Social Consequences of Group Differences in Cognitive Ability”, 2004 page 24
!bgcolor="efefef"|Average IQ
|-
|US Whites||100
|-
|US Blacks||85
|-
|US Native Americans||90
|-
|US Imigrants from nearby hispanic regions||90
|-
{|Class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"}
!bgcolor="efefef"|Richard Lynn, Business Today, January 2005
!bgcolor="efefef"|Average IQ
|-
|Indians in UK (Northern Indo Aryans and Southern Dravidians)||96
|-
{|Class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"}
!bgcolor="efefef"|James R. Flynn {{Fact|date=February 2007}}
!bgcolor="efefef"|Average IQ
|-
|Asians in America(Korean-, Japanese- and Chinese ancestry)||104
|-
|Whites in Minnesota (mainly german and norwegian ancestry)||105
|-
|Whites in USA||100.5
|-
{|Class="wikitable" border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"}
!bgcolor="efefef"|Richard Herrnstein & Charles Murray, "The Bell Curve", Free Press, September 1994
!bgcolor="efefef"|Average IQ
|-
|Ashkenazi Jews in USA and UK||107-115
|-
|Chinese in USA||97-98
|-
|Japanese in USA||97-98
|}


==End material==


=== See also === === See also ===

Revision as of 20:47, 18 February 2007

Page semi-protectedEditing of this article by new or unregistered users is currently disabled.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this article and you wish to make a change, you can submit an edit request, discuss changes on the talk page, request unprotection, log in, or create an account.
This article may benefit from being shortened by the use of summary style. Summary style may involve the splitting of sections of text to one or more sub-topic articles which are then summarized in the main article.
This article appears to be slanted towards recent events. Please try to keep recent events in historical perspective and add more content related to non-recent events.

Template:Totally-disputed

Globe icon.The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Race and intelligence are broad terms with many meanings that are often used to describe and measure human beings. The possibility of a relationship between race and intelligence has been a topic of considerable speculation, study, and debate, especially since the 19th century. The contemporary debate focuses on the nature, causes, and importance of racial and ethnic differences in intelligence test scores and other measures of cognitive ability. In the 19th and early 20th centuries research on race and intelligence was often used to argue that one race was superior to another, justifying poor outcomes and treatment for the "inferior race". Some early opinions about the differences among races grew out of stereotypes about non-whites developed during the period of colonialism and slavery.

Modern theories and research on race and intelligence are often grounded in two controversial assumptions:

Much of the evidence currently cited is based on IQ testing in the United States. There is much less data from other nations, in particular the developing world, and conclusions from the US data cannot automatically be generalized to the world as a whole. While the distributions of IQ scores among different racial-ethnic groups in the US overlap and often have a comparable range, groups differ in where their members cluster along the IQ scale. Similar clustering has been reported with related variables, such as school achievement, reaction time, and brain size. Most variation in IQ in the U.S. occurs within individual families, not between races. However, even small differences in average IQ at the group level might theoretically have large effects on social outcomes.

Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain why average IQ varies among racial-ethnic groups. Certain environmental factors, such as nutrition, are thought to moderate IQ in children, and other influences have been hypothesized, including education level, richness of the early home environment, and other social, cultural, or economic factors. The primary focus of the scientific debate is whether group IQ differences also reflect a genetic component. Hereditarianism hypothesizes that a genetic contribution to intelligence could include genes linked to neuron structure or function, brain size or metabolism, or other physiological differences which could vary with biogeographic ancestry.

The findings of this field have engendered significant controversy. Press coverage has given considerable positive attention to theories of genetic racial differences in intelligence even though there is no consensus among researchers regarding their validity. Upon publication, The Bell Curve, a controversial book that asserted that the gap in black and white IQ scores was, in part, genetic, received a great deal of positive publicity, including cover stories in Newsweek The New Republic, and The New York Times Book Review. Still, few strong propionates of the genetic theories of differences in intelligence do not think that press coverage has been positive enough. For example, media opinion of the role of genetic and environmental factors in explaining individual and group differences in IQ was studied in 1988 by conservative researchers Mark Snyderman and Stanley Rothman. They found it to differ from the opinion of mainstream experts.

Some critics question the fairness and validity of cognitive testing and racial categorization, as well as the reliability of the studies and the motives of the authors, on both sides. This has included accusations of bias based on the political ideals of the researchers or the funding agencies, such as the Pioneer Fund. Some critics fear the misuse of the research, question its utility, or feel that comparing the intelligence of racial groups is itself unethical. The disparity in average IQ among racial groups does not mean that all members of one group are more intelligent than all members of another. Robert A. Gordon, a Pioneer Fund media critic, ranking group averages "high" to "low" is not the same things as moral ranking from "good" to "bad" or an overall ranking of "superior" to "inferior". The conclusions of a few researchers: that racial groups in the US vary in average IQ scores, and the hypothesis that a genetic component may be involved, have led to heated academic debates that have spilled over into the public sphere.

Observations about race and intelligence also have important applications for critics of the media portrayal of different races. Stereotypes in media such as books, music, film, and television can reenforce old racist ideas and may influence the perceived opportunities for success in academics for minority students.

Template:Race and intelligence vertical navbox

Background information

History

Richard E. Nisbett has said that the question of whether IQ differences between Blacks and Whites have a genetic basis goes back at least a thousand years, to the time when the Moors invaded Europe. The Moors speculated that Europeans might be congenitally incapable of abstract thought. By the 19th century most Europeans probably believed that they were congenitally superior to Africans in intellectual skills. In the 19th and early 20th century research on race and intelligence was often used to confirm that one race was 'superior' to another. Francisco Gil-White, author of Resurrecting Racism: The Modern Attack on Black People Using Phony Science and Stephen Jay Gould author of The Mismeasure of Man have suggested that some modern research has similar motives. Researchers such as Amanda Thompson and Elazar Barkan have suggested that "Scientific racism" has been used to perpetuate the idea of the intellectual inferiority of African Americans and that it was used to justify slavery and segregated education in America.

Slavery

Sir Francis Galton wrote on eugenics and psychometrics in the 19th C.
Anthropologist Franz Boas was a prominent 20th C. critic of claims that intelligence differed among races.

Because the Atlantic slave trade raised moral questions from its inception scientific theories about the mental capacities of Black people were provided to justify the enslavement of Africans. According to Alexander Thomas and Samuell Sillen during this time period the Black man was described as uniquely fitted for bondage because of what researchers at the time called "his primitive psychological organization." Hence, a well-known physician of the ante-bellum South, Samuel Cartwright of Louisiana, had a psychiatric explanation for runaway slaves. He diagnosed their attempts to gain freedom as a mental illness and coined the term "drapetomania" to describe it.

Scientific arguments about the mental inferiority of Black people were instrumental in keeping slavery alive as in institution in the United States. It was widely regarded that Black people lacked the mental capacity to handle freedom. Secretary of State John C. Calhoun arguing for the extension of slavery in 1844 said "Here (scientific confirmation) is proof of the necessity of slavery. The African is incapable of self-care and sinks into lunacy under the burden of freedom. It is a mercy to give him the guardianship and protection from mental death."

The writings of Sir Francis Galton, a British psychologist, spurred interest in the study of mental abilities, particularly as they relate to heredity and eugenics. Galton estimated from his field observations in Africa that the African people were 'two grades' below Anglo-Saxons' position in the normal frequency distribution of general mental ability his work was seen as scientific validation of Africans' mental inferiority compared with Anglo-Saxons.

Immigration and segregation

The scientific debate on the contribution of nature versus nurture to individual and group differences in intelligence can be traced to at least the mid-19th century. Charles Darwin wrote in his Descent of Man (VII, On the races of Man): "Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties."

Lewis Terman wrote in The measurement of intelligence in 1916

"(Black and other ethnic minority children) are uneducable beyond the nearest rudiments of training. No amount of school instruction will ever make them intelligent voters or capable citizens in the sense of the world…their dullness seems to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stock from which they come…Children of this group should be segregated in special classes and be given instruction which is concrete and practical. They cannot master abstractions, but they can be made efficient workers…There is no possibility at present of convincing society that they should not be allowed to reproduce, although from a eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their unusual prolific breeding."

The opinion that there are differences in the brain sizes and brain structures of different racial and ethnic groups was widely held and studied during the 19th century and early 20th century. Average ethnic and racial group differences in IQ were first directly observed when analyzing the data from standardized mental tests administered on large scales during World War I.

Foremost amongst those researching this was Stanley Porteus of the University of Melbourne, who devised his maze test as early as 1919, applying it in his study of the Aborigines in the Kimberley region and Northern Territory of Australia (1929) and later the Kalahari tribesmen of southern Africa (1934). He also used it to assess the results of pre-frontal brain surgery on mental performance, publishing his results in 1931.

W.O. Brown, writing in The Journal of Negro History in 1931, wrote regarding early intelligence tests:

After the World War and during the severe agitation for the restriction of immigration, aimed especially at the Southeastern Europeans, tests came into a new usage...the tests revealed the inferior intelligence of various racial and nationality groups...The Southeastern Europeans and the Negroes especially came of badly in these tests...The results of the tests elevated their dogma of racial inequality from a mere prejudice to the dignity of a scientifically validated opinion.

Beginning in the 1930s, race difference research and hereditarianism — the belief that genetics are the primary cause of differences in intelligence among human groups — began to fall out of favor in psychology and anthropology after major internal debates. In anthropology this occurred in part due to the advocacy of Franz Boas, who in his 1938 edition of The Mind of Primitive Man wrote, "there is nothing at all that could be interpreted as suggesting any material difference in the mental capacity of the bulk of the Negro population as compared with the bulk of the White population." The hereditarian position was challenged by Boas' claim that cranial vault size had increased significantly in the U.S. from one generation to the next, because racial differences in such characteristics had been among the strongest arguments for a genetic role.

Modern work

File:Charles Murray.gif
Charles Murray (pictured) and Richard Herrnstein started the contemporary debate with The Bell Curve in 1994.
File:Stephen Jay Gould.png
In The Mismeasure of Man, updated in 1996, Stephen Jay Gould criticized many aspects of IQ research.

Inspired by the American eugenics movement, Nazi Germany implemented the T-4 Euthanasia Program in which roughly 200,000 mentally and physically disabled Germans were killed, and about 400,000 sterilized. The association of hereditarianism with Nazi Germany created an modern academic environment that has been very skeptical of suggestions that there are racial or ethnic differences in measures of intellectual or academic ability and that these differences are primarily determined by genetic factors.

In 1961, the psychologist Henry Garrett coined the term equalitarian dogma to describe the then politically fashionable view that there were no race differences in intelligence, or if there were, they were purely the result of environmental factors. Those who questioned these views often put their careers at risk.

The contemporary scholarly debate on race and intelligence may be traced to Arthur Jensen's 1969 publication in the Harvard Educational Review of "How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?" In this paper, he wrote on some of the major issues that characterize the genetic hypothesis of racial IQ differences, and on compensatory educational programs. Reports on Jensen's article appeared in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News & World Report, and The New York Times Magazine.

In the 1980's Nobel Prize winner for his work on the development of transistors, William Shockley, postulated that the higher rate of reproduction among US African Americans was having what he termed a "dysgenic" effect (meaning an opposite of eugenics), ; especially as influenced by welfare subsidies (e.g., AFDC), which he opined, unintentionally encouraged childbearing by less productive mothers. . He described this work as the most important work of his career, even though it severely tarnished his reputation. Shockley's published writings on this topic, were largely based on the research of Cyril Burt. Shockley also proposed that individuals with IQs below 100 be paid to undergo voluntary sterilization . He was subsequently criticized by the media; however his involvement brought public recognition to several controversial topics.

Press attention returned to the issue of race and intelligence in 1994 with the publication of The Bell Curve, which included two chapters on the subject of racial difference in intelligence and related life outcomes. In response to The Bell Curve, Stephen Jay Gould updated The Mismeasure of Man in 1996. Among other things, he criticized the IQ test as a measure of intelligence, citing what he perceived as inherent racial and social biases as well as systematic flaws in the testing process.

Race

Main article: Race
See also: Race and multilocus allele clusters, Race (historical definitions)

Intelligence testing

Main article: Intelligence Further information: ]

Intelligence is most commonly measured using IQ tests. These tests are often geared to be good measures of the psychometric variable g (for general intelligence factor), and other tests that measure g (for example, the Armed Forces Qualifying Test and the SAT) also serve as measures of cognitive ability.

All such tests are often called "intelligence tests," though the use of the term "intelligence" is itself controversial. It is clear, however, that performance in these tests correlates with performance in similar life tasks (school grades and to a lower degree college grades). The correlation with many real-world results is lower. For example, while the correlation of IQ with job performance is strong, income is modestly correlated and accumulated wealth is only weakly correlated. The hereditary transmission of wealth via IQ is near zero. As commonly used, "IQ test" denotes any test of cognitive ability, and "IQ" is used as shorthand for scores on tests of cognitive ability. Some critics question the validity of all IQ testing or claim that there are aspects of "intelligence" not reflected in IQ tests. Historically, criticisms of the validity of IQ testing focused primarily on questions of "test bias", which has many related meanings. Several conclusions about tests of cognitive ability are now largely accepted by intelligence researchers:

  • IQ scores measure many, but not all of the qualities that people mean by intelligent or smart (for example, IQ does not measure creativity, wisdom, or personality)
  • IQ scores are fairly stable over much of a person's life
  • IQ tests are predictive of school and job performance, to a degree that does not significantly vary by socio-economic or racial-ethnic background
  • For people living in the prevailing conditions of the developed world, cognitive ability is substantially heritable, and while the impact of family environment on the IQ of children is substantial, after adolescence this effect becomes difficult to detect.

Research

Main article: Race and intelligence (Research)

[[Image:Two Curve Bell.jpg|thumb|250px|These are idealized Race and intelligence research tries to measure the gaps between different races or ethnicities and to find the causes for these gaps. The gaps found between the average measures of races or ethnicities varies depending on methods used for racial grouping, the method and setting used to test intelligence, the health and economic situation of the test takers, the interplay between the culture of the person taking the test and the culture of those who made the test, and the period in history when the test was performed.


Test data

Main article: Race and intelligence (test data)

The modern controversy surrounding intelligence and race focuses on the results of IQ studies conducted during the second half of the 20th century, mainly in the United States and some other industrialized nations. In almost every testing situation where tests were administered and evaluated correctly, a difference of approximately one standard deviation was observed in the US between the mean IQ score of Blacks and Whites. Attempted world-wide compilations of average IQ by race generally place Ashkenazi Jews at the top, followed by East Asians, Whites, other Asians, Arabs, Blacks and Australian Aborigines. See IQ and the Wealth of Nations for an attempted compilation of average IQ for different nations and a discussion of associated measurement problems. The IQ scores vary greatly among different nations for the same group. Blacks in Africa score much lower than Blacks in the US. Some reports indicate that the Black–White gap is smaller in the UK than in the U.S. Many studies also show large differences in IQ between different groups of Whites. For example, in Northern Ireland the IQ gap between Protestants and Catholics are as large as that between Blacks and Whites in the US. For example, in Israel, large gaps in test scores and achievement separate Ashkenazi Jews from other groups such as the Sephardi.

Gaps are seen in other tests of cognitive ability or aptitude, including university admission exams such as the SAT and GRE as well as employment tests for corporate settings and the military (Roth et al. 2001). Measures of school achievement correlate fairly well with IQ, especially in younger children. In the United States, achievement tests find that by 12th grade Black students are performing on average only as well as White and Asian students in 8th grade; Hispanic students do only slightly better than Blacks. Whether the gaps are narrowing or not is debated.

Interpretations

Main article: Race and intelligence (interpretations)

Given the observed differences in IQ scores between certain groups, a great deal of debate revolves around the significance of these observations. Some believe that these differences indicate a natural genetic hierarchy of races, with East Asians being the most genetically superior, Whites slightly below, and Blacks the most genetically inferior, and suggest that attempts to close the gaps are doomed to fail. Others believe that these differences are direct evidence of the social oppression of minority groups.


Controversies

Main article: Race and intelligence (Controversies)

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|January 2007|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.


Utility of research

Main article: Race and intelligence (Utility of research)

Theories of race and intelligence have been challenged on grounds of their utility. Critics want to know what purpose such research could serve and why it has been an intense an area of focus for a few researchers. Some defend the research, saying it has egalitarian aims or that it is pure science, others say that the true motivation for the research is the same as that of the eugenics movement and other forms of scientific racism.. Even supporters of intelligence research have described such research as analogous to "working with dynamite" or "dangerous play" in sports.

As to whether research in this area is desirable, John C. Loehlin wrote in 1992, "Research on racial differences in intelligence is desirable if the research is appropriately motivated, honestly done, and adequately communicated." Defenders of the research suggest that both scientific curiosity and a desire to draw benefits from the research are appropriate motivations. Researchers such as Richard Lynn have suggested that conclusions from the research can help make political decisions, such as the type of educational opportunities and expectations of achievement policy makers should have for people of different races. Researchers such as Charles Murray have used their conclusions to criticize social programs based on racial equality that fail in Murray's eyes to recognize the realities of racial differences.

Sociologist and demographer Reanne Frank says that some race and intelligence research has been abused "The most malignant are the "true believers," who subscribe to the typological distinctions that imply hierarchical rankings of worth across different races. Although this group remains small, the members' work is often widely publicized and well known (e.g., Herrnstein and Murray 1994; Rushton 1991)"

Potential for bias

Main article: Race and intelligence (Potential for bias)

Proponents of genetic explanations of race/IQ correlation have often been criticized both of scientific misconduct and of their intimate links with groups that have historic ties to Nazis and eugenics of the early 19th century, such as the Pioneer Fund. The Pioneer Fund has been characterized by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group.

Proponents of genetic explanations of race/IQ correlation have in turn accused their critics of suppressing scientific debate in the name of political correctness. They claim harassment and interference with both their work and funding.

Policy implications

See also: Intelligence and public policy

Public policy implications of IQ and race research are one of the greatest sources of controversy surrounding this issue. Regardless of the source of the gap, most educators agree that it must be addressed. They often advocate equitable funding for education.

Some proponents of a genetic interpretation of the IQ gap, such as Template:A(Y)ref and Template:A(Y)ref, have sometimes argued that their interpretation does not in itself demand any particular policy response: while a conservative/libertarian commentator may feel the results justify, for example, reductions in affirmative action, a liberal commentator may argue from a Rawlsian point of view (that genetic advantages are undeserved and unjust) for substantial affirmative action. Since all races have representatives at all levels of the IQ curve, this means any policy based on low IQ affects members of all races.

According to the "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" statement published in Intelligence in 1997:

The research findings neither dictate nor preclude any particular social policy, because they can never determine our goals. They can, however, help us estimate the likely success and side-effects of pursuing those goals via different means.

While not specifically race-related, policies focused on geographical regions or nations may have disproportionate influences on certain racial groups and on cognitive development. Differences in health care, nutrition, regulation of environmental toxins, and geographic distribution of diseases and control strategies between the developing world and developed nations have all been subjects of policies or policy recommendations (see health and nutrition policies relating to intelligence).

Finally, germinal choice technology may one day be able to select or change directly alleles found to influence intelligence or racially identifying traits (such as skin color; see gene SLC24A5), making them susceptible to biotechnological intervention.

Appendix - IQ Data from various sources

NOTE: The information in the following tables is referenced to credible sources; however, it should be noted that some of these studies liberally synthesized their results from different sources and test methods. In general comparisons should only be made between similar primary sources, but this is not always possible given the wide variety of IQ tests, the fluid and debatable nature of racial categorization, and the lack of large scale representative data sets. Among the factors that invalidate comparisons across the studies are environment of the test subjects as well as inherent biases in the test procedures.


Richard Lynn, "Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis" 2006 Table 16.2 (indigenous populations) Average IQ
Arctic Peoples 91
East Asians 105
Europeans 99
Native Americans (north & south) 86
Southern Asian & Northern Africans 84
Bushmen (southern Africa) 54
Africans (subsaharan) 67
Australians (aboriginals) 62
Southeast Asians 87
Pacific Islanders 85
Vinko Buj, Personnal. & Individual Differences, Vol. 2, 1981 , pp. 168 to 169 (variances modern Europe) Average IQ
Dutch (Amsterdam) 109.4
Germans (Hamburg) 109.3
Swedes (Stockholm) 105.8
Italians (Rome) 103.8
Austrians (Vienna) 103.5
Norwegians (Oslo) 101.8
Danes (Copenhagen) 100.7
Bulgarians (Sophia) 96.3
Poland (Warsaw) 108.3
Yugoslavia (Zagreb) 105.7
Switzerland (Zurich) 102.8
Portugal (Lisbon) 102.6
Great Britain (London) 102
Hungary (Budapest) 100.5
Czechoslovakia (Bratislava) 100.4
Spain (Madrid) 100.3
Belgium (Brussels) 99.7
Greece (Athens) 99.4
Ireland (Dublin) 99.2
Finland (Helsinki) 98.1
France (Paris) 96.1
Linda S. Gottfredson, School of Education, University of Delaware“Social Consequences of Group Differences in Cognitive Ability”, 2004 page 24 Average IQ
US Whites 100
US Blacks 85
US Native Americans 90
US Imigrants from nearby hispanic regions 90
Richard Lynn, Business Today, January 2005 Average IQ
Indians in UK (Northern Indo Aryans and Southern Dravidians) 96
James R. Flynn Average IQ
Asians in America(Korean-, Japanese- and Chinese ancestry) 104
Whites in Minnesota (mainly german and norwegian ancestry) 105
Whites in USA 100.5
Richard Herrnstein & Charles Murray, "The Bell Curve", Free Press, September 1994 Average IQ
Ashkenazi Jews in USA and UK 107-115
Chinese in USA 97-98
Japanese in USA 97-98


See also

Notes

  1. Race as Biology Is Fiction, Racism as a Social Problem Is Real: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives on the Social Construction of Race Audrey Smedley and Brian D. Smedley
  2. Social Darwinism, Scientific Racism, and the Metaphysics of Race Rutledge M. Dennis The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 64, No. 3, Myths and Realities: African Americans and the Measurement of Human Abilities (Summer, 1995), pp. 243-252
  3. A History of Race/ism Produced By: Tim McCaskell Toronto District School Board
  4. Jalata, Asafa 1954- "Race and Ethnicity in East Africa (review)" Africa Today - Volume 48, Number 4, Winter 2001, pp. 134-136 Indiana University Press
  5. The Invention of the White Race By Chantal Mouffe, Theodore (Theodore W.) Allen
  6. Media, Stereotypes and the Perpetuation of Racism in Canada by James Crawford

    Indians were seen as a homogeneous group of savages despite the fact that individual groups varied extensively and had several well developed social systems. Black people were also portrayed as savage, uncivilized and having low intelligence. By creating these social constructs, expansion into North America was justified.

  7. Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref. For samples of individual studies showing similar results, see the National Collaborative Perinatal Project, reported by Template:AYref; the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study reported by Template:AYref; also Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref Template:AYref; Template:AYref, Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref. For scientific consensus statements see Template:AYref and Template:AYref.
  8. The gap shows up before age 3 on most standardized tests after matching for variables such as maternal education. Other clustering: Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref, Template:AYref; Template:AYref; Template:AYref. The East-Asian/White/Black difference in average IQ can be measured in very young children. For example, a one standard deviation gap is observed in Black and White 3-year olds matched for gender, birth order, and maternal education (Template:AYref). Template:AYref found that by age 6 the average IQ of East Asian children is 107, 103 for White children and 89 for Black children. Template:A(Y)ref found that the same trichotomy in brain size and IQ held at 4 months, 1 year, and 7 years of age.
  9. Template:AYref reports on the distribution of IQ within and between families, social classes, and races using a technique to partition variance called ANOVA. The average IQ difference between two siblings (within families) is about 12 points, compared to 17 points for two strangers and 20 points for one White and one Black American. Jensen attributes the large differences within families to the high heritability of IQ and the small influence of family environment.
  10. Whether or not this carries over to adulthood remains to be investigated.
  11. HEREDITY, ENVIRONMENT, AND RACE DIFFERENCES IN IQ: A Commentary on Rushton and Jensen (2005) Richard E. Nisbett Psychology, Public Policy, and Law June 2005 Vol. 11, No. 2, 302-310
  12. See: Snyderman and Rothman (study)
  13. Some researchers explicitly reject the latter terms as inaccurately global in connotation and insensitive, but the terms are used by some critics (Template:AYref, p. 42).
  14. Entman, Robert M. and Andrew Rojecki The Black Image in the White Mind: Media and Race in America 2001
  15. Darwin's Athletes: how sport has damaged Black America and preserved the myth of race By John Milton Hoberman. ISBN 0395822920
  16. Cicero warned the Romans not to purchase the British as slaves because they were so difficult to train (Sowell, 1994, p. 156); though Caesar did feel they "had a certain value for rough work," (Churchill, 1974, p. 2.)
  17. RACE, GENETICS, AND IQ by Richard E. Nisbett
  18. Social Darwinism, Scientific Racism, and the Metaphysics of Race Rutledge M. Dennis The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 64, No. 3, Myths and Realities: African Americans and the Measurement of Human Abilities (Summer, 1995), pp. 243-252
  19. Alexander Thomas and Samuell Sillen (1972). Racism and Psychiatry. New York: Carol Publishing Group.
  20. Samual A. Cartwright, "Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race", DeBow's Review—Southern and Western States, Volume XI, New Orleans, 1851
  21. Eugenics: America's Darkest Days
  22. Francis Galton:British Psychologist
  23. Template:AYref; Template:AYref
  24. Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref, Template:AYref
  25. Porteus, Stanley. The Psychology of a Primitive People, 1931.
  26. Racial Inequality: Fact or Myth W. O. Brown, The Journal of Negro History, Vol. 16, No. 1. (Jan., 1931), pp. 49
  27. According to historian of psychology Graham Richards there was widespread critical debate within psychology about the conceptual underpinnings of this early race difference research (Template:AYref). These include Estabrooks (1928) two papers on the limitations of methodology used in the research; Dearborn and Long’s (1934) overview of the criticisms by several psychologists (Garth, Thompson, Peterson, Pinter, Herskovits, Daniel, Price, Wilkerson, Freeman, Rosenthal and C.E. Smith) in a collection they edited and Klineburg, who wrote three major critiques, one in 1928, and two in 1935. Richards also notes that with over a 1000 publications within psychology during the interwar years there had been a large internal debate. Towards the end of the time period almost all those publishing, including most of those who began with a pro-race differences stance, were firmly arguing against race differences research. Richards regards the scientific controversy to be dead at this point, although he also suggests reasons for its re-emergence in the late nineteen sixties.
  28. Template:AYref
  29. Template:AYref; Template:AYref, pp. 45–54
  30. Template:AYref pp. 67–69
  31. Template:AYref
  32. ^ Explaining Race Differences in IQ: The Logic, the Methodology, and the Evidence American Psychologist, November 1984, Brian Mackenzie. Mackenzie writes of Jensen's hereditarian position as a "genetic model", in contrast to a "jointly genetic/environmental" model. Jensen often uses the term "partly-genetic" to describe his position, even though his views aren't seen as congruent with the "jointly genetic/environmental" model described by Mackenzie.
  33. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, 1992 Executive Intelligence Review, Chapter 11
  34. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, 1992 Executive Intelligence Review, Chapter 11
  35. {{This paragraph includes excerpts from William Shockley; however editors of this page have expressed concern over the lack of citations at that article. A request for citation has been placed there. Please refer to discussion page before further editing etc}}
  36. Template:AYref
  37. For statements directly reporting what views are in the majority see Template:AYref, Template:AYref, and Template:AYref. These findings are also discussed in the major handbooks, manuals, and encyclopedias on intelligence. For more detail, see the articles on IQ and intelligence.
  38. Carraher, Carraher, and Schliemann (1985) studied a group of Brazilian street children. The investigation found that the same children who are able to do the mathematics needed to run their street businesses were often unable to do mathematics in a formal setting. See: Street Mathematics and School Mathematics By Terezinha Nunes, David William Carraher, Analucia Dias Schliemann ISBN 0521388139
  39. e.g., Sternberg, 2003, pp. 386-387
  40. e.g., Sternberg, 2003, pp. 386-387
  41. Hunt & Carlson, in press
  42. Frank, Reanne, The Misuse of Biology in Demographic Research on Racial/Ethnic Differences: A Reply to van den Oord and Rowe, Demography - Volume 38, Number 4, November 2001, pp. 563-567
  43. Achieving Equitable Education in Calhoun County
  44. Educational Studies: A Jrnl of the American Educ. Studies Assoc.
  45. For example, the policy recommendations of The Bell Curve were denounced by many. Template:AYref wrote: "We can imagine no recommendation for using the government to manipulate fertility that does not have dangers. But this highlights the problem: The United States already has policies that inadvertently social-engineer who has babies, and it is encouraging the wrong women. If the United States did as much to encourage high-IQ women to have babies as it now does to encourage low-IQ women, it would rightly be described as engaging in aggressive manipulation of fertility. The technically precise description of America's fertility policy is that it subsidizes births among poor women, who are also disproportionately at the low end of the intelligence distribution. We urge generally that these policies, represented by the extensive network of cash and services for low-income women who have babies, be ended. (p. 548)" Two year later the 1996 U.S. welfare reform substantially cut these programs. In a discussion of the future political outcomes of an intellectually stratified society, they stated that they: "fear that a new kind of conservatism is becoming the dominant ideology of the affluent - not in the social tradition of an Edmund Burke or in the economic tradition of an Adam Smith but ’conservatism’ along Latin American lines, where to be conservative has often meant doing whatever is necessary to preserve the mansions on the hills from the menace of the slums below. (p. 518)"Moreover, they fear that an increasing welfare will create a "custodial state": "a high-tech and more lavish version of the Indian reservation of some substantial minority of the nation’s population. They also predict increasing totalitarianism: It is difficult to imagine the United States preserving its heritage of individualism, equal rights before the law, free people running their own lives, once it is accepted that a significant part of the population must be made permanent wards of the states. (p. 526)"
  46. Template:AYref
  47. Template:AYref
  48. Gregory Stock argues "current debates about whether some of the differences among ethnic and racial groups are cultural or biological will soon become irrelevant, given the coming " (Template:AYref, p. 194; race and intelligence discussed on pp. 44-47).

References

Main article: Race and intelligence (References)

External links

Collective Statements

Review Papers

Others

Template:Race and intelligence

Sex differences in humans
Biology
Medicine and Health
Neuroscience and Psychology
Sociology
Categories:
Race and intelligence: Difference between revisions Add topic