Race and IQ gap

Sociologists and social psychologists have known for years that poverty and education level — and arguably, intelligence, despite a foggy definition — are related. The correlation has held steady for decades — that as one’s education decreases, one's level of poverty often goes up. The team’s study examined a different relationship, said Jiaying Zhao, assistant professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia in Canada. "Previous views of poverty have blamed (it) on personal failings, on an environment that is not conducive to success," Zhao told Reuters. "We are arguing that the lack of financial resources itself can lead to impaired cognitive function.” To test their theory, the researchers performed a comparative study on two different continents, in two distinct settings. The first group consisted of 400 low- and middle-income shoppers ($20,000-$70,000 annual income) at a New Jersey mall in the United States. The second was comprised of 464 Indian sugar cane farmers, whose personal wealth had direct ties to how recently they had harvested their crops.

Mall shoppers were faced with one of two financial decisions — their car broke down and repairs either cost $150 or $1,500 — before being subjected to IQ tests and measures of impulse control. Similar data was taken from the Indian farmers, who took IQ tests before and after their harvest, effectively while they were poor and then rich. "Our results suggest that when you are poor, money is not the only thing in short supply,” said Harvard economist Sendhil Mullainathan, who was part of the international team conducting the study. “Cognitive capacity is also stretched thin.” Among New Jersey mall shoppers, IQ fell a full 13 points when researchers tasked them with a difficult financial decision, a cognitive impairment roughly equivalent to losing a full night of sleep. Farmers saw a nine to 10 point difference from one month to the next. "One month after the harvest, they're pretty rich, but the month before - when the money has run out - they're pretty poor," Mullainathan noted in the report, which was published on Thursday in the journal Science. "What we see is that IQ goes up, (when they are rich)... errors go way down, and response times go way down."

http://www.medicaldaily.com/poverty-lowers-iq-how-financial-strains-put-pressure-cognitive-logical-reasoning-255093

 

The problem with IQ tests is their reliance on visual aptitudes or represent, Visual IQ.
How might the races differ if the IQ test had some aural components.
We know if some Motor IQ were involved,, Black people would score superiorly.
I have done many "well baby" check ups. The standard landmark for walking is 1 year.
Black babies often walk by 10 months and Asian & Jewish babies 13 months. What of Motor IQ ?
Or Aural IQ ?

Moi

 

Of course not because height is based upon both nurture and environment evolution that affects the DNA genome but as noted height doesn't have anything to do with "race" that is merely reflective of the DNA genome for skin color that is unrelated to any other DNA genome.

People that argue that skin color has anything to do with IQ are probably the same ones that probably believe blond women are naturally stupid. It makes about as much sense because hair color, eye color, and skin color are all DNA sequences that have nothing to do with the other attributes of the person. By analogy it's like saying two identical Ford Mustangs, one painted white and one painted black, have different performance. The paint color of the car has absolutely nothing to do with performance and the skin color of the person has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. They are unrelated attributes of the person.

 

What's funny is that the IQ gap actually widens between Blacks and Whites when economic level increases.

And with the regression toward the mean, Black and White children have different average IQ that 'regresses' or 'progresses' despite Black and White parents having the same IQ.

 

Both skin colour and Intelligence are mostly the product of DNA. A proponderance of melanin does not in itself indicate low intelligence however it is undoubtedly true that the further you get from the equator the larger brain sizes are and the less melanin there is. I realise you will just deny this established fact but it stands none the less.

 

Blacks develop faster and reach a lower peak level earlier. This goes for motor abilities and intelligence.

 

which has nothing to do with intelligence...men have larger brains than women are men smarter? no...women now make up the majority of university students...

Average cranial capacities of indigenous populations, sex-combined means. Black: 1450 cc. and over; checkerboard: 1400-1449; crosshatching: 1350-1399; horizontal striping: 1300-1349; diagonal striping: 1250-1299; dots: 1200-1249. From Beals et al., 1984.

http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2010/03/11/the-head-sizeraceiq-trainwreck/

brain size= intelligence is racism, racists trying to justify their beliefs with science they don't comprehend...

 

It appears colder climates creates bigger heads.
Consider it is not only volume but how much "neocortex". The football shaped cranium of Neanderthal and Europeans allows for more surface area, more space for the cortex and its' folds for the same volume of a round cranium.
Now if that were significant, Asians should not be as bright as the "white" with football shaped craniums.


Moi
It don't mean it ain't true, or not

 

Neanderthals had considerably larger brains and were probably white yet their tool making didn't progress one bit in over 200.000 years.
The first of our species had almost identical brains with us 190.000 years ago yet they didn't do anything with them until the Toba eruption .
Brain size has nothing to do with intelligence nor intelligence is as crucial as racists describe, what made homo sapient conquer the planet was our creativity , our ability to speak ( thus to transfer knowledge and cooperate in large groups ) . our tendency to specialise and the fact that our children copy behaviour even if it is irrational (chimp babies improvise instead) .

 

This is an interesting thought and it's the first time I heard of it. It's true less rounded shapes have more surface area for the same volume.

As for the brain volume/IQ/race nexus, it's clearly not the whole story. I guess most of the volume variation is to do with thermoregulatory contraints. However, you can see race differences at the same latitude (yes I checked the temperature map) most notably South China vs. South Asia/ME/North Africa, so there is clearly a racial component, which is probably cognitive differences. The moderate 0.4 correlation to brain size IQ meshes with this.

 

What has women being the majority of university students have to do with it?

men dominate the areas where intelligence is paramount- Physics, Mathematics, Philosophy, core sciences. Women dominate the touchy feely areas of English and foreign langauges.

Where are teh female Chess champions that can compete with the top men?

Brain size is certainly related to intelligence.

- - - Updated - - -

The chinese are far brighter than south east asians.

 

IQ tests work well if there is agreement about what we want to test. There never has been such agreement since IQ testing began in the early 20th century as a way to categorize immigrants as stupid and exclude them because they couldn't read the English the tests were written in. Since that shameful start, IQ tests have not fared much better. The same people produce radically different results depending on the mode of the test. For example, some tests are largely verbal, testing the ability to understand and use words; other tests rely on the ability to visualize the rotation of 3D objects; some use physical puzzles like blocks, etc. There are also tests of creativity and social intelligence. The fact that the same people do well or poorly depending on the mode of the test shows the tests are not measuring a single unified trait. Today, most psychologists agree that there are several independent dimensions of intelligence, and that they must be measured separately for a rounded picture.

Everyone sees from experience that people have different degrees of proficiency. Some people look smart, others look dumb. But how important is motivation or confidence to these results? Perhaps a person of mediocre ability who is strongly motivated and confident might out-perform a person of outstanding ability who isn't trying hard or doesn't believe in his ability.

Still, there is loose reliability of IQ test results: persons with 130 IQ consistently out-perform those of 70 IQ regardless of the sort of test used. So we can distinguish among a few very large brackets of ability (let's say sub-normal, low normal, high normal, super-normal), but smaller differences fail to reach statistical significance.

 

exposing what a stupid concept brain size equals intelligence is...Einstein with an IQ estimated at 160 had a smaller than average brain, how is that possible? ...university acceptance requires qualifing grades from high school, the same schools/classes male students attend...how is it those small brained women are outscoring their male counterparts?

bs...it's cultural/social, women were dissuaded even blocked from attending "male" perceived occupations...women medical students are now in the majority, and as the older generations die off women MDs will dominate the profession, in some medical schools women make up 75% of future MDs, wanna tell me MDs are stupid? how is those smaller brained women are coming to dominate medicine?

women have different interests, it's just a stupid game...

my neurologist buddy (a man) laughed at that suggestion, function not size is the relevant factor

still more racist bs...

 

This post betrays a fantastic ignorance of IQ testing.

 

Please correct my ignorance.

What I wrote is supported by a mountain of research and journal articles. .

 

No it isn't.

 

Even relatively small IQ gaps between large groups of people shows less anti-social behavior and greater quality of life attainment.

As a group, one million people w/ an IQ of 100 'do better' than one million people w/ an IQ of 95.

 

It's b/c you apparently don't have a basic understanding of the differences between an individual and group.

Men and women's different brain volume is attributable to smaller visio-spacial regions in females than men.

Black and White men is comparing apples to apples; just as Black women are compared to White women.

As for gender and IQ differences, men have more variability than women in IQ testing, which is probably reason for why male-female gap in the most prestigious areas associated w/ high intelligence: Fields Medals, Nobel Laureates, etc.

Perhaps you can explain the cultural influences that resulted in more female Nobel laureates in the sciences than after 1950.

It's 2013 today. Why were there more female science Nobel laureates from an earlier time than today?

 

Thanks for sharing all that you know.

 

Mathematical statistics tells us that the larger sample sizes grow, the easier it becomes to establish significant differences. But this means little in practice because millions of people have never taken the same IQ test. In real life, sample sizes are relatively small. You'd need to show consistent results over time for individuals (research also shows IQ can change), and then you'd need to track "anti-social behavior and quality of life attainment" (however those might be measured) over decades. And again, all the research shows that there is no unitary thing called "intelligence." Rather, there are several independent dimensions of ability, not all of which are measured by any one test.

I don't dispute that people have different abilities. Quite the contrary. What I'm saying is that we don't have the convenience of a single test which can reliably and consistently measure those differences.

 

I don't have to explain anything it's you who needs to defend the OP...

so explain...on average women have smaller brains than men why are women now dominating the medical field? how is this possible if they have smaller brains clearly according to you this isn't possible ...give us an answer now...

Einstein estimated IQ of 160 had a smaller than average brain for a man... according to you he should have a head the size of a balloon......explain this now...there are children with small brains and genius IQ's, my twins (girls no less)tested in the 120 range at age 10, how big a brain do you think a 70 lb 10 year old has?

women's education and career paths are socially/culturally/gender motivated it is has nothing to do with smaller brain size...you would have been in a coma for the last 50 years not to know this...

mainland china with the overwhelming majority of ethnic Chinese scores at a European level, lower than the relatively tiny ethnic Chinese enclaves of Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong, and North Korea scores lower than South Korea...if there is racial connection with IQ as you assert this is impossible...so explain how you cherry pick isolated enriched social environments to base your ludicrous theory and ignore the less advantaged majority of orientals?


and ya I have a good friend an MD who is an expert neurology who say the entire hypothesis is absurd, race, gender and brain size have no bearing on intelligence...yet here you are a wannabe internet expert claiming to know more than a Neurologist...

 

I've already explained to you that the brain regions related to intelligence are not significantly different between men and women, but are for Black males and White males; and Black females and White females.

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that on average, w/ all other considerations being equal, people w/ larger brains are more intelligent in large sample sizes.

No it's not. Adult IQ is around 80% heritable and 20% environmental. The Chinese IQ easily falls w/in standard deviation of Hong Kong, etc., IQ.

Tell your friend that every study measuring brain size and IQ has found positive correlation, and that two dozen studies measuring brain volume using MRI technology has found a correlation w/ brain size and IQ of 0.35.

 

There have been many longitudinal studies involving IQ.

What's interesting is that whatever the intelligence test - reaction time, backward digit span, raven's progressive matrices, there is a strong correlation w/ the standard IQ test. What's more, Whites do even better on these highly loaded general intelligence tests than IQ tests involving some amount of prerequisite education.

In other words, the gap between Blacks and Whites in general intelligence is even greater on tests measuring pure intelligence.

 

What have the longitudinal studies shown?

I don't doubt that several sorts of IQ test show correlated results, but the question is what sort of intelligence is being measured. The research decades ago, when I last looked, showed that things like creativity and social intelligence were not correlated with things such as quantitative reasoning or verbal facility. I've heard nothing to the contrary.

 

Thanks for the clarification.
Makes it easier to ID baseless Opinions possibly over layed with some prejudice and not the product of ignorance.

I always hope any opinion uploaded can have the dots connected on request.
At times, authors of the strongest opinions are unwilling to demonstrate how they arrived at an opinion and defer to some reference.
Sort of like calling in your big brother to fight your fights.
Does this reflect on IQ. My hunch is; Yes !
The inability to connect the dots that established one's opinion.


Moi


Of course an OP is just an OP and needs no defense here.