Theory-Based Review of the Research in IQ

Race and IQ: A Theory-Based Review of the Research in Richard Nisbett’s
Intelligence and How to Get It

The Open Psychology Journal, 2010, 3, 9-35
https://openpsychologyjournal.com/contents/volumes/V3/TOPSYJ-3-9/TOPSYJ-3-9.pdf

J. Philippe Rushton1,* and Arthur R. Jensen2
1 Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A 5C2, Canada
2 Department of Education, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94308

Abstract:

We provide a detailed review of data from psychology, genetics, and neuroscience in a point-counterpoint format to enable readers to identify the merits and demerits of each side of the debate over whether the culture-only (0% genetic-100% environmental) or nature + nurture model (50% genetic-50% environmental) best explains mean ethnic group differences in intelligence test scores: Jewish (mean IQ = 113), East Asian (106), White (100), Hispanic (90), South Asian (87), African American (85), and sub-Saharan African (70). We juxtapose Richard Nisbett’s position, expressed in his book Intelligence and How to Get It, with our own, to examine his thesis that cultural factors alone are sufficient to
explain the differences and that the nature + nurture model we have presented over the last 40 years is unnecessary. We review the evidence in 14 topics of contention: (1) data to be explained; (2) malleability of IQ test scores; (3) cultureloaded versus g-loaded tests; (4) stereotype threat, caste, and “X” factors; (5) reaction-time measures; (6) within-race heritability; (7) between-race heritability; (8) sub-Saharan African IQ scores; (9) race differences in brain size; (10) sex differences in brain size; (11) trans-racial adoption studies; (12) racial admixture studies; (13) regression to the mean effects; and (14) human origins research and life-history traits. We conclude that the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that in intelligence, brain size, and other life history traits, East Asians average higher than do Europeans who average higher do South Asians, African Americans, or sub-Saharan Africans. The group differences are between 50 and 80% heritable. 

種族和智商：理查德·尼斯貝特的研究的基於理論的回顧情報和如何獲得它

J. Philippe Rushton1,* 和 Arthur R. Jensen2
1 西安大略大學心理學係，倫敦，安大略省，N6A 5C2，加拿大
2  加州大學伯克利分校教育係，CA 94308

摘要：我們以點對點的形式詳細回顧了心理學、遺傳學和神經科學的數據，使讀者能夠確定關於僅文化（0% 遺傳-100%）是否存在爭論的每一方的優缺點。 環境）或自然 + 培育模型（50% 遺傳 - 50% 環境）最能解釋平均種族群體智力測試分數差異：猶太人（平均智商 = 113）、東亞人（106）、白人（100）、西班牙裔（90）、南亞人(87)、非裔美國人 (85) 和撒哈拉以南非洲人 (70)。 我們將 Richard Nisbett 的立場並置在一起，他在書情報和如何獲得它，用我們自己的，來檢驗他的論點，即文化因素本身就足以解釋差異，並且我們在過去 40 年中提出的先天 + 後天模型是不必要的。 我們
回顧14個爭論話題的證據：（1）需要解釋的數據； (2) 智商測試分數的可塑性； (3) 文化加載與 g 加載測試； (4) 刻板印象威脅、種姓和“X”因素； (5) 反應時間措施； (6) 種內遺傳力； (7) 種族間遺傳力； (8) 撒哈拉以南非洲地區的智商分數； (9) 大腦大小的種族差異； (10) 大腦大小的性別差異； (11) 跨種族收養研究； (12) 種族混合研究； (13) 回歸均值效應；(14) 人類起源研究和生活史特征。 我們的結論是，優勢證據表明
在智力、大腦大小和其他生活史特征方麵，東亞人的平均水平高於歐洲人南亞人、非裔美國人或撒哈拉以南的非洲人。 群體差異在 50% 到 80% 之間是可遺傳的。