Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic

5/14/2009 10:04:31 PM #

I have always thought that north west Europeans had the highest IQs in the world, however the book IQ and the Wealth of Nations has the smartest whites as Germans, Austrians and Italians, with East Asians beating them. Considering the lifestyles in Scandinavia, and comparing them to the rest of the worlds, especially east Asia, makes be conclude that far North west Europeans have by far the best suite of intellectual characteristics of the world's people. They are not overpopulated, never have been, and this alone makes be believe that they are better than the rest of us.

Gregory F. Peischl | Reply

5/15/2009 3:36:34 PM #

Left out in this short article is that East Asians have a lower I.Q. for language--97 is reported in the Bible of race and I.Q. studies--Herrenstein and Murray's fascinating work "The Bell Curve."

Also, Eskanazi Jews have a higher I.Q. (~110) than corresponding caucasians.

Leftist ideologues cannot abide by these results, so anyone holding them is immediately given the treatment, i.e., totally ignored. Then if the opinions come out anyway, ferociously attacked on a personal basis beginning with lunacy and quickly heading downhill from there. Under no circumstances will the evidence ever be disputed, because it is by now indisputable. At best one hears the standard canard that the opinion is "deeply flawed," without, of course, describing any flaws.

Tom Holzel | Reply

7/18/2009 4:01:12 AM #

Results like this will never fly in our politically correct world.  Most Americans believe that their is no genetic differences in any race.  They believe this because of the media, and colleges and universities.  Our society has been pro minority for a long time, and that will never change, at least in my lifetime.  People believe what they want to, what they are told, and what makes the most sense emotionally.  It seems like a nice thought, that everybody is born the same with the same capabilities.  It is fair, and this idea means that people don't need to be discouraged by there birth race.  It would be horrible to be told that you aren't very smart because of your race.  But life isn't fair.  Different races, and different individuals of the same race have genetic differences in I.Q.
Just don't ever expect the mainstream citizen to ever believe it.   There is a myth that America is a fair, honest and justice seeking nation.  Recent developments would seem to indicate otherwise.

Dan Sadowski | Reply

8/5/2009 11:04:28 AM #

This article does not provide a coherent scientific definition of race that would make for reliable measurement. The authors and their defenders keep assuming that if they keep talking about their racial categories as if they had biological reality, they will. But what is a "US black"? There is no biological reality to that concept, only a social one. Saying there is does not make it so and until a rational explanation is provided for how conventional racial categories have any consistent biological meaning, studies like this will be worthless. The conclusion is laughable--the implications of the research are clearly that people should be treated as members of groups--after all, why waste resources on people who lack the intelligence, to the authors, to ever use those resources.

Marc | Reply

8/24/2009 2:40:23 PM #

Of course race is real.. that's why Asians are genetically predisposed to be lactose-intolerant, or blacks have higher rates of prostate cancer.

Bob | Reply

8/24/2009 7:45:24 PM #

Truth will set world Free... Free. Free.

Truth is Not a personal opinions.

Truth must be from public-evidence.

Evidence published for the world to see.

Digital publishing Web-publishing Net-publishing will all world to access the truth.

Web-publshing of public-evidence. public-facts. will allow world to know the truth.

Truth will set world Free. Truth will us Free.

charles darwin | Reply

8/25/2009 8:13:38 AM #

I understand what Marc was trying to say. The United States-The Great Melting Pot! While I suppose I still qualify as caucasian, I do have some Cherokee genes, thanks to my Great-Grandmother. I am also Irish, German, and English. Which am I the most of? No idea!
African-Americans, Asian-Americans... Without looking at their individual family trees, their own genetic make-up, how do you decide which "race" is the predominant one? Going by skin tone or the degree of slant to one's eye seems a bit simplistic.
These studies really do bother me. I expect now to see the next study saying, yes, Blacks are the better athletes, as a famous sports announcer was once ridiculed for spouting!  

Susan | Reply

8/27/2009 6:42:07 PM #

Crawford-Nutt (1976) found that African black students enrolled in westernized schools scored higher on progressive matrix tests than did American white students. The study was meant to examine perceptual/cultural differences between groups, and demonstrated that one’s performance on western standardized tests may actually correspond more closely with the quality and style of schooling that one receives more so than other factors. These findings closely support research suggesting that the forms of recognition and reasoning found on Progressive Matrixes tests are exercised and maintained within a western style educational setting (Ceci & Williams, 1997; Ceci, 1991; Richardson, 2000, 2002). Buj (1981) also showed Ghanaian adults in another study to score higher on the same supposedly ‘culture fair’ intelligence test than did Irish adults; scores were 80 (Ghanaian) and 78 (Irish), respectively. While Shuttleworth-Edwards et al (2004) in a study with black South Africans between the ages of 19–30, showed highly significant effects for both level and quality of education within groups whose first language was an indigenous black African language. For example, black African first language groups (as well as white English speaking groups) with “advantaged education” were comparable with the US standardization in IQ test scores (e.g. WAIS-III).  

Other programs have shown dramatic improvement in test scores for socially disadvantaged adolescents as a result of short-term cognitive training, so that "…three months later their performance was indistinguishable from that of middle class students” (Feuerstein & Kozulin, 1995, p. 74). Studies done with Ethiopian immigrant students coming from extraordinarily poor rural circumstances tested in Israel by different IQ tests had, in pre-intervention tests, demonstrated lower test scores than the Israeli norm. However, after a short but intensive teaching process the Ethiopian immigrant children performed at about the same level as the Israeli norm (Tzuriel & Kaufman, 1999; Kozulin, 1998).

Bond (1924) early last century pointed out that the average IQ scores of African Americans from several northern states were higher than those for whites from many southern states (Bond, 1924a, p. 63). He argued that African Americans who migrated to the North must have left their "duller and less accomplished White fellows in the South." Bond also believed that IQ test scores reflected social and educational training. Inline with this belief, Jenkins's (1936) reported the results of IQ tests given to Black and White children in Illinois, and found that the proportion of students with scores over 130 was the same among Black and White children when environmental influences were comparable. A later study, involving Caribbean children, would in essence replicate these findings. The results from that study showed that when raised in the same enriched institutional environments as white children, black children demonstrated superior IQ test scores. IQs were: Black children 108, Mixed children 106, and White children 103 (Tizard et al, 1972).

Studies also show that upward of 99% of group IQ score differences between healthy black and white Americans are eliminated after controlling for cultural factors. Manly et al (1998) found that after cultural factors such as linguistic behavior (e.g. black vs. standard English) are controlled between healthy black and white Americans that IQ score differences between these populations virtually disappear; becoming insignificant in all but only one area (a reading section)! Some argue that because those who construct standardized tests come from a narrow social group that it follows that test items will contain information and structures that match the background knowledge of some people more than others (Richardson, 2000). This may explain why “acculturation” is found to predict IQ score differences better than virtually any other variable, aside from literacy levels (which is essentially another mediator of culture). Other studies have shown similar results, after controlling for cultural factors. Fagan and Holland (2002) found that where exposure to specific information was required; whites knew more about the meanings of different sayings than did Blacks, due to exposure. But, when comprehension was based on generally available information, Whites and Blacks did not differ (Fagan and Holland, 2002; see also, Fagan and Holland, 2007). This study also found that when Blacks and Whites are matched as to the comprehension of sayings requiring specific knowledge that Blacks were superior to Whites on intelligence tests (ibid).  

Teng and Manly (2005) argue that tests developed for members of the majority culture are often inappropriate for ethnic minorities, especially those who speak a different language, have little or no formal education, and grow up in vastly different circumstances (see also, Williams, 1972; Boone et al, 2007). These researchers further argue that variables that directly affect test performance, such as education and acculturation instead of race or ethnicity, should be considered as explanatory variables for test performance (Teng and Manly, 2005). Boone et al (2007) obtained findings that further supported this line, as not ethnic differences, but the effects of acculturation directly and significantly influenced IQ test performance. The authors cautioned that normative data derived on Caucasian samples may not be appropriate for use with other ethnic groups (Boone et al, 2007). Ryan et al (2005) found that discrepancy in reading and education level was associated with worse psychological test performance (e.g. IQ and other tests), while racial/ethnic minority status was not.

Black Supremacist | Reply

8/27/2009 6:42:30 PM #

in the United States, when matched for IQ with Whites, American Blacks have been shown to demonstrate superior “Working Memory” (Nijenhuis et al., 2004). This is a particularly interesting finding as African Americans tend to be taught by less qualified teachers (e.g. non-certified teachers and teachers with limited experience) than their white counterparts, and are provided with less challenging school work (Hallinan 1994; Diamond et al., 2004; Uhlenberg and Brown 2004). In Chicago, for example, the vast majority of schools placed on academic probation as part of the district accountability efforts were majority African-American and low-income (Diamond and Spillane 2004). Thus, it is somewhat of a surprise that African Americans should outperform white Americans on any portion of a paper and pencil test designed to mimic the structures of western style schooling and culture (Richardson, 2000, 2002).

Educational inequality in the U.S. is a pervasive part of the social system and is primarily a consequence of housing. Since the majority of states determine school funding based on property taxes, schools in wealthier neighborhoods receive more funding per student. As home values in white neighborhoods are higher than minority neighborhoods, local schools receive more funding via property taxes (Kelly, 1995). In addition, there has been a history of social policy which has limited African American’s access to avenues of wealth accumulation (e.g. purchasing suburban homes); so that black families also have far fewer assets than their white counterparts who earn the same incomes (Oliver and Shapiro, 1995). Parents with greater assets are free to use them for things like tutors, purchasing educational materials (e.g. computers), and to pay for private schools and more expensive colleges.  

In a study which helped to highlight the need for better education for African American children, Serpell et al. (2006) took 162 low-income African American and white fourth graders and assigned them, randomly, to ethnically homogeneous groups of three to work on a motion acceleration task, using computer simulation or physical tools. Or to a control group that did not participate in the learning activities. It was shown that both African American and White students performed equally well on the test of initial learning, with both groups scoring significantly higher than the control group. However, it was also found that African American children’s transfer outcomes were superior to those of their White counterparts (see Serpell et al., 2006). The study demonstrated, empirically, that not only do African American children learn as well as white children, but that they may actually exceed their white counterparts in their ability to transfer learned abilities to real tasks.

Black Supremacist | Reply

8/27/2009 6:42:45 PM #

Barnes (1972) noted that the Stanford-Binet, and the Wisc IQ tests are examples of “Culture specific tests,” and that the culture in this instance is what is referred to as “white middle class” culture. Lyman (1970) designed a cross cultural test called the “American Cross Culture Ethnic Nomenclature Test”, or “ACCENT.” The instrument contained 20 black biased and 20 white biased items. In one experiment this test was administered to 110 undergraduates (91 whites and 19 blacks) where it was found that the black participants out performed the white participants. Blacks obtained a mean of 15.3 on the black items and 11.1 on the white items, while white subjects obtained a mean of 12.7 on the white items and 8.3 on the black items. The results of this study indicated that when blacks and whites are tested cross-culturally that blacks may outperform whites on standardized tests.

Williams and Rivers (1972b) showed that test instructions in Standard English penalize the black child and that if the language of the test is put in familiar labels, without training or coaching, the black child’s performance on the tests increase significantly. Ideally a child’s language development should be evaluated in terms of his progress toward the norms for his own particular speech community (Cadzen, 1966); however, this kind of evaluation is rarely, if ever, done with respect to African Americans. Studies using sentence repetition tasks have found that at both third and fifth grades white subjects repeated Standard English sentences significantly more accurately than black subjects, while black subjects repeated nonstandard English sentences significantly more accurately than did white subjects (Marwit et al, 1977). Students in American schools are usually taught and tested only in Standard English, which can put African American students at a disadvantage. In fact, this issue was at the center debates concerning the use of Ebonics in the American school system during the 1990s.

Researchers provide considerable evidence showing that traditional psychological assessment is based on skills that are considered important within white, western, middle-class culture, but which may not be salient or valued within African-American culture (Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997; Hilliard, 1995; Boone et al, 2007; Teng and Manly, 2005). Kwate (2001) argues that IQ tests are antagonistic and incompatible with an African centered conception of intelligence and mental health, while a study by Obiakor and Utley (2004) showed that culturally diverse learners are often excluded in educational programs in the U.S. through misidentification, misassessment, miscategorization, misplacement, and misinstruction-misintervention. When test stimuli are more culturally pertinent to the experiences of African Americans, performance improves (Hayles, 1991; Williams and Rivers, 1972b). For example, research shows that “Black Culture” depicts problem solving as an integrative hemispheric endeavor rather than a linear, analytical process (Bell, 1994), and that in this culture "psychological closeness" is necessary for one’s involvement in the phenomena which he seeks to understand.

Studies using empirical methods also find that cultural differences in the provision of information account for racial differences in IQ scores. Fagan and Holland (2007) asked African-Americans and white Americans to solve problems typical of those administered on standard IQ tests. Half of the problems were solvable on the basis of information generally available to either race, or on the basis of information newly learned; while other problems were only solvable on the basis of specific previous knowledge. In this study specific knowledge varied with race and was shown to be subject to test bias (Fagan and Holland, 2007).

Black Supremacist | Reply

8/30/2009 1:17:55 AM #

Black Supremacist, please stop spamming your copied and pasted drivel.

John | Reply

8/30/2009 3:22:04 PM #

Dear BS- It's interesting that you had to go back over 40 years to find studies to support your beliefs.... must have taken a lot of time.

Steve | Reply

9/1/2009 8:29:38 PM #

its so funny that everyone just loved to here that whites are so much smarter than blacks then when someone post facts from source after source saying sorry yall its just not true,now the white folks have a problem and want to get mad becouse there superior bubble is burst!I should ask my little sister who graduated from yale and is currently a doctor what she thinks.She may have a better opinion than i do seeing that she graduated from UCLA before going off to Yale,but then again she is just another stupid black women!

opex9718 | Reply

9/5/2009 12:55:12 PM #

Hi Opex, Your email didn't do anything to support your case. Next time, I suggest that you use spell check before you post.

MAC | Reply

9/11/2009 11:40:02 PM #

I think it's true as with other genetic/race traits.  It doesn't mean someone of a certain race that has tendency's to score lower on IQ tests means that the race as a whole is "dumber" than another.  It means that there are talents that they have in other areas that another race might lack in slightly from another.  One may have better communication abilities, while another may have better problem solving abilities, and another have a better memory. I'm just saying that this test does not go in depth enough and needs further research..  I'd say average out everyone of different races abilities and it would all average out to equal.

-A German/Lithuanian/Cherokee

J A | Reply

9/14/2009 9:24:23 AM #

Interesting to read as well:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm

stating such facts as:

The prevalence of imprisonment in 2001 was higher for
-- black males (16.6%) and Hispanic males (7.7%) than for white males (2.6%)
-- black females (1.7%) and Hispanic females (0.7%) than white females (0.3%)

and

Lifetime chances of a person going to prison are higher for

    -- men (11.3%) than for women (1.8%)
    -- blacks (18.6%) and Hispanics (10%) than for whites (3.4%)

The Monk | Reply

9/21/2009 6:47:22 AM #

What's crazy is that, if you look at reproduction rates, there is a correlation between IQ and reproduction - but on its face seems to indicate almost an anti-evolutionary track.  On balance, low I.Q. people have far more children per/capita than do high I.Q. people...People with high I.Q.'s have the least children per/capita.  That's just crazy.

A. Shevis | Reply

9/21/2009 7:06:10 AM #

Just look at the average IQ by country - it's overwhelming evidence of the wide difference in iq's.  But IQ doesn't address all life situations, do they?  I don't think Einstein would do well lined up at wide receiver for the Washington Redskins.  

The important thing is what does society reward?  Generally, it rewards high iq.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

A. Shevis | Reply

9/21/2009 9:51:55 AM #

It is clear many Hitler/nazi supporters are on here today. You are espousing your racism which is a result of being a minority in this world and feeling quite inferior. I believe a "SMALL" PENIS
is the first and foremost issue with white men.  Get over it!

CAN'TSTANDIT | Reply

9/21/2009 9:59:28 AM #

FBI statistics show crime is the same between blacks and
whites. Blacks are prosecuted more and whites are let go.,
taken home to their parents.

The fact that you are still arguing these issues is because
you're trying to make yourselves feel better. You white Americans are hated all over the world. You take your racism everywhere you go. You need to stop it.

CAN'TSTANDIT | Reply

10/21/2009 12:33:25 PM #

Maybe we should ship them back to Africa?

John | Reply

10/21/2009 9:33:11 PM #

John, you are racist trailer trash. America would not be the country it is today if not for the free labor (slavery) and contributions made to this country by African-Americans. People like you are the cause of most of the problems and shortcomings (no pun intended) of this country today!

Barry Richter | Reply

10/24/2009 9:52:51 PM #

Your reasoning is fallacious because it assumes that the way America prospered (slavery) is the only way it could have prospered.

A similar argument is that we wouldn't know about relativity -- and would never know about it -- if Einstein hadn't been born. This argument leaves out the possibility that someone other than Einstein could have discover relativity, just as your argument ignores the possibility that America could have prospered by a means other than slavery.

Harding | Reply

10/26/2009 2:40:14 PM #

The actual issue that everyone sidesteps is not with the "race" but the leadership. The reason that African Americans consistently do poorly on any measure of outcomes is that the leadership of the black community owes it's very existence on there being an "oppressed" underclass.

If black leaders, or white leaders that pander to the same underclass, actually had their constituent's betterment as their focus, they would lose their following. Fair housing, class mobility, economic opportunity and access to the trappings of the middle class are not segregated only to whites. As all of these things are gathered wholesale by eastern and western Asians. Indians come from a culture that is currently(today) stratified by caste. A deep and unyielding segregation bordering on slavery for some. Yet even the lower castes come here and prosper. How many Indians do you see in public housing?  The differences are in entitlement, self-sustainability and accountability.

Political correctness has become the constitution. Even if studies that focus on genetic differences could be used to help the plight of minorities, they are buried, dismissed or ignored. Did anyone see this on any national broadcast news? The so-called leadership of an entire minority is incentivized on keeping them just where they are and convincing them that the only solution to their situation is allegiance to the leaders.

Blame the political class, not the manipulated masses. No test can determine accountability and self-sufficiency. Oh, sorry--except one. Life.

Dagny Taggart | Reply

10/26/2009 6:25:41 PM #

8,448 white-on-black rapes (see Table 42 in the report) (14.2 percent of all rapes against blacks were thus committed by white rapists); and,

17,572 black-on-white rapes (same table) (13.1 percent of all rapes of whites were committed by blacks).

Now, to be technical, it is no doubt true that some of the white perps in this data, AND some of the white victims were actually Latino, given the closer proximity between blacks and Latinos, spatially. But doing the complicated extractions necessary to know what percentage of either is Hispanic, though it can be done (and I am working on the methodology for my book) is more detailed than I feel the need to be here. So for the sake of comparison I will leave the numbers as they are, knowing that both would likely be smaller, and reduced in rough proportion to one another, if Hispanics were excluded.

A few things should be noted here:

First, blacks raped were more likely to have been interracially raped than whites were.

Secondly, although the number of black-on-white rapes was higher than the reverse, to be sure, the multiple is nowhere near 50:1. Numerically it is a little more than 2 to 1. On a per capita basis, since whites are roughly 6 times more prevalent in the population than blacks (as of 2002), this would mean that on a per capita basis, any given black person was about 12 times more likely to rape a white person than vice versa.

Now perhaps you are thinking at this point, "OK, whatever: whether it's 50 to 1 or 12 to 1, that's a huge disproportion!" And that's true, sort of, though not nearly as meaningful as it seems.

To begin with, as I explain in my piece "The Color of Deception," whites and blacks do not encounter each other at rates that are comparable. Because of residential and spatial isolation from one another, this won't surprise anyone reading this, I imagine. Indeed, according to Census data, presented by criminologist Robert O'Brian (the footnote for this one is in the original Color of Deception article, which has now been critiqued on Bryant's website, and which notes can be viewed there), any given black person is about 19 times more likely to encounter a white person than vice versa. Blacks, on average, encounter 57 whites out of every 100 people they encounter--so even with spatial isolation, blacks run into lots of white folks--while whites, on average, are actually more racially isolated, encountering, on average, only about 3 blacks for every 100 people we encounter.

Now obviously, you can't victimize someone you don't encounter, and if blacks were choosing rape victims purely randomly, we would expect that 57 percent of the victims of black rape would be white. But in fact, only 26 percent are (17,579 divided by 68,621: again, you can do the calculations easily from Table 42). This means blacks are half as likely as we'd expect to rape whites, numerically speaking, if they were raping at random, let alone TARGETING whites, in which case they would have no problem finding even more than 57 percent of their victims to be white.

Likewise, based on encounter rates, if rapists picked victims randomly, we would expect 3 percent of the victims of white rapists to be black. But indeed, in 2002, there were 110,394 rapes committed by whites (check yourself in Table 42--the computation takes about two minutes). 8,448 as a share of 110,394 is actually 7.65 percent: more than DOUBLE what would be expected if white rapists picked victims randomly. If anything then, this would tend to suggest that whites are targeting blacks for rape, though indeed I am not claiming that. The disproportion is probably a statistical anomaly based on small sample size. But still, at the very least this demonstrates no disproportionate black on white rape.

Based on encounter rates alone, we would expect the 68,621 black rapists to have raped 39,114 whites, while the 110,394 white rapists should have raped 3,312 blacks: a numeric multiple of nearly 13 to 1, rather than the 2.1 numeric multiple in actuality, and we would have expected a per capita rate multiple, therefore, of 75 to 1, rather than the 12 to 1 that manifested in actuality.

In other words, based on encounter ratios and rates, blacks raped whites far less often than would have been expected, and whites raped blacks far more often than would have been expected.

blacksupremacist | Reply

10/26/2009 7:32:43 PM #

High IQs correlate to high scores on standardized tests: Asians/Whites at the one extreme end and the blacks on the other. also, Jews as a group are the most successful ethnicity in terms of achievements...is it any surprise to anybody?

Why can't we just accept the truth and move on...

Oh yeah, blacks on average are the best athletes in the world than any other racial/ethnic groups...I guess God is fair!

j-boy | Reply

10/27/2009 6:57:36 AM #

Ok. Im just randomly passing by this webpage so have no interest or obsession with the subject.

Quickly, some of my observations would be:

1). It seems to me that brain size isn't indicative of intelligence. There was a news report some time ago about a man with a degree in mathematics who went for an X-Ray and amazed and startled himself and doctors with the discovery that he had almost no brain and a hollow skull.  If intelligence was related to brain size then  how come Einstein was'nt a freak with a brain the size of a house. Einstein was'nt 6 foot 10 with a 250 pound brain. Nobody would point and laugh at his huge head. However his brain did work efficiently.
Then of course we have gifted children whos brains are smaller than those of fully grown adults yet who can find the prime number solutions of really difficult problems.

2.) People should'nt be using the question of racial intelligence to engage in triumphalism whatever the result. Triumphalism is childish and not intelligent.

3.) I would not be of the opinion that intelligence or superior athleticism happens accidentally. What is random is whether or not it is exploited to the advantage of humanity but theres no way if I had better parents  or a wealthier upbringing that I would be able to find out whether 998989322344 is a prime number without a pencil and  a piece of paper. Middle class families often have a kid who does well in school plus a kid who does poorly so whats thew difference if its not something innante ? You can give a pencil to a 5 year old. One will draw a masterpiece and the other like myself will draw a stickman. We cant all be Einsteins of Van Goghs however apart from those who are innately psychpoathic, we can be educated with the ethic to respect and care for each other.'

Alan | Reply