[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-294677-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-294677-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","thirty-years-of-research-on-race-differences-in-cognitive-ability","THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY","","A scholarly analysis reviews thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability, focusing on how mean Black–White gaps in IQ are explained. The paper compares culture-only and hereditarian models using ten evidence categories, including worldwide test-score distributions, g factor, heritability, brain size, adoption, admixture, regression, life-history traits, origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables. The authors argue new evidence suggests a genetic component for the mean IQ difference and that public policy must balance discrimination and distributional models.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/thirty-years-of-research-on-race-differences-in-cognitive-ability/294677/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/thirty-years-of-research-on-race-differences-in-cognitive-ability/294677.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Rhys","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-07","2026-09-18",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",18,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What are the two main models compared for race differences in cognitive ability?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The paper compares the culture-only model (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian model (50% genetic–50% environmental) to explain mean Black–White differences in cognitive ability.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which types of evidence are used to evaluate the causes of IQ differences?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"It reviews ten categories of evidence, including worldwide distributions of test scores, g factor, heritability, brain size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How do the authors connect the findings to public policy?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"They argue that evidence points to some genetic component in Black–White differences in mean IQ, so policy should temper the discrimination model with a distributional model that reflects underlying group characteristics.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},294677,1790040126,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":99,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},687207024643,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Psychology, Public Policy, and Law Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association  \n2005, Vol. 11, No. 2, 235–294 1076-8971/05/$12 .00 DOI: 10 . 1037/1076-8971 .11.2.235  \nTHIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY  \nJ. Philippe Rushton The University of Western Ontario  \nArthur R. Jensen University of California, Berkeley  \nThe culture-only (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian (50% genetic–50% environmental) models of the causes of mean Black–White differences in cognitive ability are compared and contrasted across 10 categories of evidence:  \nthe worldwide distribution of test scores, g factor of mental ability, heritability, brain size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, related life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables. The new evidence reviewed here points to some genetic component in Black–White differences in mean IQ. The implication for public policy is that the discrimination model (i.e., Black–White differences in socially valued outcomes will be equal barring discrimination) must be tempered by a distributional model (i.e., Black–White outcomes reflect underlying group characteristics) .  \nSection 1: Background  \nThroughout the history of psychology, no question has been so persistent or so resistant to resolution as that of the relative roles of nature and nurture in causing individual and group differences in cognitive ability (Degler, 1991; Loehlin, Lindzey, & Spuhler, 1975) . The scientific debate goes back to the mid-19th century (e.g., Galton, 1869; Nott & Glidden, 1854) . Starting with the widespread use of standardized mental tests in World War I, average ethnic and racial group differences were found. Especially vexing has been the cause(s) of the 15-point Black–White IQ difference in the United States.  \nIn 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published Arthur Jensen’s lengthy article,“How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?” Jensen concluded that (a) IQ tests measure socially relevant general ability; (b) individual differences in IQ have a high heritability, at least for the White populations of the United States and Europe; (c) compensatory educational programs have proved generally ineffective in raising the IQs or school achievement of individuals or groups; (d) because social mobility is linked to ability, social class differences in IQ probably have an appreciable genetic component; and tentatively, but most controversially, (e) the mean Black–White group difference in IQ probably has some genetic component.  \nJensen’s (1969) article was covered in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News & World Report, and New York Times Magazine. His conclusions, the theoretical issues they raised, and the public policy recommendations that many saw as stemming directly from them were dubbed “Jensenism,” a term which entered the  \nJ. Philippe Rushton, Department of Psychology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada; Arthur R. Jensen, School of Education, University of California, Berkeley.  \nCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to J. Philippe Rushton, Department of Psychology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C2, Canada. E-mail: [rushton@uwo.ca](rushton@uwo.ca)  \n236 RUSHTON AND JENSEN  \ndictionary. Since 1969, Jensen has continued to publish prolifically on all of these issues, and increasing numbers of psychometricians and behavioral geneticists have come to agree with one or more of the tenets of Jensenism (Snyderman & Rothman, 1987, 1988) .  \nThe Bell Curve (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) presented general readers an update of the evidence for the hereditarian position along with several policy recommendations and an original analysis of 11,878 youths (including 3,022 Blacks) from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. It found that most 17-year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test, regar","cbCainl8Cv16EKpb","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainl8Cv16EKpb","pdf",348053,"English","# Background\n## Nature vs. nurture in cognitive ability\n## Jensenism and the Jensen (1969) article\n## The Bell Curve and evidence updates\n## Task Force conclusions and unresolved causes","[{\"question\":\"What are the two main models compared for race differences in cognitive ability?\",\"answer\":\"The paper compares the culture-only model (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian model (50% genetic–50% environmental) to explain mean Black–White differences in cognitive ability.\"},{\"question\":\"Which types of evidence are used to evaluate the causes of IQ differences?\",\"answer\":\"It reviews ten categories of evidence, including worldwide distributions of test scores, g factor, heritability, brain size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables.\"},{\"question\":\"How do the authors connect the findings to public policy?\",\"answer\":\"They argue that evidence points to some genetic component in Black–White differences in mean IQ, so policy should temper the discrimination model with a distributional model that reflects underlying group characteristics.\"}]","THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY | PDF",1789698087,151]