heritability

literature

Ben Wilbrink

See also persoonlijke_verschillen.htm

Stephen M. Downes & Eric Turkheimer (2022). An Early History of the Heritability Coefficient Applied to Humans (1918-1960). Biological Theory volume 17, pages 126-137paywalled

KEY, MAAR IK HEB HET ARTIKEL ZELF NIET. Eric furnished this link: https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s13752-021-00392-9?sharing_token=nYg8v1Da8ZsWlkJXJ9fqUve4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY4dAYrazK-gWItTRJYTtr-D9FuQQv1DK4ULiYhMMq8P8gQGINr0CfimgBu57tP2hteX99Sr8NuPdY0zRAzckkIwo-ZweG3mX6KWjNIRUMGpQANSNh1Dc51BqTFsFZRTU4w=

David S. Moore & David Shenk (2016). The heritability fallacy WIREs Cogn Sci 2016. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1400 pdf

Key publication on the concept of 'heritability' and its misconceptions.

• "Thus, the way ‘heritability’ is used in most discussions of human phenotypes not only perpetuates false ideas; it also blinds us to steps we might otherwise take to improve the human condition."

Nicolas Robette, Emmanuelle Génin & Françoise Clerget-Darpoux- (2022). Heritability: What's the point? What is it not for? A human genetics perspective. Genetica 150,- 199-208 (2022) open access

Key

Arthur R. Jensen (1973). Educability & group differences. Harper & Row. isbn 0060121947 Appendix on heritability 366-375 scans of the book available on the Arthur Jensen site

Key on the position of behavior genetics regarding h² (heritability).

Jay Joseph (2022). A Reevaluation of the 1990 "Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart" IQ Study January 12, 2022 Human Development, 66, 48-65. open access

Key on twin research based heritability estimates.

Madeline Crosswaite and Kathryn Asbury (2018). Teacher beliefs about the aetiology of individual differences in cognitive ability, and the relevance of behavioural genetics to education. British Journal of Educational Psychology abstract

Theodore M. Porter (2018). Genetics in the madhouse. The unknown history of human heredity.. Princeton UP [UB Leiden Psycho C10.0 536] info and open access to Introductory chapter.

• At first we detect no more than a shadowy premonition of those sprawling, amorphous, yet insistent institutions of medicine that now absorb limitless resources and intrude into every dimension of our lives. Yet by 1850, mental hospitals were becoming, in parts of Europe and North America, the costliest of social programs. We might think of them as a trial run for the welfare state, working to relieve the suffering of the mentally ill and to lighten the terrible burden on their families and communities. As sites of medical treatment, they soon appeared to be failing. Yet it was scarcely possible to set free or even to hold back the intake of so many thousands of deranged, unruly, inconvenient, and (at times) dangerous persons. The eugenics movement, which has so often been characterized as an (illegitimate) outgrowth of Darwinian biology, is better understood as a reaction to the failure of asylum care to check the hyper-Malthusian increase of the institutionalized insane. Alienists (as doctors for the mad were called) set out on the basis of statistics to ascertain the principles by which insanity was reproduced. About 1880, with the spread of mandatory schooling, a parallel crisis of 'feeblemindedness'` began raising alarms. Institutions founded to treat these conditions supplied not only the incentive for a science of human heredity, but also its experts and its abundant reserves of data

  p. 5

Heritability in the genomics era — concepts and misconceptions. Peter M. Visscher, William G. Hill & Naomi R. Wray. Nature Reviews Genetics volume 9, pages 255-266 (2008) doi:10.1038/nrg2322 abstract

With a box on heritability of intelligence (IQ).

Yulia Kovas and very many othes (2015). Why children differ in motivation to learn: Insights from over 13,000 twins from 6 countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 80, 51-63. open access

D. Zabaneh and others (). A genome-wide association study for extremely high intelligence. Nature.ope access

Han L. J. van der Maas, Conor V. Dolan, Raoul P. P. P. Grasman, Jelte M. Wicherts, Hilde M. Huizenga, and Maartje E. J. Raijmakers (2006). A Dynamical Model of General Intelligence: The Positive Manifold of Intelligence by Mutualism Psychological Review, 113, 842-861. pdf

Ninety-nine independent genetic loci influencing general cognitive function include genes associated with brain health and structure (N = 280,360) Gail Davies and very many others preprint

Louis- Lello and others (2017). Accurate Genomic Prediction Of Human Height. open access

Eveline L. de Zeeuw, Eco J.C. de Geus & Dorret I. Boomsma (2015). Meta-analysis of twin studies highlights the importance of genetic variation in primary school educational achievement Trends in Neuroscience and Education 4 (2015) 69-76 view pdf

P. A. Vroon, J. de Leeuw & A. C. Meester (1986). Distributions of intelligence and educational level in fathers and sons. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 137-142. abstract

• Vroon, P.A. (1978) Enkele kanttekeningen bij het onderzoek naar de herkomst van intelligentieverschillen. Tijdschrift voor onderwijs research, jaargang 3, nummer 6, p. 284-291 http://objects.library.uu.nl/reader/index.php?obj=1874-208519&lan=en#page//62/66/74/62667417995526165856961521770897858193.jpg/mode/1up
• Groot, A.D. de (1979) Weinig informatie in artikel over intelligentie en erfelijkheid. TNO Project, jaargang 7, nummer 5, p. 202- 204
• Vroon, P.A. (1979) Worden verschillen tussen mensen bepaald door aanleg, omgeving of simplisme? De Psycholoog, jaargang XIV, nummer 1, p. 3-11
• Vroon, P.A. (1980) Over operationaliseren, rekenen en redeneren in het kader van het IO-debat. Tijdschrift voor onderwijs research, jaargang 5, nummer 4, p.170-173
• Vroon, P.A. (1980) Wat is ons richtsnoer: rede of vooroordeel? De Psycholoog, jaargang XV, nummer 4, p. 155-158
• Vroon, P.A. (1982) Is het IQ-debat de eeuwige herhaling van hetzelfde? Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar grensgebieden, jaargang 37, nummer 3, p. 167-178 transcriptie
• Vroon, P.A. (1982) Kanttekeningen bij een uitzichtloze discussie, Psychologie, jaargang 1, nummer 2, p. 15-17
• Vroon, P.A. (1983) Intelligentie en de aanleg-milieu controverse, LoL,26
• Leeuw de, J.; Vroon, P.A.; Meester, A.C. & Leyten J.L. (1984) Correlation between Raven progressive matrices tests scores of fathers and sons, Department of Data theory. University of Leiden
• Vroon, P.A. (1985) De appel valt onvoorspelbaar van de boom. Psychologie, jaargang 4, nummer 3, p. 50-52
• Vroon, P.A.; Leijten, J.L. & Ultee, W.C. (1985) Een schoolloopbaan met IQ- variabelen voor zonen en vaders. Mens en Maatschappij, jaargang 60, nummer 3, p. 274-281
• Vroon, P.A.; Leyten, J.L.; Leeuw, J. de & Meester, A.C. (1986) Redistributie van intelligentie. In: Bonarius, J.C.; Everaerd, W.Th.A.M. & Verbaten, M.H (red.) Psychologie in Nederland. Lisse, Swets & Zeitlinger, 1986, 125-136
• Sometimes good data do not answer questions: Further commentary on IQ distributions in fathers and sons Pieter A. Vroon August 1988
• Vroon, P.A. (1987) Models of Education Career With and Without IQ Measurements. The journal of psychology interdisciplinary and applied, Volume 121, number 3, p. 273-279

A. D. de Groot (1980). Vroon's neutraliteit. P. A. Vroon (1980). Wat is richtsnoer: rede of vooroordeel? De Psycholoog, XV, 149-154, 155-158.

Karri Silventoinen and many others (2015). The CODATwins Project: The Cohort Description of Collaborative Project of Development of Anthropometrical Measures in Twins to Study Macro-Environmental Variation in Genetic and Environmental Effects on Anthropometric Traits Twin Research and Human Genetics Volume 18 Number 4 pp. 348-360 2015 doi:10.1017/thg.2015.29

A. Anastasi (1958). Heredity, environment, and the question 'How?' Psychological Review, 65, 197-208. pdf

• Nor have efforts to determine the proportional contribution of hereditary and environmental factors to observed individual differences in given traits met with any greater success. Apart from difficulties in controlling conditions, such investigations have usually been based upon the implicit assumption that hereditary and environmental factors combine in an additive fashion. Both geneticists and psychologists have repeatedly demonstrated, however, that a more tenable hypothesis is that of interaction (15, 22, 28, 40). [HALDANE, J. B. S. Heredity and politics. New York: Norton, 1938 , LOEVINGER, JANE. On the proportional contributions of differences in nature and in nurture to differences in intelligence. Psychol. Bull., 1943, 40, 725-756. SCHWESINGER, GLADYS C. Heredity and environment. New York: Macmillan, 1933. WOODWORTH, R. S. Heredity and environment: A critical survey of recently published material on twins and foster children. Soc. Sci. Res. Coun. Bull., 1941, No. 47.

A. Anastasi (1976). Common fallacies about heredity, environment, and human behavior. In W. A. Mehrens: Readings in measurement and evaluation in education and psychology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. pdf of report

Katrina L. Grasby a.o. (2017). Little Evidence That Socioeconomic Status Modifies Heritability of Literacy and Numeracy in Australia. Child Development sci-hub.cc

Grasby, Katrina L., Little, Callie W., Byrne, Brian, Coventry, William L., Olson, Richard K., Larsen, Sally, & Samuelsson, Stefan (2019). Estimating classroom-level influences on literacy and numeracy: A twin study. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000418abstract

Benjamin S. Bloom (1964). Stability and change in human characteristics. New York: Wiley. lccc 64-17133 abstract

Muenks, K., Miele, D. B., Rowe, M. L., Ramani, G. B., & Stapleton, L. M. (2015). Parental beliefs about the fixedness of ability. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 41, 78-89. researchgate

"Specifically, the more parents believed that abilities were fixed, the less frequently they reported engaging in math- and reading-related activities." My question: are there third variables explaining the relation? Such as SES.

Genes, behavior, and behavior genetics Evan Charney WIREs Cogn Sci 2017, 8:e1405. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1405

temp. open access

Large Cross-National Differences in Gene × Socioeconomic Status Interaction on Intelligence Elliot M. Tucker-Drob,- Timothy C. Bates (2015). [geen pdf?] Psychological Science abstract & references

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Cognition Across Development and Context Elliot M. Tucker-Drob, Daniel A. Briley, and K. Paige Harden (2013). Current Directions in Psychological Science 22(5) 349-355 pdf

• Conclusions and Outlook
  The results reviewed here suggest a provocative reconceptualization of the relationship between social opportunity and the magnitude of heritable variation in cognition. We began this article with a quote that illustrates the common view that heritability estimates provide an “upper bound” on the effects of social intervention—if cognition is very heritable, then the environment cannot matter as much. In fact, research on how the heritability of cognition differs across development and across context suggests that genetic influences on cognition are maximized by environmental opportunity. The highest heritability estimates are obtained for older children and adolescents from economically advantaged homes—that is, among children who have the autonomy to select environmental experiences consistent with their own interests and who have an array of high-quality experiences to choose from. As social, educational, and economic opportunities increase in a society, genetic differences will account for increasing variation in cognition—and perhaps ultimately in educational and economic attainment.

Jerome Kagan (2003). Biology, context, and developmental inquiry. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 1-23. abstract

Maciej Trzaskowski, Nicholas G. Shakeshaft & Robert Plomin (2014). Intelligence indexes generalist genes for cognitive abilities. Intelligence, 41, 560-565. free access

Stuart J. Ritchie and Timothy C. Bates & Robert Plomin (2014). Does Learning to Read Improve Intelligence? A Longitudinal Multivariate Analysis in Identical Twins From Age 7 to 16. Child Development open access

Ben Wilbrink (1972). html

Added on that webpage: literature on heritability of differences in achievement and intelligence

Theoretical Concepts in the Genetics of Personality Development Elliot M. Tucker-Drob & Daniel A. Briley (2018?). To appear in: Dan P. McAdams, Rebecca L. Shiner, and Jennifer L. Tackett (Eds.) Handbook of Personality Development pdf concept

• Standard behavioral genetic methods provide a descriptive account of the extent to which individual differences in personality are statistically associated with genetic differences between people, the extent to which individual differences in personality are associated with the rearing environment that individuals share with their siblings (the shared environment), and the extent to which individual differences in personality persist after accounting for these two factors (the nonshared environment).

Richard E. Nisbett, Joshua Aronson, Clancy Blair, William Dickens, James Flynn, Diane F. Halpern, Eric Turkheimer (2012). Intelligence. New Findings and Theoretical Developments. American Psychologist, 67, 130-159 open access

Richard E. Nisbett (2013). Schooling makes you smarter. What teachers need to know about IQ. American Educator Spring, 10-39. pdf

Nicholas G. Shakeshaft , Maciej Trzaskowski, Andrew McMillan, Kaili Rimfeld, Eva Krapohl, Claire M. A. Haworth, Philip S. Dale, Robert Plomin (2013). Strong Genetic Influence on a UK Nationwide Test of Educational Achievement at the End of Compulsory Education at Age 16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0080341 open access

David Perkins, Shari Tishman, Ron Ritchhart, Kiki Donis, and Al An- drade (2000). Intelligence in the Wild. A Dispositional View of Intellectual Traits Educational Psychology Review, 12, 269-293. concept

Stuart Ritchie Elliot Tucker-Drob (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological Science abstract also a preprint

S. Selzam, E. Krapohl, S. von Stumm, P. F. O'Reilly, K. Rimfeld, Y. Kovas, P. S. Dale, J. J. Lee & R. Plomin (2017). Predicting educational achievement from DNA. Molecular Psychiatry, 22, 267-272 open access

Augustine Kong (2017). The nature of nurture: effects of parental genotypes. preprint

Eva Krapohla, Kaili Rimfelda, Nicholas G. Shakeshafta, Maciej Trzaskowskia, Andrew McMillana, Jean-Baptiste Pingaulta, Kathryn Asbury, Nicole Harlaard, Yulia Kovasa,e,f, Philip S. Daleg, and Robert Plomin (2017). The high heritability of educational achievement reflects many genetically influenced traits, not just intelligence. open access

Richard J. Haier (2017). The neuroscience of intelligence. Cambridge University Press. [UBL geleend, toch?] Ch 1.

Exercise genetics: seeking clarity from noise. Craig Pickering, John Kiely (2017). open access

Culture-gene coevolutionary psychology: cultural learning, language, and ethnic psychology. Cristina Moya and Joseph Henrich (2016). ScienceDirect Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 8:112-118 open access

OPINION: 2017 Constance Holden Memorial Address: Liberal Creationism Toby Young open access

Behavior Research Methods The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences. Craig Hedge Georgina PowellPetroc Sumner open access

Inga Schwabe, Luc Janss and Stéphanie M. van den Berg (2017). Can We Validate the Results of Twin Studies? A Census-Based Study on the Heritability of Educational Achievement. Front. Genet. open access

Draadje Tim van der Zee Twitter

• So irrespective of study design, twins or census, we find a high heritability for educational achievement in the Netherlands. The high heritability might be explained by the homogeneity in educational opportunities: most schools are tied to a standard curriculum and funded by the government (Sturm et al., 1998;- de Zeeuw et al., 2015), which might restrict the variation in school environments, leading to smaller individual differences between (see e.g.,- Heath et al., 1985;- Kovas et al., 2013;- Shakeshaft et al., 2013;- Colodro-Conde et al., 2015- for a similar argument).

James Flynn (2016). Does your Family Make You Smarter? Nature, Nurture, and Human Autonomy. info.

The first chapter 'Twins and autonomy' is some kind of summary. James Flynn will conclude the following (quote)

Chapter 2 starts serious business. The important concept here seems to be the cognitive quality of the family environment. No, Flynn does not explain what it is, at least not on p. 12 (but see appendix p. 180). Neither does he point out that there is a strenuous relation between that concept and the family genes. Having said that, it seems impossible that the child's genes and the cognitive quality of the family environment are independent variables, not being correlated. This is one of the stumble blocks making it difficult to understand what exactly Flynn is trying to do in this first part of his new book.

Ch 2 p. 13, introduces a serious confusion of 'true' and 'measured' vocabulary. What exactly does Flynn mean where he writes 'students whose vocabulary puts them at +2 SD above average'? Is it 'true' vocabuary, or is it 'level of performace' (on a vocab test) as mentioned in the preceding sentence? Is it possible for a psychometrician to conclude from some top score on a vocab test that a particular student is 98th percentile in true vocabulary? In his tables Flynn strongly suggests they are dealing with observed scores. Yet it is impossible for a +2 SD score to correspond to a +2 SD 'true' vocabulary. Flynn is talking of true vocabularies and observed vocabularies (at +1 SD etcetera) at the same time.

Ch 2, p. 18, turns the reasoning around, without mentioning as much; '.. those who would get an SAT-R score of 544, if they came from from a home typical of of those who score at that level.

Appendix 1 p. 181 at the top: 'eliminating 30 percent from the bottom of a normal curve lifts the SD of the remainder by 0.4967 SD.' This is utterly confusing; the first 'SD' should be 'median' to make it reasonable. And again in the second alinea. Proof: how Flynn talks in the second half of this page. Back to. the top passage 1): I do not understand the reasoning here at all. Yet it is crucial to everything else that follows.

For the time being, I give up on the first part of Flynn's Does your family make you smarter. I do not understand what he is doing here, it is a big thought experiment. The second part of the book is very interesting, does not however touch on the title theme.

High heritability of IQ (tested in adult age), what is its significance, if any? For starters, the question itself is a reification of the abstraction. A test is an instrument, not a societal goal. These issues confused my reading of Flynn's 'Does your family make you smarter'? https://twitter.com/benwilbrink/status/947094569509892096 Richard Nisbett does not confuse me. In his 2009 ‘Intelligence and how to get it’ http://books.wwnorton.com/books/Intelligence-and-How-to-Get-It/- … p. 38: “The degree of heritability of IQ places constraint on the degree of modifiability that is possible. All geneticists accept this principle, but hereditarians often acknowledge the principle and then go on to write as if heritability does in fact place limits on modifiability.” An example in the last category: Asbury & Plomin 2014 ‘G is for genes’

Flynn does not touch on expertise (Anders Ericsson) and how that relates to common smartness. Yet it seems to be the case that the phenomena of expertness show the concept of rather fixed intelligence to be at fault, in somewhat the same way the existence of 'Flynn-effects' does.

• The new method used here was first outlined in Intelligence and Human Progress: The Story of What Was Hidden in Our Genes (Elsevier, 2013). [eBook KB, denk ik]

  xviii

• Who is correct? Those who believe that our family history and decisions affect our cognitive abilities, or those who cite twin studies to show that our intelligence is largely the product of our genes?

  3

• . . . genes allow environment and choice far more scope than those suffering from “post-twin pessimism” may be aware.

  10

• Some of the subtests (Vocabulary, Information, Comprehension) that show children gaining the least from one generation to another are also the subtests that show the most persistent family effects within a generation. These are the very subtests most important for academic achievement and, therefore, their persistent family effects do most to handicap (or benefit) 17-year-olds.

  26

• As a preliminary, before the age at which the matching of an individual's genes with current environment begins (perhaps age 3 or 4), I posit that family determines virtually all of performance variance (this will be revisited in Chapter 6).

  45

• I accept the main thrust of the twin studies.

  159

• Dickens posited that genes and environment simply become more highly correlated as we age, which inplied that their influence was additive and not a matter of one draining potency away from the other - the potency of the environment was masked by the combination, which thanks to the twin studies was ascribed to genes alone.

  117

• Arithmetic: tiny gains for both school children and adults in terms of arithmetic reasoning. We clearly do not know how to teach this skill no matter how long we keep people in formal education. An obvious consequence is the fact that America has to import half of the engineers it needs.

  144

James Flynn (2013). Intelligence and human progress: The story of what was hidden in our genes. Elsevier. [eBook in KB]

The Impact of Variation in Twin Relatedness on Estimates of Heritability and Environmental Influences. researchgate [no pdf]

William Dickens & James Flynn (2001). Heritability estimates versus large environmental effects: The IQ paradox resolved. July 2001Psychological Review 108(3):549-549 10.1037/0033-295x.108.2.346 pdf [This article has been corrected. See Psychol Rev 2001 Jul;108(3):549.]

William Dickens (2005). Genetic differences and school readiness. February 2005The Future of Children 15(1):55-69. researchgate (complete issue)

Sandra Scarr (1988). How genotypes and environments combine: development and individual differences. In Niall Bolger, Avshalom Caspi, Geraldine Downey & Martha Moorehause (Eds.): Persons in context. Developmental processes. Cambridge University Press. isbn 052135577x (217-244). summary

M. Stoolmiller (1999). Implications of the restricted range of family environments for estimates of heritability and nonshared environment in behavior-genetic adoption studies. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 392-409. [full-text requested] [pdf via https://sci-hub.la/] [merkwaardig dat ik dit artikel in 1999. niet lijk te hebben opgemerkt] abstract

Callie H. Burt. Heritability studies: Methodological flaws, Invalidated dogmas, and changing paradigms. Advances in Medical Sociology: Health, Genetics, & Society 16, forthcoming 2015. researchgate

• The present study aims to provide interested scholars with information about heritability and heritability estimates of adverse health outcomes in light of recent advances in the biosciences.

Robert Plomin, Sophie von Stumm (2018). The new genetics of intelligence. Nature Reviews Genetics, 19, 148-159 doi:10.1038/nrg.2017.104 open

Genomic analysis of family data reveals additional genetic effects on intelligence and personality. William David- Hill (2017?). pdf preprint

Michael le Page (2017). DNA variants that are bad for health may also make you stupid. DAILY NEWS 20 June 2017. article

• So far, studies of the DNA of hundreds of thousands of unrelated people suggest that only around 30 per cent of the variation in intelligence is inherited. This big discrepancy between the results of twin studies and genome studies has become known as- the mystery of the missing heritability.

Genomic analysis of family data reveals additional genetic effects on intelligence and personality. W. David Hill, Ruben C. Arslan and others (2018). Molecular Psychiatry- (2018) doi:10.1038/s41380-017-0005-1 {paywalled, pdf not yet acquired] abstract

PUBLIC RELEASE: 9-JAN-2018 Identical twins can share more than identical genes BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE article

Epigenetics.

Dean Keith Simonton (2003). Francis Galton's Hereditary Genius. Its place in the history and psychology of science. pp 3-19 in R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). The anatomy of impact. What has made the great works of psychology great. APA PSYCHO D1.1.-37- (nog niet geleend) info

Dean Keith Simonton (2014). Historiometric Studies of Genius 87-106 in Dean Keith Simonton (Ed.) (2014). The Wiley Handbook of Genius Wiley. PSYCHO P4.2.2.-114 info

• Galton's (1869) classic directly addressed the question of whether genius is born or made, coming down strongly in favor of a genetic basis (Simonton, 2003). ( . . . ) Indeed, shortly after Galton (1869) published his argument for nature, Candolle (1873) offered the counterargument, with special focus on familial and educational experiences.

  89

• If Galton's (1869) historiometric study is the first to examine the early origins of genius, Quetelet's (1835/1968) represents the first to investigate the career trajectory once the genius enters adulthood.

  90

• Given the frequent association of genius with superlative intelligence, this individual difference variable seems an obvious place to start. Although Galton (1869) talked about differential 'natural anility' in his sample of geniuses, he never measured that construct directly. It was left to Woods (1906) to become the first researcher to attempt the historiometric assessment of 'intellect'. F. A. Woods (1906). Mental and moral heredity in royalty. Holt. archive.org

  92

Catharine Cox (1926). The early mental traits of three hundred geniuses. Volume II of Genetic Studies of Genius. Stanford University Press. archive.org

Having skimmed the conclusions: Cox assumes intelligence to be innate. Her last sentence:

• Heredity sets limits, but within these limits the adequate training of the most gifted - and so also of their less distinguished fellows - may raise them to the designed stature of men unmarred by the defects of insufficient experience, and thus realize in each one the complete development of inborn worth.

  219

Han L. J. Van Der Maas, "kees-jan Kan, Maarten Marsman and Claire E. Stevenson (2017). Network Models for Cognitive Development and Intelligence. J. Intell. 2017, 5(2), 16; doi:10.3390/jintelligence5020016 open access

The paradox of intelligence: Heritability and malleability coexist in hidden gene-environment interplay.- Pages 26-47.- Sauce, Bruno; Matzel, Louis D. (2018). - http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000131- Psychological Bulletin paywalled see also: https://neurosciencenews.com/inherited-iq-kids-8356/

• Intelligence can have an extremely high heritability, but also be malleable; a paradox that has been the source of continuous controversy. Here we attempt to clarify the issue, and advance a frequently overlooked solution to the paradox: Intelligence is a trait with unusual properties that create a large reservoir of hidden gene-environment (GE) networks, allowing for the contribution of high genetic and environmental influences on individual differences in IQ. GE interplay is difficult to specify with current methods, and is underestimated in standard metrics of heritability (thus inflating estimates of “genetic” effects). We describe empirical evidence for GE interplay in intelligence, with malleability existing on top of heritability. The evidence covers cognitive gains consequent to adoption/immigration, changes in IQ's heritability across life span and socioeconomic status, gains in IQ over time consequent to societal development (the Flynn effect), the slowdown of age-related cognitive decline, and the gains in intelligence from early education. The GE solution has novel implications for enduring problems, including our inability to identify intelligence-related genes (also known as IQ's “missing heritability”), and the loss of initial benefits from early intervention programs (such as “Head Start”). The GE solution can be a powerful guide to future research, and may also aid policies to overcome barriers to the development of intelligence, particularly in impoverished and underprivileged populations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)

  abstract

Augustine Kong and many, many others (2018). The nature of nurture: Effects of parental genotypes. Science, 359, 424-428 open access

Barbara Beatty (1998). From Laws of Learning to a Science of Values Efficiency and Morality in Thorndike's Educational Psychology. October 1998 American Psychologist Vol. 53, No. 10, I145-1152 pdf [Edward L. Thorndike]

• Thorndike was vehemently opposed to Hall's notion that the school curriculum should follow nature and recapitulate the stages of human cultural development. Not only was Hall's developmentalism intellectually uninteresting and methodologically inexact, Thorndike thought it was immoral and potentially dangerous. Schooling should improve upon nature. Not everything in nature was good; there were base instincts as well as good ones. Educators should use the impulses of nature only if they "further the aims of education. . . . when they work toward moral ideals" (Thorndike, 1901b, p. 136). "What development is can never teach what it ought to be," Thorndike stated, condemning Hall for committing the naturalistic fallacy. "No word perhaps is a poorer synonym for 'the good' than 'the natural' (Thorndike, 1901b, p. 136-7).

  1146

  Although Thorndike rejected Hall's developmentalism and genetic psychology, he did not reject the genetic component of individual differences. For Hall, genetic psychology meant the history of the development of the human race; for Thorndike, genetic psychology meant biologically inherited characteristics in individuals.

  1147

  Although Thorndike did not think there were significant sex differences in intellectual ability, he thought there was a strong genetic component to individual variation, including variation in morality. He published studies on heredity and on twins in 1903 and 1905, quoted Galton frequently, and thought intellect had such a high, fixed genetic component that, to be efficient, schools should group children into different classes and programs by ability. Thorndike's hard-nosed position on genetic limitations on human potential and the inefficiency of providing equal education to all children was to become one of the main, longstanding criticisms of his work (see Jonqich, 1962, 21-22). "It is wasteful," he wrote in the 1903 version of his Educational Psychology, "to attempt to create and folly to pretend to create capacities and interests which are assumed or denied to an individual before he is born" (p. 44). Thorndike also thought there was a genetic component to morality. But in contrast to his views on intelligence, at this early stage in his career he felt that environmental influences had a greater impact on character than on intellect, a position he would later modify. "The important moral traits seem to be matters of the direction of capacities and the creation of desires and aversions by environment to a much greater extent than are the important qualities of intellect and efficiency" (Thorndike, 1903, p. 45).

  1147

  Unabashedly hereditarian and meritocratic, Thorndike thought more traditional, moral, political, and humanitarian views did not give enough weight to individual differences and was determined to find a scientific way to do so. "Ethics, politics and philanthropy have been guilty of neglecting individual differences, partly because doing so simplifies all problems, and partly because of the retention of theological and sentimental prejudices in favor of the similarity and equality of man" (Thorndike, 1940, p. 369).

  1150

  Like many other progressives, Thorndike supported eugenics and now proposed giving political power to the genetically more able (see Curti, 1980; Hailer, 1984; Kevles, 1986). Thorndike had lectured on eugenics as early as 1913, but had stopped short of wholeheartedly recommending it (Thorndike, 1913). After more than 900 pages, the conclusion of Human Nature and the Social Order was an alarmingly simplistic list of 20 suggestions. Along with "increasing capital goods" and "the elimination of wars between and within nations," Thorndike recommended "better genes," "guidance by science," and a "national council of the able, good, and impartial endowed so as to be utterly their own masters" (Thorndike, 1940, pp. 957-961). Thorndike said he supported absolute meritocracy because quality "was better than equality" (Thorndike, 1940, p. 962). Despite the unreasonableness of some of these conclusions, his final recommendation was to have "Reasonable expectations" (Thorndike, 1940, p. 963).

  1151

  When the state of the job market in psychology led Thorndike to shift his attention from animals to education, he maintained the nineteenth-century linkage between intellect and character. In The Human Nature Club, Thorndike questioned traditional religious views but allowed for the possibility of Jamesian spirituality. In Notes on Child Study he rejected Hall's developmentalism as uninteresting, inexact, and immoral and advocated differential rather than genetic psychology. In the first version of Educational Psychology Thorndike maintained that the moral aims of education should be determined by ideals, not facts, and that morality was more influenced by environment than intellect was. In The Principles of Teaching he described morality as a product of learning acquired through numerous specific connections. In the second version of Educational Psychology he stated a genetic view of the origins of ideals. At the end of his career, in Human Nature and the Social Order, he proposed a moral measurement system and advocated selective breeding to enhance individual and social goodness. Incrementally, like the connections in his theory of learning, Thorndike' s explanations of morality became more efficiency-oriented, biologically-deterministic, and positivistic.

  1151

• Beatty, B. (1996). Rethinking the historical role of psychology in educational reform. In D. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development ( pp. 100-116). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
• Chapman, E D. (1988). Schools as sorters: Lewis M. Terman, applied psychology, and the intelligence testing movement. New York: New York University Press.
• Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1880-1990. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: The historical origins of psychological research. Cambridge UP.
• Haller, M. H. (1984). Eugenics: Hereditarian attitudes in American life. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
• Jonçich, G. (1968). The sane positivist: A biography of Edward L. Thorndike. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
• Kevles, D. J. (1986). In the name of eugenics. New York: Knopf
• Lagemann, E. C. (1989). The plural worlds of educational research. History of Education Quarterly, 29, 185-214.
• Lagemann, E. C. (1998). Contested terrain: A history of education research in the United States, 1890-1990. Educational Researcher, 26, 9, 5-17.
• Richards, R. J. (1987). Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary theories of mind and behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Thorndike, E. L. (1910). The contribution of psychology to education. The Journal of Educational Psychology, 1, 5-12.
• Tyack, D. B., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of American public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Richard E. Nisbett (2009). Intelligence and how to get it: Why schools and cultures count. New York, NY: Norton. isbn 9780393065053 [UBL PSYCHO C6.-148- ] info

• Interventions of the right kind, including in schools, can make people smarter. And certainly schools can be made much better than they are now.

• Environmental factors operating within groups need not be identical to those operating between groups. The 'factor X' argument from Lewontin.

  212

• Nisbett does not give footnotes or references for his Appendix B 'The case for a purely environmental basis for black/white differences in IQ!
• Dickens and Flynn (2001) proposed a formal model that solved the problem. They showed that two groups couls be separated by an environmental factor of great potency that did not affect each member of of the groups equally. They illustrated the point with the effects that TV had on the escalation of basketball-playing ability. [such as passing and shooting with both right and left hands]. ( . . . ) With their identical genes and identical height and quickness, identical twins were likely to have common basketball histories - and sice genes and powerful environmental factors went together, genes would get the credit for the whole package. [old vs new techniques]

  212-3

  It is now easy to imagine a variety of environmental factors that are potent and that separate black and white Americans. ( . . . ) And none of these things has to behave like the implausible factor X.

  213

  In sum, the indirect arguments for genetic determination of the black/white gap in IQ are inherently weak and readily refuted. The most direct evidence - the only evidence that really counts - concerns the European heritage within the black population. With a single exception - which happens to be the only study reported on at any length by either Herrnstein and Murray (1994) or Rushton and Jensen (2005) - the data show that more European genes are not advantageous for blacks. The last thirty years have seen a reduction in the gap in IQ by about a third and a reduction in the academic achievement gap by about the same amount. The evidence favors a completely environmental explanation of the remaining difference between blacks and whites.

  Richard E. Nisbett (2009). Intelligence and how to get it: Why schools and cultures count p. 235

Jelte M. Wicherts, Conor V. Dolan, Jerry S. Carlson, Han L. J. van der Maas (2009). Raven's test performance of sub-Saharan Africans: Average performance, psychometric properties, and the Flynn Effect. Learning and Individual Differences pdf

Jop van Kampen (12-2-2018). Wetenschappers twisten over de vraag: hoe aangeboren is IQ? Het Parool .

Robert J. Sternberg & Elena Grigorenko (Eds.) (1997). Intelligence, heredity, and environment. Cambridge University Press. contents and access

• • Sandra Scarr: Behavior-Genetic and Socialization theories of intelligence: Truce and reconciliation pp 3-41 summary and pdf "Competing theories about determinants of intellectual differences offer a challenging opportunity to test theoretically required predictions with available observations. Predictions about crucial research results are generated by Socialization Theory and by Behavior-Genetic Theory, and those predictions are quite different. The critical observations to test the adequacy of predictions from these competing theories have been made. Yet, there has been little, direct theoretical confrontation. That the theories have not been tested with existing data in a systematic fashion is either a sign of mutual ignorance or an aversion to being challenged.
    This chapter presents Socialization and Behavior-Genetic theories of intelligence and evaluates the adequacy of the theories' predictions to account for existing observations."
  • A. R. Jensen: The puzzle of nongenetic variance, 42-88 summary "Within the past decade, empirical findings in behavior genetics have importantly changed how researchers in this field think heredity and environment affect individual differences in mental ability. These insights are hardly new. Some are even found in the writings of Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911), the father of behavior genetics. But the recognition, formalization, and empirical support given to them by behavior geneticists in recent years can be considered significant advances. The most surprising findings, only conjectured by Galton, concern the role of environment in the development of mental ability. The present picture is quite different from the beliefs generally held only a decade ago.
    Genotype-environment covariance
    One such idea is that the perceptible environment is like a cafeteria. People make different selections according to their genetic makeup, or genotype. The environment is not a “given” but is largely the person's own creation. This becomes increasingly true as persons develop from infancy to maturity.
    Behavioral differences between persons that result from their self-selected and self-fashioned environments are the phenotypic expression of genotype-environment covariance. It accounts for more of the total variance (i.e., individual differences) in abilities and achievements than was formerly thought. Genotype-environment (GE) covariance is neither a strictly genetic nor a strictly environmental component of phenotypic variance but reflects the genetically driven differential selection of experiences from the available environment. It also includes the effects of differential treatment by parents, teachers, and peers, because their responses are largely evoked by the person's distinctive genotypic characteristics."
  • Robert Plomin: Identifying genes for cognitive abilities and disabilities 89-104 summary"Few scientists seriously dispute any longer the conclusion that cognitive abilities show significant genetic influence." [sloppy formulations in the summary, mistaking ‘cognitive abilities / IQ test scores’ for ‘differences in cognitive abilities / IQ test scores’. Makes a lot of difference (think only of the Flynn-effect!). b.w.] [See also: Robert Plomin & John C. DeFries (May 1998). 'The genetics of cognitive abilities and disabilities. Investigations of specific cognitive skills can help clarify how genes shape the components of intellect' Scientific American
  • John C. Loehlin, Joseph M. Horn, Lee Willerman: Heredity, environment, and IQ in the Texas Adoption Project. summary
  • Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.: IQ similarity in twins reared apart: Findings and responses to critics summary Summary Research on genetic influence on intelligence has a long and contentious history (Brand, 1993; Fancher, 1985 [The Intelligence Men; Makers of the I.Q.Controversy University Library - Closed Stack 4 - 3579 E 14 - ]; Kamin, 1974). Both the idea of a general factor of cognitive ability, Spearman's- g, and the idea that genetic factors might be an important source of variance in cognitive ability have been continuously debated since they were first systematically expounded by Galton (1869, 1876). Reviews of Galton's books published in the- London Times- at the time of their appearance could, if slight changes were made, be published today. The debate on the nature of mental abilities and the influence of heredity on such abilities (as well as most other psychological traits) initiated by Galton continues unabated.
  • Douglas Wahlsten, Gilbert Gottlieb: The invalid separation of effects of nature and nurture: Lessons from animal experimentation pp 163-192 summary "Several decades of research involving nonhuman animals have led many scientists to a developmental systems explanation of the origins of brain and behavior. Developmentalists recognize the importance of genetic variation for individual differences in behavior but also appreciate that the complex sequence of bidirectional, interacting causes makes it almost impossible to assign a definite role to the genotype unless a major gene can be identified. The prevalent model in human behavior genetics, on the other hand, presumes that heredity and environment are additive, separately acting causes whose contributions to any characteristic can be neatly separated statistically. This presumption is biologically unrealistic in view of all that is known today about the control of gene action and the interdependence of genetic and environmental effects.
    In this essay, we focus on lessons learned from animal experimentation that have special relevance for understanding individual differences among humans. We argue that a general theory of proximate causes of behavioral diversity is broadly applicable to all mammals and, in most respects, all vertebrates, but the theory is a developmental one, not one based on the invalid dualism of nature-nurture inherent in quantitative behavior genetics."
  • Thomas R. Bidell, Kurt W. Fischer: Between nature and nurture: The role of human agency in the epigenesis of intelligence pp 193-242 summary
  • H. Gardner, Th. Hatch and B. Torff: A third perspective: the symbol systems approach. 243-268 summary "In the behavioral sciences, no issue has been more passionately joined than the relative contribution to human behavior of hereditary (genetic) or environmental (cultural) approaches. In one sense, the debate dates back at least to the beginnings of the modern philosophical era: Contemporary hereditarians (hereafter Hs) can date back their pedigree to Descartes and Leibnitz, while contemporary environmentalists (hereafter Es) can trace their intellectual heritage to the British empiricists, such as Locke and Hume."
  • Joan G. Miller: A cultural-psychology perspective on intelligence pp 269-302 summary "Culture is seen as influencing which behaviors are considered to be intelligent, the processes underlying intelligent behavior, and the direction of intellectual development. It thus is essential to any theory that is oriented to understanding the respective contributions of hereditary and environmental factors in intelligence."
  • Stephen J. Ceci, Tina Rosenblum, Eddy de Bruyn, Donald Y. Lee: A bio-ecological model of intellectual development: Moving beyond h2 pp 303-322 summary "In her 1958 Presidential Address to APA, Anne Anastasi urged psychologists to move beyond the question of studying “how much” variance was accounted for by genetics and environment and instead to address the question of “how” genotypes were translated into phenotypes. Despite the passage of nearly 40 years, Anastasi's challenge has not been taken up. Today, we know much more than we once did about the role of genetics in intelligence, the distribution of alleles at neurologically relevant sites, and the molecular chemistry of brain functioning, but we still know as little as ever about the mechanisms through which genetics get translated into phenotypic intellectual expression.
    In this chapter, we endeavor to say something about the process that translates genes into phenotypes and, in so doing, say something about the environmentally loaded nature of heritability and the genetically loaded nature of the environment. While acknowledging the important role that genetics plays in intellectual development, we shall nevertheless take issue with the traditional “percent of variance accounted for” model of behavior genetics. In its place, we will suggest that traditional heritability measures do not inform us about the manner in which genes exert their influence, nor even about the organism's genetic potential. Rather, they tell us what proportion of individual differences in already actualized genetic potential has been brought to fruition by the prevailing environment. Left unknown, and unknowable from the traditional model, is (1) the amount of the organism's unactualized genetic potential, and (2) the absolute level of intellectual competence around which individual variation occurs."
  • Edmund W. Gordon, Melissa P. Lemons: An interactionist perspective on the genesis of intelligence pp 323-340 summary 'Such is the case in the continuing pursuit of understanding relevant to issues concerning the relationships between intelligence, heredity, and environments. Our conceptions of each of these constructs are influenced by differential perspectives, which are often influenced by differences in the respective social position held by the investigator. One need only look at the long history of political contamination of this debate to see how much our efforts at explaining these relationships have been shaped by concern for differences in status attributable to class, race, and sex. In approaching this set of issues, we make no claims to objectivity. The authors of this chapter are conceptually biased in favor of epigenetic and interactionist conceptions of the origin and nature of human behavioral development. We are politically biased in favor of egalitarian and humanistic values as guides to inform social organization.'
  • R. J. Sternberg: Educating intelligence: infusing the triarchic theory into school instruction. 343-362 summary
  • H. J. Eysenck S. J. Schoenthaler: Raising IQ level by vitamin and mineral supplementation pp 363-392 summary
  • Elena L. Grigorenko, Tatiana V. Kornilova The resolution of the nature-nurture controversy by Russian psychology: Culturally biased or culturally specific? pp 393-439 summary
  • Yrjö Engeström, Ritva Engeström, Merja Kärkkäinen: The emerging horizontal dimension of practical intelligence:Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in complex work activities pp 440-462 summary
  • Stacey S. Cherny, David W. Fulker, John K. Hewitt: Cognitive development from infancy to middle childhood pp 463-482 summary [this summary does not summarize]
  • J. Steven Reznick: Intelligence, language, nature, and nurture in young twins pp 483-504 summary
  • Sandra Pipp-Siegel, JoAnn L. Robinson, Dana Bridges, Sheridan Bartholomew: Sources of individual differences in infant social cognition:Cognitive and affective aspects of self and other pp 505-528 By summary
  • Earl Hunt: The feeling of vujà dé. 531-551 summary
  • Irwin D. Waldman: Unresolved questions and future directions in behavior-genetic studies of intelligence pp 552-570 summary

Robert Plomin & Gerald E. McClearn (Eds.) (1993). Nature, nurture & psychology. Washington, DC. American Psychological Association. isbn 1557982023 info

#reference

• • Kimble, G. A. Evolution of the nature-nurture issue in the history of psychology. 3-26
  • Gerald E. McClearn: Behavioral Genetics: The Last Century and the Next
  • McGue, M., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Iacono, W. G., & Lykken, D. T.: Behavioral genetics of cognitive ability: a life-span perspective.
  • David W. Fulker, S. S. Cherny, and Lon R. Cardon: Continuity and Change in Cognitive Development
  • Cardon, L. R., & Fulker, D. W.: Genetics of specific cognitive abilities.
  • John C. DeFries and Jacquelyn J. Gillis: Genetics of Reading Disability
  • Duane Alexander: Cognitive Abilities and Disabilities in Perspective
  • [IV Psychopathology: Genetic and Experiential Factors ]
  • Brody, N.: Intelligence and the behavioral genetics of personality.
  • Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J.: Heredity, environment, and the question ‘How?’ - A first approximation.
  • H. H. Goldsmith: Nature-Nurture Issues in the Behavioral Genetics Context: Overcoming Barriers to Communication
  • FrancesDegen Horowitz: The Need for a Comprehensive New Environmentalism
  • David C. Rowe and Irwin D. Waldman: The Question "How?" Reconsidered
  • Theodore D. Wachs: The Nature-Nurture Gap: What We Have Here Is a Failure to Collaborate
  • Hewitt, J. K.: The new quantitative genetic epistemology of behavior.
  • David Reiss: Genes and the Environment: Siblings and Synthesis
  • Michael Rutter, Judy Silberg, and Emily Simonoff: Whither Behavioral Genetics? - A Developmental Psychopathological Perspective
  • Robert Plomin: Nature and nurture: perspective and prospective.

Frank Miele (2002). Intelligence, race, and genetics. Conversations with Arthur R. Jensen. Westview Press. isbn 081334008X Mag dus tzt ook naar Boekenzolder --> reviewed

Careful study, lots of people involved more or less actively. Author has an axe to grind: heritability estimates in the mainstream literature are wy too high. Criticised by Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr. abstract.

Handbook of Behavior Genetics pp 81-99 | Twin Studies of General Mental Ability. Authors Nancy L. SegalEmail authorWendy Johnsonpreview

"Twin research on behavioral and medical traits, in general, and on intelligence, in particular, has advanced at an impressive rate."

Race, Genetics, and Scientific Integrity Jerry Hirsch From: Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved Volume 2, Number 3, Winter 1991 pp. 331-334 | 10.1353/hpu.2010.0046 abstract

Race, genes, and disparity. This blog: Race, genes, & intelligence, references. dated 2011. wordpress

Stephen Ceci & Wendy M. Williams (2009). Darwin 200: Should scientists study race and IQ? YES: The scientific truth must be pursued Nature open

The Intellectual War on Science. It's wreaking havoc in universities and jeopardizing the progress of research. By Steven Pinker Feb 13, 2018 The Chronicle of Higher Education site

Roxanne Connellya & Vernon Gayleb (2018). An investigation of Social Class Inequalities in General Cognitive Ability in Two British Birth Cohorts. SocArXiv Papers. open

Genome-wide association meta-analysis of 78,308 individuals identifies new loci and genes influencing human intelligence. Suzanne Sniekers, Sven Stringer[…]Danielle Posthuma. Nature Genetics volume 49, pages 1107-1112 (2017) doi:10.1038/ng.3869 abstract

Aron K. Barbey (2018). Network Neuroscience Theory of Human Intelligence Trends in Cognitive Sciences, open access

Jonathan Wai Ph.D. How the “Cafeteria of Experience” Impacts Our Development. Without sufficient opportunity attaining expertise is highly unlikely. Posted Feb 21, 2018 blog

LISTEN: Why we need to talk about the role of genetics in education - Dr Kathryn Asbury talks to Tes Podagogy. Tes Editorial Staff. 21st February 2018 pocast & text

I am worried. Deeply.

Hans J. Eysenck (Ed.) (1973). The measurement of intelligence. Readings selected and comments written by H. J. Eysenck. Lancaster: MTP Medical and Technical Publishing Co. Ltd. SBN 852000596

• • among others:
  • C. Burt: The Evidence for the Concept of Intelligence -
  • T. R. Miles: On Defining Intelligence -
  • L. L. Thurstone: The absolute zero in intelligence testing -
  • J. E. Anderson: The limitations of infant and preschool tests in the measuement of intelligence -
  • R. L. Thorndike: Intellectual status and intellectual growth -
  • P. E. Vernon: Ability factors and environmental factors -
  • H. J. Eysenck and P. O. White: Personality and measurement of intelligence -
  • W. D. Furneaux: Intellectual abilities and problem-solving behaviour -
  • P. O. White: Individual differences in speed, accuracy, and persistence: A mathematical model for problem solving -
  • L. Erlenmeyer-Kimling and L. F. Jarvik: Genetics and intelligence: A review -
  • Q. McNemar: A critical examination of the University of iowa Studies of environmental influences upon IQ -
  • R.S. Wilson: Twins: Early Mental Development
  • A. R. Jensen: IQs of Identical Twins Reared Apart
  • Q. McNemar: A Critical Examination of the University of Iowa Studies of Environmental Influences upon the IQ
  • B. Burks: The Relative Influence of Nature and Nurture upon Mental Development: a Comparative Study of Foster Parent-Foster Child Resemblance and True Parent-True Child Resemblance
  • C. Burt: Intelligence and Social Mobility
  • J. H. Waller: Achievement and social mobility: Relationships among IQ scores, education, and occupation in two generations -
  • A. Falek: Differential fertility and intelligence: Current status of the problem -
  • W. D. Crano: Does intelligence cause achievement? A cross-legged panel analysis
  • C. Burt: Ability and Income
  • D. W. Shucard and J. L. Horn: Evoked cortical potentials and measurement of human abilities.

  contents

Robert Cancro (Ed.) (1971). Intelligence: genetic and environmental influences. Grune & Stratton. lccc 79-153576. reviewed

Geeft goed beeld van het denken over intelligentie een halve eeuw geleden.

• • Among others:
  • Raymond B. Cattell: The stucture of intelligence in relation to the nature-nurtue controversy 3-30 -
  • Lloyd G. Humphreys: Theory of intelligence 31-42
  • David Wechsler: Intelligence: Definition, theory, and the IQ 50-57 -
  • Bruce Eckland: Social class structure and the genetic basis of intelligence 65-76
  • Jerry Hirsch: Behavior-genetic analysis and its biosocial consequences 88-106
  • Arthur R. Jensen: The race X sex X ability interaction 107-161
  • Steven G. Vandenberg: What do we know today about the inheritance of intelligence and how do we know it? 182-118 -
  • Edmund W. Gordon: Methodological problems and pseudoissues in the nature-nurture controversy 240-251
  • J. McV. Hunt & Girvin E. Kirk: Social aspects of intelligence: Evidence and issues 262-305

Alfred Binet & Théodore Simon (1916/1973 reprint). The development of intelligence in children. (The Binet-Simon Scale). Translated by Elizabeth S. Kite. Reprint: New York Arno Press. isbn 0405051350 online

Stephen Jay Gould (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton. isbn 0393300560 preface to 2nd edition 1996

A terrible book (and terribly popular on top of that), or is it? Needs to be studied alongside serious criticisms by psychologists. Gould might be right, I am beginning to suspect these days ;-)

• a.o.: The American school and slavery 69 - Alfred Binet and the original purposes of the Binet scale 146 - H.H. Goddard and the menace of the feeble-minded 158 - Lewis M. Terman and the mass marketing of innate IQ - R. M. Yerkes and the Army Mental Tests: IQ comes of age 192 - The case of Sir Cyril Burt 234 Correlation, caue, and factor analysis 239 - Charles Spearman and general intelligence 256 - Cyril Burt and the hereditrin synthesis 273 - L. L. Thurstone and the vectors of mind 296 - Epilogue: Arthur Jensen and the resurrection of Spearman's g 317-319
• wikipedia: The revised and expanded second edition (1996) includes two additional chapters, which critique Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray's book The Bell Curve (1994). Gould maintains that their book contains no new arguments and presents no compelling data; it merely refashions earlier arguments for biological determinism, which Gould defines as "the abstraction of intelligence as a single entity, its location within the brain, its quantification as one number for each individual, and the use of these numbers to rank people in a single series of worthiness, invariably to find that oppressed and disadvantaged groups—races, classes, or sexes—are innately inferior and deserve their status".
• Carroll, J. B. (1995). Reflections on Jay Gould's The mismeasure of man (1981): a retrospective view. Intelligence, 21, 121-134.
• review by Lloyd G. Humphreys in Applied Psychological Measurement, 1983, 113-118 preview
• More references, see Bouchard 2018
• Scientists Measure the Accuracy of a Racism Claim. By Nicholas Wade, June 13, 2011 The New ork Times article
• Russell T. Warne (2019). The mismeasurements of Stephen Jay Gould. Quillette page
• Russell T. Warne, Jared Z. Burton, Aisa Gibbons & Daniel A. Melendez (2019). Stephen Jay Gould’s Analysis of the Army Beta Test in The Mismeasure of Man: Distortions and Misconceptions Regarding a Pioneering Mental Test.Journal of intelligence, 7. open

L. E. W. van Albada (1956). Intelligentie en lichamelijke gesteldheid. Resultaten van een sociaal-geneeskundig onderzoek bij 10000 schoolkinderen in de provincie Groningen. Proefschrift RU Groningen. met stellingen.

Philip Yam (Ed.) (1998). Exploring intelligence. A search in the human, animal, machine and extraterrestrial domains. Scientific American, vol 9, issue #4.

• • ao
  • Robert Sternberg: How intelligent is intelligence testing? 12-17
  • Howard Gardner: A multiplicity of intelligences 18-23
  • Linda S. Gottfredson: The general intelligence factor 24-29
  • Tim Beardsley (staff writer ScAm): For whom did the Bell Curve toll? 30-31
  • Ellen Winner: Uncommon talents: gifted children, prodigies and savants 32-37
  • William H. Calvin: The emergence of intelligence 44-49

Elliot M. Tucker-Drob, Daniel A. Briley, Laura E. Engelhardt, Frank D. Mann, and K. Paige Harden (2016). Genetically-Mediated Associations between Measures of Childhood Character and Academic Achievement J Pers Soc Psychol. 2016 Nov; 111(5): 790-815 author manuscript

Rimfeld, K., Kovas, Y., Dale, P. S., & Plomin, R. (2016). True grit and genetics: Predicting academic achievement from personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(5), 780-789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000089 open

Irving I. Gottesman & James Shields (1972). Schizophrenia and genetics. A twin study vantage point.Academic Press. lccc 727684 [niet in UBL]

• No prediction can be made from a knowledge of the degree of genetic determination about the efficacy of curative or preventive treatments. All that could be said in such a case is that one will have to look outside the range of normal environments experienced by the untreated population.

  p. 337, citing Falconer 1965 The inheritance of liability to certain diseases , estimated from the incidence among relatives. Annals of Human Genetics, 29, 51-76, p. 69

Hans J. Eysenck (1990). Rebel with a cause. The autobiography. W. H. Allen. isbn 1852271620

Richard M. Lerner, Daniel F. Perkins & Lauren P. Jacobson (1993). Timing, process, and the diversity of developmental trajectories in human life: A developmental contextual perspective. Ch. 3 in Gerald Turkewitz & Darlynne A. Devenny (Eds.) (1993). Developmental time and timing (41-60). LEA. 0805808515 abstract. Also book preview

Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for height and body mass index in ~700,000 individuals of European ancestry. Loic Yengo, Julia Sidorenko, Kathryn E Kemper, Zhili Zheng, Andrew R Wood, Michael N Weedon, Timothy M Frayling, Joel Hirschhorn, Jian Yang, Peter M Visscher, GIANT Consortium doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/274654abstract & pdf download.

Simon Kemp (1990). Medieval psychology. Greenwood Press. isbn 0313267340

• For Augustine, as for Plato, sensation is not the source of all knowledge because certain forms of ideals are innately present in memory, and the role of sensation is to 'remind' one of what is already known. For Augustine, and indeed for many later theologians, the epitome of such innate knowledge was that of God himself, but more secular knowledge, for example, that concerning numbers and the laws of mathematics, was also present in this way. [Augustine, Confessions see note 32 for exact place]

  p. 17

Robert J. Sternberg (Ed.) (2018). The nature of human intelligence. Cambridge University Press. info Whole book available online: https://archive.org/details/TheNatureOfHumanIntelligenceSternbergRobertJ/page/n1/mode/2up

Contents:

1. Intelligence as Potentiality and Actuality pp 1-14 By Phillip L. Ackerman https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.002 This is a key publication connecting IQ and expertise of adults and adolescents. Yes! It is pretty ridiculous to test adults on IQ without considering their expertise in law, music, carpentry, whatever. Ackerman does not discuss its implications for claims of high heritabilities of IQ for adult, however. .
   Ever since Binet and Simon published the rst modern scales to measure child intelligence, the fundamental purpose of intelligence assessment has been for prediction ( .. ) Once one understands this fundamental issue in the study of intelligence, several key concepts must be considered, as follows:

   • First, intelligence is, more or less, contextually (and culturally) bounded. ( .. )
   • Second, intelligence is a 'relative' or normative construct. ( .. )
   • Third, intelligence is dynamic. ( .. )
   • Fourth ( .. ) one can make a critical distinction between intellience potentiality and intelligence actuality.
   For a conceptual discussion of investment and intellectual development, see Cattell (1971)
   understanding of adult intelligence is woefully incomplete. Assessments that give credit to adults for the wide variety of knowledge and skills that they possess have yet to be developed. A high proportion of an adult's day-to-day intellectual life is simply unaccounted for by modern IQ assessments.
2. Hereditary Ability: g Is Driven by Experience-Producing Drives pp 15-29 By Thomas J. Bouchard https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.003. Criticisms of Gould's Mismeasure of man. My problem with this chapter: it sums up some literature (useful, of course), it is weak in explaining issues and relations. The key message of Bouchard seems to be: "“the genome impresses itself on the psyche largely by influencing the character, selection, and impact of experience during development” (Bouchard et al., 1990a. p. 228)." Dynamic interaction. I will have to return to the chapter text on that interaction theme.
   I have always thought it was amazing that while psychologists and others heavily emphasize the role of family environment, thus the emphasis on socioeconomic status (SES), in the shaping of intelligence in children, they conducted almost no studies of unrelated individuals reared together (URT). The URT design is the most powerful one to assess this source of in uence. As Figure 2.1 shows, this design suggests a value near zero in adulthood for shared environment (see the asterisks in Figure 2.1), a value below that suggested by twin designs, namely, about 10%. My view is that psychologists have been plagued by confirmation bias and highly resistant to strong inference and refutation of their theories (Bouchard, 2009). The influence of genes on IQ and SES was laid out for us a great many years ago by a brilliant and highly underappreciated psychologist, namely Barbara Burks (Burks, 1938; King, Montanez-Raminez, & Wertheimer, 1996). [Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2009). Strong inference: A strategy for advancing psychological science. In K. McCartney & R. Weinberg (Eds.), Experience and development: A festschrift in honor of Sandra Wood Scarr (pp. 39-59). London: Taylor and Francis. researchgate.net. Burks, B. S. (1938). On the relative contributions of nature and nurture to average group differences in intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 24, 276-282. open. King, D. B., Montanez-Raminez, L. M., & Wertheimer, M. (1996). Barbara Stoddard Burks: Pioneer behavioral geneticist and humanitarian. In G. A. Kimble, C. A. Boneay, & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Portraits of pioneers in psychology; Volume II (pp. 213-225). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. {eBook in Dutch Royal Library}]
   Galton, in his book Hereditary Genius (1869/1914), formulated the idea that individuals differ from one another in mental ability and noted that the range of differences was quite wide, had consequences for everyday life, and, like all the features of the organic world, was influenced by inheritance or what today we call genetics.
   (note 1) The book was originally published in 1869. In the 1892 edition Galton admit- ted that the title was misleading, that it had little to do with genius, and that it should have been titled Hereditary Ability (Galton, 1892/1962, p. 26). As Darwin noted in the quote that follows, the idea of “intellect,” a xed characteristic or a trait in which individuals did not di er, has a very long history.
3. Culture, Sex, and Intelligence pp 30-48 Stephen J. Ceci, Donna K. Ginther, Shulamit Kahn, Wendy M. Williams https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.004.
   In this chapter we focus on findings from our research on sex differences in academic achievement and what they say about the role of culture in shaping mathematical and spatial cognition. Our research focuses on the policy and educational implications of spatial and mathematical ability that are correlated with psychometric data (e.g., SAT, GRE, NAEP) and raises questions about the nature and development of these differences and what role policy has in ameliorating them.
4. The Nature of the General Factor of Intelligence pp 49-63 Andrew R. A. Conway, Kristof Kovacs https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.005
   In the current chapter, we present an overview of our program of research on the relationship between working memory, executive attention, and intelligence. This line of work has culminated in a new theory of the positive manifold of intelligence and a corresponding new model of the general factor, g. We refer to this new framework as process overlap theory (POT) (Kovacs & Conway, 2016b).
5. Intelligence in Edinburgh, Scotland: Bringing Intelligence to Life pp 64-84 Ian J. Deary, Stuart J. Ritchie https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.006 #key
   • Bringing the Scottish Mental Surveys’ Intelligence Data to Life
   • Intelligence and the Length of Life
   • The Lifetime Stability of Intelligence Differences
   • What Affects Lifetime Changes in Intelligence Differences?
   • The Heritability of Intelligence
   • Structural Brain Imaging Correlates of Intelligence
   • Sex Differences, Getting on in Life, and Estimating Premorbid Intelligence
   • More Intelligence Research with Good Epidemiological Samples - Educational and Social Policy Matters in Intelligence - Questions for Future Research
6. Intelligence as Domain-Specific Superior Reproducible Performance pp 85-100 K. Anders Ericsson sci-hub.tw/10.1017/9781316817049.007
   I will then describe the work on the expert-performance approach and new insights into the structure of acquired expert performance and, in par- ticular, I will review how the correlation between basic cognitive abilities, such as IQ, and performance differs for beginners’ and skilled individuals’ performance in different domains.
7. Intelligence, Society, and Human Autonomy pp 101-115 James R. Flynn https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.008
   As recently as 10 years ago, a steel chain of ideas dominated the minds of those who studied and measured intelligence. Much of my own contribu- tion has been to break its links and therefore I must describe them in some detail. Arthur Jensen was its best advocate. The enemies of truth tried to silence Jensen. Science progresses not by labeling some ideas as too wicked to be true, but by debating their truth.

   
   The Steel Chain of Ideas

   Jensen believed that intelligence is something that transcends culture, social history, and even species; a name for certain traits of a properly developed brain that allow us to solve the wide variety of cognitive prob- lems presented in everyday life. He based his beliefs on four pillars: factor analysis, kinship studies, the dominance of g (the general intelligence fac- tor), and the method of correlated vectors.

8. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences pp 116-129 Howard Gardner, Mindy Kornhaber, Jie-Qi Chen https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.009
9. g Theory pp 130-151 Linda S. Gottfredson sci-hub.tw/10.1017/9781316817049.010 #key
   Where psychologists saw individual differences, sociologists saw social inequality. Where psychologists suspected genetic influences on cognitive competence, influential figures in sociology alleged an elite perpetuating itself under the guise of intellectual merit. Career-development psychologists asked how young people choose among different occupations; status-attainment researchers asked what bars the less privileged from entering the most desirable ones. Both theories of occupational attainment pointed to factors the other ignored. One classified occupations horizontally, by field of work; the other ordered them vertically, by prestige. One looked at the nature of work performed and interests rewarded in different occupations; the other only at the socioeconomic benefits flowing to workers in them. Both approaches had venerable histories and vast bodies of evidence, yet contradicted the other’s most fundamental assumptions and conclusions.
10. Puzzled Intelligence pp 152-166 By Elena L. Grigorenko https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.011 sci-hub.tw.10.1017/9781316817049.011
    This chapter attempts to juxtapose the field of intelligence with the bourgeoning field of epigenetics
11. A View from the Brain pp 167-182 Richard J. Haier https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.012
12. Is Critical Thinking a Better Model of Intelligence? pp 183-196 Diane F. Halpern, Heather A. Butler https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.013
13. Many Pathways, One Destination pp 197-214 Alan S. Kaufman https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.014
14. My Quest to Understand Human Intelligence pp 215-229 Scott Barry Kaufman https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.015
15. Individual Differences at the Top pp 230-255 By David Lubinski https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.016
16. The Intelligence of Nations pp 256-269 Richard Lynn https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.017
17. Intelligences about Things and Intelligences about People pp 270-286 John D. Mayer https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.018
18. Mechanisms of Working Memory Capacity and Fluid Intelligence and Their Common Dependence on Executive Attention pp 287-307 Zach Shipstead, Randall W. Engle https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.019
19. Successful Intelligence in Theory, Research, and Practice pp 308-322 Robert J. Sternberg https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316817049.020 [Sternberg on Sternberg, superfluous]

Arthur R. Jensen (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Praeger. pdf

Horatio H. Newman, Frank N. Freeman & Karl J. Holzinger (1937/1968 4e druk). Twins: a study of heredity and environment. University of Chicago Press. LC Card 37-11639 archive.org

#reference #twins #heritability #interaction #nature #nurture

• Parts: I. Introduction and biological aspects - II. Comparison of fifty pairs of identical and fifty pairs of fraternal twins - III: Study of nineteen pairs of identical twins separated in infancy
• The authors have at no time conceived their problem to be to discover whether heredity or environment determines the development of the individual, nor even to derive a ratio to express, in any universal or final sense, the relative potency of the two sets of factors. The first statement of the problem is meaningless since development is always a function of of both genetic constitution and of environmental conditions. The second is indeterminate since such a ration depends upon the type of trait and the amount of variation which exists in both the genetic and the environmental factors which are compared.

  p. 350

Stephen J. Ceci & Helene A. Hembrooke (1994). A bioecological model of intellectual development. Ch 9 in Phyllis Moen, Glen H. Elder Jr., & Kurt Lüscher (Eds) (1995). Examining lives in context. Perspectives on the ecology of human development. (303-345) American Psychological Association. isbn 1557982937

Ph. M. van der Heijden (1953). Begaafdheid en beroep. Groningen: Wolters.

Edwin G. Boring (1929/1957). A history of experimental psychology. Appleton-Century Crofts. isbn 0390109886,

Arthur R. Jensen (1973). Educability & group differences. Harper & Row. isbn 0060121947 pdf

• a.o.
• Intelligence and educability 72-102
• The heritability of scholastic achievement 103-124
• Social class differences in intelligence 151-157
• Race differences in intelligence 158-201
• Environmental rationalization versus environmental research 231-234
• Equating for socioeconomic variables 135-242
• Accentuated environmental inequalities 243-254
• Inequality of schooling 255-259
• Culture-biased tests 291-320
• Physical environment and mental development 330-351
• Appendix on heritability 366-375
• Educability is defined here as the ability to learn the traditional scholastic subjects, especially the three Rs, under ordinary conditions of classroom instruction. Thus it is apparent that educability in this sense is a relative concept. At present it is measured by tests of scholastic achievement. Educability is dependent upon intelligence, which is a theoretical construct to account for the consolidation of learning into organizational structures which permit its retrieval, broad generalization, and transfer to the soltion of new problems and to the facilitation of new learning. A theoretical distinction should be made between learning per se and the consolidation of learning into cognitive structures that permit retrieval and transfer. Thus short-term measures of school learning are less highly corelated with intelligence than cumulative long-term measures. The physiologcal structures underlying intelligence grow from birth to maturity in their capacity to consolidate learning into the kinds of cognitive structures that characterize intelligence. Whatever is learned but not consolidated in this manner is either forgotten or remains a relatively specific response to a specific set of stimlus conditions; (..). The really functional, usable part of traditional school learning is that which gets consolidated into these cognitive structures, and the extent to which this takes place depends upon the person’s intelligence.

  p. 354

Arthur R. Jensen (1972). Genetics & Education. Methuen. isbn 0416602703

#reference

• A. R. Jensen: IQ and science: the mysterious Burt affair 1-12 - S. F. Blinkhorn: Burt and the early history of factor analysis 13-44 - N. J. Macintosh: Twins and other kinship studies 45-69 - C. G. N. Mascie-Taylor: Intelligence and social mobility 70-94 - N. J. Macintosh: Declining educational standards 95-110 - H. J. Eysenck: Burt as hero and anti-hero: a Greek tragedy 111-129 - N. J. Macintosh: Does it matter? The scientific and political impact of Burt's work 130-151)

W. D. Hill, R. E. Marioni, O. Maghzian, S. J. Ritchie, S. P. Hagenaars, A. M. McIntosh, C. R. Gale, G. Davies & I. J. Deary (2018). A combined analysis of genetically correlated traits identifies 187 loci and a role for neurogenesis and myelination in intelligence. Molecular Psychiatry doi:10.1038/s41380-017-0001-5 open

Susan Goldberg,- Editor in Chief- (2018). For Decades, Our Coverage Was Racist. To Rise Above Our Past, We Must Acknowledge It. National Geographic article

The Nature of Nurture: Using a Virtual-Parent Design to Test Parenting Effects on Children's Educational Attainment in Genotyped Families. Timothy C. Bates, Brion S. Maher, Sarah E. Medland, Kerrie McAloney (2018). https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2018.11Published online: 13 March 2018 abstract https://twitter.com/timothycbates/status/973837498597113856

Warne, R. T., Astle, M. C., & Hill, J. C. (2018). What do undergraduates learn about human intelligence? An analysis of introductory psychology textbooks.- Archives of Scientific Psychology, 6(1), 32-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/arc0000038 open

J. M. Tanner (1962). Growth at adolescence. With a general consideration of the effects of hereditary and environmental factors upon growth and maturation from birth to maturity. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications info

• Size of family and rate of growth 142-143
• Secular trend in rate of growth and time of adolescence 143-155
• Maxwell & Pilliner (1960). The intellectual resemblance between sibs. Ann. Hum. Genet. (Lond.), 24, 23-32. pdf

Robert Plomin, Heather M. Chipuer & John C. Loehlin: Behavioral genetics and personality, pp 225-243 in Lawrence A. Pervin (Ed.) (1990 1st). Handbook of personality theory and research. The Guildford Press. isbn 0898624304 introduction, 3rd edition

• In this volume also: Hans J. Eysenck: Biological dimensions of personality 244-276; Michael Lewis: Self-knowledge and social development in early life 277-300; Avchalom Caspi and Daryl J. Bem: Personality continuity and change across the life course 549-575; Richard J. Contrada, Howard Leventhal, an dAnn ‘Leary: Personality and health 638-668; Leonard G. Rorer: Personality assessment: A conceptual survey 693-721

Michael Schiff and Richard Lewontin (1986). Education and class. The irrelevance of IQ. Genetic studies. Oxford: Clarendon Press. isbn 0198575998

• chapters: Historical origins - IQ scores, school achievement, and social class of origin - How much could we boost scholastic achievement and IQ scores? - How much could we boost access to universities? - Twelve errors about genetics and their social consequences - Genetic studies of IQ score: asking irrelevant questions - Summary and conclusions.

Mind, Brain, and Education in Socioeconomic Context Martha J. Farah (2009?). chapter proof

Zena Stein, Mervyn Susser, Gerhart Saenger & Francis Marolla (1975). Famine and human development. The Dutch hunger winter of 1944-1945. Oxford University Press. isbn 0192690035 reviewed

William Stern (1920). Die Intelligenz der Kinder und Jugendlichen und die Methoden ihrer Untersuchung. Verlag von Johann Ambrosius Barth archive.org

J. D. Kruschwitz, L. Waller, L. S. Daedelow, H. Walter, I. M. Veer (2018). General, crystallized and fluid intelligence are not associated with functional global network efficiency: A replication study with the human connectome project 1200 data set. NeuroImage, 171, 323-331 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.01.018 abstract

Steven Pinker (2014). 2014 : What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Behavior = Genes + Environment blog

Steven Pinker (Jan. 7, 2009). My Genome, My Self. The New York Times Magazine blog

Steven Pinker (2016). On New Advances in Behavioral Genetics blog

Steven Pinker (2002). The blank slate. The modern denial of human nature. Allen Lane. isbn 0713992565 info. See also wiki

Is that true (what the title suggests)? I doubt it, therefore I'll have to study the book. Alfred Binet and Edward Thorndike are glaringly absent in the book. Francis Galton and James Flynn only mentioned in passing. The taboo Pinker is attacking is one of the later second half of the twentieth century, the dominant opinion in the first half (e.g. Edward Thorndike) being just the reverse.

• "This book is for people who wonder where the taboo against human nature came from and who are willing to explore whether the challenges to the taboo are truly dangerous or just unfamiliar. (..) And it is for those who recognize that the sciences of mind, brain, genes, and evolution are permanently changing our view of ourselves and wonder whether the values we hold will wither, survive, or (as I will argue) be enhanced." [p.xi-xii]
• I have dumped the book.

Robert K. Sternberg & Richard K. Wagner (eds) (1994). Mind in context. Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence. Cambridge University Press. info

• Richard E. Snow: Abilities in academic tasks. 3-38.
  Uses “Gibson’s concept of situational affordances in the domain of abilities and not just visual perception.”
• Michael K. Gardner & Robert J. Sternberg: Novelty and intelligence. 38-73.
  In this view, the abilities one manifests depend largely upon the tasks life presents.A peson who isconstantly faced with tasks that are far outside his or her zone of comfort with respect to task familiarity may appear less able than someone who is constantly faced wth familiar tasks. The latter person, however, lacking challenges, may have less of an opportunity to develop his or her abilities than the former.
  Novelty and the psychometric approach to intelligence 39 Intelligence, psychometric theories, and rule induction items 39 - Novelty and cogntive styles 45 -Novelty and the information processing approach to intelligence 46 - Models of performance on rule induction problems 47 - Novelty in verbal tasks 54 - Traditional reaoning and probem-solving approaches to novelty 57 - Novelty and the developmental approach to intelligence 59 - Piagetian views of novelty and intellectual development 59 - Infant information processing, temperment, and intelligecnce 61 Developmental trends in fluid and crystallized intellgence 62 - Vygotsky and the zone of proximal development 63 Novelty and the contextual view of telligence 64 - Ceci’s bioecological theory of intelligence 64 - Why is performance in novel contexts related to intelligence? 66
• Stephen J. Ceci & Antonio Roazzi: The effects of context on cognition: postcards from Brazil 74-103 Nee hè!
• Cynthia A. Berg & Katerina S. Calderone: The role of problem interpretations in understanding the development of everyday problem solving. 105-132.
  Whereas much of the develpmental literature has recently emphasized the role of kowledge in cognitive development (e.g., Carey, 1985 [Conceptual change in childhood isbn 0262530732]; Chi, 1978 [Knowledge structure and memory development. pdf In Siegler: Children’s thinking: What develops?]; Keil, 1984 [Transaction mechanisms in cognitive development and the structure of knowledge. In Sternberg: Mechanisms of cognitive development (UB Leiden Closed Stack 3 - 1970 D 21 )], Berg and Calderone emphasize the importance of interpretation. People at different ages may interpret what appears to be the same problem differently, leading to differences in their solutions.
  #knowledge
• Richard K. Wagner: Context counts: the case of cognitive-ability testing for job selection. 133-151.
• Nira Granott & Howard Gardner: when minds meet: interactions, coincidence, and development in domains of ability. 171-201.
• Jaan Valsiner & Man-Chi Leung: From intelligence to knowledge construction: a sociogenetic process approach. 202-217.
• Robert K. Sternberg: PRSVL: an integrative framework for understanding mind in context. 218-231.

John C. Loehlin and Robert C. Nichols (1976). Heredity, environment, and personality. A study of 850 sets of twins. info

• I suppose that for example individuals with Down syndrome will have been excluded from heritability analyses. I simply do not know. Exclusion of those cases introduces a serious problem, I think: how to decide who is in, who is not? I’ll take a peek at Loehlin & Nichols 1976.
• pp 5-12. 1507 presumed twin pairs were sampled from 600 000 high school juniors administered the National Merit Scholarship test (that population is above average in ability and achievement, p. 6). In 1188 cases both twins returned questionnaires. They were sent testing materials
• for 850 sets completed testing materials were returned. A specific problem is that only twins both at school and both sitting the Merit test could be included in the sample. The authors signal the problem, no further mention of its significance in this research.
• From the conclusions (p.94) “Our data have thus not yielded any finaland conclusive answer to the heredity-environment question for personality, abilities, and interests. The data are generally consistent with a substantial influence of the genes in accounting for individual
• differences in these domains, but they imply a substantial influence of the environment as well—indeed, they do not altogether exclude a completely environmentalist position.The data do, it seems to us, have something important to say concerning this environment. And the upshot
• of what they say is that it operates in remarkably mysterious ways, given traditional views on personality and motivational development.” Okay, this was published in 1976, maybe it is history ;-) However, it gives an idea of problems with sampling twins.

Sandra Scarr & Louise Carter-Saltzman: Genetics and intelligence pp 792--896 in Robert J. Sternberg (Ed.) (1982). Handbook of human intelligence. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. isbn 0521296870 Uitstekend overzicht, ook van tweelingoderzoeken.

key publication Robert B. Johnson (1989). The Burt affair. Routledge. isbn 041501039X

Sandra Scarr (1996). How people make their own environments: Implications for parents and policy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 204-228. abstract

Key publication on environmental dynamics, a rather extreme position though.

• The more general principle is that people are not randomly assorted into their environments. Social science research finds ubiquitous correlations between people and the environments in which they are found. The typical, usually unspoken, assumption is that some people are just unlucky and wake up one day to find themselves poor and ill-educated, whereas others are just lucky to have had opportunities for higher education and well-paying jobs. The unspoken implication of most "environmentally" motivated research is that merely providing have-nots with the same opportunities as the haves will equalize their outcomes. I will show that this assumption leads to false predictions about interventions to improve the lot of the have-nots, because people are not randomly thrust into their environments; rather, to a large extent, they make their own environments by expressions of genetic variability. This is not to say that morally or ethically people deserve their fates—only that their personal characteristics are correlated with them.

  205

  Thus, although some developmentalists have suggested that children may affect the ways their parents treat them, as well as vice versa (Bell, 1968; Chess & Thomas, 1984; Chess, Thomas, & Birch, 1968; Hunt, 1961; Thomas & Chess, 1980), the theory that children actually construct their own environments from available resources challenges the basic tenets of mainstream developmental psychology.
  Second, it is commonly observed that children in the same family resemble each other to some extent in intelligence, talents, personality, and interests. The standard interpretation of these sibling correlations is that they are caused by rearing provided by the same parents (Baumrind, 1993; Wachs & Gruen, 1982). Two mistaken inferences from sibling correlations are made: that siblings are very similar in the first place and that parents' rearing practices cause siblings' similarity.( .. )
  The child's role in the kind of parenting she or he evokes and reinforces has been underestimated (Scarr & McCartney, 1983). Genetic differences in how children react to and understand their environments has been neglected in developmental research. In addition, the fact that older children and adolescents select activities and people with whom to spend their time has enormous implications for understanding genetic and environmental effects. Third, the importance of nonshared family environments has not been understood.

  205-6

Sandra Scarr & Kathleen McCartney (1983). How People Make Their Own Environments: A Theory of Genotype → Environment Effects. Child Development, 54, 424-435. read online free

Sohan Modgil & Celia Modgil (Eds.) (1987). Arthur Jensen; consensus and controversy. Lewes, East Sussex: Falmer. isbn 185000093X

L. L. Cavalli-Sforza & W. F. Bodmer (1971). The genetics of human populations. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. isbn 0716706814

• Chapter 9. Quantitative characters, polygenc inheritance, and environmental interactios 508-632, esp. 9.11 The use of twins for the study of the genetic determination of traits.
  Chapter 12. Eugenics, euphenics, and human welfare 753-804

R. C. Lewontin (1974). The genetic basis of evolutionary change. Columbia University Press. Ch 1 scan & Ch 2 scan & archive.org borrow. See also R. C. Lewontin (1991). Twenty-Five YearsAgo in GENETICS: Electrophoresis in the Development of Evolutionary Genetics: Milestone or Millstone? pdf

• In contradistinction to the discreteness of genotypic classes demanded by Mendelian analysis lies the quasi-continuous nature of the phenotypic differences that are the stuff of evolutionary change. The evolution of species consists in the gradual accumulation of very small changes in physiology, morphogenesis, and behavior. Closely related species may differ on the average in their temperature tolerance or preference, in their size and shape, but it is often impossible to distinguish an individual of one species from another on one or a combination of these characters because of the broad phenotypic overlap between the groups. Even when no closely related species overlaps it, any species will show a range of variation for most of its phenotypic characteristics, variation which has both a genetic and an environmental component. Indeed, for most of the characters whose change the evolutionist wishes to explain, the variation between genetically identical individuals is likely to be of the same or greater magnitude than the variation introduced by a single allelic substitution at one of the loci affecting the character. Even if the heritability of IQ in Caucasians is 80 percent, as is estimated by some studies (Erlenmeyer-Kimling and Jarvik, 1963), the effect of a single gene substitution on IQ is small (except for drastic abnormalities giving rise to mental deficients) as compared with environmental variations. If this were not the case, the Mendelian inheritance of IQ would have been worked out long ago. Evolutionarily significant genetic variation is then, almost by definition, variation that is manifest in subtle differences between individuals, often so subtle as to be completely overwhelmed by effects of other genes or of the environment.
  ( .. )
  When we turn from fecundity to viability, the situation is even worse. Can we distinguish an individual fly whose genotypic probability of survival from egg to newly hatched adult is 95 percent from one whose probability is only, say, 45 percent‘? Here is a drastic genetic difference indeed. But an individual either does or does not survive to a given age. Among adults all have survived and among eggs nothing can be predicted. The probability of survival is an ensemble property, not an individual one, so that enumeration of individuals by their phenotype is, in this respect, impossible by definition. Survival and reproduction are the two components of fitness, and genotypic differences with respect to these characters evolved directly under the influence of natural selection. Yet it is impossible to recognize and enumerate the different genotypes in a population with respect to those most basic of all characters.

  We see here the fundamental contradiction inherent in the study of the genetics of evolution. On the one hand the Mendelian genetic system dictates the frequencies of genotypes as the appropriate genetic description of a population. The enumeration of these genotypes requires that the effect of an allelic substitution be so large as to make possible the unambiguous assignment of individuals to genotypes. On the other hand, the substance of evolutionary change at the phenotypic level is precisely in those characters for which individual gene substitutions make only slight differences as compared with variation produced by the genetic background and the environment. What we can measure is by definition uninteresting and what we are interested in is by definition unmeasurable. This paradox in one form or another has plagued population genetics since Chetverikov proposed in 1926 that the measurement of hidden genetic variation and its mechanism of maintenance were the central problems of evolutionary genetics. The paradox is not yet resolved, but recent advances in molecular biology and in population genetic theory, which are the substance of this book, offer some hope of a resolution.

  pp. 22-23

• The book formed part of a larger campaign against sociobiology. Its authors were praised for their criticism of IQ testing, and were complimented by some for their critique of sociobiology. However, they have been criticized for misrepresenting the views of scientists such as the biologist E. O. Wilson and the ethologist Richard Dawkins, for using "determinism" and "reductionism" simply as terms of abuse, and for the influence of Marxism on their views. Critics have seen its authors' conclusions as political rather than scientific.

Stephen M. Stigler (1989). Francis Galton's Account of the Invention of Correlation. Statistical Science, 4 #2, 73-79. open access

Correlation is a concept that is eminently useful yet entails loads of misunderstandings, especially so in issues of heritability. Therefore it might be important to be clear about the roots of the concept.

Emily Smith-Woolley, Jean-Baptiste Pingault, Saskia Selzam, Kaili Rimfeld, Eva Krapohl, Sophie von Stumm, Kathryn Asbury, Philip S. Dale, Toby Young, Rebecca Allen, Yulia Kovas & Robert Plomin (2018). Differences in exam performance between pupils attending selective and non-selective schools mirror the genetic differences between them. npj|Science of Learning nature.com Nature Partner Journals open access

• 
  

  ---

  How important are our genes and our environment to our educational outcomes? Newly published research in npj Science of Learning helps us understand. Alan Woodruff Mar 23, 2018 blog and Twitter thread

  ---

  Environment is important. Genes are not the business of education. If only for this simple reason: education is about individuals, behaviour genetics about populations. http://www.benwilbrink.nl/projecten/fair_schooling.htm

  
  

  ---

  Eric Turkheimer (March 26, 2018). Smith-Woolley, Plomin et al. on genetics and educational outcomes. blog

  ---

  • See also this thread by Katryn Asbury Twitter thread

  
  

  ---

  Selective schools make no difference to GCSE results, study says. Analysis undercuts argument that grammar schools are needed for the brightest pupils to reach their full academic potential. Hannah Devlin Science correspondent @hannahdev Fri 23 Mar 2018 06.00 GMT page

  ---

  • The findings are published in the journal Science of Learning
    The study, based on 4,000 pupils who identified as white British and attended schools across the UK, assessed the pupils’ genetic data, their families’ socioeconomic status, their ability (measured by an IQ-style test), prior achievement (11+ or Sats results) and GCSE results.

    
    The study is also the first to show up subtle genetic differences between children who attend selective schools and those who do not. However, the genetic scoring system used to classify children in the study is viewed as controversial, and scientists are divided on the extent to which it is a true index for intelligence or academic potential. ( .. )
    The influence of genetics on achievement, Plomin suggested, is the “elephant in the classroom”, adding that in the future, genetic testing of children to predict their academic potential “will probably happen”. However, others questioned whether such a step would be useful or desirable.

Steven Pinker on New Advances in Behavioral Genetics (2016). The findings of behavioral genetics have turned out to be substantial and robust, and new studies are linking genes with behavioral traits like IQ blog

• Indeed,- the heritability of intelligence- has recently been corroborated by a new method which complements the classic studies of twins and adoptees and which solves an outstanding puzzle: Where are the genes? Most of the “Gene for X” claims of the 1990s turned out to be false positives that resulted from snooping around genomes in paltry samples. The discrepancy between the robust results from classic family research and the failures of the gene-hunters is called the Mystery of the Missing Heritability.-

A. Beaujean (2015). John Carroll’s Views on Intelligence: Bi-Factor vs. Higher-Order Models. Journal of Intelligence. open

• from the abstract

Luca Rinaldi, Annette Karmiloff-Smith (2015). Intelligence as a Developing Function: A Neuroconstructivist Approach. Journal of Intelligence , Volume 5; doi:10.3390/jintelligence5020018 open

Enhancing Intelligence: From the Group to the Individual. Roberto Colom, Francisco Román (2018). Journal of Intelligence , Volume 6; doi:10.3390/jintelligence6010011 open

VU (27-3-2018). Afstelling van genen verschilt tussen hoger- en lager opgeleide Nederlanders. persbericht

Nou ja, dat is wel erg kort door de bocht. De resultaten zijn gepubliceerd in- NPJ Science of Learning. Van Dongen and others 2018.

Jenny van Dongen en vele anderen (2018). DNA methylation signatures of educational attainment. nature.com npj science of learning open and behind the paper

Christopher F. Chabris, Benjamin M. Hebert, Daniel J. Benjamin, Jonathan P. Beauchamp, David Cesarini, Matthijs J.H.M. van der Loos, Magnus Johannesson, Patrik K.E. Magnusson, Paul Lichtenstein, Craig S. Atwood, Jeremy Freese, Taissa S. Hauser, Robert M. Hauser, Nicholas A. Christakis and David Laibson (2012). Most Reported Genetic Associations with General Intelligence Are Probably False Positives. Psychol Sci. 2012 Nov 1; 23(11): 1314-1323. open

Carl Zimmer, May 22, 2017. In ‘Enormous Success,’ Scientists Tie 52 Genes to Human Intelligence. The New York Times online

Why do children read more? The influence of reading ability on voluntary reading practices Elsje van Bergen Margaret J. Snowling Eveline L. de Zeeuw Catharina E.M. van Beijsterveldt Conor V. Dolan Dorret I. Boomsmaopen

Suzanne C. Swagerman, Elsje van Bergen, Conor Dolan, Eco J. C. de Geus, Marinka M. G. Koenis, Hilleke E. Hulshoff Pol, Dorret I. Boomsma (2017). Genetic transmission of reading ability. Brain and Language, 172, September, 3-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2015.07.008 abstract

Paige Harden April 13, 2018 Genetic Test Scores Predicting Intelligence Are Not the New Eugenics blog

Hill, W. D. et al. A combined analysis of genetically correlated traits identifies 187 loci and a role for neurogenesis and myelination in intelligence. Molecular Psychiatry 1 (2018)

Genomic SEM Provides Insights into the Multivariate Genetic Architecture of Complex Traits. Andrew D Grotzinger, Mijke Rhemtulla, Ronald de Vlaming, Stuart J. Ritchie, Travis T. Mallard, W. David Hill, Hill F. Ip, Andrew M. McIntosh, Ian J. Deary, Philipp D. Koellinger, K. Paige Harden, Michel G. Nivard, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob (2018). doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/305029 This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed open

Toby Young (April 23, 2018). The left is heading for a reckoning with the new genetics. The Spectator blog

• Answered by Philip Ball https://philipball.blogspot.nl/2018/04/more-on-politics-of-genes-and-education.html

Kevin Mitchell (May 2, 2018). Why genetic IQ differences between 'races' are unlikely. the Guardian article

Pieter J. van Strien (2003). De opvoedbaarheid van de intelligentie. Een oud strijdpunt tussen pedagogen en psychologen. Pedagogiek, 23122-136. pdf

Key publication. Abstract in English, article in Dutch.

Fatos Selita & Yulia Kovas (2018). Genes and Gini: What inequality means for heritability. Journal of Biosocial Science open

• The pattern of results suggests that inequality and social policies can have profound effects on the heritability of educational attainment and achievement in a population (Gene-Gini interplay). For example, heritability is generally higher at greater equality levels, suggesting that inequality stifles the expression of educationally relevant genetic propensities. The review concludes with a discussion of the mechanisms of Gene-Gini interplay and what the findings mean for efforts to optimize education for all people.

  from the abstract

M. Bartels, J. H. Rietveld, G. C. M. van Baal et al. (2002). Heritability of educational achievement in 12-year-olds and the overlap with cognitive ability. , 544-553. open

Study of 300,486 individuals identifies 148 independent genetic loci influencing general cognitive function,. Gail Davies, Max Lam, […] Ian J. Deary Nature Communications volume , Article number: 2098 (2018) open

• See also this Twitter thread
• General cognitive function is a prominent and relatively stable human trait that is associated with many important life outcomes. We combine cognitive and genetic data from the CHARGE and COGENT consortia, and UK Biobank (total- N = 300,486; age 16-102) and find 148 genome-wide significant independent loci (P < 5 × 10−8) associated with general cognitive function. Within the novel genetic loci are variants associated with neurodegenerative and neurodevelopmental disorders, physical and psychiatric illnesses, and brain structure. Gene-based analyses find 709 genes associated with general cognitive function. Expression levels across the cortex are associated with general cognitive function. Using polygenic scores, up to 4.3% of variance in general cognitive function is predicted in independent samples. We detect significant genetic overlap between general cognitive function, reaction time, and many health variables including eyesight, hypertension, and longevity. In conclusion we identify novel genetic loci and pathways contributing to the heritability of general cognitive function.

  abstract

Gry Oftedal (2005). Heritability and genetic causation. Philosophy of Science, 72, 699-709. pdf

• Abstract The method in human genetics of ascribing causal responsibility to genotype by the use of heritability estimates has been heavily criticized over the years. It has been argued that these estimates are rarely valid and do not serve the purpose of tracing genetic causes. Recent contributions strike back at this criticism. I present and discuss two opposing views on these matters represented by Richard Lewontin and Neven Sesardic, and I suggest that some of the disagreement is based on differing concepts of genetic causation. I use the distinction of structuring and triggering causes to help clarifying the basis for the opposing views.

R. C. Lewontin (1974). The Analysis of Variance and the Analysis of Causes. Am J Hum Genet 26, 400-411.

Key publication. See also Oftedal_2005. Harden 2021 p. 274 note 21: R. C. Lewontin (2006). The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. International Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 35, Issue 3, June 2006, Pages 520-52, https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyl062 open access [The same title as the 1974 article, do not get confused — Lewontin here does not even mention his 1974 article.]

Unraveling the Genetic and Environmental Relationship Between Well-Being and Depressive Symptoms Throughout the Lifespan. Bart M. L. Baselmans, Yayouk E. Willems, C. E. M. van Beijsterveldt, Lannie Ligthart, Gonneke Willemsen, Conor V. Dolan, Dorret I. Boomsma and Meike Bartels (2018). Frontiers in Psychiatry doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00261 open

Robert Plomin & C. S. Bergeman (1991). The nature of nurture: Genetic influence on 'environmental' measures. Behavioral and brain sciences, 14, 373-427. preview

John J. McArdle , Carol A. Prescott , Fumiaki Hamagami & John L. Horn (1998). A contemporary method for developmental‐genetic analyses of age changes in intellectual abilities. Developmental Neuropsychology, 14 69-114 https://doi.org/10.1080/87565649809540701 [nog niet gezien] paywalled, references

Anne Anastasi (1971). More on heritability: Addendum to the Hebb and Jensen interchange. American psychologist, 26, 1036-7. pdf [Jensen replied in 1972, below]

• In summary, available heritability data do not pro- vide a proper answer to such questions as the etiology of an individual's handicaps, the origin of ethnic differ- ences in test performance, or the anticipated benefits of compensatory education or other programs of en- vironmental intervention. The question they are de- signed to answer is much more limited in scope, namely, What is the proportional contribution of hered- ity to the variance of a specified trait in a given popu- lation under existing conditions?

Arthur Jensen (1972). Interpretation of heritability. American Psychologist 973-5. pdf [with rejoinder by Anne Anastasi]

Genetic analysis of social-class mobility in five longitudinal studies. Daniel W. Belsky, Benjamin W. Domingue, Robbee Wedow, Louise Arseneault, Jason D. Boardman, Avshalom Caspi, Dalton Conley, Jason M. Fletcher, Jeremy Freese, Pamela Herd, Terrie E. Moffitt, Richie Poulton, Kamil Sicinski, Jasmin Wertz, and Kathleen Mullan Harris (2018). PNAS open

Toby Youg (July 9, 2018). The left is heading for a reckoning with the new genetics. Spectator blog

W. David Hill, Sarah, E. Harris, Ian J. Deary (2018). What genome-wide association studies reveal about the association between intelligence and mental health. prepublication

Out today in @NatureGenet: our paper on RDR, a novel method for estimating heritability without environment bias (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-018-0178-9 …). I wrote an accessible blog post explaining the paper and its implications (https://geneticvariance.wordpress.com/2018/08/13/relatedness-disequilibrium-regression-explained/ …) #geneticstweet

Alexander Young (2018). Relatedness disequilibrium regression explained. blog

• "In a- paper- [abstract and references] published today in- Nature Genetics- by myself, Augustine Kong, Kari Stefansson, and other scientists at deCODE Genetics, we introduce a novel method for estimation of heritability, Relatedness Disequilibrium Regression (RDR). Like Sib-Regression, RDR takes advantage of the variation in relatedness due to random shuffling of genes during production of sperm and eggs in parents, which we term ‘relatedness disequilibrium’. The difference is, by using genetic information on parents, RDR can use the relatedness disequilibrium from all pairs of individuals in a sample, not just siblings. By using a large sample of Icelanders, we were able to estimate heritability precisely for a variety of human traits."

How scientists are trying to predict your future with your genes. But what are the limits? Genome-wide association studies, explained. By Brian Resnick @B_resnick brian@vox.com Aug 23, 2018, 9:10am EDT blog

Theodosius Dobzhansky (1973). Genetic diversity & human equality. Basic Books. isbn 0465026710

• It would seem that the easiest way to discredit the idea of equality is to show that people are innately, genetically, and therefore irremediably diverse and unlike. The snare is, of course, that human equality pertains to the rights and to the sacredness of life of every human being, not to bodily or even mental characteristics. Diversity is an observable fact of nature, while equality is an ethical commandment.

Richard J. Herrnstein & Charles Murray (1994). The Bell curve. Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: The Free Press. isbn 0029146739

interview

The six points illustrate the mainstream position of especially American psychologists studying differences in intelligence. It is by no means the case, as H&M claim, that there is no technical dispute. The dispute was already going on at the turn of the 20th century, and many of the arguments are still valid today. Developments in recent years (after 1994) add new arguments: the Flynn effect, the network approach (Van der Maas and others), research on experts (Ericsson and others). Remark that nowhere do H&M refer to cognitive science: their treatment of intelligence is in terms of individual differences as measured by tests of cognitive ability in the (school) population. This individual differences frame is contingent on our (school) culture. In the field of education, contemporary folk conceptions of intelligence are derived from the psychologi cal dogmatism of, e.g., Edward Thorndike: intelligence does exist, it is a stable characteristic of the individual, therefore it must be genetic in origin.

@ 1: Yes, there is a positive manifold of cognitive abilities.

@ 2. Yes. I’d rather not call tests ‘measurements of this general factor’, though. @ 3. Yes. And that is a serious problem because what is reflected in ordinary language is folk psychology. Scientific psychology surely should not be folk psychology clad as pseudoscientific psychology. @ 4. This simply is not true. Education will make a difference. Environments make for differences, therefore changes in the environment will effect IQ scores. @ 5. IQ tests not biased? Come on. The APA Standards warn for bias! @ 6: The main question: small genetic differences get amplified in environmental dynamics. Heritability coefficients should not include those dynamics.

Arthur I. Gates (1921). The Inheritance of Mental Traits. Psychological Bulletin 358-365 whole volume archive.org

Ben Williamson (Sept 2, 2018). Postgenomic science, big data, and biosocial education. on_education Journal for Research and Debate.open

• Ball, P. (2018). The IQ trap: how the study of genetics could transform education.- New Statesman, 16 April:- https://www.newstatesman.com/2018/04/iq-trap-how-study-genetics-could-transform-education
• Brassington, I. (2018). Toby Young, Eugenics, IQ, and the Poor.- Journal of Medical Ethics- blog, 8 January: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2018/01/08/toby-young-eugenics-iq-and-the-poor-part-1/
• Conley, D. (2017). What’s your polygenic score?- Scientific American, 13 March:- https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/whats-your-polygenic-score/
• Feinstein, L. (2017). On genetics and social mobility: why Toby Young’s structural inequality argument is not science.- LSE British Politics and Policy, 3 November: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/on-genetics-and-social-mobility/
• Gaysina, D. (2016). How genetics could help future learners unlock hidden potential.- The Conversation, 15 November:- https://theconversation.com/how-genetics-could-help-future-learners-unlock-hidden-potential-68254
• Gibbon, S., Prainsack, B., Hilgartner, S. & Lamoreaux, J. (eds). (2018).- Handbook of Genomics, Health, and Society, 2nd- ed. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Gillborn, D. (2016). Softly, softly: Genetics, intelligence and the hidden racism of the new geneism.- Journal of Education Policy- 31(4): 365-388.
• Gulson, K. & Baker, B. (2018). New biological rationalities in education.- Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education- 39(2): 159-168.
• Gulson, K. & Webb, P.T. (2018). ‘Life’ and education policy: intervention, augmentation and computation.- Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education- 39(2): 276-291.
• Harden, K.P. (2018). Why Progressives Should Embrace the Genetics of Education.- The New York Times, 24 July:- https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/24/opinion/dna-nature-genetics-education.html
• Hayles, N.K. (1999).- How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics.- London: University of Chicago Press.
• Lee, J.J., Wedow, R., Okbay, A., et al. (2018). Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals.- Nature Genetics- 50: 1112-1121.
• Meloni, M. (2018). A postgenomic body: histories, genealogy, politics.- Body & Society- 24(3): 3-38.
• Meloni, M., Williams, S. & Martin, P. (2016). The biosocial: sociological themes and issues.- Biosocial Matters: Rethinking the Sociology-Biology Relations in the Twenty-First Century. The Sociological Review Monographs- 64(1): 7-25.
• Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2018).- Genome Editing and Human Reproduction: social and ethical issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
• Pickersgill, M., Niewohner, J., Muller, R., Martin, P. & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2013). Mapping the new molecular landscape: social dimensions of epigenetics.- New Genetics and Society- 32(4): 429-447.
• Plomin, R. & Asbury, K. (2013).- G is for Genes: The Impact of Genetics on Education and Achievement, Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
• Plomin, R. & von Stumm, S. (2018). The new genetics of intelligence.- Nature Reviews Genetics, doi:10.1038/nrg.2017.104
• Reardon, J. (2017).- The Postgenomic Condition: Ethics, Justice, and Knowledge after the Genome.Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Regalado, A. (2017). Eugenics 2.0: We’re at the Dawn of Choosing
• Embryos by Health, Height, and More.- MIT Technology Review, 1 November:- https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609204/eugenics-20-were-at-the-dawn-of-choosing-embryos-by-health-height-and-more/
• Regalado, A. (2018). DNA tests for IQ are coming, but it might not be smart to take one.- MIT Technology Review, 2 April:- https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610339/dna-tests-for-iq-are-coming-but-it-might-not-be-smart-to-take-one/
• Rose, N. (2007).- The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century.- Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Selzam, S., Krapohl, E., von Stumm, S., O’Reilly, P.F., Rimfield, K., Kovas, Y., Dale, P.S. & Plomin, R. (2017). Predicting educational achievement from DNA.- Molecular Psychiatry- 22: 267-272.
• Stevens, H. (2016a).- Biotechnology and Society. London: University of Chicago Press.
• Stevens, H. (2016b). Hadooping the Genome: The impact of big data tools on biology.- BioSocieties- 11(3): 352-371.
• Warner, J. (2018). Why We Shouldn’t Embrace the Genetics of Education.- Inside Higher Ed,- 26 July:- https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/why-we-shouldnt-embrace-genetics-education
• Youdell, D. (2017). Bioscience and the sociology of education: The case for biosocial education.- British Journal of Sociology of Education- 38: 1273-1287.
• Young, T. (2018). The left is heading for a reckoning with the new genetics.- The Spectator, 23 April: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/the-left-is-heading-for-a-reckoning-with-the-new-genetics/
• Zimmer, C. (2018). Genetic intelligence tests are next to worthless.- The Atlantic,- 29 May:- https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/05/genetic-intelligence-tests-are-next-to-worthless/561392/

Hamilton Cravens (1992). A scientific project locked in time. The Terman genetic studies of genius, 1920s-1950s. Scientific American, 47, 183-189 [hard copy, mag weg toch? Maar ik vind geen pdf, bewaren diff] 10.1037/0003-066X.47.2.183 abstract

David Burbridge (2001). Francis Galton on twins, heredity and social class. The British Journal for the History of Science, 34, 323-340. abstract

Robert Plomin and Frank M. Spinath (2004). Intelligence: Genetics, Genes, and Genomics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 112-129. pdf

Kate E. Lynch (2016). Heritability and causal reasoning. Biology & Philosophy, 32, 25-49. abstract appendix references

& pdf

L. J. Eaves, K. Last, N. G. Martin & J. L. Jinks (1977). A progressive approach to non-additivity and genotype-environmental covariance in the analysis of human differences. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1977.tb00722.x abstract & citing literature #127

Kaili Rimfeld and Margherita Malanchini (7 September 2018). How much is academic achievement shaped by genes? BBC Future. blog

Yulia Kovas, Ivan Voronin, Andrey Kaydalov, ...and others (Plomin) (2013). Literacy and Numeracy Are More Heritable Than Intelligence in Primary School. Psychological Science open

Lots of assumptions. #twins

Robert Plomin, Heather M. Chipuer & John C. Loehlin: Behavior genetics and personality 225-243 in Lawrence A. Pervin (Ed.) (1990 1st). Handbook of personality theory and research. The Guildford Press. isbn 0898624304 introduction, 3rd edition

• In this volume also: Hans J. Eysenck: Biological dimensions of personality 244-276; Michael Lewis: Self-knowledge and social development in early life 277-300; Avchalom Caspi and Daryl J. Bem: Personality continuity and change across the life course 549-575; Richard J. Contrada, Howard Leventhal, an dAnn ‘Leary: Personality and health 638-668; Leonard G. Rorer: Personality assessment: A conceptual survey 693-721

Kathryn Asbury (Sept 7, 2018). The genetic baseline: how a DNA score may soon determine how children are taught in school. Tes [not online]

Maxwell L Elliott and many others (2018). A Polygenic Score for Higher Educational Attainment is Associated with Larger Brains. Cerebral Cortex open

Allegrini, A.G., Selzam, S., Rimfeld, K., von Stumm, S., Pingault, J.B., Plomin, R. (2018 preprint). Genomic prediction of cognitive traits in childhood and adolescence preprint Sept 2018 & abstract of publication

• Because inherited DNA variants do not change during development, polygenic scores are unique predictors in two ways. First, unlike other characteristics of the individual, DNA variants can predict individual differences in adult behaviour from birth. Second, unlike other correlations, associations between DNA variants and behaviour are causal from DNA to behaviour in the sense that there can be no backward causation from behaviour to DNA. These unique features will put genomic prediction of cognitive traits in the front line of the DNA revolution.
• Cecile Janssens: "Researchers also have a stunning explanation for why DNA is a causal predictor of education attainment: correlation = causation, if there is no way back." thread
• A critical review here by @stevepittelli

Judith R. Harris (1998). The nurture assumption. Why children turn out the way they do. Parents matter less than you think and peers matter more. New York: Free Press.

Eric M. Gander (2003). On our minds. How evolutionary psychology is reshaping the nature-vesus-nurture debate. Johns Hopkins UP. [UB Leiden Psycho C14.-25] info

• Stephen Jay Gould historicizes science 19
• Richard Herrnstein stirrs up controversy at Harvard Yard 31
• Edward O. Wilson brings more controversy to the Yard 56
• Richard Lewontin and his colleagues demur 76
• Nature's 'very special way 97
• What is the mind? 116
• The challenges of reverse engineering 132
• The benefit of hardwiring 155
• What cultures can the mind run? 174
• The evolutionary psychology of 'little house on the prairie' 196
• Brave New World revisited - again 224
• Writing on The Blank Slate 237 #Pinker

Toby Young (Sept 23, 2018). Listen again to the @BBCRadio4 programme I presented on character. I explore whether good character can be taught, either by parents or schools, and interview the behavioural geneticist Robert Plomin, among others.tweet

Genetic determinism rides again. Nathaniel Comfort (25 Sept 2018) questions a psychologist's troubling claims about genes and behaviour. [review of Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are- Robert Plomin- Allen Lane (2018)] article

There is much criticism on this article. I wonder what the specific arguments are. e.g. Timothy Bates tweet. Paige Harden's thread https://twitter.com/kph3k/status/1044990109299486720

• But Plomin’s argument provides live ammunition for those who would abandon proven methods of improving academic achievement among socio-economically deprived children. His utopia is a forensic world, dictated by polygenic algorithms and the whims of those who know how to use them. People would be defined at birth by their DNA. Expectations would be set, and opportunities, resources and experiences would be doled out — and withheld — a priori, before anyone has had a chance to show their mettle. Reviewed by Jay Joseph: https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.ucsc.edu/dist/0/158/files/2021/10/FinalJay-Joseph-Review-of-Blueprint-Manuscript-AJP-Revised-9-17-2021.pdf

Epigenetics and IQ: the mechanism behind environmentally-induced effects on cognitive performance. By Siobhán Dunphy - 24.09.2018 press and the article itself: Epigenetic variance in dopamine D2 receptor: a marker of IQ malleability? Jakob A. Kaminski and many, many others (2018). open access

• Taken together, our findings suggest that both func- tional activation of the reward system, epigenetic control of dopaminergic neurotransmission, and genetic markers contribute to gIQ. Of note, the effect sizes studied are small but in the same range as previous studies (2.4%10 in previous structural imaging studies and up to 4.8%4 for previous polygenic scores).

Ben Williamson Behavioural geneticist Robert Plomin introducing a 'robot' & 'chip' that predict education achievement from millions of DNA differences - the data-centric genetics of education is really here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FptGxaxJyms- tweet

John C. Loehlin and Robert C. Nichols (1976). Heredity, environment, and personality. A study of 850 sets of twins. University of Texas Press. isbn 0292730039 info

• Our data have thus not yielded any final and conclusive answer to the heredity-environment question for personality, abilities, and intersts. The data are generally consistent with a substantial influence of the genes in accounting for individual differences in these domains, but they imply a substantial influence of the environment as well - indeed, they do not altogether exclude a completely environmentalist position. The data do, it seems to us, have something to say concerning this environment. And the upshot of what they say is that it operates in remarkably mysterious ways, given traditional views on personality and motivational development.

  p. 94

Daniel Benjamin, David Cesarini, Philipp Koellinger and Peter Visscher (nd). FAQs about "GWAS of 126,559 individuals identifies genetic variants associated with educational attainment" pdf

Pedro Sept 2018 blog

Saskia Selzam, Jonathan R. I. Coleman, Avshalom Caspi, Terrie E. Moffitt & Robert Plomin (2018). A polygenic p factor for major psychiatric disorders. Translational Psychiatry, 8, Article number: 205 (2018) |open

Robert Plomin (2018). Blueprint. How DNA makes us who we are. allen Lane. isbn 9780241282076 info

• Toby Young (November 16, 2018). Do Parents Make a Difference? A Public Debate in London. Quillette https://quillette.com/2018/11/16/do-parents-make-a-difference-a-public-debate-in-london/ “On Monday in London’s Emmanuel Centre a- debate- took place that pitted two- Quillette- contributors—Robert Plomin- and- Stuart Ritchie—against two “experts” on child psychology—Susan Pawlby- and- Ann Pleshette Murphy.- ” Turkheimer: Robert Plomin's use of my ideas in 'Blueprint' http://www.geneticshumanagency.org/gha/robert-plomins-use-of-my-ideas-in-blueprint/ The gloomy prospect then and now http://www.geneticshumanagency.org/gha/the-gloomy-prospect-then-and-now/ The blueprint metaphor http://www.geneticshumanagency.org/gha/the-blueprint-metaphor/ "- “Blueprint” is trying to sell the idea that a bunch of mid-range ingredient correlations can be the basis for a deterministic developmental biology and psychology, but they can’t. In what may well be the worst sentence ever written about behavior genetics, Plomin says, “Put crudely, nice parents have nice children because they are all nice genetically.” The “put crudely” qualification is no excuse. It is the equivalent of saying that churches are churches because they started out with churchy materials." More on Robert Plomin's 'Blueprint.' Nature defeats nurture, 50 - 50! http://www.geneticshumanagency.org/gha/blogpost-more-on-robert-plomins-blueprint-nature-defeats-nurture-50-50/
• Kathryn Paige Harden (October 2018). Robert Plomin argues that 'only DNA matters', making it possible to 'predict your future from birth'. It's an outlandish claim that raises many ethical questions. The Spectator webpage
• Reviewed by Jay Joseph: pdf manuscript

==================

==================

Arthur S. Goldberger (1979). Heritability. Economica, 46, 327-347. preview

Robert Plomin (October 15, 2018). What Does Genetic Research Tell Us About Equal Opportunity and Meritocracy? article

#Blueprint

Erik Turkheimer (1998). Heritability and Biological Explanation. Psychological Review, 105, 782-791. pdf

Amy Harmon (Oct. 18, 2018). ‘Could Somebody Please Debunk This?’: Writing About Science When Even the Scientists Are Nervous. New York Times blog

Héléna Alexandra Gaspar, View ORCID ProfileChristopher Hübel, View ORCID ProfileJonathan RI Coleman, Ken B Hanscombe , Gerome Breen (2018). Navigome: Navigating the Human Phenome. bioRxiv abstract & preprint download

Nicholas W. Papageorge, Kevin Thom (2017). Genes, Education, and Labor Market Outcomes: Evidence from the Health and Retirement Study. Upjohn Institute working paper 17-273. abstract & paper

Jag Bhalla (13 April, 2018). How do "genes" work? So-called experts have a hard time agreeing. blog

• How we talk about genes shows many are confused. Seductive stats illusions, iffy gene ideas, bad causology, and lax jargon, are creating a recipe for epistemic comedy (and genetic tragedy).

Dean Keith Simonton (Ed.) (2014). The Wiley handbook of genius. [UBL PSYCHO P4.2.2.-114] info

• • a.o.:
  • Wendy Johnson & Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr.: Genetics of intellectual and personality traits associated with creative genius: Could geniuses be cosmobian dragon kings? 269-296 pdf
  • K. Anders Ericsson: Creative genius: A view from the expert-performance approach 321-349.

    summary

Cecile Janssens (Aug 2018). a tweetorial about this polygenic risk prediction paper Twitter thread

• the paper: Clues to your health are hidden at 6.6 million spots in your DNA. The New York Times

Jag Bhalla (13 April 2018). How do "genes" work? So-called experts have a hard time agreeing blog

July 27, 2018 /- by- K. Paige Harden- and- Daniel W. Belsky Predicting education from DNA? blog

Ewan Birney thread On the west coast I have had time to dig into this biorxive paper with the intriguing title "Genetic Consequences of Social Stratification in Great Britain" https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/10/30/457515- … Here are my initial thoughts on this Twitter thread

Variation in the Heritability of Educational Attainment: An International Meta-Analysis. Amelia R. Branigan Kenneth J. McCallum Jeremy Freese. Social Forces, Volume 92, Issue 1, 1 September 2013, Pages 109-140, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sot076 abstract

Daniel A. Briley, Jonathan Livengood, Jaime Derringer, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob, R. Chris Fraley, & Brent W. Roberts (2018 accepted) Interpreting Behavior Genetic Models: Seven Developmental Processes to Understand. Manuscript accepted for publication in Behavior Genetics. http://publish.illinois.edu/dabriley/files/2018/11/Briley-2018-Interpreting-behavior-genetic-models.pdf

A dangerous idea. website

Mark- Adams,- William David- Hill,- David M.- Howard,- Katrina A. S.- Davis,- Ian J- Deary,- Matthew- Hotopf,- Andrew M- McIntosh (2018). Factors associated with sharing email information and mental health survey participation in two large population cohorts. bioRXiv doi:- https://doi.org/10.1101/471433 open

#bias

Kevin J. Mtchell (2018). Innate. How the wiring of our brains shapes who we are. Princeton UP. isbn 9780691184999 info The first chapter is free.

Malanchini, Margherita,Engelhardt, Laura E.,Grotzinger, Andrew D.,Harden, K. Paige,Tucker-Drob, Elliot M. (2018). “Same but different”: Associations between multiple aspects of self-regulation, cognition, and academic abilities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology abstract [paywalled]

tweet

If genomics is the answer, what's the question? A commentary on PsychENCODE . By Kevin Mitchell - December 20, 2018 blog

Maurice Schouten & Huib Looren de Jong (Eds.) (2007/2012). ‘The matter of the mind. Philosophical essays on psychology, neuroscience, and reduction’ Wiley-Blackwell

William H. Schneider (1990). Quality and quantity. The quest for biological regeneration in twentieth-century France. Cambridge History of Medicine.

#eugenics_history

Jay S. Kaufman & Crles Muntaner (27 March 2016). 'The association between intelligence and lifespan is mostly genetic' International Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 45, Issue 2, 1 April 2016, Pages 576-577,https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw019comment

Critial comments on an article by Arden et al.

Kevin M. Beaver, Joseph A.Schwartz, Mohammed Said Al-Ghamdi, Ahmed Nezar Kobeisy, Curtis S. Dunkel, Dimitri van der Linden (2014). A closer look at the role of parenting-related influences on verbal intelligence over the life course: Results from an adoption-based research design. Intelligence, 46, 179-187.abstract 10.1016/j.intell.2014.06.002

Not yet retrieved; not mentioned by Flynn 2016 (Family).

Harden KP, Turkheimer E, Loehlin JC (2007) Genotype by environment interaction in adolescents’ cognitive aptitude. Behav Genet 37:273-283. doi:10.1007/s10519-006-9113-4 abstract

Loehlin JC, Harden KP, Turkheimer E (2009) The effect of assumptions about parental assortative mating and genotype-income correlation on estimates of genotype-environment interaction in the National Merit Twin Study. Behav Genet 39:165-169. doi:10.1007/s10519-008-9253-9

Robert M. Kirkpatrick, Matt McGue & William G. Iacono (2014). Replication of a Gene-Environment Interaction Via Multimodel Inference: Additive-Genetic Variance in Adolescents’ General Cognitive Ability Increases with Family-of-Origin Socioeconomic Status. Behavior Genetics volume 45, pages200-214 abstract

Eric Turkheimer, Kathryn Paige Harden, and Richard E. Nisbett May 18, 2017. Charles Murray is once again peddling junk science about race and IQ. webpage

• Stuart Ritchie (2 Jun 2017). 'This Vox article (https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/5/18/15655638/charles-murray-race-iq-sam-harris-science-free-speech- ) accused Charles Murray of "peddling junk science" in his Sam Harris interview.' Twitter thread

Marinus H. van IJzendoorn, Femmie Juffer, Caroline W. Klein Poelhuis (2005). Adoption and Cognitive Development: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Adopted and Nonadopted Children's IQ and School Performance. Psychological Bulletin researchgate.net

Thinking positively: The genetics of high intelligence. Nicholas G. Shakeshaft Maciej Trzaskowski Andrew McMillan Eva Krapohl, Michael A. Simpson Avi Reichenberg, Martin Cederlöf Henrik Larsson, Paul Lichtenstein, Robert Plomin (2015). Intelligence 48, 123-132 open access

The abstract mentions genetic causes of intelligence. That is a big problem with Plomin, exchanging correlations for causes.

Tinca C. Polderman a.o. (2015). Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nature Genetics advance online researchgate.net

'the causes of individual differences in human traits' Well, well, causes, not correlations?

The Problem of Non-Shared Environment in Behavioral Genetics. Oleg N. Tikhodeyev & Оlga V. Shcherbakova (2019). Behavior Genetics abstract

S. Alexandra Burt (2009). Rethinking Environmental Contributions to Child and Adolescent Psychopathology: A Meta-Analysis of Shared Environmental Influences. Psychological Bulleting, 135, 608-637. PDF

Tikhodeyev, O. N., & Shcherbakova, О. V. (2019). The Problem of Non-Shared Environment in Behavioral Genetics. Behavior Genetics. doi:10.1007/s10519-019-09950-1 url to share this paper: sci-hub.tw/10.1007/s10519-019-09950-1

A. Cecile J.W. Janssens and many others (2011). Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (GRIPS): explanation and elaboration European Journal of Human Genetics open

AUS DEM SPIEGEL AUSGABE 36/2010 Jörg Blech (2010). Studies Show Nurture at Least as Important as Nature. How Hereditary Can Intelligence Be? open

• Researchers have long overestimated the role our genes play in determining intelligence. As it turns out, cognitive skills do not depend on ethnicity, and are far more malleable than once thought. Targeted encouragement can help children from socially challenged families make better use of their potential.

Eric Turkheimer (2015). Genetic prediction. A Hastings Center Report. paywalled

Ewan Birney, on genetics. Feb 18, 2019 thread

Reimers, M. A., Craver, C., Dozmorov, M., Bacanu, S.-A., & Kendler, K. S. (2018). The Coherence Problem: Finding Meaning in GWAS Complexity. Behavior Genetics doi:10.1007/s10519-018-9935-x scihub

Rolf Degen (28 jan 2016). The groundbreaking lessons of behavior genetics are about the environment, not about genes. blog

A.C.Heath R.C.Kessler, M. C. neale, J. K. Hewitt, L. J. Eaves & K. S. Kendler (1993). Testing hypotheses about direction of causation using cross-sectional family data. Behavior Genetics, 23 pdf

Michael C. Neale & Lindon J. Eaves (1993). Estimating and controlling for the effects of volunteer bias with pairs of reltives. Behavior Genetics, 23. pdf

Tinca C. Polderman a.o. (2015). Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nature Genetics advance online researchgate.net

'the causes of individual differences in human traits' Well, well, causes, not correlations?

Kevin Mitchell(May 29, 2018). Grandma’s trauma - a critical appraisal of the evidence for transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in humans blog

J. C. DeFries & D. W. Fulker (1986). Multivariate behavioral genetics and development: An overview. Behavior Genetics, 16, 1-10 preview

Suzanne C. Swagerman, Elsje van Bergen, Conor Dolan, Eco J.C. de Geus, Marinka M.G. Koenis, Hilleke E. Hulshoff Pol, Dorret I. Boomsma (2017). Genetic transmission of reading ability. Brain & Language, 172,3-8. pdf

• thread: https://twitter.com/benwilbrink/status/1114278923595132928

Genetic Associations with Mathematics Tracking and Persistence in Secondary School. Kathryn Paige Harden, Benjamin W Domingue, Daniel W Belsky, Jason Boardman, Robert Crosnoe, Margherita Malanchini, Michel G Nivard, Elliot M Tucker-Drob, Kathleen Mullan Harris (2019). preprint bioRxivdoi: https://doi.org/10.1101/598532open

• It is now well-established that educational attainment is heritable33 and can be predicted from an individual’s DNA34. What is less well-understood is how genetic differences between individuals lead to differences in educational outcomes. In order for genetics research to inform education policy and practice, greater knowledge is needed about the developmental and social processes that connect students’ DNA to their educational outcomes35. Indeed, because polygenic scores are largely “black boxes” that aggregate genetic variants with unknown biological functions, some scientists have insisted that genetic discoveries in the area of education have no policy implications whatsoever 6

  However, our results directly connect these genetic discoveries to a common target of educational reforms - math coursetaking in secondary school. In the U.S., many states and school districts have increased the number of mathematics courses required for high school graduation37, while others have enacted policies designed to push more students into accelerated math tracks38, standardize the procedures for deciding how students are tracked39, or eliminate tracking altogether40. More generally, the U.S. government spends an estimated $3 billion on programs intended to increase STEM degree attainment41.

• Finally, with the caveat that the Add Health data represents an earlier cohort of students, our results suggest that even advantaged school contexts squander an enormous amount of potential human capital. Out of students who both had exceptional polygenic scores (+2 SD above the Add Health sample mean or the top 2% of the population distribution) and attended high status high school, about 31% took Calculus by the end of high school, whereas only 24% of students who had the same score and attended low status schools took calculus. This deficit in advanced course-taking among students with exceptional genetic propensities for succeeding in education indicates a tremendous amount of squandered human potential. The pipeline is leaking badly

Comparing within- and between-family polygenic score prediction. Saskia Selzam, Stuart J. Ritchie, Jean-Baptiste Pingault, Chandra A. Reynold, Paul F. O’Reilly, Robert Plomin1 (April 10, 2019). preprint

Twitter thread https://twitter.com/SaskiaSelzam/status/1116072320253272065

Eric Turkheimer (April 11, 2019). Within- and between-family prediction in TEDS. blog in Selzam a.o. 2019

thread https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1116325301292810240

• - I agree that the between-within comparison is the interesting part, and it seems to me the conclusion is very clear.

  
  So for example, a common conclusion from this lab is the GPS are about to revolutionize education. The conclusion from the between-within comparison is that making educational decisions about children on the basis of their GPS score is mostly a matter of tracking poor kids into special classes. Do we really want to do that? The enthusiasm for (behavioral) GPS needs to be tempered by what we are learning about it.

• Turkheimer, April 11: Robert Plomin is the senior author of this paper. He publishes a result that directly contradicts the spirit of his recent book, and doesn't mention it. Doesn't even look at the theoretical implications. I call that discreetly looking away.
• also: https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1116358916936544256 refers to Plomin et al https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-018-0019-8 Differences in exam performance between pupils attending selective and non-selective schools mirror the genetic differences between them

Pierrick Wainschtein and very many others (2019). Recovery of trait heritability from whole genome sequence data bioRxiv preprint

Alexander Young (2019). Missing heritablity revisited. blog

Commentary on Wainschtein a.o. 2019.

Genetic Associations with Mathematics Tracking and Persistence in Secondary School K. Paige Harden and many others (2019). preprint

Nick Barton, Joachim Hermisson & Magnus Nordborg (March 21, 2019). Population Genetics: Why structure matters blog [via Eric Turkheimer https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1118890989677109248]

• Great care is needed when interpreting claims about the genetic basis of human variation based on data from genome-wide association studies.

Kevin Mitchell on January 7, 2019. Is Our Future Really Written in Our Genes? A recent book argues your DNA can predict your future from birth with 100 percent reliability. That assertion is not 100 percent reliable. Scientific American blog

(2002 3rd). Race and membership in American history: The eugenics movement. Facing History and Ourselves Foundation. ISBN 0-9615841-9-K book pdf

Edward L.Thorndike (1935). In defense of facts. Journal of Adult Education.

• The general intellectual factor just mentioned - the general intellectualnability of ordinary educational discussion - resists efforts to increase it so obdurately that some of the most competent investigators of the matter deny that it can be increased at all. It is idle to argue we should give men power to think, in so far as that power is given or withheld by biological causes that are beyond our control.

  p. 2

Alexander I. Young (Published: June 24, 2019). Solving the missing heritability problem https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1008222open [uncorrcted proof]

key, for its list of references. Via Paige Harden (Twitter)

Eric Turkheimer (5 uly 2019). Cochran on Zimmer, ad correcting an old misimpression. blog

Heather L. Norton, Ellen E. Quillen, Abigail W. Bigham, Laurel N. Pearson and Holly Dunsworth (2019). Human races are not like dog breeds: refuting a racist analogy. Evolution: Education and Outreach open

Rosa Cheesman, Avina Hunjan, Jonathan Coleman, Yasmin Ahmadzadeh, Robert Plomin, Tom A McAdams, Thalia C Eley, Gerome Breen (July 2019). Comparison of adopted and non-adopted individuals reveals gene-environment interplay for education in the UK Biobank. bioRXivpreprint

(Turkheimer: Smart study from @thaliaeley, @psychgenomics @RobertPlomin and others, looking at reduced PGS performance in adoptees. Another reason to remember that PGS != inborn potential for educational attainment. https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1152295558750572544 )

Daniel A. Briley & Elliot Tucker-Drob (2013). Explaining the Increasing Heritability of Cognitive Ability Across Development. A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Twin and Adoption Studies. Psychological Science DOI: 10.1177/0956797613478618 read online free

Amelia R. Branigan, Kenneth J. McCallum, Jeremy Freese (2013). Variation in the Heritability of Educational Attainment: An International Meta-Analysis. Social Forces, Volume 92, Issue 1, September 2013, Pages 109-140, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sot076 abstract

Eric Turkheimer (2019). The genetics of aphasia. blog

Or any complex entity.

Genetics and Learning: How the Genes Influence Educational Attainmentarticle

Biased from the very beginning? "Thus, knowledge derived from genetics and epigenetics, as well as from neuroscience, should be used to enhance education professionals’ understanding of the biological origins of differences in mental capabilities" [my emphasis]

Early cortical surface plasticity relates to basic mathematical learning. Ulrike Kuhl, Angela D. Friederici (2019). NeuroImage abstract

de Zeeuw, Eveline L; Kees-Jan Kan; Catharina E M van Beijsterveldt; Mbarek, Hamdi; Jouke-Jan Hottenga; et al. NPJ Science of Learning; London Vol. 4, (2019): 1-8. DOI:10.1038/s41539-019-0052-2 The moderating role of SES on genetic differences in educational achievement in the Netherlands. ProQuest open access

OCTOBER 24, 2019- BY- EWANBIRNEY Race, genetics and pseudoscience: an explainer blog

Ritchie, S. J., Quinlan, E. B., Banaschewski, T., Bokde, A. L., Desrivieres, S., Flor, H., … Schumann, G. (2019, October 9). Neuroimaging and genetic correlates of cognitive ability and cognitive development in adolescence. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8pwd6 open

Comparing the Developmental Genetics of Cognition and Personality over the Lifespan Daniel A. Briley and Elliot M. Tucker-Drob (2017). Journal of Personality open access

Jasmin Wertz and many others (27 October 2019) Using DNA From Mothers and Children to Study Parental Investment in Children’s Educational Attainment. Child Development https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13329 oppen access

Nichols, R. C. (1978).- 1: Policy Implications of the IQ Controversy. Review of Research in Education, 6(1), 3-46.- doi:10.3102/0091732x006001003- url to share this paper: sci-hub.tw/10.3102/0091732X006001003

Summarizes the thinking on IQ and its heritability around 1975.

Alexander O. Savi, Maarten Marsman, Han L. J. van der Maas, Gunter K. J. Maris (2019). The Wiring of Intelligence. Perspectives on Psychological Science. open access open access & PsyArXiv Preprints

Jinkinson Smith. Genome-wide association studies of intelligence: a review of the literature. Authorea. June 13, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22541/au.156043260.01203836 preprint

Via Steve Pittelly https://twitter.com/StevePittelli/status/1192552407798099986

Per Engzell and Felix C. Tropf (2019). Heritability of education rises with intergenerational mobility. PNAS open access

Loic YengoMorgan SidariKarin J. H. VerweijPeter M. VisscherMatthew C. KellerBrendan P. Zietsch (2020). No Evidence for Social Genetic Effects or Genetic Similarity Among Friends Beyond that Due to Population Stratification: A Reappraisal of Domingue et al (2018) abstract

SP Hagenaars and many others (2016). Shared genetic aetiology between cognitive functions and physical and mental health in UK Biobank (N =112 151) and 24 GWAS consortia. Molecular Psychiatry (2016) 21, 1624-1632; doi:10.1038/mp.2015.225; published online 26 January 2016 open

C.M.A. Haworth and many others (2010). The heritability of general cognitive ability increases linearly from childhood to young adulthood. Molecular Psychiatry open

• Why, despite life's ‘slings and arrows of outrageous fortune’, do genetically driven differences increasingly account for differences in general cognitive ability? We suggest that the answer lies with genotype-environment correlation: as children grow up, they increasingly select, modify and even create their own experiences in part based on their genetic propensities.

  from the abstract

Viewing Education Policy through a Genetic Lens Kathryn Asbury & Jonathan Waisci-hub.tw/10.1080/15582159.2019.1705008

28 JAN CHARLES MURRAY'S "HUMAN DIVERSITY" Posted at 14:51h in Uncategorized by Eric Turkheimer blog

Michelle N. Meyer, Patrick Turley, and Daniel J. Benjamin (Feb 3, 2020). Response to Charles Murray on Polygenic Scores. blog

• Consider IQ. IQ is not a fixed attribute of individuals and can be affected — for better and worse — by the environment in myriad ways. For example, in a society where people of color are denied access to childhood enrichment programs or adequate nutrition, a polygenic score for IQ might reflect genetic variants associated with skin pigmentation. Relatedly, in a sexist society, variants on the X and Y chromosomes, which determine biological sex, might be related to a variety of socio-economic phenotypes. Such polygenic scores would indeed moderately predict the IQ of people on average, but — and this is key — much of that predictive power would simply reflect- social- choices, not innate or immutable biology. (Note that polygenic scores for IQ are actually poor predictors of any one- individual’s phenotype, as Mr. Murray acknowledges.)

Kathy J. Cooke (1998). The Limits of Heredity: Nature and Nurture in American Eugenics Before 1915. Journal of the History of Biology, 31, 263-278. academia.edu

• For many biologists, eugenics provided a means to social stability through implementation of the biological principle that any living thing “is the product of interaction between its inheritance and its environment.”10 While marshaling statistics regarding the perceived increase in the numbers of criminals, insane persons, the feeble-minded, ant the sick, eugenicists tended to address hereditary and environmental factors. For instance, H. E. Jordan, an embryologist at the University of Virginia, in 1910 rampaged against “the social monsters - vice, crime and disease, the enemies of race improvement” before the Virginia State Conference of Charities and Correction, arguing that simple “observance of the laws of heredity and enforcement of eugenic principles” would “cure many of our social, political, and economic ills.”11 However, in this argument Jordan also included proper environment as a necessary component in the drive for social stability, explaining that a “discussion of the relative values in development of heredity and environment would be senseless. Both heredity and environment are essentials; essentials cannot be compared.” The best native abilities, Jordan emphasized, would never emerge in an unfavorable environment.12

  10 H. E. Jordan, “Heredity as a Factor in the Improvement of Social Conditions,” Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1991), 246-254, on p. 251. 11 Ibid., pp. 248, 253 12 Ibid., p. 251.

  Jordan’s view reflected the conviction of the many biologists who found it unwise if not impossible to try to distinguish the influence of physically inherited traits from the influence of the environment. In many cases scientists viewed them as truly inseparable. In 1908, Princeton biologist Edwin Grant Conklin emphasized the inherent relationship between the two when he tried to clarify the meaning of the word “heredity.” For Conklin, heredity was “not a unique principle for it is only similarity of growth and differentiation in successive generations.”13 Conklin’s view was reflected in the 1911 analysis of Frederick Adams Woods, a medical doctor and lecturer in biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who explained that many biologists doubted the possibility of separating environment and heredity. Woods himself hoped to refine scientific views of heredity and overcome the “older idea that heredity means resemblance between parent and offspring.”14 Still, for many biologists the word “heredity” was inextricably bound up with development, and could describe only past biological relationships. Moderate eugenicists, like Conklin, were aware of the difficulties involved in extricating environmental from hereditary effects, and thus advocated methods of social reform that included attention both to hereditary and environmental conditions.

Edwin Grant Conklin (1915). Heredity and environment in the development of man. archive.org

A. H. Halsey: Social mobility. In G. A. Harrison & A. J. Boyce (Eds.) (1972). The structure of human populations. Clarendon Press.

Wat dacht Halsey over IQ en erfelijkheid, rond 1970?

Tim T Morris, Neil M Davies, George Davey Smith (2020). Can education be personalised using pupils’ genetic data? open

Tim T. Morris, Neil M. Davies, Gibran Hemani and George Davey Smith (2020). Population phenomena inflate genetic associations of complex social traits. Science Advances 15 Apr 2020: Vol. 6, no. 16, eaay0328 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aay0328 via Eric Turkheimer https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1252936475202801664open

Benjamin Domingue Sam Trejo Emma Armstrong-Carter Elliot Tucker-Drob (2020). Interactions between polygenic scores and environments: Methodological and conceptual challenges SocArXiv Papers open

Steven P R Rose (2006). Commentary: Heritability estimates—long past their sell-by date. International Journal of Epidemiology 2006;35:525-527 Advance Access publication 27 April 2006 doi:10.1093/ije/dyl064 open access

Zie ook Steven Rose (18 october 2013) School achievement isn't just in your genes. Anyone who asserts that educational attainment is in large part inherited needs a lesson in modern genetics, says a professor of biology. (On Cummings!)

There is No Nature-Nurture War. by Scott Barry Kaufman, January 18, 2019 in Blog blog

Eric Turkheimer (August 22, 2019). The Shiny—and Potentially Dangerous—New Tool for Predicting Human Behavior blog

Elliot M Tucker-Drob 1, Mijke Rhemtulla, K Paige Harden, Eric Turkheimer, David Fask (2011). Emergence of a Gene X Socioeconomic Status Interaction on Infant Mental Ability Between 10 Months and 2 Years. Psychol Sci. 2011 Jan;22(1):125-33. doi: 10.1177/0956797610392926. open

• At age 10 months, genes accounted for negligible variation in mental ability across all levels of socioeconomic status (SES). However, genetic influences emerged over the course of development, with larger genetic influences emerging for infants raised in higher-SES homes. At age 2 years, genes accounted for nearly 50% of the variation in mental ability of children raised in high-SES homes, but genes continued to account for negligible variation in mental ability of children raised in low-SES homes.

  from the abstract

Jan Noordman (1992). Het eugenetisch optimisme van Heymans. De Psycholoog, oktober, 432-436.

The Inflated Promise of Genomic Medicine COVID-19 has laid bare the need to reconsider the hope and money we invest in genetics research. By Erik Parens on June 1, 2020 Scientific American

Karri Silventoinen, Aline Jelenkovic, […]Jaakko Kaprio (2020). Genetic and environmental variation in educational attainment: an individual-based analysis of 28 twin cohorts. Scientific Reports volume 10, Article number: 12681 (2020). Open access

W. T. Dickens & J. R. Flynn (2001). Heritability estimates versus large environmetal effects: The IQ paradox resolved. Psychological Review, 108 346-369 abstract and pdf researchgate.net

Op deze abstract-pagina ook een reeks direct relevante artikelen:

• Our model posits strong reciprocal causation between phenotypic IQ and environment. That reciprocal causation produces gene X environment correlation. The model has three features that allow for potent environmental effects while accommodating high estimates of heritability.

  First, the reciprocal causation between IQ and environment leads to a positive correlation between environment and genotype that masks the potency of environment. Because of this correlation, both direct effects of genotype on IQ and indirect effects through induced environments are measured by standard heritability estimates. Judging the size of the environmental effects by the fraction of variance not explained by genotype will understate its full magnitude because to do so ignores environmental effects induced by differences in genotype. Second, reciprocal causation produces a multiplier effect that inflates both genetic and environmental advantages by a process in which higher IQ leads one into better environments causing still higher IQ, and so on. Third, we hypothesize that at least three aspects of this process lead to averaging of many environmental influences. Because of the law of large numbers, this averaging allows environmental effects to be arbitrarily large relative to the variance of an index of their combined effect—even though they seem small relative to the variance of environmental effects not correlated with genetic endowment.

• Erratum in Psychol Rev 2001 Jul;108(3):549
• The IQ paradox: resolved? Still an open question.Loehlin JC.
Psychol Rev. 2002 Oct;109(4):754-8; discussion 764-71. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.109.4.754.
PMID:- 12374329
• 
 Expanding variance and the case of historical changes in IQ means: a critique of Dickens and Flynn (2001).Rowe DC, Rodgers JL.
Psychol Rev. 2002 Oct;109(4):759-63; discussion 764-71. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.109.4.759.
PMID:- 12374330
• 
 Heritability analyses of IQ scores: science or numerology?Layzer D.
Science. 1974 Mar 29;183(4131):1259-66. doi: 10.1126/science.183.4131.1259.
PMID:- 4815127
• 
 The heritability of IQ.Devlin B, Daniels M, Roeder K.
Nature. 1997 Jul 31;388(6641):468-71. doi: 10.1038/41319.
PMID:- 9242404
• 
 The paradox of intelligence: Heritability and malleability coexist in hidden gene-environment interplay.Sauce B, Matzel LD.
Psychol Bull. 2018 Jan;144(1):26-47. doi: 10.1037/bul0000131. Epub 2017 Oct 30.
PMID:- 29083200- Free PMC article.- Review.
• 
 The identical-twin transfusion syndrome: a source of error in estimating IQ resemblance and heritability.Munsinger H.
Ann Hum Genet. 1977 Jan;40(3):307-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1977.tb00195.x.
PMID:- 848859
• 
 Genetics and high cognitive ability.Plomin R, Thompson LA.
Ciba Found Symp. 1993;178:67-79; discussion 79-84. doi: 10.1002/9780470514498.ch5.
PMID:- 8168371- Review.
• 
 Education and Cognitive Functioning Across the Life Span.Lövdén M, Fratiglioni L, Glymour MM, Lindenberger U, Tucker-Drob EM.
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2020 Aug;21(1):6-41. doi: 10.1177/1529100620920576.
PMID:- 32772803- Free PMC article.
• 
 Genes, Education, and Labor Market Outcomes: Evidence from the Health and Retirement Study.Papageorge NW, Thom K.
J Eur Econ Assoc. 2020 Jun;18(3):1351-1399. doi: 10.1093/jeea/jvz072. Epub 2019 Dec 14.
PMID:- 32587483
• 
 The Relational Abilities Index+: Initial Validation of a Functionally Understood Proxy Measure for Intelligence.Colbert D, Malone A, Barrett S, Roche B.
Perspect Behav Sci. 2019 May 24;43(1):189-213. doi: 10.1007/s40614-019-00197-z. eCollection 2020 Mar.
PMID:- 32440651- Free PMC article.
• 
 The Flynn effect for fluid IQ may not generalize to all ages or ability levels: a population-based study of 10,000 US adolescents.Platt JM, Keyes KM, McLaughlin KA, Kaufman AS.
Intelligence. 2019 Nov-Dec;77:101385. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2019.101385. Epub 2019 Sep 10.
PMID:- 32322129
• 


Stoolmiller, M. (1999). Implications of the restricted range of family environments for estimates of heritability and nonshared environment in behavior-genetic adoption studies. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 392- 409. DOI:- 10.1037/0033-2909.125.4.392 abstract and some relevant literature

Pieter J. van Strien (2003). De opvoedbaarheid van de intelligentie. Een oud strijdpunt tussen pedagogen en psychologen. Pedagogiek, 23e jaargang • 2 • 2003 • 122 -136 pdf

Zajonc, R. B., & Mullaly, P. R. (1997). Birth order: Reconciling conflicting effects. American psychologust, 52, 685-699. pdf

• Is birth order an insignificant factor in explaining Scholastic Assessment test and other standardized test scores, or does it account for more than 80% of the variance? Strong data supporting both conclusions have been gathered by psychologists.

W. F. Wertheim (1972). Intelligentieverschillen in het licht van de sociologie. Wetenschap en Samenleving, Orgaan van het Verbond van Wetenschappelijke Onderzoekers, 26, 156-172 Dit artikel is een soort van vervolg op zijn vrijwel gelijknamige artikel 'Intelligentieverschillen in het licht der sociologie' in De Nieuwe Stem, 7, p. 9 e.v. [Dit opstel verschijnt ongeveer gelijktijdig in enigszins uitgebreider vorm in het Tijdschrift ‘Psychologische Achtergronden’.]en nu ook in dbnl te lezen: dbnl

Robert M. Kirkpatrick, Lisa N. Legrand, William G. Iacono, Matt McGue (2011). A twin and adoption study of reading achievement: Exploration of shared-environmental and gene-environment-interaction effects. Learning and Individual Differences 21, 368-375. academia.edu

A twin and adoption study of reading achievement: Exploration of shared-environmental and gene-environment-interaction effects. Robert M. Kirkpatrick ⁎, Lisa N. Legrand, William G. Iacono, Matt McGue (2011). Learing and Individual Differences, 21, 368-375 academia.edu

Samuel H. Preston, and Cameron Campbell (1993). Differential Fertility and the Distribution of Traits: The Case of IQ. SYMPOSIUM ON INTERGENERATIONAL TRANSMISSION 10.1086/230135 abstract

James S. Coleman (1993). Comment on Preston and Campbell's "Differential Fertility and the Distribution of Traits" 10.1086/230137 preview & JSTOR read online

Willim G. Hill (2014). Applications of Population Genetics to Animal Breeding, from Wright, Fisher and Lush to Genomic Prediction. Genetics, 196 1-16open

• I discuss some of the history and genetic issues as applied to the science of livestock improvement, which has had and continues to have major spin-offs into ideas and applications in other areas.

  from the abstract

Carl F. Craver, Mikhail Dozmorov, Mark Reimers, and Kenneth S. Kendler (). Gloomy Prospects and Roller Coasters: Finding Coherence in Genome-Wide Association. Studies Philosophy of Science 87, Number 5 abstract

Madrid-Valero, J.J., Chapman, R., Bailo, E.- et al.- What Do People Know About the Heritability of Sleep?.- Behav Genet- (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-021-10041-3 paywalled

• Eric Turkheimer: "An account of lay knowledge of the meaning of "heritability,." The presumably correct answer is by my lights incorrect, or at best misleading and vague. "Genetic influences account for approximately 30% of the differences between people in insomnia""

  https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1353531134366412801

Deary, I.J., Cox, S.R. & Hill, W.D. Genetic variation, brain, and intelligence differences. Mol Psychiatry (2021). open access [via Eric Turkheimer https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1358455103217352704]

Kathy J. Cooke (1998). The Limits of Heredity: Nature and Nurture in American Eugenics Before 1915. Journal of the History of Biology 31: 263-278 academia.edu

Nasa Sinnott-Armstrong, Sahin Naqvi, Manuel Rivas, Jonathan K Pritchard (20121). GWAS of three molecular traits highlights core genes and pathways alongside a highly polygenic background open access Draadje van Kevin Mitchell https://twitter.com/WiringTheBrain/status/1362716247071285249

Bart Penders & A. Cecile J. W. Janssens (2021). Do we measure or compute polygenic risk scores? Why language matters. Human Genetics. 10.1007/s00439-021-02262-7 open access

Kathy J. Cooke (1998). The Limits of Heredity: Nature and Nurture in American Eugenics Before 1915 Journal of the History of Biology 31: 263-278, academia.edu

Barry Mehler (1997). Beyondism: Raymond B. Cattell and the New Eugenics Originally published in Genetica 99: 153-163 Revised for posting on ISAR web page, January 1998. http://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/OTHERSRV/ISAR/bios/Cattell/genetica.htm academia.edu

Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2011). Genetic essentialism: On the deceptive determinism of DNA. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 800-818. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021860 abstract

Jay Joseph (September 3, 2019). A ‘Blueprint’ for Genetic Determinismblog

Kathryn Paige Harden (march 2021). The science of terrible men/ The pioneers of social genetics were racists and eugenicists: should we give up on the science they founded altogether?

Barry Mehler (1997). Beyondism: Raymond B. Cattell and the New Eugenics. Genetica 99: 153-163. academia.edu

CAUSATION AND MECHANISM. Posted at 13:14h in Uncategorized by Eric Turkheimer 11 june 2019 blog

E. E. Maccoby (2000). Parenting and its effects on children. On reading and misreading behavior genetics. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 1-27. open access

• Children’s genetic predispositions and their parents’ childrearing regimes are seen to be closely interwoven, and the ways in which they function jointly to affect children’s devel- opment are explored.

Gilbert Gottlieb (1995). Some Conceptual Deficiencies in "Developmental" Behavior Genetics. Human Development, v38 n3 p131-41 abstract

Turkheimer, E., Goldsmith, H. H., & Gottesman, I. I. (1995). "Some conceptual deficiencies in 'developmental' behavior genetics": Comment. Human Development, 38(3), 143-153. https://doi.org/10.1159/000278307 abstract

• Comments on an article by G. Gottlieb (see record 1996-10515-001) regarding the validity of behavioral genetics (BG). The authors argue that there is no fundamental disagreement between Gottlieb's theses and the mainstream view of BG. Issues addressed include heritability, reaction range, and hierarchical models from systems theory. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Eric Turkheimer (2000). Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean. Current directions in Psychological Science http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/three_laws.pdpdf

Eric Turkheimer (2016). Weak Genetic Explanation 20 Years Later. Reply to Plomin et al. Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 11 24-28 https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615617442 abstract & pdf

Jonathan Michael Kaplan & Eric Turkheimer (2021). Galton's Quincunx: Probabilistic causation in developmental behavior genetics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.04.001 abstract

• In what sense are associations between particular markers and complex behaviors made by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and related techniques discoveries of, or entries into the study of, the causes of those behaviors? In this paper, we argue that when applied to individuals, the kinds of probabilistic ‘causes’ of complex traits that GWAS-style studies can point towards do not provide the kind of causal information that is useful for generating explanations; they do not, in other words, point towards useful explanations of why particular individuals have the traits that they do. We develop an analogy centered around Galton's “Quincunx” machine; while each pin might be associated with outcomes of a certain sort, in any particular trial, that pin might be entirely bypassed even if the ball eventually comes to rest in the box most strongly associated with that pin. Indeed, in any particular trial, the actual outcome of a ball hitting a pin might be the opposite of what is usually expected. While we might find particular pins associated with outcomes in the aggregate, these associations will not provide causally relevant information for understanding individual outcomes. In a similar way, the complexities of development likely render impossible any moves from population-level statistical associations between genetic markers and complex behaviors to an understanding of the causal processes by which individuals come to have the traits that they in fact have.

Sara A. Hart, Callie Little & Elsje van Bergen (2021). Nurture might be nature: cautionary tales and proposed solutions npj science of learningopen access

J. E. Schulte (1938). Erfelijkheid en eugenetiek. I Wetenschappelijke grondslagen. II Toepassing der erfelijkheidsleer. Haarlem: Bohn.

Biyao Wang Jessie R. Baldwin Tabea Schoeler Rosa Cheesman Wikus Barkhuizen Frank Dudbridge David Bann Tim T. Morris Jean-Baptiste Pingault (2021). Robust genetic nurture effects on education: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on 38,654 families across 8 cohorts. AJHG DOI

Ryutaro Uchiyama, Rachel Spicer, Michael Muthukrishna (2021). Cultural Evolution of Genetic Heritability preprint

L. Raffington, P.T. Tanksley, A. Sabhlok, L. Vinnik, T. Mallard, S. King, B. Goosby, K.P. Harden, E.M. Tucker-Drob (2021). Socially stratified epigenetic profiles are associated with cognitive functioning in children and adolescents abstract download

Elsje van Bergen Sara Hart Antti Latvala Eero Vuoksimaa Asko Tolvanen Minna Torppa (2021). Literacy skills seem to fuel literacy enjoyment, rather than vice versa. PsyArXiv Preprints preprint

• Children who like to read and write tend to be better at it. This association is typically interpreted as enjoyment impacting engagement in literacy activities, which boosts literacy skills. We fitted direction-of-causation models to partial data of 3,690 Finnish twins aged 12. Literacy skills were rated by the twins’ teachers and literacy enjoyment by the twins themselves. A bivariate twin model showed substantial genetic influences on literacy skills (70%) and literacy enjoyment (35%). In both skills and enjoyment, shared-environmental influences explained about 20% in each. Direction-of-causation modelling showed that skills impacted enjoyment. The influence in the other direction was zero. The genetic influences on skills influenced enjoyment, via the skills enjoyment path. This indicates active gene-environment correlation: children with an aptitude for good literacy skills are more likely to seek out literacy activities. To a lesser extent, it was also the shared-environmental influences on children’s skills that propagated to influence children’s literacy enjoyment. Environmental influences that foster children’s literacy skills (e.g., families and schools), also foster children’s love for reading and writing. These findings underline the importance of nurturing children’s literacy skills.

  abstract

Kathy Cooke (1998). The Limits of Heredity: Nature and Nurture in American Eugenics Before 1915. Journal of the history of biology academia.edu

Augustine Kong, Stefania Benonisdottir, and Alexander I. Young (2021) Family Analysis with Mendelian Imputations preprint via Eric Turkheimer

Ik heb het artikel vluchtig bekeken, en kan wel zeggen dat ik er weinig of niets van begrijp. Ik zou graag een heldere uitleg zien van wat hier 'direct effect' wordt genoemd, en waarom dat echt anders is dan wat gewoonlijk op basis van GWAS-onderzoek effect (verklaarde variante) wordt genoemd. Ik reke erop dat Eric Turkheimer er wel een blogje aan zal gaan wagen.

K. Paige Harden, Benjamin W. Domingue, Daniel W. Belsky, Jason D. Boardman, Robert Crosnoe, Margherita Malanchini, Michel Nivard, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob & Kathleen Mullan Harris- (2020) Genetic associations with mathematics tracking and persistence in secondary school npj Science of Learning volume- 5, Article- number:- 1 open access

Intergenerational Transmission of Skills (ITS) research project website

• The Intergenerational Transmission of Skills (ITS) project has developed a unique and unparalleled database, linking skills of parents to skills of children. This database- database (internally also referred to as the ‘Goldmine project’) currently provides information on some 25,000 parents and 41,000 of their children. In the future, this database will continue to expand with new data. The unique feature of the dataset is that skills of parents and their children were measured at the same age (both around age 12) and with the same test (a national test measuring proficiency in language and math skills). This linked dataset is enriched with extensive information on the grandparents, the parents, and the children. This makes the ITS database unique in the world.

Jacobs, B., Vermeulen, S., van der Velden, R., (2021).- The Intergenerational Transmission of Skills dataset. (ROA Technical Reports; Vol. ROA-TR-2021/, No. 007). Maastricht: Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market. pdf

Exploring the Uncharted Waters of- Educational Mobility: The Role of Key Skills Babs Jacobs, Rolf van der Velden- (2021).- ROA Research Memoranda No. 006

The Intergenerational Transmission of Cognitive Skills: An Investigation of the Causal Impact of Families on Student Outcomes. Eric A. Hanushek,- Babs Jacobs, Guido Schwerdt,- Rolf van der Velden,- Stan Vermeulen, Simon Wiederhold (2021).- ROA Research Memoranda No. 007

Eric Turkheimer & Paige Harden (). Behavior Genetic Research Methods. Testing Quasi-Causal Hypotheses Using Multivariate Twin Data. pdf via Eric https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1459522042907308032

Polderman, T., Benyamin, B., de Leeuw, C. et al. Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nat Genet 47, 702-709 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3285 abstract, references Via Eric Turkheimer

• "This study provides the most comprehensive analysis of the causes of individual differences in human traits thus far and will guide future gene-mapping efforts. All the results can be visualized using the MaTCH webtool."

Polygenic Risk Score Task Force of the International Common Disease Alliance. Responsible use of polygenic risk scores in the clinic: potential benefits, risks and gaps. Nat Med (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01549-6open via @cecilejanssens https://twitter.com/cecilejanssens/status/1460595990390521860

Evan J. Giangrande, Eric Turkheimer (2021). Race, Ethnicity, and the Scarr-Rowe Hypothesis: A Cautionary Example of Fringe Science Entering the Mainstream. Perspectives on Psychological Science abstract via Eric Turkheimer https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1461760118530486272 [preprint]

Stephen M. Downes & Eric Turkheimer (2021). An Early History of the Heritability Coefcient Applied to Humans (1918-1960). Biological Theory pdf

Thomas Frisell, Yudi Pawitan, Niklas Langström (2021). Is the Association between General Cognitive Ability and Violent Crime Caused by Family-Level Confounders? PlosOne open

James J. Lee and many many others (2018). Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educationalattainment in 1.1 million individuals Nature Genetics, 50, 1112-1121. open via 'The genetic lottery' note 24 ch 1

• A joint (multi-phenotype) analysis of educational attainment and three related cognitive phenotypes generates polygenic scores that explain 11-13% of the variance in educational attainment and 7-10% of the variance in cognitive performance.

  from the abstract

• Our results also highlight two caveats to the use of the poly- genic scores in research. First, our within-family analyses suggest that GWAS estimates may overstate the causal effect sizes: if educa- tional attainment-increasing genotypes are associated with paren- tal educational attainment-increasing genotypes, which are in turn associated with rearing environments that promote educational attainment, then failure to control for rearing environment will bias GWAS estimates. If this hypothesis is correct, some of the predictive power of the polygenic score reflects environmental amplification of the genetic effects. Without controls for this bias, it is therefore inappropriate to interpret the polygenic score for educational attain- ment as a measure of genetic endowment.

  from the conclusion

Laura E. Engelhardt1, Daniel A. Briley1,2, Frank D. Mann1, K. Paige Harden1,2, and Elliot M. Tucker-Drob (2015). Genes Unite Executive Functions in Childhood. Psychological Science OnlineFirst, published on July 8, 2015 as doi:10.1177/0956797615577209 pdf

Phillip D. Koellinger & K. Paige Harden (2018). 'Using nature to understand nurture', Science 359, # 6374: 386-87 10.1126/science.aar6429

Augustine Kong et al. (2018). 'The nature of nurture: effects of parental genotypes' Science 359, #6374: 424-28386-87 doi.org/10.1126/science.aan6877

Aysu Okbay, Yeda Wu, …Alexander I. Young (2022). Polygenic prediction of educational attainment within and between families from genome-wide association analyses in 3 million individuals. Nature genetics Zie vooral ook het draadje van Eric https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/1509576563515445254 open

Eric Turkheimer (6 april 2022) op Twitter [regression of GCSE score onto the within-family variation in the EA4 PGI]tweet

Matthews, L. J., & Turkheimer, E. (2019). Across the great divide: pluralism and the hunt for missing heritability.- scihub

Lucas J. Matthews, Eric Turkheimer (2022). Three legs of the missing heritability problem. Studies in history and philosophy of science, 93, June, 183-191. abstract

text

Eric Turkheimer (May 12, 2022). Peter Visscher on the Genomics of Complex Human Traits blog

• https://twitter.com/benwilbrink/status/1524774187566505993 Clear. Thanks a lot, Eric. "Modern genomics has changed very little in our understanding of the causes of human socioeconomic and educational inequality." #5%
• It matters a lot for the interpretation of individual differences in education. #genetic or not. We are not our genes, neither are our children, or the children we teach.
• As a social scientist, I assumed it to be self-evident for heritabilities to be established as corrected for (social) stratification. Wrong assumption! (Another perennial question: are pathologies—Down syndrome, Klinefelter—regarded as outliers to be removed from samples?)

Peter Visscher article

Eric Turkheimer (May 17, 2022). 'Still thinking about Peter Visscher's essay and reply' twitter thread [The reply: comment on the blog http://turkheimer.com/peter-visscher-on-the-genomics-of-complex-human-traits/#comments ]

Ed Yong (). An enormous study of the genes related to staying in school. Science [Over een onderzoek van Peter Visscher en vele anderen. ] web page The Atlantic

Tim T Morris, Neil M Davies, George Davey Smith (2020). Can education be personalised using pupils’ genetic data? open access

Robert Plomin & John Crabbe (2000). DNA. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 806-828 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.6.806 scihub pdf

K. Paige Harden (2022). Genetic determinism, essentialism and reductionism: semantic clarity for contested science. Nature Reviews Genetics https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-022-00537-x Springer SharedIt & Twitter thread

Lucas J. Matthews & Eric Turkheimer (2022). Three legs of the missing heritability problem. June 2022 Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A 93(11):183-191 DOI:10.1016/j.shpsa.2022.04.004

R. A. Fisher (1919). XV. The Correlation between Relatives on the Supposition of Mendelian Inheritance.. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 52, pp 399-433 doi:10.1017/S0080456800012163

Tina Baier, Espen Moen Eilertsen, Eivind Ystrom, Imac M. Zambranac, Torkild H. Lyngstad (2022). An Anatomy of the Intergenerational Correlation of Educational Attainment-Learning from the Educational Attainments of Norwegian Twins and their Children. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. Available online 7 April 2022 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027656242200018X via https://twitter.com/torkildl/status/1515016192523747332

  http://www.benwilbrink.nl/literature/heritability.htm

English translation of the code of integrity, download it here https://easy.dans.knaw.nl/ui/datasets/id/easy-dataset:110600/tab/2