DOCSLIB.ORG

Houle00gfactor.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Houle00gfactor.Pdf The Nature of Intelligence: Novartis Foundation Symposium 233. Volume 233 Edited by Gregory R. Bock, Jamie A. Goode and Kate Webb Copyright Novartis Foundation 2000. ISBN: 0-471-49434-8 THE NATURE OF INTELLIGENCE The Novartis Foundation is an international scienti¢c and educational charity (UK Registered Charity No. 313574). Known until September 1997 as the Ciba Foundation, it was established in 1947 by the CIBA company of Basle, which merged with Sandoz in 1996, to form Novartis. The Foundation operates independently in London under English trust law. It was formally opened on 22 June 1949. The Foundation promotes the study and general knowledge of science and in particular encourages international co-operation in scienti¢c research. To this end, it organizes internationally acclaimed meetings (typically eight symposia and allied open meetings and 15^20 discussion meetings) and publishes eight books per year featuring the presented papers and discussions from the symposia. Although primarily an operational rather than a grant-making foundation, it awards bursaries to young scientists to attend the symposia and afterwards work with one of the other participants. The Foundation’s headquarters at 41 Portland Place, London W1B 1BN, provide library facilities, open to graduates in science and allied disciplines. Media relations are fostered by regular press conferences and by articles prepared by the Foundation’s Science Writer in Residence. The Foundation o¡ers accommodation and meeting facilities to visiting scientists and their societies. Information on all Foundation activities can be found at http://www.novartisfound.org.uk Novartis Foundation Symposium 233 THE NATURE NATURE OF OF INTELLIGENCEINTELLIGENCE 2000 JOHN WILEY & SONS, LTD Chichester · New York · Weinheim · Brisbane · Singapore · Toronto Copyright & Novartis Foundation 2000 Published in 2000 byJohnWiley & Sons Ltd, Ba⁄ns Lane, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1UD, England National 01243 779777 International (+44) 1243 779777 e-mail (for orders and customer service enquiries): [email protected] Visit our Home Page on http://www.wiley.co.uk or http://www.wiley.com All Rights Reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except under the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 or under the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London,W1P 9HE, UK, without the permission in writing of the publisher. OtherWiley Editorial O⁄ces JohnWiley & Sons, Inc., 605 Third Avenue, NewYork, NY 10158-0012, USA WILEY-VCH VerlagGmbH, Pappelallee 3, D-69469 Weinheim, Germany JacarandaWiley Ltd, 33 Park Road, Milton, Queensland 4064, Australia JohnWiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd, 2 Clementi Loop #02-01, Jin Xing Distripark, Singapore 129809 JohnWiley & Sons (Canada) Ltd, 22 Worcester Road, Rexdale, Ontario M9W1L1, Canada Novartis Foundation Symposium 233 viii+300 pages, 24 ¢gures, 24 tables British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 0 471 49434 8 1 1 Ty p e s e t i n 1 0 Ù2 on 12 Ù2 pt Garamond by DobbieTypesetting Limited,Tavistock, Devon. Printed and bound in Great Britain by Biddles Ltd, Guildford and King’s Lynn. This book is printed on acid-free paper responsibly manufactured from sustainable forestry, in which at least two trees are planted for each one used for paper production. Contents SymposiumonThenatureofintelligence,held atthe Novartis Foundation, London, 30 Nov^2 Dec 1999 Editors: Gregory R. Bock (Organizer),Jamie A. Goodeand KateWebb Thissymposiumis based on a proposalmade by Geo¡rey Miller Michael Rutter Introduction 1 David Lubinski Intelligence: success and ¢tness 6 Discussion 27 Arthur R. Jensen The g factor: psychometrics and biology 37 Discussion 47 IanJ. Deary Psychometric intelligence di¡erences and brain function 58 Discussion 73 Britt Anderson The g factor in non-human animals 79 Discussion 90 Randolph M. Nesse Natural selection, mental modules and intelligence 96 Discussion 105 General discussion I 116 Nathan Brody g and the one ^many problem: is one enough? 122 Discussion 129 Douglas K. Detterman General intelligence and the de¢nition of phenotypes 136 Discussion 144 David Houle Is there a g factor for ¢tness? 149 Discussion 159 J. Michael Bailey How can psychological adaptations be heritable? 171 Discussion 180 v vi CONTENTS Andrew Whiten Social complexity and social intelligence 185 Discussion 196 James R. Flynn IQ gains,WISC subtests and £uid g: g theory and the relevance of Spearman’s hypothesis to race 202 Discussion 216 Andrew Pomiankowski Mutation, selection and the heritability of complex traits 228 Discussion 237 Peter McGu⁄n The quantitative and molecular genetics of human intelligence 243 Discussion 255 Geo¡rey Miller Sexual selection for indicators of intelligence 260 Discussion 270 Final general discussion 276 Michael Rutter Closing remarks 281 Index of contributors 288 Subject index 290 Participants B. Anderson Neurology (127), BirminghamVA Medical Center, 700 S 19th Street, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA J. M. Bailey Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2710, USA N. Brody Department of Psychology,Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT 06459, USA I. J. Deary Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh,7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, UK D. K. Detterman Department of Psychology, CaseWestern Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106-7123, USA R. Dunbar School of Biological Sciences, Nicholson Building, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK J. R. Flynn Department of Political Studies, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand S. Gangestad Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque,NM87131,USA S. Harnad Department of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, High¢eld, Southampton SO171BJ, UK R. Hinde StJohn’s College, Cambridge CB2 1TP, UK D. Houle Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallehassee, FL 32306-1100, USA vii viii PARTICIPANTS N. Humphrey Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science (CPNSS), Tymes Court Building, London School of Economics, Houghton Street, LondonWC2A 2AE, UK A. R. Jensen Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1670, USA A. Karmilo¡-Smith Neurocognitive Development Unit, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, LondonWC1N1EH, UK D. Lubinski Department of Psychology and Human Development,Vanderbilt University, Nashville,TN 37203, USA N. J. Mackintosh Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK J. Maynard Smith School of Biological Sciences, Biology Building, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN19QG, UK P. McGu⁄n Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Research Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK G. Miller Centre for Economic Learning and Social Evolution, University College London, Gower Street, LondonWC1E 6BT, UK R. M. Nesse Department of Psychiatry and Institute for Social Research,The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248, USA A. Pomiankowski The Galton Laboratory, Department of Biology, University College London, London NW1 2HE, UK M. Rutter (Chair) Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK T. Suddendorf (Bursar) School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia A.Whiten School of Psychology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9AJ, UK The Nature of Intelligence: Novartis Foundation Symposium 233. Volume 233 Edited by Gregory R. Bock, Jamie A. Goode and Kate Webb Copyright Novartis Foundation 2000. ISBN: 0-471-49434-8 Introduction Michael Rutter Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Research Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK The main rationale put forward for this meeting was that there was an apparent clash between the expectations of evolutionary psychologists and the claims of behaviour geneticists with respect to genetic in£uences on variations in intelligence. Evolutionary psychologists, it was said, would expect that a trait so strongly adaptive as general intelligence would have been intensely shaped by natural selection and that, as a result, intelligence should show only weak genetic e¡ects on individual variations within the population (Tooby & Cosmides 1990). By contrast, behaviour geneticists have argued that empirical research ¢ndings have been consistent in showing a high heritability for intelligence. The supposed quandary was how to explain why the high intelligence that distinguishes us from other species, and which must have been under strong selection, nevertheless still shows large individual di¡erences that are subject to strong genetic in£uences. In trying, over the course of the next few days, to come up with some kind of resolution of this apparent paradox, we will need to consider carefully the assumptions that underlie this proposition. The starting point, I suppose, is the theoretical expectation that traits under strong selection tend to have low heritability and that evolution by natural selection destroys the genetic variation on which it feeds (Dawkins 1999, citing Falconer 1960 and Lewontin 1979). Probably, most of us will
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Harnad (1994) Computation Is Just Interpretable Symbol Manipulation
    Computation Is Just Interpretable Symbol Manipulation: Cognition Isn't http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Papers/Harnad/harnad94.computa... Harnad, S. (1994) Computation Is Just Interpretable Symbol Manipulation: Cognition Isn't. Special Issue on "What Is Computation" Minds and Machines 4:379-390 [Also appears in French translation in "Penser l'Esprit: Des Sciences de la Cognition a une Philosophie Cognitive," V. Rialle & D. Fisette, Eds. Presses Universite de Grenoble. 1996] COMPUTATION IS JUST INTERPRETABLE SYMBOL MANIPULATION; COGNITION ISN'T Stevan Harnad Department of Psychology University of Southampton Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ UNITED KINGDOM email:[email protected] ftp://cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pub/harnad/ http://cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/ gopher://gopher.princeton.edu/11/.libraries/.pujournals phone: +44 703 592582 fax: +44 703 594597 ABSTRACT: Computation is interpretable symbol manipulation. Symbols are objects that are manipulated on the basis of rules operating only on the symbols' shapes , which are arbitrary in relation to what they can be interpreted as meaning. Even if one accepts the Church/Turing Thesis that computation is unique, universal and very near omnipotent, not everything is a computer, because not everything can be given a systematic interpretation; and certainly everything can't be given every systematic interpretation. But even after computers and computation have been successfully distinguished from other kinds of things, mental states will not just be the implementations of the right symbol systems, because of the symbol grounding problem: The interpretation of a symbol system is not intrinsic to the system; it is projected onto it by the interpreter.
    [Show full text]
  • Affective Sentience and Moral Protection
    Rochester Institute of Technology RIT Scholar Works Articles Faculty & Staff Scholarship 1-9-2021 Affective sentience and moral protection Russell Powell Boston University Irina Mikhalevich Rochester Institute of Technology Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.rit.edu/article Recommended Citation Powell, Russell and Mikhalevich, Irina (2020) Affective sentience and moral protection. Animal Sentience 29(35). DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1668 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty & Staff Scholarship at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Sentience 2020.397: Powell & Mikhalevich Response to Commentary on Invertebrate Minds Affective sentience and moral protection Response to Commentary on Mikhalevich & Powell on Invertebrate Minds Russell Powell Department of Philosophy, Boston University Irina Mikhalevich Department of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology Abstract: We have structured our response according to five questions arising from the commentaries: (i) What is sentience? (ii) Is sentience a necessary or sufficient condition for moral standing? (iii) What methods should guide comparative cognitive research in general, and specifically in studying invertebrates? (iv) How should we balance scientific uncertainty and moral risk? (v) What practical strategies can help reduce biases and morally dismissive attitudes toward invertebrates? Russell Powell, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Boston University, specializes in philosophical problems in evolutionary biology and bioethics. Website Irina Mikhalevich, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology, specializes in conceptual and methodological problems in comparative cognitive science and their implications for the treatment of nonhuman animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Programme
    Full Programme www.bristol.ac.uk/ehbea2014 1 Contents Welcome 3 Key Events 5 Schedule at a Glance 6 Plenary Abstracts 9 Talk Abstracts 15 Poster Abstracts 61 2 Welcome Welcome to the 9th Annual Conference of the European Human Behaviour and Evolution Association! We are delighted to welcome you to Bristol, a unique and bustling city in South West England. The conference venue At-Bristol is located in the central area, by the historic harbourside. Most of the attractions are within walking distance: Bristol Aquarium, Brunel’s ss Great Britain, M Shed (museum of Bristol’s history), Bristol Cathedral, Bristol Shopping Quarter, Bristol Museum and Art Gallery, and University of Bristol. The Bristol Zoo Gardens and the world- famous Clifton Suspension Bridge are a 40-minute walk (or a short bus ride) from the centre. There are also many green spaces nearby: College Green, Queen Square, Brandon Hill, and Castle Park. For the conference, we are delighted to welcome our plenary speakers Russell Gray, Martie Haselton, Daniel Hruschka, Annette Karmiloff-Smith, and Samir Okasha. We are also excited to have as our sixth plenary speaker, the 2014 New Investigator Award winner Willem Frankenhuis. In addition, we have 46 talks and 104 posters spanning a wide range of topics and approaches from researchers around the world. On Monday morning, Prof Nick Lieven (Pro Vice-Chancellor, University of Bristol) will open the conference, which will be followed by the first plenary. The Poster Session will take place on Monday evening, but we invite the presenters to have their posters displayed for the duration of the conference starting Sunday evening.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Keith Hunley Department of Anthropology July 16, 2019
    Curriculum Vitae Keith Hunley Department of Anthropology July 16, 2019 Educational History − BS, 1980 Purdue University. Biology − MA, 1996, University of Michigan, Anthropology − PhD, 2002, University of Michigan, Anthropology − Faculty Research Fellow, 2002-2004, University of Michigan, Human Genetics Employment History − Associate Professor, 2011- present, Anthropology, University of New Mexico − Assistant Professor, 2005-11, Anthropology, University of New Mexico − Visiting Assistant Professor, 2004-05, Anthropology, University of New Mexico Professional Recognition and Honors − Award for Assessment, 2017, College Assessment Review Committee, College of Arts and Sciences, UNM − Invited Commentary, 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences − Nominee, 2013, Outstanding Online Teacher of the Year, UNM − Keynote speaker, 2015, American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Symposium: Thinking anthropologically about genetics − Invited Public Lecture, 2015, Morrison Institute, Stanford University − Nominee, 2007, Outstanding Teacher of the Year Award, UNM − Roy A, Rappaport Teaching Award, 2002, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan − Genome Sciences Training Fellowship, 1999 – 2001, National Institutes of Health 1 Scholarly Achievements Citation indices: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=OjIQkBQAAAAJ&hl=en Website: http://keithhunley.wixsite.com/keith-hunley Articles Published in Refereed Journals (*senior or corresponding author) Since tenure 1. Jennifer L. Hay, Kirsten Meyer White, Andrew Sussman, Kim Kaphingst, Dolores Guest, Elizabeth Schofiel, Yvonne T. Dailey, Erika Robers, Matthew R. Schwartz, Kate Zielaskowski, Yuelin Li, David Buller, Keith Hunley Marianne Berwick. Psychosocial and cultural determinants of interest and uptake of skin cancer genetic testing in diverse primary care. Submitted to Public Health Genomics. In press. 2. White K, Y Dailey, D Guest, K Zielaskowski, E Robers, A Sussman, K Hunley, C Hughes, M Schwartz, K Kaphingst, D Buller, J Hay, Marianne Berwick.
    [Show full text]
  • Predictors of Leadership: the Usual Suspects and the Suspect Traits
    Predictors of leadership: The usual suspects and the suspect traits John Antonakis Faculty of Business and Economics University of Lausanne. Internef 618 CH-1015 Lausanne-Dorigny Switzerland [email protected] Tel ++41 (0)21 692-3438 Fax ++41 (0)21 692-3305 To appear in: In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson, & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds). Sage Handbook of Leadership . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications 7 July 2009 Word count of text : 8’842 Keywords : traits, personality, intelligence, biology, social cognition Abstract In this chapter, I review literature on traits (i.e., individual differences) and their links to leader outcomes. I present an integrated model, the ascription-actuality trait theory, to explain two routes to leader outcomes that stem from traits: the route that objectively matters and the route that appears to matter but objectively may not. I discuss the history of trait research and provide criteria by which we should judge the validity of trait models. Finally, I review trait models that are the most predictive of leadership outcomes and identify those that are non-starters. 1 A major preoccupation of teams, organizations, and countries is to select leaders who will be effective. This issue is timeless and very important, given that leadership appears to matter much for organisational effectiveness, particularly at the highest echelons where leader discretionary power is high (Bertrand & Schoar, 2003; Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1990; Hambrick & Finkelstein, 1987; Hambrick & Mason, 1984; Jones & Olken, 2005; Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996). Plato was one of the first to write about the importance of leadership, its determinants and its outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Group Selection Plays an Essential Role in Explaining Human Cooperation: a Sketch of the Evidence
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2016), Page 1 of 68 doi:10.1017/S0140525X1400106X, e30 Cultural group selection plays an essential role in explaining human cooperation: A sketch of the evidence Peter Richerson Emily K. Newton Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California– Department of Psychology, Dominican University of California, San Rafael, CA Davis, Davis, CA 95616 94901 [email protected] [email protected] http://emilyknewton.weebly.com/ www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/richerson/richerson.htm Nicole Naar Ryan Baldini Department of Anthropology, University of California–Davis, Graduate Group in Ecology, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA 95616 Davis, CA 95616 [email protected] https://sites.google.com/site/ryanbaldini/ [email protected] Adrian V. Bell Lesley Newson Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California– [email protected] http://adrianbell.wordpress.com/ Davis, Davis, CA 95616 [email protected] [email protected] Kathryn Demps https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lesley_Newson/ Department of Anthropology, Boise State University, Boise, ID 83725 [email protected] Cody Ross http://sspa.boisestate.edu/anthropology/faculty-and-staff/kathryn- Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM 87501 demps/ [email protected] http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xSugEskAAAAJ Karl Frost Graduate Group in Ecology, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA 95616 Paul E. Smaldino [email protected] https://sites.google.com/site/karljosephfrost/ Department of Anthropology, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA 95616 [email protected] http://www.smaldino.com/ Vicken Hillis Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California– Timothy M.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Basics and the Economics of the Family Author(S): Donald Cox Reviewed Work(S): Source: the Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol
    American Economic Association Biological Basics and the Economics of the Family Author(s): Donald Cox Reviewed work(s): Source: The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Spring, 2007), pp. 91-108 Published by: American Economic Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30033719 . Accessed: 31/08/2012 19:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Economic Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Economic Perspectives. http://www.jstor.org Journal of EconomicPerspectives-Volume 21, Number2-Spring 2007-Pages 91-108 Biological Basics and the Economics of the Family Donald Cox any economic models of the family are based on a generic "person one/person two" household or "parent-child" family, rather than their anatomicallyanatomically correct counterparts: sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, and grandfathers and grandmothers. These economic models can offer powerful insights into family behavior, but also can leave certain patterns unex- plained and neglect potentially important crosscurrents. Melding biological in- sights with family economics can cast new light on existing knowledge and open up novel paths for research. For example, study after study has found that putting family income in the hands of mothers, rather than fathers, tends to increase the consumption of children, as noted in this journal in Lundberg and Pollak (1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Unified Science of Cultural Evolution
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2006) 29, 329–383 Printed in the United States of America Towards a unified science of cultural evolution Alex Mesoudi Centre for Social Learning and Cognitive Evolution and School of Psychology, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife KY16 9JP, Scotland, United Kingdom; and Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri – Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211; and W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z2, Canada. [email protected] www.missouri.edu/mesoudia/ Andrew Whiten Centre for Social Learning and Cognitive Evolution and School of Psychology, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife KY16 9JP, Scotland, United Kingdom. [email protected] www.st-and.ac.uk/aw2/ Kevin N. Laland Centre for Social Learning and Cognitive Evolution and School of Biology, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife KY16 9TS, Scotland, United Kingdom. [email protected] www.st-andrews.ac.uk/seal Abstract: We suggest that human culture exhibits key Darwinian evolutionary properties, and argue that the structure of a science of cultural evolution should share fundamental features with the structure of the science of biological evolution. This latter claim is tested by outlining the methods and approaches employed by the principal subdisciplines of evolutionary biology and assessing whether there is an existing or potential corresponding approach to the study of cultural evolution. Existing approaches within anthropology and archaeology demonstrate a good match with the macroevolutionary methods of systematics, paleobiology, and biogeography, whereas mathematical models derived from population genetics have been successfully developed to study cultural microevolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Report: the Generalized Theory of Evolution, Duesseldorf Center for Logic and Philosophy of Science, January 31 – February 3, 2018
    Conference Report: The Generalized Theory of Evolution, Duesseldorf Center for Logic and Philosophy of Science, January 31 { February 3, 2018 Gregor P. Greslehner According to Theodosius Dobzhansky's famous dictum, \nothing in bi- ology makes sense except in the light of evolution" [3]. On the other hand, philosophers like Ludwig Wittgenstein used to be rather skeptical concerning the relevance of evolutionary thinking to philosophy: \The Darwinian theory has no more to do with philosophy than has any other hypothesis of natural science" [6, 4.1122]. In the last decades, however, { in particular since Richard Dawkins coined the term `meme' for the cultural counterpart of the gene [2]{ the application of evolutionary principles has been successfully pursued in areas other than biology. The central principles are reproduction, variation, and selection [4]. Based on these principles, several models, methods, and theories of a wide range of phenomena have been developed { not confined to the realm of biology. More generally, philosophy of science, social sciences, psychology, economics, and many other areas show a growing interest in a generalized theory of evolution. Like in many disciplines and areas of research, the publication of an introductory textbook indicates a certain stage of maturity. Such a textbook has been provided (in German) by Gerhard Schurz [5]. An updated English version is currently in preparation. Being one of the first big conferences in this area, \The Generalized Theory of Evolution" brought together international researchers, schol- ars, and an interested audience to discuss the current state and trends of the interdisciplinary field of a generalized theory of evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Family Size and the IQ Scores of Young Men
    IZA DP No. 3011 Small Family, Smart Family? Family Size and the IQ Scores of Young Men Sandra E. Black Paul J. Devereux Kjell G. Salvanes DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES DISCUSSION PAPER August 2007 Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Institute for the Study of Labor Small Family, Smart Family? Family Size and the IQ Scores of Young Men Sandra E. Black University of California, Los Angeles, NHH, NBER and IZA Paul J. Devereux University College Dublin, CEPR and IZA Kjell G. Salvanes Norwegian School of Economics, Statistics Norway, CEP and IZA Discussion Paper No. 3011 August 2007 IZA P.O. Box 7240 53072 Bonn Germany Phone: +49-228-3894-0 Fax: +49-228-3894-180 E-mail: [email protected] Any opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and not those of the institute. Research disseminated by IZA may include views on policy, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent nonprofit company supported by Deutsche Post World Net. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its research networks, research support, and visitors and doctoral programs. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Ability & Talent IQ, Life History 11:10-11:35 Prokosch (45)* 11:10-11:35 Kovacs (37)* 11:10-11:35 Wenner (56)* IQ & Mate Selection Sex Diff
    International Society for Intelligence Research 2005 Alfred Binet Program Sixth Annual Conference Hyatt Regency Albuquerque, NM Acknowledgements Organizer: Douglas K. Detterman Case Western Reserve University Advisory Committee: Thomas Bouchard University of Minnesota Ian Deary University of Edinburgh Linda Gottfredson University of Delaware Earl Hunt University of Washington, Seattle David Lubinski Vanderbilt University Robert Plomin University of London Robert Sternberg Yale University Con Stough Swinburne University of Technology Conference Coordinators Katherine Gartman We would like to thank the Templeton Foundation for their generous support and Elsevier for sponsoring the reception. We also thank Rosalind Arden for her assistance in planning this conference. 1 ISIR, 2005 9:55-10:20 Whetzel (57) 9:55-10:20 Irwing (33) Diminishing returns IQ & wealth of nations Sex differences evid. 10:05-10:20 Break 10:20-10:45 Hunt (32) 10:20-10:45 Johnson (34)* 10:20-10:45 Sefcek (49)* IQ & prosperity Sex diff. and the brain IQ, life history !0:45-11:10 Gottfredson (27) !0:45-11:10 Webb (55) !0:45-11:10 MacDonald (40) Innovartion and accid. Spatial ability & talent IQ, life history 11:10-11:35 Prokosch (45)* 11:10-11:35 Kovacs (37)* 11:10-11:35 Wenner (56)* IQ & mate selection Sex diff. & RAPM Profiling approaches 11:35-12:05 Lee (38)* 11:35-12:05 Puts (46)* 11:35-12:05 Figueredo (22) IQ & primate clade CAH and digit ratio Exec. Function & JD 12:05-1:30 Lunch 12:05-1:30 Lunch 12:05-1:30 Lunch 1:30-1:55 Kaplan (36) 1:30-1:55 To Mind Institute 1:30-1:55 te Nijenhuis (52) Leaning and IQ 1:55-2:20 Haier (15) Score gains: no g 1:55-2:20 Geary (26) g and grey matter 1:55-2:20 Luo (39) Evol.
    [Show full text]
  • Does a Fitness Factor Contribute to the Association Between Intelligence
    ARTICLE IN PRESS INTELL-00516; No of Pages 11 Intelligence xxx (2009) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Intelligence journal homepage: Does a fitness factor contribute to the association between intelligence and health outcomes? Evidence from medical abnormality counts among 3654 US Veterans Rosalind Arden a,⁎, Linda S. Gottfredson b, Geoffrey Miller c a Social, Genetic, Developmental and Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London SE5 8AF, United Kingdom b School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA c Psychology Department, Logan Hall 160, University of New Mexico, MSC03 2220 Albuquerque, NM 87131-1161, USA article info abstract Available online xxxx We suggest that an over-arching ‘fitness factor’ (an index of general genetic quality that predicts survival and reproductive success) partially explains the observed associations between health Keywords: outcomes and intelligence. As a proof of concept, we tested this idea in a sample of 3654 US Fitness Vietnam veterans aged 31–49 who completed five cognitive tests (from which we extracted a g Intelligence factor), a detailed medical examination, and self-reports concerning lifestyle health risks (such Cognitive epidemiology as smoking and drinking). As indices of physical health, we aggregated ‘abnormality counts’ of Health physician-assessed neurological, morphological, and physiological abnormalities in eight Mutation load categories: cranial nerves, motor nerves, peripheral sensory nerves, reflexes, head, body, skin condition, and urine tests. Since each abnormality was rare, the abnormality counts showed highly skewed, Poisson-like distributions. The correlation matrix amongst these eight abnormality counts formed only a weak positive manifold and thus yielded only a weak common factor.
    [Show full text]