Nobel Laureate James Watson got into trouble recently for expressing the opinion that blacks are less intelligent than whites.
If you look at almost all existing data from standardized tests in the United States, there is indeed a sizable black-white test score gap. Whether the gap is due to genetic differences is a hotly debated academic question.
Roland Fryer and I have done some research on this topic which we think is potentially quite interesting and important — although we seem to be the only ones with this opinion at present. (The paper was rejected yesterday by the American Economic Review on the second round of review, and a search of Google Scholar reveals only two citations to the working paper version released in early 2006.)
In my work with Fryer, we analyzed a newly available nationally representative survey of children ages two and under, done by the Department of Education. Included in this study are tests of mental ability around a child’s first birthday. While you might think it would be impossible to capture anything meaningful at such a young age, it turns out that these measures of one-year-olds’ intelligence are somewhat highly correlated with IQ scores at later ages, as well as with parental IQ scores.
The striking result we find is that there are no racial differences in mental functioning at age one, although a racial gap begins to emerge over the next few years of life.
So what does this mean for the genetics vs. environment debate? Quoting from our abstract, “the observed patterns are broadly consistent with large racial differences in environmental factors that grow in importance as children age. Our findings are not consistent with the simplest models of large genetic differences across races in intelligence, although we cannot rule out the possibility that intelligence has multiple dimensions and racial differences are present only in those dimensions that emerge later in life.”
Like all research, our study has its flaws and limitations. I have to say, however, that I imagined a lot of reactions to this paper, none of which were utter indifference on the part of academics and the popular press. But that was the reaction we got.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Developmental Psychologists have been working on this for a long time. Leave it to a couple of economists to solve the nature v. nurture debate!
Developmental Psychologists have been working on this for a long time. Leave it to a couple of economists to solve the nature v. nurture debate!
In a similar vein, allthough even more puzzling IMO, is the black/black achievement gap. Blacks born in other countries, such as haiti, africa etc, have a higher average income than do American born blacks.
I have often wondered why no economist has ever seriously studied this issue, (to the best of my knowledge)and would love to see you gentlemen tackle it.
In a similar vein, allthough even more puzzling IMO, is the black/black achievement gap. Blacks born in other countries, such as haiti, africa etc, have a higher average income than do American born blacks.
I have often wondered why no economist has ever seriously studied this issue, (to the best of my knowledge)and would love to see you gentlemen tackle it.
Next question to study:
Was the perceived “indifference” due to genuine disinterest in your findings, or hesitance (fear) to speak out one way or the other?
Next question to study:
Was the perceived “indifference” due to genuine disinterest in your findings, or hesitance (fear) to speak out one way or the other?
“Like all research, our study has its flaws and limitations.”
Fortunately, whatever the flaws, your research does *not* have the potent and detrimental flaw of entrenched racism.
“Like all research, our study has its flaws and limitations.”
Fortunately, whatever the flaws, your research does *not* have the potent and detrimental flaw of entrenched racism.