Further evidence for Spearman's hypothesis concerning black–white differences on psychometric tests

Spearman’s Hypothesis Tested Comparing 47 Regions of Japan Using a Sample of 18 Million Children

Many groups differ in their mean intelligence score. Spearman’s hypothesis states that the differences are a function of cognitive complexity. There tend to be large differences on subtests of high cognitive complexity and small differences on subtests of low cognitive complexity. Spearman’s hypothesis has been supported by a large number of studies. Can Spearman’s hypothesis be generalized to regions of a country, where these regions differ in mean intelligence? We utilized data from 86 different cognitive tests from all 47 Japanese prefectures and correlated the g loadings of 86 subtests with standardized differences on the same subtests. Spearman’s hypothesis was clearly supported: the biggest differences between the regions were on the tests that were of the greatest complexity, meaning that Spearman’s hypothesis may be generalizable from groups to regions. In Japan, g loadings offer a better explanation of group differences in intelligence than cultural differences. Future research should explore whether Spearman’s hypothesis is also supported for differences between regions of other countries.

Spearman’s Hypothesis Tested Comparing 47 Regions of Japan Using a Sample of 18 Million Children

Many groups differ in their mean intelligence score. Spearman’s hypothesis states that the differences are a function of cognitive complexity. There tend to be large differences on subtests of high cognitive complexity and small differences on subtests of low cognitive complexity. Spearman’s hypothesis has been supported by a large number of studies. Can Spearman’s hypothesis be generalized to regions of a country, where these regions differ in mean intelligence? We utilized data from 86 different cognitive tests from all 47 Japanese prefectures and correlated the g loadings of 86 subtests with standardized differences on the same subtests. Spearman’s hypothesis was clearly supported: the biggest differences between the regions were on the tests that were of the greatest complexity, meaning that Spearman’s hypothesis may be generalizable from groups to regions. In Japan, g loadings offer a better explanation of group differences in intelligence than cultural differences. Future research should explore whether Spearman’s hypothesis is also supported for differences between regions of other countries.

General Mental Ability

Individual differences on diverse tests of mental abilities that range in complexity from simple reaction time to abstract reasoning are all positively correlated in the population. The total covariance among all such tests can be analyzed into a number of uncorrelated components of variance, or factors, that, in terms of their generality, are hierarchical, with the most general factor, or g, at the apex. This g factor is common to every type of cognitive performance, whatever other ability factors may be involved (e.g., verbal, spatial, numerical, musical, etc.), and is the crucial factor in most tests' practical validity. Its correlations with various tests' heritability, inbreeding depression, heterosis, average evoked potentials, brain metabolism, and many other physical correlates indicate that as a product of evolution it is profoundly enmeshed with many organismic variables. A theory based on empirical evidence links g to neural processes involved in the speed and efficiency of information processing.

Ethnic Stigma as a Contextual Experience: A Possible Selves Perspective

This article critiques trait views of stigma that suggest that membership in a negatively stereotyped group leads to low self-esteem and self-hatred, and it builds from Erving Goffman's theorizing to define stigma as the expectation of a stereotypical and discrediting judgment of oneself by others in a particular context. Students (40 of color and 46 European American) watched a videotape of a prospective teaching assistant (TA) in an experiment in which ethnic match with the TA and frequency of imagined evaluation by the TA were manipulated. Students of color envisioned less positive views of self in ongoing interactions with a European American TA who would evaluate them in the domain of the stigma. Implications for stigma theory and education are discussed.

Contributions to the history of psychology: CXII. Intelligence, behavior genetics, and the Pioneer Fund

Since World War I, political controversies have complicated the long-standing debate on nature versus nurture, especially the question of the source of the observed mean difference in intelligence between white and black groups. The Pioneer Fund, one of the few nonprofit foundations making grants for study and research into human individual and group differences, has been widely and unfairly attacked by those who believe any such research jeopardizes political commitment to legal equality. The four main scholarly areas of research financially supported by Pioneer have been behavioral genetics, cognitive ability, demographic characteristics, and racial variation. This article provides a unique perspective on the history of the Pioneer Fund and some of the controversies that have taken place.

Ethnic differences on the Outcome Questionnaire

The Outcome Questionnaire is a 45-item inventory of client-report symptoms and distress, used to track therapeutic change on a session-by-session basis. Data collected with the cooperation of a managed care provider were analyzed to note ethnic differences on the questionnaire. 1552 first session questionnaires were selected and mean total and subscale scores were analyzed using analysis-of-variance procedures for differences by ethnicity. No significant differences were found; however, significant ethnic differences on some items were noted, and these are reported with ethnic trends in clients' problems, diagnoses, and therapists' ratings on Global Assessment of Functioning. These findings were contrasted with those of other studies reporting ethnic differences on various measures such as IQ and personality assessment.