Most of the other papers cited are 20 or 30 years old, and one predates the first Star Wars movie. They primarily deal with the discovery that an embryo requires both a paternal and a maternal genome for appropriate development and that in the absence of these complementary genomes, development fails.
Then, at the bottom of the Cosmopolitan post, yet another source is linked: Good Housekeeping. A click on that just takes the reader to the same Lauren Smith-authored post featured on the Cosmo site. This tautological cross-referencing gets almost as tangled as the genetics of intelligence. The "story" traces from what appears to be a translated post at Psychology Spot to Good Housekeeping to Cosmopolitan to Second Nexus, which cites Psychology Spot and Cosmo as its sources and then ships straight to you by way of Facebook.
That Psychology Spot post alone appears to have had 2. The explanation for the virality despite the hot mess and inaccuracies? Those headlines. The only thing that truly makes sense here is that every single one of these posts uses an image of a little girl in giant glasses and adds a similar headline, one designed to get at that enormous ready-made audience:. Yet the claims in those headlines--and the articles that follow--are just rubbish, and pretty obviously so.
Which just goes to show that no matter how smart we are or where we got those smarts, confirmation bias will be what makes us click This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here. More From Forbes. A meta-analysis. Psychol Sci. Breastfeeding and intelligence in adulthood: due to genetic confounding? The Lancet Global Health. J Human Resources. Your Privacy Rights. To change or withdraw your consent choices for VerywellMind.
At any time, you can update your settings through the "EU Privacy" link at the bottom of any page. These choices will be signaled globally to our partners and will not affect browsing data. We and our partners process data to: Actively scan device characteristics for identification. I Accept Show Purposes. Was this page helpful? Thanks for your feedback! Sign Up. What are your concerns? By continuing to use this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Find out more here. Accept cookies.
Free psychological tests 1,, taken last month. Genetic research maintains that there is no correlation between race and general cognitive ability. This is supported by the fact that race is a social construct and not something that exists on the genome. In other words, we are all human. You do not inherit a specific race and your race has no bearing on how you perform on intelligence tests.
Geneticists maintain that any past studies that claimed the opposite were flawed and did not take socioeconomic status, education inequality, and other environmental influences. Genetics plays a role in how a person performs on intelligence tests, but there are also environmental predictors and determinants. Going back to our definition of intelligence, it is a combination of our genetic predisposition and our actual educational attainment. Socioeconomic status plays a major role in what opportunities are afforded to a person during their life.
Think of it this way: A person born with the genetic predisposition for average intelligence might reach an average IQ score if they grow up with a healthy diet and a well-rounded education. If they have a parent at home to help make sure they get their homework done, the family can afford healthy meals, and the neighborhood offers the chance to get outside and run around, they're more likely to perform at the maximum cognitive ability genetically afforded to them.
But, if they don't have these kinds of supports and these are just a few examples among many , they may reach a lower iq score than this with the same genetic determinants.
Another way to understand how environmental influences correlate with genetic predictors is to think of an athlete. Inherited traits such as strength, agility, and height clearly influence an athlete's highest potential. But if he never learns to play basketball or doesn't have access to the best coaches, he may not be able to reach this potential. On the other hand, a child who has all the best athletic supports but just isn't genetically predisposed to success in a certain support can only go so far.
0コメント