The Flynn Effect and "g"

The Flynn Effect (FE) is a secular rise in IQ over time that has been occurring throughout the West for 80 years now. All ages and ethnic groups are effected. Preliminary evidence indicates that it is also occurring in the Caribbean (Dominica), South America (Brazil) and Africa (Kenya).

An overview of the FE itself goes beyond the scope of this post, but if you click on the Flynn Effect category at the end of the post, you can read up on what I have written about it.

The FE is quite complex, and many people do not seem to understand the concept properly, hence are not able to discuss it, much less debate it. However, most people of reasonable intelligence, if interested, seem to be able to grasp the basic implications of the FE.

Hereditarians, most of whom are White racists, are very upset by the FE (Talk about being opposed to human progress!) because they have a strong emotional investment in White intellectual superiority and the intellectual inferiority of Blacks, Hispanics and other groups. We know that the major hereditarian researchers on intelligence are racists because almost all of them support getting rid of all anti-discrimination laws.

The agenda is clear for both lab coat racists and White nationalists: if we can prove that Blacks, Hispanics and others are intellectually inferior to Whites, we can legalize discrimination, especially job discrimination, against them.

A particularly frightening lab coat racist endeavor is attempting to prove that Blacks are inferior employees to Whites on average. If they prove this scientifically, then they will have a logical reason to support discriminating against Blacks in employment.

Almost all of these folks are White, and most of them call themselves race realists. They spend a good deal of time screaming and yelling about why Blacks and Browns will not accept that they are intellectually inferior (Steve Sailer specializes in this). Why would anyone want to accept, or accept, such a thing?

Furthermore, given the nefarious agenda behind those promoting these theories that seeks to legalize discrimination against Blacks and Browns, any Black or Hispanic person who gets behind this would have to be out of their minds.

I have ritually added "Hispanic" after Black above, but in general, Hispanics are being left out of this debate. The real effort here is directed by racist Whites against Blacks, not Hispanics. It is against Blacks that these Whites seek to legalize the right to discriminate.

The Flynn Effect has been hard to argue against, but the hereditarians have tried hard. They have shown that the FE is not on g. G is a hypothesized common correlational factor that supposedly measures pure intelligence. Everything outside of g is "not real intelligence".

However, according to one paper, the very concept of g is tendentious to say the least, and possibly nonsensical. The paper is titled G, A Statistical Myth, by an admittedly brilliant mathematician named Cosma Shalizi. I read through the whole thing but I couldn't really make sense of it. Perhaps someone who knows math better than I do can have a go at it.

A schematic of the g, or general intelligence, factor. The ovals represent subtests on an intelligence test. G represents the totality of the areas where the purple subtests shade into the pink circle, and the degree to which they correlate (line up) with each other.

G is a correlation coefficient of various tests. It measures the tendency of superior test takers (and someone who has a brain that works a bit better), if they do well on one test, do also do well on all other tests. The FE is generally not on g because some tests have risen dramatically, others moderately, and still others little or not at all.

Therefore, intelligence has not risen in a general, across-the-board kind of way. However, certain aspects of intelligence have definitely risen, and those aspects have quantifiable benefits in modern society, occupationally, academically and in other ways.

The argument of whether or not the FE gains are on g or not is very complex, about as complex as the FE itself. First of all, the FE gains have not been across the board. In general, they have focused on verbal analysis, visual analysis, verbal intelligence, and problem-solving. Gains have been few to none in basic things like general knowledge, mathematics, mathematical analysis, spelling and reading comprehension.

G is a hypothesized and problematical construct that is a correlational factor all of the subtests on an intelligence test. It is thought to be highly heritable and physiologically based, and this is why the hereditarians have gone nuts over it.

It measures how someone with a somewhat more neurologically efficient brain will tend to score better across an entire range of subtests than someone who with a less efficient brain.

The reason the FE is not on g is because it is limited to a subset of intelligence subtests, and gains have been small to none across another subset. Therefore, there is no g gain.

However, Raven's Progressive Matrices has shown larger gains than any other test. Raven's was designed to measure pure g and nothing else. Raven's scores are not thought to be effected by environmental factors outside of pregnancy and the first few months of life, and are thought to be purely neurologically, physiologically or genetically based.

Given the pure g basis for Raven's, the wild secular gains on it on the FE are most puzzling.

However, recently James Flynn has shown that the FE does show a .5 correlation on a factor analyzing fluid g.

There is fluid g and crystallized g.

Fluid g is thought to peak early in life. This is why things that require raw brain processing power tend to peak in young people. Creative persons - artists, musicians, poets, novelists, filmmakers, mathematicians, physicists - often do their best work as young people (usually as young men). Fluid g is really a measure of how well, fast or efficient your brain works.

Crystallized g is another matter altogether. Crystallized g may be seen as "what you know" as opposed to "how fast of a brain you have." While fluid g peaks early, crystallized g often goes up throughout life, and people can still score high on crystallized g in their 50's, 60's, 70's and even 80's.

This is what we might call "accumulated knowledge" or "wisdom." The old person's brain does not work as fast, but the accumulated knowledge makes up for that in that they can see connections between things easier.

The young person's brain works very fast, but with the lack of accumulated knowledge and life experience they are not able to put things together as well to arrive at the correct conclusion. This is why no society has ever put the 18-23 year old's in power, no matter how zippy their brains are.

Instead, the old men have always been put in power. The accumulation of a life of learning is thought to lead to a wisdom that will manifest itself as the ability to make "wise," correct and proper decisions.

The concepts of crystallized and fluid g are complicated, but hopefully that explanation helped you understand it.

The FE is on fluid g, not crystallized g. Visual intelligence and analysis, problem solving, verbal analysis and analytical thinking in general, on intelligence tests, is in the realm of fluid g. Those are those little puzzles that ask you to decide which figure goes next in the series.

On intelligence tests, crystallized g measures accumulated knowledge and the degree to which one has learned basic tasks of modern life. The gains on mathematics, math analysis, reading comprehension, vocabulary and general knowledge are small to nil, and all of these tests measure crystallized g. To sum, these are the sorts of things you learn in school.

This is why, despite skyrocketing IQ's, we cannot read a book, add and subtract, or calculus any faster than our grandparents. We also do not know any more than they did, and we know no more words than they did.

This is obvious in the many reports on "idiocratic" state of high school seniors, college students or college grads. And this is how a puzzle is solved - how IQ's are surely rising at the same time as idiocracy is.

From Flynn's chapter summary:

IQ gains over time were calculated for each WISC (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children) subtest and the subtests ranked by size of gain. Verbal Similarities led at 20 points per generation - larger than gains on Raven's Progressive Matrices. Similarities measures on-the-spot problem-solving (something akin to fluid g ); verbal subtests that do not measure this show low rate of gain.

WISC subtests were also ranked by their correlations with Raven's, the latter being used as a marker for fluid g. The r between the two hierarchies was calculated to approximate a correlation between IQ gains and fluid g.

The result of 0.50 contrasts with the negative correlation between IQ gains and the g generated by factor analyzing the WISC battery itself, which is generally viewed as predominately a crystallized g.

In sum, it appears that human groups can make massive fluid g gains in a period too short to accommodate radical change in the speed and efficiency of neural processes. Moreover, once gains in intelligent behavior over historical time are seen to be independent of brain physiology, does g really provide a criterion for assessing their significance?

Finally, not only a measure of fluid g (which is highly heritable) but also inbreeding depression are shown to be correlated with IQ gains - gains overwhelmingly environmental in origin. Therefore, correlations between such genetically influenced factors and the size of the black/white IQ gap do not show that the gap has a genetic component.

The Similarities test has risen faster than any other test. It measures analytical thinking and is thought to be a good measure of raw fluid g. The final paragraph is interesting. The Black-White IQ gap is correlated with something called inbreeding depression score, a purely heritable measure. Hereditarians use this to say that the B-W IQ gap is genetic.

But Flynn shows here that the FE (a purely environmental gain) also correlates with inbreeding depression, a purely hereditarian score. Flynn uses this to say that the B-W IQ gap is not necessarily genetic.

Flynn notes above that the FE cannot possibly be caused by brains that actually work better physiologically than the brains of our grandparents. Genetics doesn't work that fast.

Therefore, what does the FE measure? Flynn says it measures "intelligent behavior". So our brains don't work any better than our grandparents' brains, but we show improved "intelligent behavior" over them.

Therefore, another mystery is solved, how massive IQ gains can occur without concomitant improvement in the physiology of our brains.

Since hereditarians use g as a measure of physiological efficiency of our brains, Flynn calls this into question by noting that g gains can occur too fast to be accommodated for by physiologically improved brains. Therefore, Flynn suggests chucking g as a measure of pure brain physiological efficiency.

Therefore, the White nationalist and hereditarian argument that the FE is not on g has been proven wrong.

References

Flynn, James R. 2000. IQ Gains, WISC Subtests and Fluid g: g Theory and the Relevance of Spearman's Hypothesis to Race, Chapter 12 in Bock, Gregory R., Goode, Jamie A., Webb, Kate. Novartis Foundation Symposium 233 - The Nature of Intelligence, pp. 202-227. Novartis Foundation. Published online.

James Flynn on America

James Flynn is an Emeritus Professor of Political Studies at the University of Otago in New Zealand. He has also done a lot of work on the Flynn Effect, which shows IQ's rising all over the world in the past 80 years for unknown reasons. We've written about at a lot on this blog. Click the Flynn Effect category at the end to read up.

For reasons that remain unknown to me, White nationalists (almost all of whom are just White racists really) are driven into a frenzy by the mention of Flynn's name. I find this very mystifying.

First of all, White racists insist that Blacks are defective, and present a lot of evidence indicating that Blacks as a group do have a lot of problems and that this group does do a disproportionate amount of damage to society. All of this is noncontroversial to anyone whose brain has not been turned to mush by political correctness.

Low IQ is frequently cited by White racists as one of the reasons for Black dysfunction and the resulting serious problems inflicted on society.

Other reasons are given too, but all of these are chalked up to genetics for some odd reason. It's an odd White racist who thinks culture or environment is behind Black pathologies. Fair enough.

But when someone like Flynn comes forward and notes that Blacks have gotten dramatically more intelligent in the past 80 years, White racists for the most part just go ballistic and see red. Why?

If Black dysfunction really is caused by low IQ, and these problems cause massive damage to society, would it not be better for Blacks, White racists and everyone else for the Black IQ to go up, and problems resulting from the low IQ to diminish? Sure, right?

Think again. White racists are furious at the notion that the Black IQ is rising. Almost nothing sends them battier.

This is very strange. It implies, despite all of their rhetoric, that White nationalists really do not have the best interests of Blacks at heart. They don't want Blacks to get smarter, better, or less dysfunctional. The more fucked up, stupid, violent and criminal Black people are, the more joyous White nationalists are.

Wow.

Excuse me, but what a bunch of cruel, perverse assholes White nationalists are! You bitch that Blacks are incompetent, violent idiots, but that's just the way you want them to be. If that's the case, then maybe you just deserve to live with them and their messes after all?

There must be some other motivation here. The only thing that makes sense is a hoary cliche that I usually don't consider.

White nationalists want Blacks to be stupid, dumb and fucked up because that way White racists can feel superior to Blacks.

White nationalists are the insecure punks from high school rejoicing in the failures of their rivals. White racists have an emotional investment in feeling superior to other races, and anything that suggests that the folks they dislike are gaining some ground in the footrace sends them into conniptions.

Sheesh. How petty and childish can you get? As long as this is what really motivates White nationalists, I'd say they have no right to diss Blacks for being pathological. Looks like White nationalists are plenty pathological themselves. We need to feel better than others because we're a bunch of insecure weenies! Waaa waaa!

Grow up.

Anyway, Flynn has a very good article on the stupidity and uselessness of US liberalism from a sane First World point of view. He points out quite well what a bunch of political morons we are. But if the Democrats took up Flynn's philosophy, they would get massacred. America is a center-right to conservative society at best, and liberal pikers like Obama are the best we can do.

Flynn also talks about US Blacks. He points out that between the ages of 25-45, there are only 57 Black men likely to be permanent (or even semi-permanent) partners for every 100 Black women. Sure, Black women could marry out, but few non-Black men want them. If you're a Black female, you either have a kid out of wedlock with some Black loser, or you forego now and forever your chance to have a kid.

I think that most people have a right to have kids. As such, it's reasonable that Black women are going to figure out a way to become mothers one way or another. That's reasonable. I've made this argument to some White "liberal" Americans and they frowned. "Having kids isn't all it's cracked up to be," a mother of four (!) grimaced. Hmm.

Flynn points out that for every 100 Hispanic women, there are 96 promising males, hence their single parenthood rate is 50% lower than Blacks. It all makes sense. Black illegitimacy isn't sky-high due to Black genes (Why were 80% of Black parents married in 1960?) but due to unpleasant circumstances, namely the catastrophic state of Black men in America.

The Fallacy of Hereditarian Racial IQ Gap Theory

The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.

Updated September 2. I am republishing this piece which I published earlier. I am including some links and some more data making the case for a 6-10 Flynn Effect gain for US NE Asians from the 1970's to today. They went from about 97.5 IQ to 103.5 IQ (or 100.5 IQ to 106.5 IQ renormed) over 30 years, meeting and then surpassing US Whites, a gain of approximately 6 full points, purely by the environment.

In the comments section, Alan Weiss, a very smart guy, says it is either intellectually lazy or racist to assume that the B-W IQ gap, now at 13.5 points, not 15 points, as is frequently reported, is genetic. I don't agree that it's automatically racist or lazy to assume that the B-W gap is genetic. The hereditarians have done some excellent work in proving their case.

I guess my argument is that the hereditarian case is not necessarily relevant. Saying that "the gap is genetic" doesn't really mean much.

The hereditarians say that 70% of the B-W IQ gap is genetic?

Ok, look.

James Flynn points out that in the 1940's in the US, the IQ gap between NE Asians and Whites in the US was 3.5 points. The scores were US White = 100, US NE Asian = 97.5. Now, the hereditarians say that 70% of that racial gap is genetic, and it's insurmountable. US NE Asians could never come within 1.5 pts of US Whites, no matter what happened in their environment.

But look what happened.

In the next generation, they not only met Whites, but they surpassed them. They gained anywhere from 5.5 to 6.5 IQ points on Whites. Now, with renorming, Whites are at 103 and US NE Asians are at 106. So an "insurmountable" gap that was "70% genetic" was not only surmounted, but it was actually surpassed.

Flynn says that US Chinese had an IQ no greater than Whites in 1949, (actually their IQ was 97.5) yet got better jobs due to extra-IQ factors such as stronger work ethic and higher motivation. They used these new jobs to provide a better environment for their kids, which raised their kids IQ's to 109 in children, falling to 103 by adolescence as parental influence wore off.

In his book, Asian Americans, Achievement Beyond IQ (The book is available for browsing online, and you are free to look through it). Flynn notes that the average US NE Asian American IQ may have risen 10 points over 30 years. From 1943-1975, average IQ was ~97.5 for Chinese and Japanese.

Flynn also found that Chinese-Americans in earlier decades were working at occupations that suggested IQ's fully 21 points higher than what their actual IQ's were.

This shows right there that IQ is not destiny, and there are extra-IQ factors that figure in occupational success. Now it is 103 according to Flynn (106 renormed), and others pretty much concur. This chart shows a US Asian IQ of 106 (Reynolds and Chastain, 1987, p.330). With an IQ of 106, it appears that US Asian IQ may have risen fully 6 points relative to other scores in 20-30 years.

Flynn also suggested an Asian IQ (Chinese, Japanese and Korean) of 104 in the last few years. With renorming, that should be 107. With renorming, all scores point to a US Asian IQ of 106-107.

There is support for Flynn's data from hardcore hereditarians. Richard Lynn reports that Japanese IQ was significantly higher than average IQ in the United States, and that Japanese IQ scores had risen over the past generation (Lynn 1982).

Herrnstein and Murray 1994, Rushton and Jensen 2005 and Lynn 2006 all find that the average IQ scores of East Asians in Asia, North America and Europe are significantly higher than 100. Lynn has US Asian IQ at 106 and rising in this article.

About the Flynn Effect, Flynn notes that our vocabularies and information are no greater than our ancestors, so we can't do any better at reading an adult novel.

The Dickens-Flynn Model shows that all of so-called pure genetic aspects of IQ can actually be explained by the environment.

Smaller families have had an IQ effect that looks like better nutrition - they can provide a better environment for their kids.

Studies have also shown that Asians enjoy studying more than other groups. This may explain their superior performance even relative to IQ.

This is what I mean when I say that when they say that racial gaps are "70% genetic" or whatever, it doesn't necessarily mean all that much. Now the hereditarians have to look at the 3.5 point gain that US NE Asians have over US Whites (US NE Asians = 106.5, US Whites = 103) and say that gap is 70% genetic. Does that make any sense either? Of course not.

Once these "wholly genetic" gaps are not only overcome but even surpassed by purely environmental actions, the whole hereditarian argument gets a bit silly.

References

Flynn, James R. 1991. Asian Americans: Achievement Beyond IQ. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Herrnstein, RJ and Murray, C. 1994. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press

Lynn, R. 1982. IQ In Japan And The United States Shows A Growing Disparity. Nature, 297:222-3.

Lynn, R. 2006. Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Books.

Reynolds, C. R., Chastain R. L., Kaufman, A. S., & McLean, J. E. 1987. Demographic Characteristics And IQ Among Adults: Analysis Of The WAIS-R Standardization Sample As A Function Of The Stratification Variables. Journal of Social Psychology, 25:323-342.

Rushton, J. P. & Jensen, A. R. 2005. Thirty Years Of Research On Black-White Differences In Cognitive Ability. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.

7.5 Point Reduction in B-W IQ Gap in the 1900's

None other than hereditarian Charles Murray himself, shows that Blacks reduced the Black-White IQ gap by 7.5 points (or .5 standard deviation) for the cohorts born in the 1920's (my father's generation) to the cohorts born in the 1960's (my three siblings' generation). Since then, Murray claims that the B-W gap has actually increased slightly.

The test used was Woodcock, and the ages were from 6-65. The .5 standard deviation reduction occurred on IQ and the two measures of g, fluid g and crystallized g. Fluid g is roughly a measure of raw brain processing power, and peaks early, possibly in the early 20's, though it seems hard to believe if you spend a lot of time around college kids.

Crystallized g is the sort of thing that 50-year old's like me excel in, and it may be called knowledge, or wisdom, or cumulative life experience. There is a reason why primitive tribes always chose an older person or persons to make all of the important decisions for them, and why they paid so much attention to elders.

This secular rise in IQ and both forms of g can only be seen as a Flynn Effect. The notions that the the B-W IQ gap is genetic and set in stone forever and cannot be moved 1% by any environmental factor, or that the Flynn Effect is not on g, or is not on crystallized g, or whatever the fake hereditarian (usually racist) line is today, or that recent rises are only on certain tests and only affect kids, must all be rejected.

I haven't looked into the study yet, but the whole thing is online at the link if you want to pick it over. The B-W shrinkage may have been due to better nutrition for Blacks or possibly to the increased complexity of American society during this period.

Blacks born during this period also started to see a lot of benefits in the way of employment and education open up for them. The reason for the slight shrinkage in recent years in not known, but other data show that in Black kids anyway, the gap has closed 5-6 points over the past 30 years.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.<