I believe that 'good' science includes meta-analyses (as invented by
Pearson amongst others) that can produced not just point estimates to
two decimal places (0.80) but also errors of the estimate and ranges?
For example Devlin et al's (1997) paper published in Nature
388(6641):468-71, found that;
'Meta-analysis of 212 previous studies shows that our 'maternal-effects'
model fits the data better than the 'family-environments' model.
Maternal effects, often assumed to be negligible, account for 20% of
covariance between twins and 5% between siblings, and the effects of
genes are correspondingly reduced, with two measures of heritability
being less than 50%. The shared maternal environment may explain the
striking correlation between the IQs of twins, especially those of adult
twins that were reared apart'
Devlin et al. reported a broad-sense heritability estimate of 48% (43%
to 54% - 95%CI) and a narrow-sense heritability of only 34% (27% - 40% -
95%CI)
I don’t think that these are 'political' findings?
Regards
Dave
Martin Sewell wrote:
> At 17:10 13/06/2007 +0100, Dave Gordon wrote:
>> Martins statement is somewhat misleading.
>>
>> Some studies have shown that IQ scores (not intelligence) have a
>> narrow heritability component of 80%, other studies have produced much
>> lower estimates (circa 40%) - there is no direct evidence that this
>> narrow heritability is genetic rather than
>> social/cultural/environmental in origin. No one has produced any
>> convincing evidence that they have found a gene or genes for IQ score.
>
> Age Heritability
> 4-6 0.42
> 7-20 0.55
> late adolescence 0.75
> adults 0.80
>
> There is plenty of (indirect) evidence for the above (several decades of
> peer-reviewed research). Those who dismiss the evidence do so for
> political, not scientific, reasons.
>
> Regards
>
> Martin
>
> References:
> GOTTFREDSON, Linda S., 1997. Mainstream Science on Intelligence: An
> Editorial with 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography. Intelligence
> 24(1) 13-23.
> NEISSER, Ulric, et al., 1996. Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns.
> American Psychologist, 51(2), 77-101.
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
> message will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
> to [log in to unmask]
> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender
> and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by
> subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about
> Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past
> issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site
> www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
--
Dave Gordon
Townsend Centre for International Poverty Research
University of Bristol
8 Priory Road
Bristol BS8 1TZ, UK
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
Tel: +44-(0)117-954 6761
Fax: +44-(0)117-954 6756
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|