Childhood Socioeconomic Status Amplifies Genetic Effects on Adult Intelligence
Open accessAbstract
Studies of intelligence in children reveal significantly higher heritability among groups with high socioeconomic status (SES) than among groups with low SES. These interaction effects, however, have not been examined in adults, when between-families environmental effects are reduced. Using 1,702 adult twins (aged 24–84) for whom intelligence assessment data were available, we tested for interactions between childhood SES and genetic effects, between-families environmental effects, and unique environmental effects. Higher SES was associated with higher mean intelligence scores. Moreover, the magnitude of genetic influences on intelligence was proportional to SES. By contrast, environmental influences were constant. These results suggest that rather than setting lower and upper bounds on intelligence, genes multiply environmental inputs that support intellectual growth. This mechanism implies that increasing SES may raise average intelligence but also magnifies individual differences in intelligence.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some subsequent US research has replicated the G × SES interaction.
“Some subsequent US research has replicated the interaction (Bates, Lewis, & Weiss, 2013; Harden, Turkheimer, & Loehlin, 2007; Tucker-Drob, Rhemtulla, Harden, Turkheimer, & Fask, 2011; Turkheimer, Haley, Waldron, D’Onofrio, & Gottesman, 2003).”
From Large Cross-National Differences in Gene × Socioeconomic Status Interaction on Intelligence (2016) · cites this paper as Bates, Lewis, & Weiss, 2013
The indexed record’s title (metadata; no section or page) identifies a study of childhood socioeconomic status amplifying genetic effects on adult intelligence, which supports the interaction component. The available passages do not establish that this was US research or that it replicated an earlier finding; searches for the study setting and replication returned only metadata. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredCATs show mean score group differences by gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES).
“Commonly used in employee selection, cognitive ability tests (CATs) show mean score group differences by gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES).”
From Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Bates et al., 2013
The available passages are bibliographic records (no section or page) and do not discuss cognitive ability test scores across gender, ethnicity, or SES groups. Searches for those group differences and for employee-selection terminology found no substantive passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAdults from lower SES backgrounds typically score modestly lower on intelligence tests, with childhood SES explaining around 5% of adult intelligence.
“Adults from lower SES backgrounds typically score modestly lower, with childhood SES found to explain around 5% of adult intelligence (Bates et al., 2013).”
From Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Bates et al., 2013
The indexed passages returned for this paper are bibliographic metadata (no section or page), not findings about intelligence scores. Searches for the lower-SES comparison and the claimed 5% figure found no passage in our copy that addresses either point. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 40 · Cited by 89
- Authors
- Bates, T. C., Lewis, G. J., & Weiss, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-09-03
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2111-2116
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2134424206
- Cited by
- 89
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 12.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Keywords
- socioeconomic status, intelligence, heritability, gene-environment interaction, adult twins, unique environmental effects, individual differences in intelligence, genetic influences on intelligence
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child Development, Employment, Environment, Female, Humans, Income, Intelligence, Male, Middle Aged, Parents, Social Class, Socioeconomic Factors, Twins, Dizygotic, Twins, Monozygotic, Young Adult, Gene-Environment Interaction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
