On the nature and nurture of intelligence and specific cognitive abilities: The more heritable, the more culture dependent
Abstract
To further knowledge concerning the nature and nurture of intelligence, we scrutinized how heritability coefficients vary across specific cognitive abilities both theoretically and empirically. Data from 23 twin studies (combined N = 7,852) showed that (a) in adult samples, culture-loaded subtests tend to demonstrate greater heritability coefficients than do culture-reduced subtests; and (b) in samples of both adults and children, a subtest’s proportion of variance shared with general intelligence is a function of its cultural load. These findings require an explanation because they do not follow from mainstream theories of intelligence. The findings are consistent with our hypothesis that heritability coefficients differ across cognitive abilities as a result of differences in the contribution of genotype-environment covariance. The counterintuitive finding that the most heritable abilities are the most culture-dependent abilities sheds a new light on the long-standing nature-nurture debate of intelligence.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Kan and colleagues (2013) found that the g-loadings and heritability coefficients of a test were substantially correlated with its cultural load (r = .83 and r = .40 respectively).
“Kan and colleagues (2013), who found that the g-loadings and heritability coefficients of a test were substantially correlated with its cultural load (r = .83and r = .40respectively).”
From No negative Flynn effect in France: Why variations of intelligence should not be assessed using tests based on cultural knowledge (2021) · cites this paper as Kan et al., 2013
The interpretation of heritability estimates poses well-known issues and has been criticized elsewhere.
“The interpretation of heritability estimates poses well-known issues and has been criticized elsewhere (e.g.Dickens & Flynn, 2001;Kan et al., 2013).”
From No negative Flynn effect in France: Why variations of intelligence should not be assessed using tests based on cultural knowledge (2021) · cites this paper as Kan et al., 2013
Cites
A dynamical model of general intelligence: The positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism.
Van Der Maas, H. L. J., Dolan, C. V., Grasman, R. P. P. P., Wicherts, J. M., Huizenga, H. M., & Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.4.842 · Cited by 1,006 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schmidt, F. L. (2017) · Archives of Scientific Psychology · doi:10.1037/arc0000033 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Gonthier, C., Grégoire, J., & Besançon, M. (2021) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2020.101512 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kan, K.-J., Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V., & van der Maas, H. L. J.
- Affiliations
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Tilburg University (NL)
- Department of Psychological Methods, University of Amsterdam
- Corresponding author
- Kan, Kees-Jan
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-10-08
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2420-2428
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2122796632
- Cited by
- 100
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10
- FWCI
- 12.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Keywords
- heritability of intelligence, specific cognitive abilities, twin studies, general intelligence, nature versus nurture, intelligence theory
- MeSH terms
- Cognition, Culture, Humans, Intelligence, Twins, Wechsler Scales, 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