Cited by 18Cognitive Abilities and TestingRace, Genetics, and SocietyIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies

Filling in the Gaps: The Association between Intelligence and Both Color and Parent-Reported Ancestry in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997

Open access
Hu, Meng, Lasker, Jordan, Kirkegaard, Emil, Fuerst, John·2019·Psych

Abstract

Little research has dealt with intragroup ancestry-related differences in intelligence in Black and White Americans. To help fill this gap, we examined the association between intelligence and both color and parent-reported ancestry using the NLSY97. We used a nationally-representative sample, a multidimensional measure of cognitive ability, and a sibling design. We found that African ancestry was negatively correlated with general mental ability scores among Whites (r = −0.038, N = 3603; corrected for attenuation, rc = −0.245). In contrast, the correlation between ability and parent-reported European ancestry was positive among Blacks (r = 0.137, N = 1788; rc = 0.344). Among Blacks, the correlation with darker skin color, an index of African ancestry, was negative (r = −0.112, N = 1455). These results remained with conspicuous controls. Among Blacks, both color and parent-reported European ancestry had independent effects on general cognitive ability (color: β = −0.104; ancestry: β = 0.118; N = 1445). These associations were more pronounced on g-loaded subtests, indicating a Jensen Effect for both color and ancestry (rs = 0.679 to 0.850). When we decomposed the color results for the African ancestry sample between and within families, we found an association between families, between singletons (β = −0.153; N = 814), and between full sibling pairs (β = −0.176; N = 225). However, we found no association between full siblings (β = 0.027; N = 225). Differential regression to the mean results indicated that the factors causing the mean group difference acted across the cognitive spectrum, with high-scoring African Americans no less affected than low-scoring ones. We tested for measurement invariance and found that strict factorial invariance was tenable. We then found that the weak version of Spearman’s hypothesis was tenable while the strong and contra versions were not. The results imply that the observed cognitive differences are primarily due to differences in g and that the Black-White mean difference is attributable to the same factors that cause differences within both groups. Further examination revealed comparable intraclass correlations and absolute differences for Black and White full siblings. This implied that the non-shared environmental variance components were similar in magnitude for both Blacks and Whites.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/psych1010017

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • As predicted by human capital model, we found that color had no incremental validity beyond ancestry.

    “As predicted by the human capital model (Hu et al. [17], Prediction 7), we found that color had no incremental validity beyond ancestry.”

    From Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability (2019) · cites this paper as [17]

    Prediction 7 (Introduction; reiterated in Conclusions, page unavailable) predicts that color will have little independent relation with cognitive ability after accounting for genetic ancestry. That supports the direction attributed to the model, but not the categorical claim of no incremental validity. The citing authors’ statement about what they found is their own result, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • We go beyond Hu et al. in that we included measure of both color and genetic ancestry in regression analyses.

    “We go beyond Hu et al. [17] in that we included a measure of both color and genetic ancestry in our regression analyses.”

    From Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability (2019) · cites this paper as [17]

  • Skin color was related to cognitive ability in models not including ancestry, as found in previous studies.

    “However, it was related to cognitive ability in models not including ancestry, as found in previous studies [17,[94][95][96] (for a review of older studies, see [1]).”

    From Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability (2019) · cites this paper as [17]

  • Hu et al. found that darker color was associated with lower g scores while parent-reported European ancestry was associated with higher g scores.

    “Among African-Americans, Hu et al. [17]) found that darker color was associated with lower g scores while parent-reported European ancestry was associated with higher g scores.”

    From Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability (2019) · cites this paper as [17]

  • Our study goes beyond Kirkegaard et al. and Warne in that we established both SFI and weak form of Spearman's hypothesis regarding African-/European-American difference.

    “Our study goes beyond those of Kirkegaard et al. [24]) and Warne [25]) in that we (as with Hu et al. [17]) established both SFI and the weak form of Spearman's hypothesis regarding the African-/European-American difference.”

    From Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability (2019) · cites this paper as [17]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. Kirkegaard, E.O.W.; Wang, M.; Fuerst, J. Biogeographic Ancestry and Socioeconomic Outcomes in the Americas: A Meta-analysis. Mank. Q. 2017, 573, 398-427.
  2. Rushton, J.P.; Jensen, A.R. Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability. Psychol. Public Policy Law 2005, 11, 235-294. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  3. Walker, A. If the Present Looks Like the Past, What Does the Future Look Like? Heresies A Fem. Publ. Art Polit. 1983, 4, 56-59.
  4. Dixon, A.R.; Telles, E.E. Skin Color and Colorism: Global Research, Concepts, and Measurement. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2017, 43, 405-424. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  5. Marira, T.D.; Mitra, P. Colorism: Ubiquitous Yet Understudied. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 2013, 6, 103-107. [CrossRef] · DOI
  6. Monk, E.P., Jr. The Cost of Color: Skin Color, Discrimination, and Health among African-Americans. Am. J. Sociol. 2015, 121, 396-444. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  7. Hailu, S. Skin-Tone and Academic Achievement Among 5-year-old Mexican Children. Master's Thesis, Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Richmond, VA, USA, 2018.
  8. Fuerst, J.; Kirkegaard, E.O. Admixture in the Americas: Regional and National Differences. Mank. Q. 2016, 56, 255.
  9. Conley, D.; Fletcher, J. The Genome Factor: What the Social Genomics Revolution Reveals About Ourselves, Our History, and the Future; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2017.
  10. Fuerst, J.; Kirkegaard, E.O. The Genealogy of Differences in the Americas. Mank. Q. 2016, 56, 425.
  11. Lewis, C., Jackson, J., Eds.; Center for African American Research and Policy: Madison, WI, USA, 2010; pp. 63-76.
  12. Averhart, C.J.; Bigler, R.S. Shades of Meaning: Skin Tone, Racial Attitudes, and Constructive Memory in African American Children. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 1997, 67, 363-388. [CrossRef] · DOI
  13. Kirkegaard, E.O.W.; Woodley of Menie, M.A.; Williams, R.; Fuerst, J.; Meisenberg, G. Biogeographic ancestry, cognitive ability, and socioeconomic outcomes. Psych 2019, 1, 1-25. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  14. Kreisman, D.; Rangel, M.A. On the Blurring of the Color Line: Wages and Employment for Black Males of Different Skin Tones. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2015, 97, 1-13. [CrossRef] · DOI
  15. Hannon, L.; DeFina, R. Reliability Concerns in Measuring Respondent Skin Tone by Interviewer Observation. Public Opin. Q. 2016, 80, 534-541. [CrossRef] · DOI
  16. Moreno, K.E.; Segall, D.O. Reliability and Construct Validity of CAT-ASVAB. In Computerized Adaptive Testing: From Inquiry to Operation; Sands, W.A., Waters, B.K., McBride, J.R., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 1997; Chapter 17; pp. 169-174.
  17. Hartmann, P.; Kruuse, N.H.S.; Nyborg, H. Testing the Cross-racial Generality of Spearman's Hypothesis in Two Samples. Intelligence 2007, 35, 47-57. [CrossRef] · DOI
  18. Jensen, A.R. Uses of Sibling Data in Educational and Psychological Research. Am. Educ. Res. J. 1980, 17, 153-170. [CrossRef] · DOI
  19. Jensen, A.R.; Johnson, F.W. Race and Sex Differences in Head Size and IQ. Intelligence 1994, 18, 309-333. [CrossRef] · DOI
  20. Nagoshi, C.T.; Phillips, K.; Johnson, R.C. Between-Versus Within-Family Factor Analyses of Cognitive Abilities. Intelligence 1987, 11, 305-316. [CrossRef] · DOI
  21. Murray, C. The Secular Increase in IQ and Longitudinal Changes in the Magnitude of the Black-White Difference: Evidence from the NLSY. In Proceedings of the Behavior Genetics Association Meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 4 July 1999.
  22. Van De Schoot, R.; Kluytmans, A.; Tummers, L.; Lugtig, P.; Hox, J.; Muthén, B. Facing off with Scylla and Charybdis: A Comparison of Scalar, Partial, and the Novel Possibility of Approximate Measurement Invariance. Front. Psychol. 2013, 4, 770. [CrossRef] · DOI
  23. Dragt, J. Causes of Group Differences Studied with the Method of Correlated Vectors: A Psychometric Meta-analysis of Spearman's Hypothesis. Master's Thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010.
  24. Frisby, C.L.; Beaujean, A.A. Testing Spearman's Hypotheses Using a Bi-factor Model with WAIS-IV/WMS-IV Standardization Data. Intelligence 2015, 51, 79-97. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  25. Becker, G. Correcting the Point-Biserial Correlation for Attenuation Owing to Unequal Sample Size. J. Exp. Educ. 1986, 55, 5-8. [CrossRef] · DOI
  26. Kittles, R.A.; Santos, E.R.; Oji-Njideka, N.S.; Bonilla, C. Race, Skin Color and Genetic Ancestry: Implications for Biomedical Research on Health Disparities. Calif. J. Health Promot. 2007, 5, 9-23.
  27. Jensen, A.R. The Nature of the Black-White Difference on Various Psychometric Tests: Spearman's Hypothesis. Behav. Brain Sci. 1985, 8, 193-219. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  28. Dolan, C.V.; Hamaker, E.L. Investigating Black-White Differences in Psychometric IQ: Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analyses of the WISC-R and K-ABC and a Critique of the Method of Correlated Vectors. Adv. Psychol. Res. 2001, 6, 31-59.
  29. Mardia, K.V. 9 Tests of Univariate and Multivariate Normality. Handb. Stat. 1980, 1, 279-320.
  30. Kankainen, A.; Taskinen, S.; Oja, H. On Mardia's Tests of Multinormality. In Theory and Applications of Recent Robust Methods; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2004; pp. 153-164.
  31. Rosseel, Y. Lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 2012, 48, 1-36. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  32. Fan, X.; Sivo, S.A. Using ∆ Goodness-of-Fit Indexes in Assessing Mean Structure Invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 2009, 16, 54-69. [CrossRef] · DOI
  33. Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Fit Indices in Covariance Structure Modeling: Sensitivity to Underparameterized Model Misspecification. Psychol. Methods 1998, 3, 424. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  34. Chen, F.F. Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 2007, 14, 464-504. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  35. Khojasteh, J.; Lo, W.J. Investigating the Sensitivity of Goodness-of-Fit Indices to Detect Measurement Invariance in a Bifactor Model. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 2015, 22, 531-541. [CrossRef] · DOI
  36. Hoyle, R.H., Ed.; Sage: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1995; pp. 56-75.
  37. Korkmaz, S.; Goksuluk, D.; Zararsiz, G. MVN: An R package for Assessing Multivariate Normality. R J. 2014, 6, 151-162. [CrossRef] · DOI
  38. Nyborg, H.; Jensen, A.R. Occupation and Income Related to Psychometric g. Intelligence 2001, 29, 45-55. [CrossRef] · DOI
  39. Flynn, J.R. Reservations about Rushton. Psych 2019, 1, 35-43. [CrossRef] · DOI
  40. Te Nijenhuis, J.; Jongeneel-Grimen, B.; Armstrong, E.L. Are Adoption Gains on the g-factor? A meta-analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2015, 73, 56-60. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  41. te Nijenhuis, J.; Jongeneel-Grimen, B.; Kirkegaard, E.O. Are Headstart Gains on the g-factor? A meta-analysis. Intelligence 2014, 46, 209-215. [CrossRef] · DOI
  42. Te Nijenhuis, J.; Van Der Flier, H. Is the Flynn Effect on g?: A Meta-analysis. Intelligence 2013, 41, 802-807. [CrossRef] · DOI
  43. Woodley of Menie, M.A.; te Nijenhuis, J.; Shibaev, V.; Li, M.; Smit, J. Are the Effects of Lead Exposure Linked to the g Factor? A Meta-analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 137, 184-191. [CrossRef] · DOI
  44. Flynn, J.R.; te Nijenhuis, J.; Metzen, D. The g Beyond Spearman's g: Flynn's Paradoxes Resolved Using Four Exploratory Meta-analyses. Intelligence 2014, 44, 1-10. [CrossRef] · DOI
  45. Woodley of Menie, M.A.; Fernandes, H.B.; Hopkins, W.D. The More g-loaded, the More Heritable, Evolvable, and Phenotypically Variable: Homology with Humans in Chimpanzee Cognitive Abilities. Intelligence 2015, 50, 159-163. [CrossRef] · DOI
  46. Te Nijenhuis, J.; Choi, Y.Y.; van den Hoek, M.; Valueva, E.; Lee, K.H. Spearman's hypothesis tested comparing Korean young adults with various other groups of young adults on the items of the Advanced Progressive Matrices. J. Biosoc. Sci. 2019, 1-38. [CrossRef] [PubMed] · DOI
  47. Lubke, G.H.; Dolan, C.V.; Kelderman, H.; Mellenbergh, G.J. On the Relationship between Sources of Within-and Between-Group Differences and Measurement Invariance in the Common Factor Model. Intelligence 2003, 31, 543-566. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  48. Dalliard, M. The Elusive X-Factor: A Critique of JM Kaplan's Model of Race and IQ. Open Differ. Psychol. 2014, 27. [CrossRef] · DOI
  49. Zou, J.Y.; Park, D.S.; Burchard, E.G.; Torgerson, D.G.; Pino-Yanes, M.; Song, Y.S.; Sankararaman, S.; Halperin, E.; Zaitlen, N. Genetic and Socioeconomic Study of Mate Choice in Latinos Reveals Novel Assortment Patterns. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 13621-13626. [CrossRef] · DOI
  50. Norris, E.T.; Rishishwar, L.; Wang, L.; Conley, A.B.; Chande, A.T.; Dabrowski, A.M.; Valderrama-Aguirre, A.E.; Jordan, I.K. Assortative Mating on Ancestry-Variant Traits in Admixed Latin American populations. Front. Genet. 2019, 10, 359. [CrossRef] [PubMed] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hu, M., Lasker, J., Kirkegaard, E., & Fuerst, J.
Affiliations
  • Independent Researcher, Paris, Vitry-sur-Seine 94400, France
  • Independent Researcher, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
  • University of Ulster (GB)
  • Cleveland State University (US)
Corresponding author
Fuerst, John
Venue
Psych
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-05-22
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
240-261
ISSN
2624-8611 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2945586204
Cited by
18
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Psych (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Keywords
intelligence, African ancestry, European ancestry, skin color, general intelligence, black-white gap, measurement invariance, Spearman's hypothesis, nonshared environment, National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, full siblings, regression to the mean

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