IQ and Global Inequality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
IQ and Global Inequality
IQ and Global Inequality cover
Author Richard Lynn
Tatu Vanhanen
Language English
Publisher Washington Summit Publishers
Publication date
10 November 2006
Media type Print (hardcover)
Pages 442
ISBN 1-59368-025-2

IQ and Global Inequality is a 2006 book by psychologist Richard Lynn and political scientist Tatu Vanhanen.[1] IQ and Global Inequality is follow-up to their 2002 book IQ and the Wealth of Nations,[2] an expansion of the argument that international differences in current economic development are due in part to differences in average national intelligence as indicated by national IQ estimates, and a response to critics. The book was published by the controversial Washington Summit Publishers.

Lynn and Vanhanen's research on national IQs has attracted widespread criticism of the book's scores, methodology, and conclusions. The book was positively received by some long time supporters of Lynn's research, including J. Philippe Rushton.[citation needed]


  • Chapter 1 summarizes theories of economic growth.
  • Chapter 2 defines and describes intelligence.
  • Chapter 3 argues that the scientific literature indicates that intelligence is a determinant of incomes and related phenomena among individuals within a number of countries.
  • Chapter 4 describes the collection and determination of national IQ, presenting calculated IQs for 113 countries and estimated IQs for an additional 79 countries. This represents all countries with population greater than 40,000.
  • Chapter 5 introduces a new statistic, the quality of human condition index (QHC) and 12 alternative variables that measure human conditions.
  • Chapter 7 focuses on the relationship between national IQ and QHC, which Lynn and Vanhanen report to be strongly correlated.
  • Chapter 8 examines the relationship between national IQ and 12 alternative variables, which Lynn and Vanhanen report are also correlated with national IQ.
  • Chapter 9 discusses the genetic and environmental contributions to differences in national intelligence, and argues that racial composition of the population is a major factor.
  • Chapter 10 considers the causal relationship between national IQ and important variables related to global inequality.
  • Chapter 11 discusses and responds to criticisms made to Lynn and Vanhanen's theory by reviewers.
  • Chapter 12 summarizes the book and discusses policy recommendations.

Significant correlations with higher national IQ were found for a number of factors: higher GDP/capita, higher adult literacy rate, higher gross tertiary education enrollment ratio, higher life expectancy at birth, higher level of democratization 2002 (Tatu Vanhanen's Index of Democratization), higher Human Development Index, higher Gender-related Development Index, higher economic growth rate, lower Gini index of inequality in income or consumption, lower population below the $2 a day international poverty line, lower measures of undernourishment, lower maternal mortality ratio, lower infant mortality rate, higher Corruption Perceptions Index, higher Economic Freedom of the World ratings, higher Index of Economic Freedom ratings, and more narrow population pyramid (MU Index).


The book received a mixed reception with most academics dismissing the work.

In a review J. Philippe Rushton, President of the Pioneer fund that has been a long time funder of research by Lynn,[3][4] writes that the book extends and answers criticisms against the earlier work in several ways. Rushton concludes that the methods is accurate.[5] Rushton states that the national IQs have very high validity as measures of national differences in cognitive ability.[5] He states that "They show that there is remarkable consistency in the IQs of nations when these are classified into racial clusters." [5]

In contrast to Lynn, Kanazawa "contends that it is the evolutionary novelty of the environment which increased general intelligence" and not the cold climate and harsh winters as Lynn states.[6]

The methods of the study were criticized by Richard E. Nisbett for relying on small and haphazard samples and for ignoring data that did not support the conclusions.[7]

In an article published in European Journal of Personality, Heiner Rindermann compared the IQ scores from the book to a large number of international student assessment studies on subjects such as reading, mathematics, science, and problem solving, and found them to be highly intercorrelated. Statistical analyses indicated that the results could be explained by an underlying general cognitive ability. More than 30 commentaries on Rindermann's findings were published in the same issue of the journal.[8]

The study A systematic literature review of the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans by Jelte M. Wicherts and colleagues stated that:

"For instance, Lynn and Vanhanen (2006) accorded a national IQ of 69 to Nigeria on the basis of three samples (Fahrmeier, 1975; Ferron, 1965; Wober, 1969), but they did not consider other relevant published studies that indicated that average IQ in Nigeria is considerably higher than 70 (Maqsud, 1980a,b; Nenty & Dinero, 1981; Okunrotifa, 1976). As Lynn rightly remarked during the 2006 conference of the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR), performing a literature review involves making a lot of choices. Nonetheless, an important drawback of Lynn (and Vanhanen)'s reviews of the literature is that they are unsystematic."[9]

However, the study also did its own literature review on the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans. It did not find as low a value as the book, below 70, but the estimated average value of 82 is still low compared to industrialized nations. Regarding four studies comparing and finding agreement between Lynn's estimated national IQs and the international student assessment tests, they disagree regarding sub-Saharan Africa but write "these four studies appear to validate national IQs in other parts of the world."[9]

Richard Lynn and Gerhard Meisenberg in turn replied that "critical evaluation of the studies presented by WDM shows that many of these are based on unrepresentative elite samples" and that a further literature review, including taking into account results in mathematics, science, and reading, gave "an IQ of 68 as the best reading of the IQ in sub-Saharan Africa".[10] Wicherts and colleagues in yet another reply stated: "In light of all the available IQ data of over 37,000 African testtakers, only the use of unsystematic methods to exclude the vast majority of data could result in a mean IQ close to 70. On the basis of sound methods, the average IQ remains close to 80. Although this mean IQ is clearly lower than 100, we view it as unsurprising in light of the potential of the Flynn Effect in Africa (Wicherts, Borsboom, & Dolan, 2010) and common psychometric problems associated with the use of western IQ tests among Africans."[11]

Consequently, some later studies using average national IQ data have checked their results against both data sets.[12][13]

Jones and Schneider commenting on the differences to the earlier book write "LV (2002) assembled results from 183 conventional IQ tests, both verbal and visual, given in 81 countries across the entire 20th century;they used hundreds of IQ tests from 113 countries across centuries in LV (2006). They aggregated these results using best practice methods to create estimates of “national average IQ” for these countries. LV show in those works as well as in Lynn (2006) that the IQ gaps between regions of the world have not appreciably changed during the 20th century."[14]

Earl Hunt cited Lynn and Vanhanen's work as an example of scientists going far beyond the empirical support to make controversial policy recommendations, and as such as examples of irresponsible uses of science. Hunt argues that in their argumentation they both made the basic mistake of assigning causality to a correlation without evidence, and that they made "staggeringly low" estimates of Sub-Saharan African IQs based on highly problematic data. He considers that by their negligence of observing good scientific practice Lynn and Vanhanen are not living up to the basic responsibility of scientists to make sure that their results can function as reasonable empirical support for policy decisions.[15]

National IQ and QHC values[edit]

Lynn and Vanhanen base their analysis on data gathered from a literature review. They selected IQ data from studies which covered 113 nations. For another 79 nations, they estimated the mean IQs on the basis of the arithmetic means of the measured IQs of neighboring countries. They justify this method of estimation by pointing out that the correlation between the estimated national IQs they reported in IQ and the Wealth of Nations and the measured national IQs since obtained is very high (0.91).[9][16]

Lynn and Vanhanen calculated the national IQs in relation to a British mean of 100, with a standard deviation of 15. They adjusted all test results to account for the Flynn effect: adjustments were 2 points per decade for Raven's Progressive Matrices and 3 points per decade for all other types of tests. When two IQ studies were used from one country, their mean was calculated, whereas when three or more were available, the median was used.[9][16]

See also[edit]

Theories of Race and Intelligence:

Publications of Race and Intelligence:


  1. ^ Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen (2006). IQ and Global Inequality. Washington Summit Publishers: Augusta, GA. ISBN 1-59368-025-2
  2. ^ Lynn, R. and Vanhanen, T. (2002). IQ and the wealth of nations. Westport, CT: Praeger. ISBN 0-275-97510-X
  3. ^ Grantees
  4. ^ Lynn & Vanhanen 2002 p.2
  5. ^ a b c Review by J. Philippe Rushton in Personality and Individual Differences, 2006, 41, 983-5.
  6. ^ Temperature and evolutionary novelty as forces behind the evolution of general intelligence, Satoshi Kanazawa, Intelligence, Volume 36, Issue 2, March–April 2008, Pages 99-108
  7. ^ Nisbett, Richard. 2009. Intelligence and how to get it. pp. 215.
  8. ^ Rindermann,H. (2007). The g-factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: The homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ-tests across nations. European Journal of Personality, 21, 6 67−706
  9. ^ a b c d Wicherts, J. M., et al., A systematic literature review of the average IQ of Sub-Saharan Africans, Intelligence (2009),
  10. ^ "The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans: Comments on Wicherts, Dolan, and van der Maas", Richard Lynna and Gerhard Meisenberg, Intelligence, Volume 38, Issue 1, January–February 2010, Pages 21-29
  11. ^ The dangers of unsystematic selection methods and the representativeness of 46 samples of African test-takers, Jelte M. Wicherts, Conor V. Dolana and Han L.J. van der Maas, Intelligence Volume 38, Issue 1, January–February 2010, Pages 30-37
  12. ^ IQ in the Utility Function: Cognitive skills, time preference, and cross-country differences in savings rates, Garett Jones and Marta Podemska, (Presented at Canadian Economics Association meetings, June 2010)
  13. ^ Christopher Eppig, Corey L. Fincher, and Randy Thornhill Parasite prevalence and the worldwide distribution of cognitive ability Proc R Soc B 2010: rspb.2010.0973v1-rspb20100973.
  14. ^ IQ IN THE PRODUCTION FUNCTION: EVIDENCE FROM IMMIGRANT EARNINGS, GARETT JONES1, W. JOEL SCHNEIDER2, conomic Inquiry, Volume 48, Issue 3, pages 743–755, July 2010
  15. ^ Hunt, E. (2010). The rights and responsibilities implied by academic freedom. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(4), 264-271.
  16. ^ a b McDaniel, M.A. (2008). Book Review of: IQ and Global Inequality. Intelligence, 36, 731-732.

External links[edit]