Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:11, 2 May 2010

Template:Systemic bias

This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. Please add a reason or a talk parameter to this template to explain the issue with the article. When placing this tag, consider associating this request with a WikiProject.

The history of the race and intelligence controversy concerns the historical development of a debate, primarily in the United States, concerning possible explanations of group differences in intelligence. Although it has never been disputed that there are systematic differences between average scores in IQ tests of different population groups, sometimes called "racial IQ gaps", there has been no agreement on whether this is mainly due to environmental and cultural factors, or whether some inherent hereditarian factor is at play, related to genetics.

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, group differences in intelligence were assumed to be due to race and, apart from intelligence tests, research relied on measurements such as brain size or reaction times. By the mid-1930s most psychologists had adopted the view that environmental and cultural factors played a dominant role. In 1969 the educational psychologist Arthur Jensen published a long article reviving the older hereditarian point of view, with the suggestion that eugenics was more likely to increase the average intelligence in the US than remedial education for blacks. His work, publicized by the Nobel laureate William Shockley, sparked controversy amongst the academic community and even led to student unrest. A similar debate amongst academics followed the publication in 1994 of The Bell Curve, a book by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray which argued in favor of the hereditarian viewpoint. It not only provoked the publication of several interdisciplinary books on the environmental point of view, some in popular science, but also led to a public statement from the American Psychological Association acknowledging a gap between average IQ scores of whites and blacks as well as the absence of any adequate explanation of it, either environmental or genetic. The hereditarian line of research continues to be pursued by a group of researchers, mostly psychologists, some of whom are supported by the Pioneer Fund.

Early history

The idea that there are differences in the brain structures/sizes of different racial groups, and that these differences explain varying rates of intelligence, was widely advocated and studied during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Through the publication of his book Hereditary Genius in 1869, polymath Francis Galton spurred interest in the study of mental abilities, particularly as they relate to heredity and eugenics.

In 1895, R. Meade Bache of the University of Pennsylvania published an article in Psychological Review claiming that reaction time increases with evolution. Bache supported this claim with data demonstrating increased reaction times among White Americans when compared with those of Native Americans and African Americans, with Native Americans having the shortest reaction time. He hypothesized that the long reaction time of White Americans was to be explained by their possessing more contemplative brains which did not function well on tasks requiring automatic responses. This was one of the first examples of modern scientific racism, in which science was used to bolster beliefs in the superiority of a particular race.

In 1912 the Columbia psychology graduate Frank Bruner reviewed the scientific literature on auditory perception in black and white subjects in Psychological Bulletin, characterizing, "the mental qualities of the Negro as: lacking in filial affection, strong migratory instincts and tendencies; little sense of veneration, integrity or honor; shiftless, indolent, untidy, improvident, extravagant, lazy, untruthful, lacking in persistence and initiative and unwilling to work continuously at details. Indeed, experience with the Negro in classrooms indicates that it is impossible to get the child to do anything with continued accuracy, and similarly in industrial pursuits, the Negro shows a woeful lack of power of sustained activity and constructive conduct."

In 1916 George O. Ferguson conducted research in his Columbia Ph.D. thesis on "The psychology of the Negro", finding them poor in abstract thought, but good in physical responses, recommending how this should be reflected in education. In the same year Lewis Terman, in the manual accompanying the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test, referred to the higher frequency of morons among non-white American racial groups stating that further research into race difference on intelligence should be conducted and that the "enormously significant racial differences in general intelligence" could not be remedied by education.

In the 1920's psychologists started questioning underlying assumptions of racial differences in intelligence; although not discounting them, the possibility was considered that they were on a smaller scale than previously supposed and also due to factors other than heredity. In 1924 Floyd Allport wrote in his book "Social Psychology" that the French sociologist Gustave Le Bon was incorrect in asserting "a gap between inferior and superior species" and pointed to "social inheritance" and "environmental factors" as factors that accounted for differences. Nevertheless he conceded that "the intelligence of the white race is of a more versatile and complex order than that of the black race. It is probably superior to that of the red or yellow races."

In 1929 Robert Woodworth in his textbook "Psychology: a study of mental life" made no claims about innate differences in intelligence between races, pointing instead to environmental and cultural factors. He considered it advisable to "suspend judgment and keep our eyes open from year to year for fresh and more conclusive evidence that will probably be discovered".

In 1935 Otto Klineberg wrote two books "Negro Intelligence and Selective Migration" and "Race Differences", dismissing claims that African Americans in the northern states were more intelligent than those in the south. He concluded that there was no scientific proof of racial differences in intelligence and that this should not therefore be used as a justification for policies in education or employment. In the 1940s many psychologists, particularly social psychologists, conceded that environmental and cultural factors, as well as discrimination and prejudice, provided a more probable explanation of disparities in intelligence. According to Samelson (1978), this change in attitude had become widespread by then, with very few studies in race differences in intelligence, a change brought out by an increase in the number of psychologists not from a "lily-white ... Anglo-Saxon" background but from Jewish backgrounds. Other factors that influenced American psychologists were the economic changes brought about by the depression and the reluctance of psychologists to risk being associated with the Nazi claims of a master race.

1960-1980

In 1965 William Shockley, Nobel laureate in physics and professor at Stanford University, made a public statement at the Nobel conference on "Genetics and the Future of Man" about the problems of "genetic deterioration" in humans caused by "evolution in reverse", in contrast to the capacity for social management and organization of early American settlers. Speaking of the "genetic enslavement" of African Americans, owing to an abnormally high birth rate, Shockley discouraged improved education as a remedy, suggesting instead sterilization and birth control. In the following ten years he continued to argue in favor of this position, claiming it was not based on prejudice but "on sound statistics". Shockley's outspoken public statements and lobbying brought him into contact with those running the Pioneer Fund who subsequently provided financial support though the intermediary Carleton Putnam for his extensive lobbying activities in this area, reported widely in the press. The Pioneer Fund had been set up by W.P. Draper in 1937 with one of its two charitable purposes being to provide aid for "study and research into the problems of heredity and eugenics in the human race ... and ... into the problems of race betterment with special reference to the people of the United States".

One of Shockley's lobbying campaigns involved the educational psychologist, Arthur Jensen, from the University of California, Berkeley. Although earlier in his career Jensen had favored environmental rather than genetic factors as the explanation of race differences in intelligence, he had changed his mind during the year 1966-1967 spent at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Stanford, where he got to know Shockley. In his autobiographical writings 30 years afterwards Jensen does not mention Shockley as an important influence on his later thought, rather he describes as decisive his work with Hans Eysenck. He also mentions his interest in behaviorist theories of Clark Hull which he says he abandoned largely because he found the them to be incompatible with experimental findings during his years at Berkeley.

Jensen (1969) wrote a long article in the Harvard Educational Review, "How Much can We Boost IQ and Achievement", arguing that racial minorities should be taught by relying on their ability to associate rather than understand, i.e. learning by rote, not through conceptual explanation. He decried the "misguided and ineffective attempts to improve lot" of blacks, suggesting that initiatives like the Head Start Program had failed.

In his article Jensen insisted on the accuracy and lack of bias in intelligence tests, stating that the absolute quantity g that they measured "stood like a Rock of Gibraltar in psychometrics". He stressed the importance of biological considerations in intelligence, commenting that "the belief in the almost infinite plasticity of intellect, the ostrich-like denial of biological factors in individual differences, and the slighting of the role of genetics in the study of intelligence can only hinder investigation and understanding of the conditions, processes, and limits through which the social environment influences human behavior." He argued at length that, contrary to environmentalist orthodoxy, intelligence was partly dependent on the same genetic factors that influence other physical attributes. More controversially, he briefly speculated that the difference in performance at school between blacks and whites might have a partly genetic explanation, commenting that "the preponderance of evidence is, in my opinion, less consistent with a strictly environmental hypothesis than with a genetic hypothesis, which, of course, does not exclude the influence of environment or its interaction with genetic factors." He advocated the allocation of educational resources according to merit and and insisted on the close correlation between intelligence and occupational status, arguing that "in a society that values and rewards individual talent and merit, genetic factors inevitably take on considerable importance." Concerned that the average IQ in the USA was inadequate to answer the increasing needs of an industrialised society, he predicted that people with lower IQs would become unemployable while there would be an insufficient number with higher IQs to fill professional posts. As he wrote, "Is there a danger that current welfare policies, unaided by eugenic foresight, could lead to the genetic enslavement of a substantial segment of our population?" He concluded by emphasizing the importance of child-centerd education, suggesting that, in order to ensure equality of opportunity, "schools and society must provide a range and diversity of educational methods, programs and goals, and of occupational opportuities, just as wide as the range of human abilities." Later, writing about how the article came into being, Jensen said that the editors of the Review had specifically asked him to include his view on the heritability of race differences, which he had not previously published. He also maintains that only five percent of the article touched on the topic of race difference in IQ.

Shockley conducted a widespread publicity campaign for Jensen's article, supported by the Pioneer Fund. Jensen's views became widely known in many spheres. As a result there was renewed academic interest in the hereditarian viewpoint and in intelligence tests. Jensen's original article was widely circulated and often cited; the material was taught in university courses over a range of academic disciplines. In response to his critics, Jensen wrote a series of books on all aspects of psychometrics. There was also a widespread positive response from the popular press — with the New York Times Magazine dubbing the topic "Jensenism" — and amongst politicians and policy makers.

In 1971 Richard Herrnstein wrote a long article on intelligence tests in The Atlantic for a general readership. Undecided on the issues of race and intelligence, he discussed instead score differences between social classes. Like Jensen he took a firmly hereditarian point of view. He also commented that the policy of equal opportunity would result in making social classes more rigid, separated by biological differences, resulting in a downward trend in average intelligence that would conflict with the growing needs of a technological society.

Jensen and Herrnstein's articles were widely discussed. Hans Eysenck defended the hereditarian point of view and the use of intelligence tests in "Race, Intelligence and Education" (1971), a pamphlet presenting Jensenism to a popular audience, and "The Equality of Man" (1973). He was severely critical of anti-hereditarians whose policies he blamed for many of the problems in society. In the first book he wrote that, "All the evidence to date suggests the strong and indeed overwhelming importance of genetic factors in producing the great variety of intellectual differences which observed between certain racial groups", adding in the second, that "for anyone wishing to perpetuate class or caste differences, genetics is the real foe".

Although the main intention of the hereditarians had been to challenge the anti-hereditarian establishment, they were unprepared for the level of reaction and censure in the scientific world. Militant student groups at Berkeley and Harvard conducted disruptive campaigns of harassment on Jensen and Herrnstein with charges of racism, despite Herrnstein's refusal to endorse Jensen's views on race and intelligence. Jensen himself states he even lost his employment at Berkeley because of the controversy. Similar campaigns were waged in London against Eysenck and in Boston against Edward Wilson, the founding father of sociobiology, the discipline that explains human behavior through genetics. The attacks on Wilson were orchestrated by the Sociobiology Study Group, part of the organization Science for the People, formed of 35 scientists and students, including the Harvard biologists Stephen J. Gould and Richard Lewontin, who both became prominent critics of hereditarian research in race and intelligence.

This disruption was accompanied by a high level of commentaries, criticisms and denouncements from the academic community. Two issues of the Harvard Educational Review were devoted to critiques of Jensen's work by psychologists, biologists and educationalists. The academic debate became entangled with the so-called "Burt Affair", because Jensen's article had partially relied on the 1966 twin studies of the British educational psychologist Sir Cyril Burt: shortly after Burt's death in 1971, there were allegations, prompted by research of Leon Kamin, that Burt had fabricated parts of his data, charges which have never been fully resolved. Samelson (1997) documents how Jensen's views on Burt's work varied over the years: he was his main defender in the USA during the 1970s; in 1983, following the publication in 1978 of Leslie Hearnshaw's official biography of Burt, he changed his mind, "fully accept as valid ... Hearnshaw’s biography" and stating that "of course will never be exonerated for his empirical deceptions"; however, in 1992 he wrote that "the essence of the Burt affair ... a cabal of motivated opponents, avidly aided by the mass media, to bash reputation completely", a view repeated in an invited address on Burt before the American Psychological Association, when he called into question the scholarship of the recently deceased Hearnshaw.

The debate was further exacerbated by issues of racial bias that had already intensified through the 1960s due to civil rights concerns and changes in the social climate. In 1968 the Association of Black Psychologists (ABP) had demanded a morotorium on IQ tests for children from minority groups. After a committee set up by the American Psychological Association drew up guidelines for assessing minority groups, failing to confirm the claims of racial bias, Jackson (1975) wrote the following as part of a response on behalf of the ABP:

Psychological testing historically has been a quasi-scientific tool in the perpetuation of racism on all levels of scientific objectivity, it has provided a cesspool of intrinsically and inferentially fallacious data which inflates the egos of whites by demeaning Black people and threatens to potentiate Black genocide.

1980-present

In the 1980s, the New Zealand psychologist James Flynn started a study of group differences in intelligence in their own terms. His research led him to the discovery of what is now called the Flynn effect: he observed empirically a gradual increase in average IQ scores over the years over all groups tested. His discovery was confirmed later by many other studies. Flynn concluded in 1987 that "IQ tests do not measure intelligence but rather a correlate with a weak causal link to intelligence"

In 1994 the debate on race and intelligence was reignited by the publication of the book The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray. The book was received positively by the media, with prominent coverage in Newsweek, Time, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Although only two chapters of the book were devoted to race differences in intelligence, treated from the same hereditarian standpoint as Jensen's 1969 paper, it nevertheless caused a similar furor in the academic community to Jensen's article. Many critics, including Stephen J. Gould and Leonard Kamin, pointed out flaws in the analysis and unwarranted simplifications. These criticisms were subsequently presented in books, most notably The Bell Curve Debate (1995), Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth (1996) and an expanded edition of Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1996). In response to the debate, the American Psychological Association set up a ten-person taskforce, chaired by Ulrich Neisser, to report on the book and its findings. In its report, published in February 1996, the committee made the following comments on race differences in intelligence:

African American IQ scores have long averaged about 15 points below those of Whites, with correspondingly lower scores on academic achievement tests. In recent years the achievement-test gap has narrowed appreciably. It is possible that the IQ-score differential is narrowing as well, but this has not been clearly established. The cause of that differential is not known; it is apparently not due to any simple form of bias in the content or administration of the tests themselves. The Flynn effect shows that environmental factors can produce differences of at least this magnitude, but that effect is mysterious in its own right. Several culturally-based explanations of the Black/White IQ differential have been proposed; some are plausible, but so far none has been conclusively supported. There is even less empirical support for a genetic interpretation. In short, no adequate explanation of the differential between the IQ means of Blacks and Whites is presently available.

From the 1980s onwards, the Pioneer Fund continued to fund hereditarian research on race and intelligence, in particular the two English-born psychologists Richard Lynn of the University of Ulster and J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario, its president since 2002. Rushton returned to the cranial measurements of the nineteenth century, using brain size as an extra factor determining intelligence; in collaboration with Jensen, he most recently developed updated arguments for the genetic explanation of race differences in intelligence. Lynn, long time editor of and contributor to Mankind Quarterly and a prolific writer of books, has concentrated his research in race and intelligence on gathering and tabulating data about race differences in intelligence across the world. He has also made suggestions about its political implications, including the revival of older theories of eugenics, which he describes as "the truth that dares not speak its name".

See also

• Race and intelligence
• Henry Garrett
• Robert Yerkes
• Snyderman and Rothman (study)

Notes

1. Morton 1839
2. Bean 1906
3. Mall 1909
4. Benjamin 2006, p. 188-189
5. "Reaction Time with Reference to Race" in: Psychological Review, Vol 2(5), Sept. 1895, pp. 475-486.
6. Benjamin 2006, p. 188
7. Bruner, Frank G. (1912), "The primitive races in America", Psychological Bulletin, 9: 380–390
8. Benjamin 2006, p. 188-189
9. Ferguson, George O. (1916), The psychology of the Negro, Negro Universities Press
10. Benjamin 2006, p. 189
11. Terman, Lewis M. (1916), The Measurement of Intelligence: An Explanation of and a Complete Guide for the use of the Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale, Houghton Mifflin Co.
12. Benjamin 2006, p. 189
13. Allport, Floyd Henry (1984), Social psychology, Routledge, ISBN 0415092582 Reprint of 1924 book.
14. Benjamin 2006, p. 189
15. Woodworth, Robert S. (2006), Psychology: A Study of Mental Life, Kessinger Publishing, ISBN 1428641262 Reprint of 1929 textbook.
16. Benjamin 2006, p. 189-190
17. Klineberg, Otto (1935), Negro intelligence and selective migration, Columbia University Press
18. Klineberg, Otto (1935), Race differences, Harper and Brothers
19. Benjamin 2006, p. 190-191
20. Tucker 2002, p. 43,180-181
21. Lynn 2001 The official history of the Pioneer Fund written by a board member.
22. Tucker 2002
23. Shurkin 2006
24. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(99)80002-6, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1016/S0160-2896(99)80002-6 instead.
25. Wooldridge 1995
26. Tucker 2002
27. Maltby, Day & Macaskill 2007
28. Gottfredson 1998
29. Wooldridge 1995, p. 365
30. Tucker 2002
31. Maltby, Day & Macaskill 2007, p. 331
32. Gottfredson 1998
33. Tucker 2002
34. Wooldridge 1995
35. Wooldridge 1995, p. 365
36. Wooldridge 1995, p. 366-367
37. Wooldridge 1995, p. 368-373
38. Segerstråle, 2001 & 17-24 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFSegerstråle200117-24 (help) Segerstråle gives a detailed account of the Sociobiology Study Group, founded in 1975.
39. Wooldridge 1995, p. 374-376
40. Wooldridge 1995, p. 375
41. Samelson 1997
42. Mackintosh 1995
43. Mackintosh 1998, p. 74-76
44. Alland 2002
45. Jensen 1974
46. Jensen 1978
47. Jensen 1983, pp. 17, 20
48. Jensen 1992a, p. 121
49. Jensen 1992b
50. Samelson 1997, pp. 146–148
51. Jensen 1980, p. 16
52. Wooldridge 1995, p. 376
53. Hickman & Reynolds 1986, p. 411
54. Richards 1997, p. 279
55. Maltby, Day & Macaskill, p. 302 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMaltbyDayMacaskill (help)
56. Mackintosh 1998, p. 148
57. Matlby, Day & Macaskill 2007, p. 334-347 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMatlbyDayMacaskill2007 (help)
58. Hothersall 2003, p. 440-441
59. Neisser 1996, p. 97
60. Rushton & Jensen 2005
61. Tucker 2002
62. Richards 1997
63. Richardson 2003, p. 226
64. Current editorial board of Mankind Quarterly

References

• Alland, Alexander (2002), Race in Mind: Race, IQ, and Other Racisms, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 79–104, ISBN 031223838X, Chapter 5, "Race and IQ: Arthur R. Jensen and Cyril Burt"
• Bean, Robert Bennett (1906), "Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain" (PDF), American Journal of Anatomy, 5: 353–432, doi:10.1002/aja.1000050402
• Benjamin, Ludy T. (2006), Brief History of Modern Psychology, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 188–191, ISBN 140513206X
• Hickman, Julia A.; Reynolds, Cecil R. (1986), "Are Race Differences in Mental Test Scores an Artifact of Psychometric Methods? A Test of Harrington's Experimental Model", The Journal of Special Education, 20: 409–430
• Gottfredson, Linda S. (1998), "Jensen, Jensenism, and the sociology of intelligence", Intelligence, 26: 291–299
• Hothersall, David (2003), History of Psychology (4th ed.), McGraw-Hill, pp. 440–441, ISBN 0072849657
• Jackson, G. D. (1975), "Another psychological view from the Association of Black Psychologists", American Psychologist, 30: 88–93
• Jensen, A.R. (1969), "How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?", Harvard Educational Review, 39: 1–123
• Jensen, A.R. (1974), "Kinship correlations reported by Sir Cyril Burt", Behavior Genetics, 4: 1–28
• Jensen, A.R. (1978), "Sir Cyril Burt in perspective", American Psychologist, 33: 499–503
• Jensen, A.R. (1980), Bias in mental testing, Free Press, ISBN 0029164303
• Jensen, A.R. (1983), "Sir Cyril Burt: A personal recollection", Association of Educational Psychologists Journal, 6: 13–20
• Jensen, A.R. (1992a), Scientific fraud or false accusation?. The case of Cyril Burt, Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences (ed Miller, D.J. & M. Hersen), Wiley, pp. 97–124
• Jensen, A.R. (1992b), "The Cyril Burt scandal, research taboos, and the media", The General Psychologist, 28: 16–21 (Transcript of invited address, sponsored by Div. 1, at APA Convention, Washington, DC, August 14, 1992.)
• Loehlin, John C.; Lindzey, Gardner; Spuhler, J.N. (1975), Race Differences in Intelligence, W H Freeman & Co, ISBN 0716707535 {{citation}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
• Lynn, Richard (2001), The science of human diversity: a history of the Pioneer Fund, University Press of America, ISBN 076182040X
• Mackintosh, N.J., ed. (1995), Cyril Burt: Fraud or Framed?, Oxford University Press, ISBN 019852336X
• Mackintosh, N.J. (1998), IQ and Human Intelligence, Oxford University Press, ISBN 019852367X
• Mall, F. P. (1909), "On several anatomical characters of the human brain, said to vary according to race and sex, with especial reference to the weight of the frontal lobe", American Journal of Anatomy, 9: 1–32
• Maltby, John; Day, Liz; Macaskill, Ann (2007), Personality, Individual Differences and Intelligence, Pearson Education, ISBN 0131297600
• Morton, Samuel George (1839), Crania Americana; or, A Comparative View of the Skulls of Various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America: To which is Prefixed An Essay on the Varieties of the Human Species, J. Dobson {{citation}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |1= and |2= (help); Unknown parameter |city= ignored (|location= suggested) (help)
• Neisser, Ulrich; et al. (1996), "Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns" (PDF), American Psychologist, 51: 77–101 {{citation}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |first= (help)
• Richards, Graham (1997), Race, racism, and psychology: towards a reflexive history, Routledge, ISBN 0415101417
• Richardson, Angélique (2003), Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century: rational reproduction and the new woman, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0198187009
• Rushton, J. P.; Jensen, A. R. (2005), "Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability" (PDF), Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11: 235–294
• Samelson, Franz (1978), "From "race psychology" to "studies in prejudice": Some observations on the thematic reversal in social psychology", Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 14: 265-278
• Samelson, Franz (1997), "What to do about fraud charges in science; or, will the Burt affair ever end?", Genetica, 99: 145–151, doi:10.1023/A:1018302319394
• Segerstråle, Ullica Christina Olofsdotter (2001), Defenders of the Truth: The Battle for Science in the Sociobiology Debate and Beyond, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0192862154
• Shurkin, Joel N. (2006), Broken Genius: The Rise and Fall of William Shockley, Creator of the Electronic Age, # Macmillan, ISBN 1403988153
• Tucker, William H. (2002), The Funding of Scientific Racism: Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund, University of Illinois Press, ISBN 0252027620
• Wooldridge, Adrian (1995), Measuring the Mind: Education and Psychology in England c.1860-c.1990, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521395151

v t e Sex differences in humans
Biology	Sexual differentiation Disorders In research Physiology Dimorphism Scientific measures
Medicine and Health	Autoimmunity Life expectancy Mental disorders Autism Depression Schizophrenia Substance abuse Suicide Stroke care
Neuroscience and Psychology	Cognition Coping Emotional expression Aggression Emotional intelligence Empathy Gender empathy gap Intelligence Memory Narcissism Neurosexism Sexuality Age disparity in relationships Attraction Desire Fantasy Jealousy
Sociology	Crime Education in the U.S. Gender inequality Leadership Religion Social capital Social support Sociolinguistics Equality paradox

• Race and intelligence controversy
• History of psychology
• Intelligence tests