|
Fall 2009
|
Psychology
8935: Readings in Behavioral Genetics and Individual Differences Psychology
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PSYCHOLOGY 8935 Fall 2009MONDAY, 12:00 – 1:00; N227 ELLIOTT HALL The journal club in Individual Differences Psychology and Behavioral Genetics continues this fall. The format for the journal club is relatively freewheeling and eclectic. Each week participants are expected to read the assigned book chapter and articles and come prepared to discuss the material during the appointed hour. Nobody takes primary responsibility for leading the discussion; rather the expectation is that each participant will come prepared to add to the discussion. There are no prerequisites for enrolling in this seminar other than intellectual openness. In the past, the seminar has had participants from a broad array of backgrounds including Behavior Genetics, Social, Clinical, Industrial/Organizational Personality, Cognitive and Biological, and Counseling. We have also had graduate students from Child Development, Philosophy, Sociology, Anthropology, and the Carlson School. In short, all interested parties are welcome. Students who are interested should let Matt McGue know and register for 1 credit S/N. The seminar will begin on Monday September 14. This fall the seminar will have a somewhat different format than in previous years. In response to student and seminar participant request (given the title of the book they recommended, I fear their request may have been motivated by an interest in improving the quality of seminar participants), the focus of the seminar will be Nisbett’s recently published book on intelligence: Nisbett, R.E. (2009). Intelligence and how to get it: Why schools and culture count. New York: Norton. Each week we will read one chapter from the book along with 2-4 readings selected to be relevant to the topic of the chapter. The book is available for purchase at the University Bookstore. The associated articles can be downloaded following the links here. Readings are available in pdf format from the course website (if queried the account # is psy8935, the pw is behgen). Note that we will begin discussing articles at and the first chapter at our first meeting. Syllabus (in pdf format)
(Clink link to take you to readings for each week)
Week #1 - 14 September: Chapter 1 - Varieties of Inteligence Comment: Most of the discussion in the first chapter will be uncontroversial and generally familiar to the group (excepting Nisbett’s benign treatment of Sternberg). I thought then we could begin by reading reviews of the book in the popular press – one in a NYT editorial (Kristof, 2009) and a second as a NYT book review (Holt, 2009). Clearly, Nisbett has hit a resonant chord, at least at the NYT. Providing a somewhat different take on the book, Earl Hunt (Hunt, 2009) argues that it gave him indigestion (be prepared). Since Nisbett also discusses non-cognitive contributors to achievement, I thought it would be useful to also read a summary of findings from the positive psychology movement (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005). (Note – given Nisbett’s fondness for Sternberg, newcomers might have expected one of Sternberg’s Practical Intelligence articles. However, I have been forewarned that another Sternberg assignment will result in my overthrow). Week #2 - 21 September: Chapter 2 - Heritability and Mutability Comment: While Nisbett acknowledges the heritability of IQ, he argues that the methodological and theoretical limitations of the biometric approach and standard BG designs result in its overestimation. Taylor (Taylor, 2009) provides a philosophical critique (and sadly typical for philosophical papers, long-winded as well) of biometric approaches. Nisbett concludes that adoption studies suggest that family environmental factors can affect a 12-18 point boost in IQ. The major reference on this is the 1990 study by Locurto (1990), which we will also read. Unfortunately the following paper on heritability (co-authored by three members of the journal club!) only came out this week (Johnson et al., 2009). It is a good antidote to the Taylor paper, but I got it too late to assign for this week - sorry! Week #3 - 28 September: Chapter 3 - Getting Smarter Comment: Ok, this is where Nisbett takes up the Flynn effect, which Nisbett believes is due, at least in part, to better schools. The classic paper on school influences is by Ceci (Ceci, 1991). But are improved educational practices enough to account for the Flynn effect? Lynn (Lynn, 2009) thinks not, as the Flynn effect is apparently evident prior to when children start school. Week #4 – 5 October: Chapter 4 - Improving the Schools Comment: If schools are a major contributor to the Flynn increase then it stands to reason that improving schools will result in improving intelligence, right? Ireson & Hallam (Ireson & Hallam, 1999) review evidence on the impact of tracking (i.e., ability grouping); Seligman and colleagues (Seligman, Ernst, Gillham, Reivich, & Linkins, 2009) argue that making students happy will be the source of success (didn’t California try this already?) using data from the improbably named Geelong School; and Cohen and colleagues (Cohen, Garcia, Purdie-Vaughns, Apfel, & Brzustoski, 2009) report impressive follow-up data on a simple intervention we read about a few years ago. Week #5 – 12 October: Special Minnesota Population Center Symposium by James Vaupel “Supercentenarians and the Theory of Heterogeneity” 12:15-1:15 50 Willey Hall About the Speaker: James Vaupel is one of the leading and most celebrated gerontologists and demographers in the world. He is the Founding Director of Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany. He is a member of the US National Academy of Sciences, German Academy of Sciences and a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. This past week he and his colleagues published a major article in the journal Lancet (Christensen et al., 2009) in which they show why more than half of babies alive today will survive 100 and discuss the social, technological, and medical implications of this demographic trend (a popular account of this research can be found at (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8284574.stm) Week #6 – 19 October: Chapter 5 - Social Class and Cognitive Culture Comment: In this chapter Nisbett makes the case that “there is an enormous causal influence of class on intelligence” (p.78). Sorry, I missed that development in the field and we have obviously been reading the wrong literature in this seminar the past 10 years. To try and understand the basis for his conclusion will take us two weeks. Along with this week’s chapter, will read the meta-analysis by Sirin (Sirin, 2005), which is an update on the classic review by White. We will also discuss the review article by Hackman and Farah (Hackman & Farah, 2009), in which they make the case for SES effects on brain development and the classic (but short) paper by Waller (Waller, 1971). Sadly, this paper is never cited and pretty much inaccessible in this electronic age. Week #7 – 26 October: Chapter 6 - IQ in Black and White Comment: In this chapter Nisbett makes the case that when considering the origins of the Black-White IQ gap, “genes account for none of the difference” (p. 118). A good place to start our review is to try and understand the magnitude of the gap and whether the racial gap in IQ has changed, and is continuing to change, over time. Hedges and Nowell (Hedges & Nowell, 1999) conclude that the black-white gap has diminished over time but that the rate of change slowed after 1972; Dickens and Flynn (Dickens & Flynn, 2006) claim that the decline in the gap has been fairly constant from 1972-2002. Unfortunately, the later-published paper does not cite the former, so it will be up to us to resolve the issue. Week #8 –2 November: Chapter 6 continued Comment: I thought it might be useful to continue the discussion of the previous week by considering outcomes for immigrants. Kalmijn (Kalmijn, 1994) provides a review of social outcomes for US immigrant Caribbean blacks, who are often compared to US born African Americans but for whom I could find very little scholarly research. The other articles we will read for this week deal with whether scientists should even study the association of race and IQ. In an interesting brief debate in the pages of Nature, Steven Rose (Rose, 2009) argues that studying (at least some aspects of) race is morally questionable; Ceci & Williams (Ceci & Williams, 2009) think researchers are obligated to do so in the interest of pursuing truth. Their positions generate a series of short letters and a reply (there are 3 one-page links here: letter1, letter2, letter3). Finally, in a provocative brief editorial, Bruce Charlton (Charlton, 2009) argues that the problem lies with scientists – we are just too boring and compliant! (Note that Charlton acknowledges Wendy Johnson in the paper – hope she doesn’t think we’re too boring too) Week #9 – 9 November: Chapter 7 - Mind the Gap Comment: In Chapter 7 Nisbett reviews the literature on the impact of early-childhood and school-based interventions. Belfield et al. (Belfield, Nores, Barnett, & Schweinhart, 2006) provide one of the few peer-reviewed reports on the influential Perry Preschool Program. Anderson (Anderson, 2008) gives a statistical critique and re-analysis of claims from the Perry, Abecedarian, and Early Training programs. Week #10 – 16 November: Chapter 7 continued Comment: We will continue our review of early-childhood interventions with a discussion of Head Start. Ludwig and Phillips (Ludwig & Phillips, 2008) make the case for the potential benefits of Head Start, while Besharov (Besharov, 2005) concisely articulates his reservations. It is also helpful to look at foreign experiences, Berlinski and colleagues (Berlinski, Galiani, & Manacorda, 2008) conclude from an interesting study from Uruguay that pre-primary education has long-term beneficial effects, but then there are those high-achieving Finns, described by Gamerman (Gamerman, 2008), who don’t even start school until the age of 7. Week #11 – 23 November: Chapter 8 - Advantage Asia Comment: Asians are one ethnic group who appear to be high-achieving, but is this because they are smarter or because they have a culture that encourages hard-work. Nisbett favors the latter explanation. Caplan et al. (Caplan, Choy, & Whitmore, 1992) is a largely popular account of SE Asian refugee children. We read this paper in this seminar over 15 years ago but I still think it retains its informativeness today and it is relevant to Nisbett’s argument. Lindblad and colleagues (Lindblad, Dalen, Rasmussen, Vinnerljung, & Hjern, 2009) provide some recent evidence on the cognitive achievement of Swedish adoptees, many of whom are of Asian ancestry. Finally, Mau (Mau, 1997) reports what seems to be paradoxical yet replicable results – associations of parenting practices with child achievement can vary quite markedly across different ethnic groups. I add here an Annual Review chapter on the social achievements of Asian-Americans by Sakamoto and colleagues (2009), which was just published. Given our plate is already fuill for this week, this article will need to be optional background reading. Week #12 – 30 November: Chapter 9 - People of the Book Comment: Jews are a second ethnic group who appear to be high-achieving. Nisbett concludes they are just “over-achievers”. Burstein (Burstein, 2007) provides a nice review of the evidence and a description of alternative explanations for Jewish high achievement. We read the Cochran, Hardy & Harpending (Cochran, Hardy, & Harpending, 2006) paper on Askanazi intelligence in manuscript form in this seminar 5 years ago. The reason we read it as a manuscript is that they were having difficulties getting it published; it was dismissed as racist and rejected because its characterization of the Jewish people did not comport with that from Fidler on the Roof. The paper, which lays out a genetic model, has caused less of a stir than the initial reviewers (and I) imagined. Note – Henry Harpending is a highly-regarded anthropologist and member of the National Academy. Week #13 – 7 December: Chapter 10 - Raising Your Child's Intelligence Comment. In this final chapter Nisbett provides a lot of advice to parents on how they can boost their children’s IQs. We’ll look at two of these. First, breast feeding seems a relatively easy way to get a 6-IQ point boost. Two years ago we read the review article by Der and colleagues (Der, Batty, & Deary, 2006), which gave a negative assessment of breast feeding effects. Subsequently, Kramer and colleagues (Kramer et al., 2008) reported findings from a large (> 13,000) randomized trial of breast feeding, concluding that it results in an ~ 7-IQ point effect. The Kramer report motivated a series of letters, including one by Der and colleagues (Der, Batty, & Deary, 2008; Gordon, 2008; Sullivan, 2008), as well as an author reply (Kramer & Platt, 2008). Second, the influential Hart and Risley (1995) study implies that speaking to your children will help boost their academic achievement. But then what happens to the children of mute parents? We’ll read two short case histories of children you experienced extreme isolation up through age 6; the first by Kingsley Davis (Davis, 1947); the second by Marie Mason (Mason, 1942). Week #14 – 14 December: Epilogue - What We Know about Intelligence and Academic Achievement Comment. We’ll end discussing Nisbett’s final summing up as well as James J. Lee’s (Lee, 2009) comprehensive and critical review of Intelligence and How to Get It. (I have Lee’s permission but need to distribute his review in an alternative format since it is not yet published.) Hopefully, after 14 weeks of study and discussion we will also be able to reach some consensus on the how and to what extent we know how to shape intelligence.
Full Citations
Adkins, D. E., & Vaisey, S. (2009). Toward a Unified Stratification Theory: Structure, Genome, and Status Across Human Societies. Sociological Theory, 27(2), 99-121. Anderson, M. L. (2008). Multiple Inference and Gender Differences in the Effects of Early Intervention: A Reevaluation of the Abecedarian, Perry Preschool, and Early Training Projects. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103(484), 1481-1495. Belfield, C. R., Nores, M., Barnett, S., & Schweinhart, L. (2006). The high/scope perry preschool program - Cost-benefit analysis using data from the age-40 follow-up. Journal of Human Resources, 41(1), 162-190. Berlinski, S., Galiani, S., & Manacorda, M. (2008). Giving children a better start: Preschool attendance and school-age profiles. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5-6), 1416-1440. Besharov, D. J. (2005). Head Start's Broken Promise. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute. Burstein, P. (2007). Jewish educational and economic success in the United States: A search for explanations. Sociological Perspectives, 50(2), 209-228. Caplan, N., Choy, M. H., & Whitmore, J. K. (1992). Indo-Chinese refugee families and academic achievement. Scientific American, 266(2), 36-42. Ceci, S., & Williams, W. M. (2009). Darwin 200: Should scientists study race and IQ? YES: The scientific truth must be pursued YES: The scientific truth must be pursued. Nature, 457(7231), 788-789. Ceci, S. J. (1991). How much does school influence general intelligence and its cognitive components: A reassessment of the evidence. Developmental Psychology, 27(5), 703-722. Charlton, B. G. (2009). Why are modern scientists so dull? How science selects for perseverance and sociability at the expense of intelligence and creativity. Medical Hypotheses, 72(3), 237-243. Cochran, G., Hardy, J., & Harpending, H. (2006). Natural history of Ashkenazi intelligence. Journal of Biosocial Science, 38(5), 659-693. Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Apfel, N., & Brzustoski, P. (2009). Recursive Processes in Self-Affirmation: Intervening to Close the Minority Achievement Gap. Science, 324(5925), 400-403. Davis, K. (1947). Final note on a case of extreme isolation. American Journal of Sociology, 52(5), 432-437. Der, G., Batty, G. D., & Deary, I. J. (2006). Effect of breast feeding on. intelligence in children: prospective study, sibling pairs analysis, and meta-analysis. British Medical Journal, 333(7575), 945-948A. Der, G., Batty, G. D., & Deary, I. J. (2008). Results From the PROBIT Breastfeeding Trial May Have Been Overinterpreted. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(12), 1456-1457. Dickens, W. T., & Flynn, J. R. (2006). Black Americans reduce the racial IQ gap - Evidence from standardization samples. Psychological Science, 17(10), 913-920. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16(12), 939-944. Gamerman, E. (2008, February 29). What makes Finnish kids so smart? The Wall Street Journal. Gordon, A. G. (2008). Breastfeeding, Breast-Milk Feeding, Breast Feeding, and IQ: Unknown and Known Knowns. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(12), 1457-1458. Hackman, D. A., & Farah, M. J. (2009). Socioeconomic status and the developing brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(2), 65-73. Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1999). Changes in the black-white gap in achievement test scores. Sociology of Education, 72(2), 111-135. Holt, J. (2009). Get smart. New York Times, March 3. Hunt, E. (2009). A must read- Perhaps with Maalox. Intelligence, 37, 514-515. Ireson, J., & Hallam, S. (1999). Raising standards: is ability grouping the answer? Oxford Review of Education, 25(3), 343-358. Kalmijn, M. (1994, Aug 05-09). The socioeconomic assimilation of Caribbean American blacks. Paper presented at the 89th Annual Meeting of the American-Sociological-Association, Los Angeles, CA. Kramer, M. S., Aboud, F., Mironova, E., Vanilovich, I., Platt, R. W., Matush, L., et al. (2008). Breastfeeding and child cognitive development - New evidence from a large randomized trial. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(5), 578-584. Kramer, M. S., & Platt, R. W. (2008). Breastfeeding, Breast-Milk Feeding, Breast Feeding, and IQ: Unknown and Known Knowns Reply. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(12), 1458-1459. Kristof, N. D. (2009). Rising above IQ. New York Times, June 7. Lee, J. J. (2009). Review: Intelligence and How to Get It. Cambridge, MA. Lindblad, F., Dalen, M., Rasmussen, F., Vinnerljung, B., & Hjern, A. (2009). School performance of international adoptees better than expected from cognitive test results. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 18(5), 301-308. Locurto, C. (1990). The malleability of IQ as judged from adoption studies. Intelligence, 14(3), 275-292. Ludwig, J., & Mayer, S. (2006). "Culture" and the intergenerational transmission of poverty: The prevention paradox. Future of Children, 16(2), 175-196. Ludwig, J., & Phillips, D. A. (2008). Long-term effects of Head Start on low-income children. In Reducing the Impact of Poverty on Health and Human Development: Scientific Approaches (Vol. 1136, pp. 257-268). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Lynn, R. (2009). What has caused the Flynn effect? Secular increases in the Development Quotients of infants. Intelligence, 37(1), 16-24. Mason, M. K. (1942). Learning to speak after six and one-half years of silence. American Journal of Speech Disorders, 7(4), 295-304. Mau, W. C. (1997). Parental influences on the high school students' academic achievement: A comparison of Asian immigrants, Asian Americans, and white Americans. Psychology in the Schools, 34(3), 267-277. Rose, S. (2009). Darwin 200: Should scientists study race and IQ? NO: Science and society do not benefit. Nature, 457(7231), 786-788. Seligman, M. E. P., Ernst, R. M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Positive education: positive psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 293-311. Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453. Sullivan, J. L. (2008). Cognitive Development: Breast-Milk Benefit vs Infant Formula Hazard. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(12), 1456-1456. Taylor, P. (2009). Three puzzles and eight gaps: What heritability studies and critical commentaries have not paid attention to. Biological Philosophy, on-line publication(26 June). Waller, J. H. (1971). Achievement and social mobility: Relationships among IQ score, education, and occupation in two generations. Social Biology, 18(3), 252-259. Ludwig and Mayer (Ludwig & Mayer, 2006) pose a paradox on the intergenerational transmission of poverty – Tom will give $1 to anyone who solves the paradox but I get to collect $5 from those who don’t. Finally, Adkins (Adkins & Vaisey, 2009) is a young sociologist – he wrote this paper as a grad student – which gives hope that that field is not beyond hope (to any humorless sociologists in the group – jk)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
