Richard Lynn

Richard Lynn (born 1930) is a British Professor Emeritus of Psychology who is known for his controversial views on racial and ethnic differences^[1]. Lynn claims there exists race differences and sex differences in intelligence.

Lynn was educated at Cambridge University. He has worked as lecturer in psychology at the University of Exeter, and as professor of psychology at the Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin and at the University of Ulster at Coleraine. He has written or co-written more than 11 books and 200 journal articles spanning five decades. Two of his recent books are on dysgenics and eugenics.

In the late 1970s, Lynn wrote that he found a higher average IQ in East Asians compared to Whites (5 points higher in his meta-analysis). In 1990 he proposed that the Flynn effect – an observed year on year rise in IQ scores around the world – could possibly be explained by improved nutrition, especially in early childhood.

Like much of the research in race and intelligence, Lynn's research is controversial. He is cited in the controversial The Bell Curve. He was also one of the 52 scientists who signed an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal defending the The Bell Curve. ^[2] He sits on the editorial boards of the journals Intelligence and Personality and Individual differences.^[3] He also sits on the boards of the controversial Pioneer Fund, and of the Pioneer-supported journal Mankind Quarterly, both of which have been the subject of articles and books which claim they favor racism.

Additional recommended knowledge

What is the Correct Way to Check Repeatability in Balances?

Don't let static charges disrupt your weighing accuracy

How to quickly check pipettes?

Race differences in intelligence

Past Works

  Lynn's psychometric studies were cited in the 1994 book The Bell Curve and were criticized as part of the controversy surrounding that book. His article, "Skin color and intelligence in African Americans," 2002 Population and Environment, concludes that lightness of skin color in African-Americans is positively correlated with IQ, which he claims derives from the higher proportion of Caucasian admixture.[6]

In IQ and the Wealth of Nations (2002)^[4], Lynn and co-author Tatu Vanhanen (University of Helsinki) argue that differences in national income (in the form of per capita gross domestic product) correlate with, and can be at least partially attributed to, differences in average national IQ. One controversial [7] study following up on Lynn and Vanhanen's hypothesis, "Temperature, skin color, per capita income, and IQ: An international perspective" (Templer and Arikawa 2006)[8] is listed as the most downloaded article in Intelligence at ScienceDirect (Jan. - March 2006).[9]

More Recent Works

  Lynn's 2006 Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis^[5] is the largest review of the global cognitive ability data. The book organizes the data by nine global regions,^[6] surveying 620 published studies from around the world, with a total of 813,778 tested individuals. Lynn's meta-analysis lists the average IQ scores of East Asians (105), Europeans (99), Inuit (91), Southeast Asians and Amerindians each (87), Pacific Islanders (85), Middle Easterners (including South Asians and North Africans) (84), sub-Saharan Africans (67), and Australian Aborigines (62). Lynn has previously argued at length that nutrition is the best supported environmental explanation for variation in the lower range,^[7] and a number of other environmental explanations have been advanced (see below). Ashkenazi Jews average 107-115 in the U.S. and Britain, but lower in Israel.^[8] Lynn argues the surveyed studies have high reliability in the sense that different studies give similar results, and high validity in the sense that they correlate highly with performance in international studies of achievement in mathematics and science and with national economic development.

Following Race Differences in Intelligence, Lynn co-authored a further paper[10] along the lines of IQ and the Wealth of Nations with Jaan Mikk (Šiauliai University, Lithuania) - in press in Intelligence - and has co-authored a second book on the subject with Vanhanen, IQ and Global Inequality, which was published later in 2006.^[9]

Further information: Race and intelligence#World-wide scores

Immigration

Lynn has spoken against immigration in Britain at a 2000 American Renaissance magazine sponsored conference, citing problems of unemployment, crime, illegitimacy, and low IQ, considering African and African-Caribbean immigants to perform worse in these measures than Indian and Chinese immigrants.[11] Lynn spoke on his book IQ and the Wealth of Nations at a 2002 American Renaissance conference.[12]

Sex differences in intelligence

Lynn's research correlating brain size and reaction time with measured intelligence led him to the problem that men and women have different size brains in proportion to their bodies, but consensus for the last hundred years has been that the two sexes perform equally on cognitive ability tests. In 1994, Lynn controversially concluded in a meta-analysis that an IQ difference of roughly 4 points does appear from age 16 and onwards, but detection of this had been complicated by the faster rate of maturation of girls up to that point, which compensates for the IQ difference. This reassessment of male-female IQ has been bolstered by Paul Irwing's meta-analyses in 2004 and 2005 which conclude a difference of 4.6 to 5 IQ points (see BBC coverage). Irwing finds no evidence that this is due primarily to the male advantage in spatial visualization, and concludes that some research previously presented to show that there are no sex differences actually shows the opposite.

Dysgenics and eugenics

In Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations (1996) and Eugenics: A Reassessment (2001)^[10] Lynn reviews these areas and argues the condemnation of eugenics in the second half of the 20th century went too far. He argues the eugenic objectives of eliminating genetic diseases, increasing intelligence, and reducing personality disorders, remain desirable and are achievable by the human biosciences. Lynn concludes human biotechnology is likely to progress spontaneously, and that East Asian countries' lesser resistance to eugenics will contribute to their pulling ahead of Western countries in the 21st century.

In Eugenics, Lynn argues embryo selection as a form of standard reproductive therapy would raise the average intelligence of the population by 15 IQ points in a single generation (p. 300). If couples produce a hundred embryos, he argues, the range in potential IQ would be around 15 points above and below the parents' IQ. Lynn argues this gain could be repeated each generation, eventually stabilizing the population's IQ at a theoretical maximum of around 200 after as little as six or seven generations.

Eugenics received praise in the American Psychological Association Review of Books (Lykken 2004) as "[an] excellent, scholarly book . . .one cannot reasonably disagree with him on any point unless one can find an argument he has not already refuted.", as well as by the journal Nature ^[11] as a "comprehensive histor[y]" and a welcome one, "given the importance of the topic" of dysgenic trends.

"What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of the populations of incompetent cultures.[13] But we do need to think realistically in terms of "phasing out" of such peoples. If the world is to evolve more better humans, then obviously someone has to make way for them. ... To think otherwise is mere sentimentality."

Elsewhere Lynn makes clear which "incompetent cultures" need "phasing out": "Who can doubt that the Caucasoids and the Mongoloids are the only two races that have made any significant contributions to civilization?" (cited in New Republic, 10/31/94)"

However, Lynn has stated that he was actually summarizing the views of another author in these quotations. The quotations are from a book review.

The Pioneer Fund

Lynn currently serves on the board of directors of the Pioneer Fund, and is also on the editorial board of the Pioneer-supported journal Mankind Quarterly, both of which have been the subject of controversy for their dealing with race and intelligence and eugenics, and have been accused of racism. Lynn's Ulster Institute for Social Research received $609,000 in grants from the Pioneer Fund between 1971 and 1996.[14]

Lynn's 2001 book The Science of Human Diversity: A History of the Pioneer Fund^[12] is a history and defense of the fund, in which he argues that, for the last sixty years, it has been "nearly the only non-profit foundation making grants for study and research into individual and group differences and the hereditary basis of human nature . . . Over those 60 years, the research funded by Pioneer has helped change the face of social science."

Controversy

Lynn's work on global racial differences in cognitive ability, mostly surveys of other scientists' studies, has been criticized for its associated measurement difficulties.

In a critical review of The Bell Curve, psychologist Leon Kamin accused Lynn of disregarding scientific objectivity, misrepresenting data, and racism.^[13] Kamin argues the studies of cognitive ability of Africans in Lynn's meta-analysis cited by Herrnstein and Murray show strong cultural bias. Kamin also criticized Lynn for "concocting" IQ values from test scores that have no correlation to IQ.^[14] Furthermore, Kamin argues Lynn selectively excluded a study that found no difference in White and Black performance, and ignored the results of a study which showed Black scores were higher than White scores.^[15]

Journalist Charles Lane made similar criticisms in his New York Review of Books article "The Tainted Sources of 'The Bell Curve'" (1994),[15] which was replied to in the same publication by the Pioneer Fund president of the time, Harry F. Weyher.[16].

Psychologist Ulric Neisser, who was the chairman of the APA's 1995 taskforce charged with writing a consensus statement on intelligence research states in his book review that, though race and intelligence research "turns [his] stomach . . . the research funded by Pioneer has helped change the face of social science." Neisser also writes "Lynn reminds us that Pioneer has sometimes sponsored useful research - research that otherwise might not have been done at all. By that reckoning, I would give it a weak plus."^[16]

Notes

References

• Beaujean, A. A. and Osterlind, S. J (Dec. 2005). Assessing the Lynn-Flynn Effect in College Basic Academic Subjects Examination (PDF). International Society for Intelligence Research manuscript.
• Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., Menozzi, P., & Piazza, A. (1994). The history and geography of human genes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Flynn, J. (1982). Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 35, 411.
• Flynn, J. (1984). The mean IQ of Americans: massive gains 1932 to 1978. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 29-51.
• Flynn, J. (1987). Massive gains in 14 nations: what IQ tests really measure. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 171-91.
• Lykken, D. (2004). The New Eugenics. Contemporary Psychology, 49, 670-672.
• Lynn, R. (1978). "Ethnic and Racial Differences in Intelligence, International Comparisons", Human variation: The biopsychology of age, race, and sex. Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-529050-0. 
• Lynn, R. (1982). IQ in Japan and the United States shows a growing disparity. Nature, 297, 222-3.
• Lynn, R. (1990). The role of nutrition in secular increases of intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 273-285.
• Lynn, Richard (1996). Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations. Praeger Publishers. ISBN 0275949176. 
• Lynn, Richard (2001). Eugenics: A Reassessment. Praeger Publishers. ISBN 0275958221. 
• Malloy, J. (2006). A World of Difference: Richard Lynn Maps World Intelligence. Gene Expression. Retrieved on February 22, 2006.
• Martin, N. (2001). Retrieving the 'eu' from eugenics. Nature, 414, 583.
• Neisser, U. (1997). Rising Scores on Intelligence Tests. American Scientist, Sept.-Oct.
• Neisser, U. (2004). Serious scientists or disgusting racists? Contemporary Psychology, 49, 5-7.