Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T05:00:57.252Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do schooling gains yield anomalous Jensen effects? A reply to Flynn (2019) including a meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2019

Jan te Nijenhuis Open the ORCID record for Jan te Nijenhuis [Opens in a new window] ,
Esteban van der Boor ,
Yu Yong Choi  and
Kunho Lee
Jan te Nijenhuis
Affiliation:
National Research Center for Dementia, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea
Esteban van der Boor
Affiliation:
Work and Organizational Psychology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Yu Yong Choi
Affiliation:
National Research Center for Dementia, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea
Kunho Lee*
Affiliation:
National Research Center for Dementia, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea Department of Biomedical Science, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A test of Jensen effects is of nil value as a diagnostic instrument when various good-sized meta-analyses show Jensen effects appear for both genetic effects and environmental effects. Using thought experiments, Flynn (2019) claims that some schooling gains yield Jensen effects, which should not be the case for an environmental effect. However, a meta-analysis (K = 12, total N = 60,993, mean r = 0.13) of schooling gains shows no Jensen effect. Real data trump thought experiments, so it is concluded there is no empirical proof of anomalous Jensen effects for schooling gains.

Keywords

Jensen effectsSchooling gainsIQ
Type
Debate
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 51 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 917 - 919
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baltes, PB and Reinert, G (1969) Cohort effects in cognitive development of children as revealed by cross-sectional sequences. Developmental Psychology 1, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cahan, S and Cohen, N (1989) Age versus schooling effects on intelligence development. Child Development 60, 1239–1249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cliffordson, C and Gustafsson, J (2008) Effects of age and schooling on intellectual performance: estimates obtained from analysis of continuous variation in age and length of schooling. Intelligence 36, 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flynn, JR (2019) A response to te Nijenhuis et al. (2019). Journal of Biosocial Science. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932019000270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, ES (1951) Negro intelligence and selective migration: a Philadelphia test of the Klineberg hypothesis. American Sociological Review 16, 227–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, FL and Le, H (2004) Software for the Hunter–Schmidt Meta-Analysis Methods. IQ 42242. University of Iowa, Department of Management and Organization, Iowa City.Google Scholar
te Nijenhuis, J, Choi, YY, van den Hoek, M, Valueva, E and Lee, KH (2019) Spearman’s hypothesis tested comparing Korean young adults with various other groups of young adults on the items of the Advanced Progressive Matrices. Journal of Biosocial Science. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932019000026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar