Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns

• Published in: The American psychologist 1996-02, Vol.51 (2), p.77-101
• Main Authors: Neisser, Ulric, Boodoo, Gwyneth, Bouchard, Thomas J, Boykin, A. Wade, Brody, Nathan, Ceci, Stephen J, Halpern, Diane F, Loehlin, John C, Perloff, Robert, Sternberg, Robert J, Urbina, Susana
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Bell Curve (Herrnstein and Murray); Conceptual models; Cultural factors; Education; Environment; Environmental-Genetic factors; Ethnic Groups; Gender; Genetics; Human; Human Sex Differences; Income; Individual differences; Intelligence; Intelligence Differences; Intelligence Measures; Intelligence Quotient; Intelligence Tests; Nature Nurture Controversy; Psychology; Racial and Ethnic Differences; Racial Differences; Research Needs; Social environment; Social status; Task forces; Test Use; Theories
• ISSN: 0003-066X; 1935-990X
• DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77

In the fall of 1994, the publication of Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve sparked a new round of debate about the meaning of intelligence test scores and the nature of intelligence. The debate was characterized by strong assertions as well as by strong feelings. Unfortunately, those assertions often revealed serious misunderstandings of what has (and has not) been demonstrated by scientific research in this field. Although a great deal is now known, the issues remain complex and in many cases still unresolved. Another unfortunate aspect of the debate was that many participants made little effort to distinguish scientific issues from political ones. Research findings were often assessed not so much on their merits or their scientific standing as on their supposed political implications. In such a climate, individuals who wish to make their own judgments find it hard to know what to believe. Reviewing the intelligence debate at its meeting of November 1994, the Board of Scientific Affairs (BSA) of the American Psychological Association (APA) concluded that there was urgent need for an authoritative report on these issues-one that all sides could use as a basis for discussion. Acting by unanimous vote, BSA established a Task Force charged with preparing such a report. Ulric Neisser, Professor of Psychology at Emory University and a member of BSA, was appointed Chair. The APA Board on the Advancement of Psychology in the Public Interest, which was consulted extensively during this process, nominated one member of the Task Force; the Committee on Psychological Tests and Assessment nominated another; a third was nominated by the Council of Representatives. Other members were chosen by an extended consultative process, with the aim of representing a broad range of expertise and opinion. The Task Force met twice, in January and March of 1995. Between and after these meetings, drafts of the various sections were circulated, revised, and revised yet again. Disputes were resolved by discussion. As a result, the report presented here has the unanimous support of the entire Task Force.