# Why do black pupils in the US underachieve academically when one factors out poverty? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 25, 2009, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948 "2009-01-25T20:13:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 30
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/581 "2015-02-12T12:07:18Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > No they don’t exist, and no there is specific evidence that genes are not the explanation. > > Comparing IQ tests across the decades is a ridiculous exercise, and the guy who promotes it (your buddy Flynn) thinks the current average black adult male IQ is 85 but was in the 60s or 70s several decades ago. > > That sounds like good, credible stuff, considering that IQ values were created to model intellectual functioning. Therefore according to Flynn, several decades ago most adult male blacks were mentally retarded (clinically speaking). Sheesh. If so, this sounds like a pretty good indication that IQ may not be a particularly useful measure of intelligence. Regardless, according to the data, average black IQ scores now are identical to white IQ scores X number of years ago – which goes to show us how much environment can be involved in test scores. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/582 "2015-02-12T15:53:35Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Lee performed no experiments. There is specific experimental data (the Scarr study that I’ve linked to numerous times) that refutes the genetic explanation – it shows that greater levels of African ancestry (measured by “blood group loci” – an older DNA marker/method) among self-identified African Americans does not correlate with lower IQ scores. This is the fact that has moved me off the notion that genetics were a significant factor in the IQ disparity between whites and blacks. IANAS but it seems to me that if there is a white smart gene then it would be more likely to passed on with greater white ancestry so the average IQ of African Americans would grade up along with skin color. > [@](#): > > The fact that researchers are mostly unsure does not convince me that black people are inherently intellectually inferior on average due to genetics. But do you believe they are intellectually inferior due to other factors? Or do we ignore things like IQ tests because it tells us something we don’t believe to be true deep down in our guts? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/583 "2015-02-12T15:59:06Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > But do you believe they are intellectually inferior due to other factors? Or do we ignore things like IQ tests because it tells us something we don’t believe to be true deep down in our guts? To the first question – no. I don’t believe IQ tests accurately measure things like intellectual inferiority/superiority between groups. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/584 "2015-02-12T16:04:14Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If so, this sounds like a pretty good indication that IQ may not be a particularly useful measure of intelligence. Regardless, according to the data, average black IQ scores now are identical to white IQ scores X number of years ago – which goes to show us how much environment can be involved in test scores. Isn’t there a pretty good correlation between IQ and academic performance and all sorts of other shit? We can try to muddy the waters about what intelligence means and try to dismiss the significance of IQ but if you had to choose between a workforce of people with 110 IQ and a workforce of people with 90 IQ, which workforce would you choose (all other things being equal)? If you have a preference for the 110 IQ workforce, why would you have that preference? What is it that IQ measures that makes the 110 IQ workforce more desirable? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/585 "2015-02-12T16:05:35Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > To the first question – no. I don’t believe IQ tests accurately measure things like intellectual inferiority/superiority between groups. Do you think IQ scores measure anything at all or would we be just as well served by measuring intelligence using palm readers? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/586 "2015-02-12T16:32:47Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Isn’t there a pretty good correlation between IQ and academic performance and all sorts of other shit? We can try to muddy the waters about what intelligence means and try to dismiss the significance of IQ but if you had to choose between a workforce of people with 110 IQ and a workforce of people with 90 IQ, which workforce would you choose (all other things being equal)? If you have a preference for the 110 IQ workforce, why would you have that preference? What is it that IQ measures that makes the 110 IQ workforce more desirable? I believe IQ test scores may correlate to many things. I suspect IQ tests measure certain skills and abilities, but are unable to measure many aspects of overall intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/587 "2015-02-12T17:29:51Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I believe IQ test scores may correlate to many things. Such as school performance and learning, work performance, criminal record or the lack of it, income, marital success, and others. These are important social outcomes, as you will agree. Since IQ test scores correlate with these factors, and since performance on IQ tests is strongly correlated with heredity, it is useful to use IQ test scores in predicting which groups will tend in which direction. ([Cite for the above.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient)) > [@](#): > > I suspect IQ tests measure certain skills and abilities, but are unable to measure many aspects of overall intelligence. Are you saying that these alleged other aspects cannot be measured? If they can’t, then obviously they can’t be studied and are not subject to analysis by the scientific method. If they can, what are your measuring tools, what leads you to think they are valid, and what results do they give? IOW do you have anything other than anecdotes, and can you demonstrate a pattern? If this is merely a faith-based statement then just say so. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/588 "2015-02-12T17:37:37Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Such as school performance and learning, work performance, criminal record or the lack of it, income, marital success, and others. These are important social outcomes, as you will agree. Since IQ test scores correlate with these factors, and since performance on IQ tests is strongly correlated with heredity, it is useful to use IQ test scores in predicting which groups will tend in which direction. ([Cite for the above.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient)) Okay. Thanks for the information that doesn’t conflict with anything I’ve said. > [@](#): > > Are you saying that these alleged other aspects cannot be measured? No. Maybe they can. > [@](#): > > If they can, what are your measuring tools, what leads you to think they are valid, and what results do they give? IOW do you have anything other than anecdotes, and can you demonstrate a pattern? > > If this is merely a faith-based statement then just say so. > > Regards, > Shodan There is no clear definition of “intelligence”. Like Wikipedia [says](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence), it has been defined in many different ways. I believe things like memory can be measured by tools we possess, and mathematical ability, and musical ability, and some other mental skills and abilities… but abstract thought? Understanding? Self-awareness? Emotional knowledge? Creativity? I’m not sure if these qualities can be measured by any tools we currently have. I’m [far from the only one](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_intelligence#Theories_of_intelligence) to doubt that IQ tests actually measure general intelligence or overall intellectual ability: [QUOTE=Wikipedia] There are critics of IQ, who do not dispute the stability of IQ test scores or the fact that they predict certain forms of achievement rather effectively. They do argue, however, that to base a concept of intelligence on IQ test scores alone is to ignore many important aspects of mental ability. [/quote] This is far from a settled field, even before we bring any discussion of genes into it at all. What are you views, **Shodan**? Do you think that black people are inherently intellectually inferior, on average, due to genes for intelligence? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/589 "2015-02-12T17:58:39Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There is no clear definition of “intelligence”. Sure there is, in the context of this discussion. Intelligence is what is measured by IQ tests. Therefore intelligence is strongly affected by heredity, and high intelligence correlates with the other desirable social outcomes mentioned above. > [@](#): > > I believe things like memory can be measured by tools we possess, and mathematical ability, and musical ability, and some other mental skills and abilities… but abstract thought? Understanding? Self-awareness? Emotional knowledge? Creativity? I’m not sure if these qualities can be measured by any tools we currently have. Then they cannot be established to exist in any scientific sense, and have no place in a discussion of science. If you are claiming that IQ tests aren’t valid because there are un-demonstrated, un-measurable, un-falsifiable factors that outweigh them, then you are not doing very good science. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/590 "2015-02-12T18:01:34Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Sure there is, in the context of this discussion. Intelligence is what is measured by IQ tests. Therefore intelligence is strongly affected by heredity, and high intelligence correlates with the other desirable social outcomes mentioned above. That’s not the context of the discussion I’ve been having. > [@](#): > > Then they cannot be established to exist in any scientific sense, and have no place in a discussion of science. Okay. > [@](#): > > If you are claiming that IQ tests aren’t valid because there are un-demonstrated, un-measurable, un-falsifiable factors that outweigh them, then you are not doing very good science. > > Regards, > Shodan Where did I say that IQ tests aren’t valid? I think they’re valid in measuring something – I’m just not convinced it’s overall “intelligence” that they’re measuring. I’ll ask again: What are you views, **Shodan**? Do you think that black people are inherently intellectually inferior, on average, due to genes for intelligence? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/591 "2015-02-12T18:29:41Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > That’s not the context of the discussion I’ve been having. Yes, it is. Read the title of the OP. > [@](#): > > Where did I say that IQ tests aren’t valid? I think they’re valid in measuring something – I’m just not convinced it’s overall “intelligence” that they’re measuring. That’s a distinction without a difference. If you cannot point to any measurable, demonstrable factors between “overall intelligence” and “intelligence as measured by IQ testing”, then there is no difference between the two. Let’s define “performance on IQ tests” as “IQ” (for the purposes of this discussion). Do you believe that: [ul][li]IQ is measured by IQ tests[/li][li]IQ correlates strongly with income and job performance and learning and not breaking the law and other desirable outcomes[/li][li]IQ is strongly affected although not entirely determined by heredity[/li][li]IQ has high statistical reliabillity - that is[/li] > [@](#): > > A high reliability implies that—although test-takers may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing occasions, and they may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at the same age—the scores generally agree with one another and across time. Like all statistical quantities, any particular estimate of IQ has an associated standard error that measures uncertainty about the estimate. For modern tests, the standard error of measurement is about three points. [li]In the US, an SIRE of “black” correlates with lower scores, on average, than an SIRE of “white” or “Asian”[/li][li]That correcting for SES and parental education levels does not elminate the gap[/li][/ul]Because every one of the above is demonstrably true. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/592 "2015-02-12T18:33:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Yes, it is. Read the title of the OP. I guess we’ll agree to disagree here. > [@](#): > > That’s a distinction without a difference. > > If you cannot point to any measurable, demonstrable factors between “overall intelligence” and “intelligence as measured by IQ testing”, then there is no difference between the two. I just posted about all the factors I understand are considered part of “intelligence” by many experts that can’t, with current tools, be quantified. I guess this is another thing we’ll agree to disagree on. > [@](#): > > Let’s define “performance on IQ tests” as “IQ” (for the purposes of this discussion). > > Do you believe that: > [ul][li]IQ is measured by IQ tests[/li][li]IQ correlates strongly with income and job performance and learning and not breaking the law and other desirable outcomes[/li][li]IQ is strongly affected although not entirely determined by heredity[/li][li]IQ has high statistical reliabillity - that is[/li] > [li]In the US, an SIRE of “black” correlates with lower scores, on average, than an SIRE of “white” or “Asian”[/li][li]That correcting for SES and parental education levels does not elminate the gap[/li][/ul]Because every one of the above is demonstrably true. > > Regards, > Shodan None of those things conflict with anything I’ve said. I’m fine with calling whatever that thing is “IQ” for now. You still refuse to answer my question – here it is, a third time: What are you views, **Shodan**? Do you think that black people are inherently intellectually inferior, on average, due to genes for intelligence? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/593 "2015-02-12T18:39:46Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I believe IQ test scores may correlate to many things. I suspect IQ tests measure certain skills and abilities, but are unable to measure many aspects of overall intelligence. “IQ may not be a particularly useful measure of intelligence” But it sounds like you think it may be a useful measure of things that are, you know, useful to measure. If you want to explain why one group underperforms another group and there is a significant IQ gap between the two then couldn’t that be one of the reasons for some of that underperformance? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/594 "2015-02-12T18:46:06Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > “IQ may not be a particularly useful measure of intelligence” > > But it sounds like you think it may be a useful measure of things that are, you know, useful to measure. If you want to explain why one group underperforms another group and there is a significant IQ gap between the two then couldn’t that be one of the reasons for some of that underperformance? Possibly, or there could be some other causative factor, and lower test scores and worse outcomes might both be symptoms of that causative factor. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/595 "2015-02-12T21:12:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Possibly, or there could be some other causative factor, and lower test scores and worse outcomes might both be symptoms of that causative factor. Sure but to the extent that the unknown causative factor (psst… its discrimination) causes (directly and indirectly) lower IQ scores which are reflective of actual lower IQ as opposed to simply stereotype threat, that lower IQ is a contributing factor towards then the lower IQ might be the cause of socioeconomic underperformance. Right? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/596 "2015-02-12T22:05:26Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Sure but to the extent that the unknown causative factor (psst… its discrimination) causes (directly and indirectly) lower IQ scores which are reflective of actual lower IQ as opposed to simply stereotype threat, that lower IQ is a contributing factor towards then the lower IQ might be the cause of socioeconomic underperformance. Right? I don’t really understand this phrase: “that lower IQ is a contributing factor towards then the lower IQ might be the cause of socioeconomic underperformance”. The placement of “then” and “might” are really confusing to me. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2015, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/597 "2015-02-13T09:42:43Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Lee performed no experiments. There is specific experimental data (the Scarr study that I’ve linked to numerous times) that refutes the genetic explanation – it shows that greater levels of African ancestry (measured by “blood group loci” – an older DNA marker/method) among self-identified African Americans does not correlate with lower IQ scores. I never said Lee performed experiments. I said I wasn’t aware of any significant experiments since his review of the evidence as it was in 2009. He noted the overall evidence to date was inconclusive, and as noted proposed a means of resolving the debate. As I said, Piffer has looked at some alleles that are linked to cognitive abilities and those [aren’t distributed evenly across groups](http://www.unz.com/pfrost/population-differences-in-intellectual/). There’re only a small number of alleles identified so far though. If you are referring to Sandra Scarr, the main study I am aware of that she was involved in was the [Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study)? When tested at age 17 the adoptees performed consistently with the group average for their respective ethnic groups. While those with one white and one black parent averaged between the other two groups. Scarr has subsequently commented on the pressure of finding an environmental interpretation: > [@](#): > > "The test performance of the Black/Black adoptees [in the study] was not different from that of ordinary Black children reared by their own families in the same area of the country. My colleagues and I reported the data accurately and as fully as possible, and then tried to make the results palatable to environmentally committed colleagues. In retrospect, this was a mistake. The results of the transracial adoption study can be used to support either a genetic difference hypothesis or an environmental difference one (because the children have visible African ancestry). We should have been agnostic on the conclusions ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2015, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/598 "2015-02-13T09:49:57Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If so, this sounds like a pretty good indication that IQ may not be a particularly useful measure of intelligence. Regardless, according to the data, average black IQ scores now are identical to white IQ scores X number of years ago – which goes to show us how much environment can be involved in test scores. No. It goes to show us you cannot compare IQ or other standardized scores across decades. They are not static exams, statically delivered to identical cohorts. The debate will rage on forever about what, exactly, “an IQ” test measures. Ditto for any other standardized exam, such as the SAT. The SAT has trended down; not up, across the decades. It makes no sense to advance anti-genetic arguments using IQ results across decades without acknowledging an opposite trend for other standardized tests. The variables involved in who gets tested (and the tests themselves) are legion. What doesn’t change is the general order of outcomes by self-identified group, whether one is comparing that over decades or across socioeconomic status. To date nothing has changed that, even factoring out poverty. You can take the same exam, in the same time period, and compare SES or other cohorts. Even James Flynn, whose name is so readily advanced in the crusade against genetics, doesn’t personally think genetics don’t drive intelligence differences among groups. Witness [Flynn’s hot water when he made some remarks about not bringing down the national IQ](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10450313)by making it too easy for the genetically underendowed to reproduce. He couldn’t back off that fast enough and pretend his comments about putting contraception in the water of those groups were just pretend. _“Otago University emeritus professor Dr Jim Flynn was commenting on census figures that show mothers without a higher education were the anchor of New Zealand’s current fertility rate. Everyone knows if we only allowed short people to reproduce there would be a tendency in terms of genes for height to diminish. Intelligence is no different from other human traits.”_ ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2015, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/599 "2015-02-13T10:02:37Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Please explain how a deletion polymorphism is a **phenotypic** distinction. > > Or why we should consider a difference of **1 out of 3 million** (total indels) to be particularly worthy of the term “broad division in genes” Baby steps. I want to convince you that these pools are separated. That particular polymorphism appearing in such distinct disproportion is an example of two things: The branching point at out of africa, and the fact that genes flow only to descendant lines. We tend to study gene variants for disease, and for good reason. If you look at those variants, you find a broad average difference of gene variant frequencies between the two pools. We can also look at the physical reasons people self-identify and infer that other gene variations average frequencies exist. When we study gene variants for ordinary physiology, they also exist. When we look at gene variant introgression by archaic lines, that also exists. The complexity of gene interaction makes it extremely difficult to say, “this exact variation in this exact milieu of the genetic code is what drives this exact outcome.” This is true whether we are talking about bonobos v humans or population A v population B. But the overall pattern of evolutionary divergence for separated groups is much more likely to be the case than not, for any human trait. This is why any population geneticist so easily slips into “sub-saharan” and “non-african” gene pools language. It is also why it is equally easy to assuage the masses with wordsmithing that “well; this particular SNP is just one tiny thing and can’t possibly be extrapolated for the rest of the DNA code.” ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2015, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948/600 "2015-02-13T10:05:50Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > To the first question – no. I don’t believe IQ tests accurately measure things like intellectual inferiority/superiority between groups. They just work within groups, right? So if I have a group of self-identified whites, an IQ range measures something related to brain function. But if I test an asian and she scores higher, why that score only makes sense against other asians. She may well be dumber than rocks compared with a white who has a lower score… Yep. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-black-pupils-in-the-us-underachieve-academically-when-one-factors-out-poverty/482948.md?page=31)