*Genes thought to affect IQ might not*

Oct. 2, 2012
Courtesy of
the Association for Psychological Science
and World Science <http://www.world-science.net> staff

*Most of the genes long thought to be linked to in­tel­li­gence, simply aren't, a new study has con­cluded.

"We are not say­ing the peo­ple who did ear­li­er re­search in this ar­ea were fool­ish," said Chris­to­pher Chabris, a psy­cho­log­i­cal sci­ent­ist at Un­ion Col­lege in New York who co-led the stu­dy. "They were us­ing the best tech­nol­o­gy and in­form­ati­on they had avail­able."

Nor do Chabris and his col­leagues de­ny that in­tel­li­gence is he­red­i­tary and ge­net­ic. But they say it now turns out that this in­tan­gi­ble qual­ity is probably too com­plex to sum up in a few genes. It may be some time be­fore re­search­ers can iden­ti­fy in­tel­li­gence's spe­cif­ic ge­net­ic roots, say the re­search­ers, whose find­ings are pub­lished on­line in the re­search jour­nal /Psy­cho­log­i­cal Sci­ence/.

Chabris and Da­vid Laib­son, a Har­vard econ­o­mist, led an in­tern­ati­onal team of re­search­ers that an­a­lyzed a doz­en genes us­ing large da­ta sets that in­clud­ed both in­tel­li­gence test­ing and ge­net­ic da­ta. In nearly eve­ry case, the re­search­ers found that in­tel­li­gence could not be linked to the spe­cif­ic genes tested.

"We only found one gene that ap­peared to be as­so­ci­at­ed with in­tel­li­gence, and it was a very small ef­fect. This does not mean in­tel­li­gence does not have a ge­net­ic com­po­nent. It means it's a lot harder to find the par­tic­u­lar genes, or the par­tic­u­lar ge­net­ic vari­ants, that in­flu­ence the dif­fer­ences in in­tel­li­gence," said Chabris.

It had long been be­lieved, on the ba­sis of stud­ies of iden­ti­cal and fra­ter­nal twins, that in­tel­li­gence was a her­it­a­ble trait. The new re­search af­firms that conclusi­on. But old­er stud­ies that pick­ed out spe­cif­ic genes had flaws, Chabris said, pri­marily be­cause of tech­no­log­i­cal lim­its that pre­vented re­search­ers from prob­ing more than a few loc­ati­ons in the hu­man ge­nome to find genes that af­fect­ed in­tel­li­gence.

Al­so, "at the time, it was be­lieved that in­di­vid­ual genes would have a much larg­er ef­fect --- they were ex­pect­ing to find genes that might each ac­count for sev­er­al IQ points," Chabris ex­plained. IQ is a wide­spread meas­ure of in­tel­li­gence in which av­er­age in­tel­li­gence is scored as 100, while high­er or low­er in­tel­li­gence are scored high­er or low­er. The score is meant to mea­sure a per­son's in­tel­li­gence as com­pared to the av­er­age for their age group, as a per­cent­age.

Chabris said additi­onal re­search is needed to de­ter­mine the ex­act role genes play in in­tel­li­gence.

"As is the case with oth­er traits, like height, there are probably thou­sands of genes and their vari­ants that are as­so­ci­at­ed with in­tel­li­gence," he said. "And there may be oth­er ge­net­ic ef­fects be­yond the sin­gle gene ef­fects. There could be interacti­ons among genes, or interacti­ons be­tween genes and the en­vi­ron­ment. Our re­sults show that the way re­search­ers have been look­ing for genes that may be re­lat­ed to in­tel­li­gence --- the 'can­di­date gene' meth­od --- is fairly likely to re­sult in false pos­i­tives, so oth­er meth­ods should be used."**

http://www.world-science.net/othernews/121002_intelligence

*Natalia*
*
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to