New Model Solves IQ Paradox

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Image: JOHNNY JOHNSON

For several decades, unstandardized IQ scores in about 20 industrialized nations have been on the rise, presenting scientists with a serious riddle: the increase is far too fast to come from genetic changes and yet intelligence is presumed to be highly heritable.

The upward trend is known as the Flynn effect, for the scientist who first noticed it in the 1980s. James R. Flynn's finding gained added popularity in 1994, when it was widely used to counter ideas put forth in Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray's controversial book, The Bell Curve. Now Flynn, a professor of political science at the University of Otago in New Zealand, and William T. Dickens of the Brookings Institution, claim to have cracked the paradox.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The duo developed a new mathematical model, described in this month's Psychological Review, that measures multiple influences on IQ and the interplay among them. Their conclusion, in short, is that environmental factors can have a significant impact on intelligence¿big enough, in fact, to explain the Flynn effect. "Heritability isn't a very useful number for thinking about the direct impact of genes on IQ," Dickens says. "Changes in environment can produce changes in IQ that are several times as large when both are measured relative to their variation in the population."

The model is consistent with a number of experimental findings¿such as the fact that adopted and nonadopted siblings have highly correlated IQs while they share an environment but move apart with age toward the intelligence of their biological parents. So, too, it helps account for the observation that childhood enrichment programs appear to improve IQ scores only while children are in them. To test the model, Dickens and Flynn propose testing IQ scores before and after radical environment changes, such as time in jail. Any volunteers

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe