The Paychologiul Record, 1966, 16, 43-.46.

THE MEANINGFULNESS OF NEGRO-WHITE DIFFERENCES IN INTELLIGENCE

TEST PERFORMANCE

ROBERT A. HICKS AND ROBERT J. PELLEGRINI Unl~dtfl of Denoet

The non-equalitarian interpretation of Negro-wbJt.e IQ di!er-ences holds that these differences have value in guidance and pre-diction. Negro-white IQ differences are thus wed as evidence for the prohibition of miscegenation and school integration.

It is the contention of this srudy that there is no established objective basis for this interpretation. The statistically significant results on which the non-equalitarian interpretation is based re-flect the reUabillty of Negro-white IQ differences but not the mean-ingfulness of these differences. Where it was possible, a statistic, est . ..,2, designed to measure meaningfulness, was used to re-evaluate the data ifven in studies of N~white IQ. The results of this re-evaluation showed th:it these studies have failed to estab-lish the existence of differences in intelligence that have utility for guidance.

A number of studies have demonstrated that the mean IQ of white Ss is significantly superior to the mean IQ of Negro Ss. These results have been interpreted in two ways. The non-equalitarlans, notably Garrett, ( 1962) and Shuey, ( 1958) claim that these data are the result of innate differences in intelligence; i.e. the Negro is con-stitutionally inferior to the white. Garrett ( 1962, p. 2) has stated that "the clliierences between these groups are real and highly useful in guidance and prediction." Garrett would, on the basis of these diHer-ences, prohibit miscegenation and the integration of schools. He feels that it is wrong to mix a superior ethnic group with an inferior ethnic group. As Garrett points out, the mixing of Negroes and whites would produce a race of mongrels.

The equalitarians, exempli.6ed by Chein ( 1962, Klineberg ( 1963), and Tumin ( 1963). cannot overlook these demonstrated differences in mean IQ but object vigorously to explanations of these data offered by Garrett and other non-equalltarians. 'The equalitarlans contend that no acceptable evidence bas been advanced to suggest that ethnic groups differ in innate abilities.

The statistical differences demonstrated in studies of racial intelli-gence are thought to reflect uncontrolled differences in opportunity that accompany any form of segregation. It is not possible to decide whether equalitarians or the non-equalitarians have .. explained" these data correctly. It is thought that explanations offered by Garrett can be questioned on a more objective basis . than offering alternative ex-

)

' ' UICl.s AND PELLEGRINI

planations. Garrett haS misconstrued the meaning of statistical signifi· cance. It is incorrect to claim that a difference between two means which is significant demonstrates differences that •. . . are real and highly useful in guidance and prediction.· As Hays ( 1963, p. 326) points out ... Virtually any study can be made to show significant results if one uses enough subjects regardless of how nonsensical the content may be:

TABLE l

THE e's and EST.W:'t FOR THE 27 STUDIES RE-EVALUATED

cumputed or N Study est..,2 reported c• White Negro

Allinger ( 1954) .000 o.oo 49 49 Alper & Boring (1944) .119 48.84 13,110 4,4:55

.298 63.04 3,904 5,425 Armstrong ( 1933) .098 4.78 100 100 Brigham ( 1923) .159 149.05 93,955 23,596 Brown (1944) .005 4.09 341 91 Bruce (1940) 1.68 5.75 87 '72

.174 5.88 87 72 .282 19.40 521 432

Chapanls & Williams ( 1945) .057 16.17 3,501 810 Charles ( 1936) .067 6.25 352 176

,145 7.71 172 17Z Clark (1933) .001 .77 130 169

.002 .64 130 169 Conlni ( 1946) .059 9.43 1,030 365 Davidson et al ( 1950) .OIH 2.92 41 44 Fernald et al (1920) .029 4.43 478 129

.060 6.11 447 118

.044 5.21 453 107 Griffith (1947) .060 2.89 39 76 Hurlock (1924) .061 3.13 85 51

.028 2.23 86 50

.043 2.67 86 50 Hurlock ( 1930) .060 5.19 194 210 Jordan (1947) .22S 30.53 1,980 1.214 Lambeth & Lanier (1933) .328 5.50 30 30 McOure (1933) .001 1.37 S30 7l McCurk ( 1951) .020 3.12 213 213 Patrick & Sims (1934) .158 6.54 103 12.5

.383 9.80 101 52 Petenon & Lanier ( 1929) .oot .19 60 181 Rhoads et al (1945) .054 3.53 113 87 Shuey ( 1942) .115 3.50 43 43 Slawson (1926) .028 2.65 160 48

.029 2.64 155 46 .03S 3.06 176 53

Stone (1921·2.2) .133 7.90 299 100 Tamer ( 1939) .16S 8.65 211 162

.155 9.52 387 102

.116 8 .09 386 103

•Several studies included in Table 1 did not report a t statistic. These were com-puted from the data given In the research report.

'

NECRO-WHITE TEST PERFORMANCE

The predictive relation between two variables can only be established with a measure of statistical association. The non-equalitarian interpre-tation of racial IQ differences is based on a statistic which has yet to be computed. The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate. where possible. the data from studies of racial IQ using a measure of statistical :issociation, est.w2. a statistic given by Hays ( 1963 ). Using this statistic it was possible to measure the degree to which uncertainty about IQ was reduced with Jcnowledge of skin color.

METIIOD The studies in Shuey ( 1958) were reviewed and those studies

which met the following criteria were re-evaluated using est ... 2 : a) the study had used a recognized measure of IQ; and b) the study included sufficient data for the computation of est.w2•

RESULTS The results are listed in Table 1. Since several studies included

more than one group comparison, an est.c.i2 was computed for each comparison. The median value for the est.toi2 given in Table 1 was .061.

DISCUSSION The results of this study reflect directly on the conflicting inter-

pretations of racial differences in IQ.

The Median est.C112, .061, is thought to best represent the strength of association between skin color and intelligence. Six per cent represents only a small reduction in uncertainty. When Garrett claims that the differences in Negro and white IQ " ... are real and highly useful in guidance and prediction," he has greatly exaggerated the strength of the relationship between skin color and IQ.

It is concluded that studies of racial intelligence have failed to establish the existence of meaningful ethnic diHerences in intelligence. Therefore any interpretation of racial IQ data that stipulates differential treatment of Negroes and whites is unwarranted.

I REFERENCES ,'

I

' I

ALLINGER, D. A. 1954. Comparison of Negro and white pre-school children in performance on specific Items of the Revised Stanford-Binet test Un-published master's thesis, George Washington University.

ALPER, T. G. & BORING, E. C . 1944. Intelligence-test scores of northern and southern white and Negro recruits ln 1918. ]. abnorm. .oc. P.,,chol.. 39, 471-474.

ARMSTRONG, C. P. 1933. Juvenile delinquf'l>C)' as related to immigration. Sch.. & Soc •• 38, 61-64.

BRICHAM, C. C. 1923. A itudv of Amerlcon lntelll1ence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

BROWN. F. 1944. An e:rperlmental and critical study of the fntdllgence of Negro and white JdndeTgarten children. /. genet. Plflchol., 65, 161-175.

BRUCE, M. 1940. Factors affecting intelligence test performance of whites and Negroes in the rural South. Arch. Pn;chol .• N.Y .• No. 252.

HICKS AND PELLEGRINI

CllAPANIS, A. & WILLIAMS, W. C. 1945. Results of a mental survey with tho Kuhlmann-Anderson Intelligence tests in Williamson County, Tennessee. /. genet. Psychol., f!T, 27-5:S.

CHARLES, C. M. 1936. A comparison of the intelligence quotients of incarcerated delinquent white and American Negro boys. }. appl. Psychol., 20, 499-510.

CllEIN, I. 1962. The roots of a conspiracy. SPSSI Newletter, 2. CLARK, R. M. 1933. The effect of schooling upon intelligence quotients of Negro

children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western Reserve University. CORSINI, R. 1946. Season of birth and mental ability of prison Inmates. /. fOC,

P81Jchol., 23, 65-72. DAVIDSON, K. S., GIBBY, R. C., McNEIL, E. B., SEGAL, S. J. & SILVERMAN,

H. 1950. A preliminary study of Negro and white differences in Form I of the Wechsler-Bellevue Scale. /. conmlt. P81Jchol., 14, 489-492.

FERNALD, M. R., HAYES, M.H.S. & DAWLEY, A. 1920. A stud11 of women ds-linquenta in New York State. New York: Century.

GARRETI, H. E. 1962. Rejoinder by Garrett. SPSSI Newalettet, May, 1-2. GRIFFITH, W. R. 1947. A study of Negro children In the upper grades of a Port•

land elementary school. Unpublished master's thesis, Washington State College.

HAYS, W . 1963. Stati#ics forp$flchologfm. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston, Inc. HURLOCK, E. B. 1924. The value of praise and reproof as incentives for children.

Arch. Psychol., N.Y., No. 71. HURLOCK, E . B. 1930. The suggestibility of children. Ped. aem. & ] . genet. P1Vchol.,

37, 59-74. JORDAN, A. M. 1947. Testing the Intelligence of the children of a rural c:iounty.

High Sch.]., 30, 35-45. KLINEBERG, 0. 1963. Negro-white differences in intelligence test perfonnanoe:

a new look at an old program. Amer. P1Vchologlst., 18, 198·203. LAMBETH, M. & LANIER, L. H. 1933. Race differences in speed of reaction. 1

genet. Psych.al., 42, 2.SS...297, McCLURE, W. E. 1933. Intelligence of 600 juvenile delinquents. J. juu. Res., 17,

35-43. McGURK, F. C. J. 1951. Comparison of the performance of Negro and white high

school seniors on cultural and non-cultural psychological test questions. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University American Press, (microcard).

PATRICK, J. R. & SIMS, V. M. 1934. Personality difference between Negro and white college students, north and south. }. abnomi. aoc. Psychol., 29, 181-201.

PETERSON, J. & LANIER, L. H. 1929. Studies in the comparative abilities of whites and Negroes. Merit. MellMTlt. Monogr., No. 5. .

RHOADS, T. F., RAPOPORT, M., KENNEDY, R. & STOKES, J. JR. 1945. Studies on the growth and development of male children receiving evaporated milk II. Physical growth, dentition, and Intelligence of white and Negro children through the first four yean as influenced by vitamin supplements. ]. Pediat., 26, 415-454.

SHUEY, A. M. 1942. A comparison of Negro and white college students by means of the Ame!rcan Council Psychological Examination. J. Prvchol., 14, 35-52.

SHUEY, A. M. 1958. The testl"g of Negro lntelllgerice. Lynchburg, Va.: J. P. Bell Company, Inc.

SLAWSON, J. 1926. The delinquent bot/. Boston: Gorham Press • STONE, C. P. 1921-1922. A comparative 1tudy of the Intelligence of 399 inmates

of the Indiana Reformatory and 653 men of the United States Army. ]. crim. Law & crimlnol., 12, 238-257.

TANSER, J. A. 1939. The •ettreme11t of 'Negroes fn Kent County, Ontario, arul a atud11 of the mental capacity of their ducendanu. Chatham, Ont.: Shepherd Puhl

TUMIN, M. M. (Ed.) 1963. Race and lmeUlgenu. New Yor'k: Anti-Defamation Leaitue of B'nai B'rtth.