Inquisitive Bird Profile picture
Jul 26, 2019 21 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Are people with bigger brains smarter (on average)?

Here I will summarize some of the biggest studies which test whether there is a correlation between intelligence and brain size (within modern humans).

Thread.
2) In modern intelligence tests, you give individuals a battery of cognitive tests, testing a wide range of cognitive abilities at once. Then a general factor of intelligence can be estimated, in short "g".

Brain size can be measured with modern brain-imaging technology.
3) To address this question, McDaniel (2005) gathered 37 samples with a total of 1530 people who had been intelligence tested and brain-scanned.

He found that, on average, the correlation between brain size and general intelligence was 0.33.

doi.org/10.1016/j.inte…
4) In a later and larger meta-analysis of 148 samples and more than 8000 individuals, Pietschnig and colleagues (2015) estimate the correlation to be slightly smaller, but still highly significant, r = 0.24.

doi.org/10.1016/j.neub…
5) Quality of tests vary (e.g. Brief tests vs longer and more comprehensive tests).

Gignac & Bates (2017) reanalyzed the studies from the previous meta-analysis and found that the correlations were higher when higher-quality intelligence tests were used.

doi.org/10.1016/j.inte…
6) In fact, this is just a statistical phenomenon. When there is a correlation between two variables, then the better measured the two variables are, the higher the correlation will be.

Poor measurements contain lots of noise which weakens the relationship between the variables.
7) Instead of meta-analyses that pool results from many samples, we can also look at individual high-quality studies.

Ritchie and colleagues (2015) look at many brain variables in a sample of N = 672, but total brain volume and "g" correlated r = 0.31.

https://t.co/y0ENghSE73doi.org/10.1016/j.inte…
8) Dubois and colleagues, in a large sample (N = 884), test if resting-state brain activity correlates with intelligence. It does, but they also report other brain correlates. They find that brain volume correlates r = 0.33 with general intelligence.

https://t.co/sFto5YtXa9royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rs…
9) Recently a study with a massive sample (N = 29,004 individuals) was published.

The correlation between brain volume and general intelligence found was 0.276.

They only used 4 subtests to estimate "g", hence this might even be a slight underestimate.

https://t.co/lmJD6GvP7Udoi.org/10.1016/j.inte…
10) To minimize possible effects of different environments people have lived in, you can look within families. Lee and colleagues find that, of siblings raised in the same family, the sibling with the larger brain tends to be more intelligent.

doi.org/10.1016/j.inte…
11) Another source of evidence comes from "genome-wide association studies." Here you take DNA samples from many individuals and see which gene variants tend to be correlated with some chosen variable of interest.

You can then calculate the genetic overlap two traits have.
12) Genome-wide association studies have now been done for many traits, including intelligence and head circumference (a noisy proxy for brain size).

One such study finds a genetic correlation of 0.31 between intelligence and head circumference.

https://t.co/1OcIjompkHnature.com/articles/s4138…
13) To summarize:

In studies with high-quality measurements, the correlation between brain size and intelligence is roughly r ≈ 0.3.

This is a real, but not a strong relationship. If you want to estimate intelligence, test it directly rather than measuring just brain size.
14) But brain size is just a single variable. Other brain variables also correlate with intelligence. In principle, prediction of intelligence from brain imaging could likely become much stronger if we took multiple brain variables into account at once.

pnas.org/content/early/…
15) Brain size is probably the simplest brain variable to measure, and likely that's why it has been included in many studies. What other brain variables might contribute to differences in intelligence? That's for other research to establish.

Thanks for reading.
@rexjung And yes, it must be frustrating working with expensive research with highly noisy measurements. So I can understand why people would prefer working with structural imaging.
@DumoulinBaptis2 @JamesPsychol For example, take the study in tweet 9). This is likely the most representative. They find estimate of 0.276. If we divide by 0.8 for correction for attentuation (which seems reasonable, perhaps even too generous), we get 0.276/0.8 = 0.345.

So I don't think it's higher than 0.35
@DumoulinBaptis2 @JamesPsychol Find me an individual study (not a meta-analysis) that has a large sample (say, N > 500) and a good intelligence measure that finds correlation above 0.4.

These studies should be plenty if you think the *average* correlation is around 0.4.
@DumoulinBaptis2 @JamesPsychol And this challenge is still open. I'm genuinely interested. Because I've read this literature fairly closely, and from my reading the value is closer to 0.3 than to 0.4.

@joanne_mourched You're right that this is different from establishing causality, as the relationship could be confounded.

A study that attempts to address this as well as they can is the following:

sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
New genome-wide association study of brain volume. The genetic correlation between brain volume and intelligence they find is 0.24, quite close to other estimates given in the above thread.

Source:
https://t.co/g1KQs0vatHnature.com/articles/s4146…


• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Inquisitive Bird

Inquisitive Bird Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Scientific_Bird

Mar 28
The weird thing about articles like this is that if they had asked a demographer, they would've known that there's a consensus that immigration cannot solve the problem of ageing populations.
More precisely, the amount of immigration necessary to keep the population age down is extreme and unprecedented. Infrastructure wouldn't even be able to keep up.
Some right-wingers will post the image of this old 2000 UN report called "Replacement Migration" without reading it. It actually concludes replacement migration cannot realistically solve population ageing. Image
Image
Read 5 tweets
Mar 16
It's usually a good idea to read what you're sharing (insofar one is trying to be honest).

The "7 times" figure did not come from the study with 25,000 couples (that's citing an old study, which doesn't replicate). The new large study finds small differences. Image
In a previous thread, I tried to review the research on this question. Generally, sex differences tend to be small, and are not rarely in the opposite direction of the claim.

There's a study from Finland with ~130,000 couples, reviewing multiple illnesses and conditions, which finds an effect in the *opposite* direction as claimed.

It must be a total coincidence that they don't cite such results Image
Read 4 tweets
Mar 11
A comparison between fertility measures in Denmark -- or why over-relying on "total fertility rate" is a mistake

This chart shows three fertility measures: (1) the most commonly used "total fertility rate", (2) completed cohort fertility, and (3) the "tempo-adjusted" TFR. Image
Completed cohort fertility rate is actually the "true" fertility. I.e., it's the actual number of children women have over their lifetime.

The "total fertility rate" uses snapshot data from one given year at a time.
This snapshot of the fertility rate is imperfect because it reflects the interplay of "tempo" (timing) and "quantum" (level) effects.

As women change their timing in childbirths it creates strong fluctuations in the total fertility rate.
Read 7 tweets
Mar 4
This story gets more and more distorted, further and further removed from reality. Here are the actual facts:

1) Franklin did not take Photo 51.
2) Watson and Crick did not steal Photo 51.
3) Photo 51 was not central for the discovery of the DNA structure.
1) Franklin did not take Photo 51.

This one's easy to address. It was actually taken by the PhD student Raymond Gosling, who worked under supervision of Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin.
2) Watson and Crick did not steal Photo 51.

Maurice Wilkins -- who was head at the lab where Rosalind Franklin worked, and supervisor of Raymond Gosling (who took the picture) -- willingly showed the picture.
Read 13 tweets
Feb 16
Youth robbery in Sweden

In this thread, I will talk about the issue of youth immigrant robbery in Sweden.

The reasons for doing robbery range from feeling bored, to purchase cigarettes, to feel powerful, to wanting to "fight the Swedes", to wanting to humiliate their victims.
In the 1990s, a distinct phenomenon of youth robbery became prevalent in places such as Malmö and Stockholm in Sweden. It was almost exclusively young boys targeting other young boys. The perpetrators were usually foreign-born and the victims were usually not.
A 2000 report showed that reported youth robberies had sharply increased between 1995 and 1999.

A school victimization survey indicated that about 1 in 5 young boys had been a victim of a robbery (or robbery attempt) in the last 2 years. Image
Image
Read 16 tweets
Dec 22, 2024
I don't know where people get these ideas from.

As far as I can tell, there is no convincing evidence that supports this “immediate drop” in female car crash deaths (relative to men's).

Even in the community note, where the same claim is made, the links don't provide any?
So I decided to look at car accident deaths over time in the United States, 1999-2022.

Is there any evidence that the female death rate suddenly drops relative to men's? No, the male and female *trends* are almost identical. Image
In the 2000s, there is a strong decline traffic accident deaths overall. But this is independent of sex, so clearly this isn't caused by this narrow sex-specific factor.

The homicide rate also fell from 2000 to 2010, so perhaps it's a more general decline in recklessness.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(