Posted on 04/16/2015 5:12:57 AM PDT by reaganaut1
New research that shows poor children have smaller brains than affluent children has deepened the national debate about ways to narrow the achievement gap.
Neuroscientists who studied the brain scans of nearly 1,100 children and young adults nationwide from ages 3 to 20 found that the surface area of the cerebral cortex was linked to family income. They discovered that the brains of children in families that earned less than $25,000 a year had surface areas 6 percent smaller than those whose families earned $150,000 or more. The poor children also scored lower on average on a battery of cognitive tests.
...
In another study that has been accepted for publication in Psychological Science, a team led by neuroscientist John Gabrieli of MIT found differences in the brain’s cortical thickness between low-income and higher-income teenagers. The study linked that difference for the first time to standardized test scores: Fifty-seven percent of the poor children scored proficient in math and reading tests given annually in Massachusetts, compared with 91 percent of the higher-income students.
...
But James Thompson, a psychologist at University College London, has a third theory.
“People who have less ability and marry people with less ability have children who, on balance, on average, have less ability,” he said. Thompson noted that there is a genetic component to intelligence that Noble and Sowell failed to consider.
“It makes my jaw drop that we’ve known for years intelligence is inheritable and scientists are beginning to track down exactly how it happens,” Thompson said. “The well-known genetic hypothesis has not even had a chance to enter the door in this discussion.”
Charles Murray, a conservative political scientist who argues there is a relationship between intelligence and economic class in his book “The Bell Curve,” said genetics cannot be ignored.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Here is my comment to the Marxist with the #1 “most liked” comment:
So, what you are suggesting is that it’s not fair that smarter people make more money than less intelligent people. And let me guess, the government should even things out through redistribution.
IOW, welcome to the USSA, comrades. Let the government make the decisions, and decide who “deserves” what. Never mind if smarter people work harder, defer gratification, and accumulate their own wealth. It ain’t fair that they were smarter! Take from the smart, and give to the dumb...
Great idea! Almost sounds like some cutting-edge plans they tried for a few years in the former Soviet Union among other places....and how did that work out?
Can we do the same research on WP/PMSNBC reporters?
[The brain is a muscle. The more you use it, the bigger and stronger it gets]
Healthy diets play a contributing factor too.
It’s still a big inconvenient truth. The authors still are afraid to talk about genetics and heritability. They remember what happened to Murray and Hernstein when they published The Bell Curve.
“Noble and Sowell have two theories about why poor children have smaller brains. One is that poor families lack access to material goods that aid healthy development, such as good nutrition and higher-quality health care. The other is that poor families tend to live more chaotic lives, and that stress could inhibit healthy brain development.”
They ignore the obvious in their paper. They have to or the paper won’t get published. If they mentioned genes they’d never get their paper published in a good journal - if at all.
Globull warming?
[ quick and brief ] recalling an explanation of why something changed in people suddenly - one day - in 1800’s - THE day ELECTRICITY GENERATORS were turned ON in NewYorkCity.
Same thing gradually worked its way as ELECTRICITY was added to more and more areas.
Reason: Prior to electricity, people heated with wood, wood ashes FERTILIZED their food/gardens. ERGO all the GOOD NUTRIENTS they got that way - had stopped when that stopped with the using of electricity.
(This may take exception to immigrants having poorer nutrition.)
“Great, now Obama will call for brain redistribution programs.”
I was thinking JugEars, UpChuck Schumer, Turban Durbin, et al. will want to propose a surtax on families with greater than average surface areas of the cerebral cortex: a “tax on the cerebral cortex surface area one percenters.”
What conclusion did the jackasses come to? If we give “poor kids” more money their brains will grow or people with large brains are more affluent?
So funny. I hadn’t read your comment when I posted mine. Their ‘two theories’ jumped out at me also.
It’s bizarre to ignore genetics. Genes are important in horse racing, agriculture and dog breeding but these guys pretend they’re not worth mentioning when it comes to humans.
Sheesh - even poor people with their smaller brains know a pit bull is better protection than a cocker spaniel.
Really? So how do you explain Hillary, Reid, etc? (not you, the article)
Nature or nature? It’s both. Better parenting and better nutrition could close the gap some, but no chance the gap will ever be fully closed.
Next, gov’t will identify undersized and poorly coordinated kindergartners and develop programs to turn them into world class athletes.
The solution is simple: Keep giving the poor more money and benefits until their brains get as big as the non-poor.
This is a perfect big government problem in search of a redistribution solution.
brains not smaller, brains with less surface area, less folds.
brain botox for the poor?
How many parents know that on average children raised in a big city grow up smaller and have more health problems than those that grow up in the countryside? That's been known for some time but the truth is suppressed due to country children more likely to turn into Republican voters, even if they later move to a big city. While the Democrat bell curve is wider, the average Republican is both taller and smarter than the average Democrat. You'll never hear that truth from the urban media.
Oops: Nature or nurture?
If it is linked to family income then the poor family needs to work harder to buy more brain size for their children. Is it purchased in ounces or in grams and who are the major suppliers?
Institute for Research on Poverty, a Wisconsin-based, left-wing group, found in the 1970s that "work effort," as measured by the amount of hours worked in a week outside the home, was two to four times higher for a MARRIED man---who should theoretically have much less time than an unmarried man---over an unmarried man, an unmarried woman, or a married woman.
If the mother receiving just $20 would read a book each night to her children, it would do more good than $300.
It was just scary seeing a kid go nuts over cheese and grapes, when his mother gave him permission to eat the cheese when she started eating it.
The toddler was starving for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.