0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/06/26 03:09

From version 67.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 02:59
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 69.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 03:28
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -130,12 +130,7 @@
130 130  {{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
131 131  
132 132  
133 -💥 If this works, we can move on to the next study! 🚀 Let me know how it looks!
134 134  
135 -I'll process the next study and populate the template accordingly. Let me extract the key details from the uploaded document now.
136 -
137 -Here's the structured summary for the next study:
138 -
139 139  ---
140 140  
141 141  {{expand title="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018" expanded="false"}}
... ... @@ -305,18 +305,489 @@
305 305  ---
306 306  
307 307  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
308 -{{velocity}}
309 -#set($doi = "10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z")
310 -#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
311 -#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename"))
312 -[[Download>>attach:$filename]]
313 -#else
314 -{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
315 -#end
316 -{{/velocity}}
303 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
317 317  
318 318  {{/expand}}
319 319  
320 320  {{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
321 321  
309 +{{expand title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults" expanded="false"}} Source: Addictive Behaviors
310 +Date of Publication: 2016
311 +Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
312 +Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
313 +DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.02.030
314 +Subject Matter: Substance Use, Mental Health, Adolescent Development
322 322  
316 +Key Statistics
317 +General Observations:
318 +
319 +Study examined cannabis use trends in young adults over time.
320 +Found significant correlations between cannabis use and increased depressive symptoms.
321 +Subgroup Analysis:
322 +
323 +Males exhibited higher rates of cannabis use, but females reported stronger mental health impacts.
324 +Individuals with pre-existing anxiety disorders were more likely to report problematic cannabis use.
325 +Other Significant Data Points:
326 +
327 +Frequent cannabis users showed a 23% higher likelihood of developing anxiety symptoms.
328 +Co-occurring substance use (e.g., alcohol) exacerbated negative psychological effects.
329 +Findings
330 +Primary Observations:
331 +
332 +Cannabis use was linked to higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, particularly in frequent users.
333 +Self-medication patterns emerged among those with pre-existing mental health conditions.
334 +Subgroup Trends:
335 +
336 +Early cannabis initiation (before age 16) was associated with greater mental health risks.
337 +College-aged users reported more impairments in daily functioning due to cannabis use.
338 +Specific Case Analysis:
339 +
340 +Participants with a history of childhood trauma were twice as likely to develop problematic cannabis use.
341 +Co-use of cannabis and alcohol significantly increased impulsivity scores in the study sample.
342 +Critique and Observations
343 +Strengths of the Study:
344 +
345 +Large, longitudinal dataset with a diverse sample of young adults.
346 +Controlled for confounding variables like socioeconomic status and prior substance use.
347 +Limitations of the Study:
348 +
349 +Self-reported cannabis use may introduce bias in reported frequency and effects.
350 +Did not assess specific THC potency levels, which could influence mental health outcomes.
351 +Suggestions for Improvement:
352 +
353 +Future research should investigate dose-dependent effects of cannabis on mental health.
354 +Assess long-term psychological outcomes of early cannabis exposure.
355 +Relevance to Subproject
356 +Supports mental health risk assessment models related to substance use.
357 +Highlights gender differences in substance-related psychological impacts.
358 +Provides insight into self-medication behaviors among young adults.
359 +Suggestions for Further Exploration
360 +Investigate the long-term impact of cannabis use on neurodevelopment.
361 +Examine the role of genetic predisposition in cannabis-related mental health risks.
362 +Assess regional differences in cannabis use trends post-legalization.
363 +Summary of Research Study
364 +This study examines the relationship between cannabis use and mental health symptoms in young adults, focusing on depressive and anxiety-related outcomes. Using a longitudinal dataset, the researchers found higher risks of anxiety and depression in frequent cannabis users, particularly among those with pre-existing mental health conditions or early cannabis initiation.
365 +
366 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
367 +
368 +📄 Download Full Study
369 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
370 +
371 +{{/expand}}
372 +
373 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
374 +
375 +{{expand title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?" expanded="false"}}
376 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
377 +**Date of Publication:** *2014*
378 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
379 +**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
380 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
381 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
382 +
383 +---
384 +
385 +## **Key Statistics**
386 +1. **General Observations:**
387 + - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
388 + - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
389 +
390 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
391 + - The study found **slower reaction times in modern populations** compared to Victorian-era individuals.
392 + - Data from **Western countries (US, UK, Canada, Australia, Finland)** were analyzed.
393 +
394 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
395 + - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
396 + - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
397 +
398 +---
399 +
400 +## **Findings**
401 +1. **Primary Observations:**
402 + - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
403 + - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
404 +
405 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
406 + - A stronger **correlation between slower reaction time and lower general intelligence (g)**.
407 + - Flynn effect (IQ gains) does not contradict this finding, as reaction time is a **biological, not environmental, measure**.
408 +
409 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
410 + - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
411 + - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
412 +
413 +---
414 +
415 +## **Critique and Observations**
416 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
417 + - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
418 + - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
419 +
420 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
421 + - Some historical data sources **lack methodological consistency**.
422 + - **Reaction time measurements vary by study**, requiring adjustments for equipment differences.
423 +
424 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
425 + - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
426 + - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
427 +
428 +---
429 +
430 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
431 +- Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
432 +- Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
433 +- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
434 +
435 +---
436 +
437 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
438 +1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
439 +2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
440 +3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
441 +
442 +---
443 +
444 +## **Summary of Research Study**
445 +This study examines **historical reaction time data** as a measure of **cognitive ability and intelligence decline**, analyzing data from **Western populations between 1884 and 2004**. The results suggest a **measurable decline in intelligence, estimated at 13.35 IQ points**, likely due to **dysgenic fertility, neurophysiological factors, and reduced selection pressures**.
446 +
447 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
448 +
449 +---
450 +
451 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
452 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
453 +
454 +{{/expand}}
455 +
456 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
457 +
458 +{{expand title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation" expanded="false"}}
459 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
460 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
461 +**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
462 +**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
463 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
464 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
465 +
466 +---
467 +
468 +## **Key Statistics**
469 +1. **General Observations:**
470 + - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
471 + - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
472 +
473 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
474 + - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
475 + - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
476 +
477 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
478 + - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
479 + - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
480 +
481 +---
482 +
483 +## **Findings**
484 +1. **Primary Observations:**
485 + - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
486 + - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
487 +
488 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
489 + - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
490 + - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
491 +
492 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
493 + - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
494 + - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
495 +
496 +---
497 +
498 +## **Critique and Observations**
499 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
500 + - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
501 + - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
502 +
503 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
504 + - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
505 + - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
506 +
507 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
508 + - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
509 + - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
510 +
511 +---
512 +
513 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
514 +- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
515 +- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
516 +- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
517 +
518 +---
519 +
520 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
521 +1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
522 +2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
523 +3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
524 +
525 +---
526 +
527 +## **Summary of Research Study**
528 +This study reviews **genome-wide association study (GWAS) findings on intelligence**, demonstrating a **strong correlation between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**. The research highlights how **genetic selection may explain population-level cognitive differences beyond genetic drift effects**. Intelligence-linked alleles showed **higher variability across populations than height-related alleles**, suggesting stronger selection pressures.
529 +
530 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
531 +
532 +---
533 +
534 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
535 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
536 +
537 +{{/expand}}
538 +
539 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
540 +
541 +{{expand title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media" expanded="false"}}
542 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
543 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
544 +**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
545 +**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
546 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
547 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
548 +
549 +---
550 +
551 +## **Key Statistics**
552 +1. **General Observations:**
553 + - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
554 + - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
555 +
556 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
557 + - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
558 + - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
559 +
560 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
561 + - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
562 + - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
563 +
564 +---
565 +
566 +## **Findings**
567 +1. **Primary Observations:**
568 + - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
569 + - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
570 +
571 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
572 + - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
573 + - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
574 +
575 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
576 + - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
577 + - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
578 +
579 +---
580 +
581 +## **Critique and Observations**
582 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
583 + - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
584 + - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
585 +
586 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
587 + - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
588 + - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
589 +
590 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
591 + - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
592 + - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
593 +
594 +---
595 +
596 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
597 +- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
598 +- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
599 +- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
600 +
601 +---
602 +
603 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
604 +1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
605 +2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
606 +3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
607 +
608 +---
609 +
610 +## **Summary of Research Study**
611 +This study surveys **expert opinions on intelligence research**, analyzing **how backgrounds, political ideologies, and media representation influence perspectives on intelligence**. The findings highlight **divisions in scientific consensus**, particularly on **genetic vs. environmental causes of IQ disparities**. Additionally, the research uncovers **widespread dissatisfaction with media portrayals of intelligence research**, pointing to **the impact of ideological biases on public discourse**.
612 +
613 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
614 +
615 +---
616 +
617 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
618 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
619 +
620 +{{/expand}}
621 +
622 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
623 +
624 +{{expand title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications" expanded="false"}}
625 +**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
626 +**Date of Publication:** *2010*
627 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
628 +**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
629 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
630 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
631 +
632 +---
633 +
634 +## **Key Statistics**
635 +1. **General Observations:**
636 + - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
637 + - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
638 +
639 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
640 + - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
641 + - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
642 +
643 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
644 + - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
645 + - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
646 +
647 +---
648 +
649 +## **Findings**
650 +1. **Primary Observations:**
651 + - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
652 + - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
653 +
654 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
655 + - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
656 + - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
657 +
658 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
659 + - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
660 + - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
661 +
662 +---
663 +
664 +## **Critique and Observations**
665 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
666 + - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
667 + - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
668 +
669 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
670 + - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
671 + - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
672 +
673 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
674 + - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
675 + - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
676 +
677 +---
678 +
679 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
680 +- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
681 +- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
682 +- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
683 +
684 +---
685 +
686 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
687 +1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
688 +2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
689 +3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
690 +
691 +---
692 +
693 +## **Summary of Research Study**
694 +This study evaluates **whether Homo sapiens should be classified as a polytypic species**, analyzing **genetic diversity, evolutionary lineage, and morphological variation**. Using comparative analysis with other primates and mammals, the research suggests that **human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**, with implications for **evolutionary biology, anthropology, and medicine**.
695 +
696 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
697 +
698 +---
699 +
700 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
701 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
702 +
703 +{{/expand}}
704 +
705 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
706 +
707 +{{expand title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age" expanded="false"}}
708 +**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
709 +**Date of Publication:** *2013*
710 +**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
711 +**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
712 +**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
713 +**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
714 +
715 +---
716 +
717 +## **Key Statistics**
718 +1. **General Observations:**
719 + - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
720 + - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
721 +
722 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
723 + - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
724 + - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
725 +
726 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
727 + - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
728 + - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
729 +
730 +---
731 +
732 +## **Findings**
733 +1. **Primary Observations:**
734 + - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
735 + - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
736 +
737 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
738 + - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
739 + - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
740 +
741 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
742 + - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
743 + - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
744 +
745 +---
746 +
747 +## **Critique and Observations**
748 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
749 + - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
750 + - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
751 +
752 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
753 + - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
754 + - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
755 +
756 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
757 + - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
758 + - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
759 +
760 +---
761 +
762 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
763 +- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
764 +- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
765 +- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
766 +
767 +---
768 +
769 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
770 +1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
771 +2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
772 +3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
773 +
774 +---
775 +
776 +## **Summary of Research Study**
777 +This study documents **The Wilson Effect**, demonstrating how the **heritability of IQ increases throughout development**, reaching a plateau of **0.80 by adulthood**. The findings indicate that **shared environmental effects diminish with age**, while **genetic influences on intelligence strengthen**. Using **longitudinal twin and adoption data**, the research provides **strong empirical support for the increasing role of genetics in cognitive ability over time**.
778 +
779 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
780 +
781 +---
782 +
783 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
784 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
785 +
786 +{{/expand}}
787 +
788 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}