0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

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

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -130,7 +130,12 @@
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!
133 133  
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 +
134 134  ---
135 135  
136 136  {{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"}}
... ... @@ -300,489 +300,18 @@
300 300  ---
301 301  
302 302  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
303 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
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}}
304 304  
305 305  {{/expand}}
306 306  
307 307  {{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
308 308  
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
315 315  
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}}