1. General Observations:
      - Survey of 102 experts on intelligence research and public discourse.
      - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.

2. Subgroup Analysis:
   - 90% of experts were from Western countries, and 83% were male.
   - Political spectrum ranged from 54% left-liberal, 24% conservative, with significant ideological influences on views.

3. Other Significant Data Points:
   - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale).
   - 50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors.

1. Primary Observations:
      - Experts overwhelmingly support the g-factor theory of intelligence.
      - Heritability of intelligence was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.

2. Subgroup Trends:
   - Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences.
   - Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors in intelligence disparities.

3. Specific Case Analysis:
   - The study compared media coverage of intelligence research with expert opinions.
   - Found a disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.

1. Strengths of the Study:
      - Largest expert survey on intelligence research to date.
      - Provides insight into how political orientation influences scientific perspectives.

2. Limitations of the Study:
   - Sample primarily from Western countries, limiting global perspectives.
   - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward those more willing to engage with controversial topics.

3. Suggestions for Improvement:
   - Future studies should include a broader range of global experts.
   - Additional research needed on media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research.

- Provides insight into expert consensus and division on intelligence research.
- Highlights the role of media bias in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
- Useful for understanding the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse on intelligence research.

1. Examine cross-national differences in expert opinions on intelligence.
   2. Investigate how media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research.
   3. Conduct follow-up studies with a more diverse expert pool to test findings.

Download Full Study

1. General Observations:
      - Study analyzed genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits linked to intelligence.
      - Found a strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels.

2. Subgroup Analysis:
   - Factor analysis of 9 intelligence-associated alleles revealed a metagene correlated with country IQ (r = .86).
   - Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.

3. Other Significant Data Points:
   - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers.
   - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions.

1. Primary Observations:
      - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate highly with national IQ levels.
      - Genetic selection for intelligence appears stronger than selection for height-related genes.

2. Subgroup Trends:
   - East Asian populations exhibited the highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles.
   - African populations showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.

3. Specific Case Analysis:
   - Polygenic scores using intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs in predicting IQ.
   - Selection pressures may explain differences in global intelligence distribution beyond genetic drift effects.

1. Strengths of the Study:
      - Comprehensive genetic analysis of intelligence-linked SNPs.
      - Uses multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results.

2. Limitations of the Study:
   - Correlation does not imply causation; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
   - Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles—future studies may identify more.

3. Suggestions for Improvement:
   - Larger cross-population GWAS studies needed to validate findings.
   - Investigate non-genetic contributors to IQ variance in addition to genetic factors.

- Supports research on genetic influences on intelligence at a population level.
- Aligns with broader discussions on cognitive genetics and natural selection effects.
- Provides a quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies.

1. Conduct expanded GWAS studies including diverse populations.
   2. Investigate gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence.
   3. Explore historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles.

Download Full Study