Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T07:48:22.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intelligence, hormones, sex, brain size, and biochemistry: It all needs to have equal causal standing before integration is possible

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2007

Helmuth Nyborg
Helmuth Nyborg
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Aarhus, DK-8362 Horning, Denmark. helmuthnyborg@msn.comwww.helmuthnyborg.dk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent brain imaging points to differences in brain structure that relate to intelligence, but how do we model their causal relationship within a coherent framework that circumvents classic dualist traps? A bottom-level nonlinear, dynamic, multifactor, multiplicative, multidimensional, molecular (ND4M) trait-covariance time-space model may accomplish this better than traditional approaches.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , April 2007 , pp. 164 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. S, Damasio, H., Grabowski, T. J., Bruss, J. & Zhang, W. (2003) Sexual dimorphism and asymmetries in the gray-white composition of the human cerebrum. NeuroImage 18:880–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gur, R. C., Turetsky, B. I., Matsui, M., Yan, M., Bilker, W., Hughett, P. & Gur, R. E. (1999) Sex differences in brain grey and white matter in healthy young adults: Correlations with cognitive performance. Journal of Neuroscience 19(10):4065–72.Google Scholar
Haier, R. J., Chueh, D., Touchette, P., Lott, I., Buchsbaum, M. S., Macmillan, D., Sandman, C., Lacasse, L. & Sosa, E. (1995) Brain size and cerebral glucose metabolic rate in nonspecific mental retardation and Down syndrome. Intelligence 20(2):191–210.Google Scholar
Haier, R. J., Jung, R. E., Yeo, R. A., Head, K. & Alkire, M. T. (2004) Structural brain variation and general intelligence. NeuroImage 23(1):425–33.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. N. & Rushton, J. P. (2006) Males have greater g: Sex differences in general mental ability from 100,000 17- to 18-year-olds on the Scholastic Assessment Test. Intelligence 34:479–86.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998) The g factor: The science of mental ability. Praeger.Google Scholar
Kimura, D. & Hampson, E. (1994) Cognitive pattern in men and women is influenced by fluctuations in sex hormones. Current Directions in Psychological Science 3:57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynn, R. (1999) Sex difference in intelligence and brain size: A developmental theory. Intelligence 27:1–12.Google Scholar
Nyborg, H. (1983) Spatial ability in men and women: Review and new theory. Advances in Human Research and Therapy 5:39–140.Google Scholar
Nyborg, H. (1994) Hormones, sex, and society: The science of physicology. Praeger.Google Scholar
Nyborg, H. (1997) Molecular man in a molecular world: Applied physicology. Psyche and Logos 18:457–74.Google Scholar
Nyborg, H. (2003) Sex differences in g. In: The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen, ed. Nyborg, H., pp. 187–222. Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Nyborg, H. (2005) Sex-related differences in general intelligence g, brain size, and social status. Personality and Individual Differences 39(3):497–509.Google Scholar
Pennington, B. F., Filipek, P. A., Lefly, D., Chhabildas, N., Kennedy, D. N., Simon, J. H., Filley, C. M., Galaburda, A. & DeFries, J. C. (2000) A twin MRI study of size variations in human brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12(1):223–32.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904) General intelligence, objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology 15:201–93.Google Scholar
Toga, A. W. & Thompson, P. M. (2005) Genetics of brain structure and intelligence. Annual Review of Neuroscience 28:1–23.Google Scholar