Genes, Brains, and Human Potential The Science and Ideology of Intelligence

32 PINNING DOWN POTENTIAL

Prize for Neuroscience “for demonstrating that brain researchers, by
using complicated instruments and simple statistics, can see meaningful
brain activity anywhere— even in a dead salmon.”^38
It’s good fun, of course, and possibly a little unkind to the many ben-
efi ts of the technology, especially in medical fi elds. However, it is because
of such worries that the journal Cognitive and Aff ective Behavioral
Research published a special issue on reliability and replication in cogni-
tive neuroscience research. In their introduction, Deanna M. Barch and
Tal Yarkoni stress the need to “to step back and develop new procedures
and methods for tackling at least some of the prob lems contributing to
the crisis of replication, whether real or perceived.”^39 Th ey particularly
refer to choices of analy sis in fMRI interpretations that can artifi cially
produce the results desired. A special issue of the journal Perspectives on
Psychological Science (January 2013) made similar points. Th at prob lem
might particularly infl uence attempts to correlate IQ with aspects of
brain function and structure.
However, we have already been warned of such prob lems in the report
by a subgroup of the American Psychological Association that was spe-
cially convened in 2012 to review pro gress in understanding intelligence.
“Consistency across studies in brain areas associated with reasoning...
is limited,” they said. “Patterns of activation in response to vari ous fl uid
reasoning tasks [i.e., IQ tests] are diverse, and brain regions activated in
response to ostensibly similar types of reasoning... appear to be closely
associated with task content and context.” Th ey point out, for example,
how “two diff er ent intelligence test batteries revealed only limited over-
lap in brain regions identifi ed.” So they question attempts to show that
“high- ability individuals are more effi cient prob lem solvers at the neural
level,” because “the results of these studies provide a somewhat disjointed
picture of the neural basis for intelligence.”^40 Michael Rutter and Andrew
Pickles have also warned that, although “brain imaging constitutes a
valuable tool... so far, its achievements do not live up to the claims and
its promise.”^41
Much the same can be said about the promises surrounding neurosci-
ence and education. A major review states that “that there are no current
examples of neuroscience motivating new and eff ective teaching meth-
ods,” and argues that “neuroscience is unlikely to improve teaching in the

This content downloaded from 139.184.14.159 on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:51:16 UTC

http://www.ebook3000.com