> The cited article (thanks for the citation to that year 2000 article, which I wouldn't call "recent" on this subject) The two books you’ve cited are older th

> The cited article (thanks for the citation to that year 2000 article, which I wouldn't call "recent" on this subject) The two books you’ve cited are older than this. An article with such a high citation count is usually an old seminal work (citations increase with the age of an article). For an article to have such a high number of citations in only 8 years is somewhat unusual (even when it is a Science paper). > You are welcome to speak for yourself on that issue, of course. But on my part, I have observed that there are some HN readers who do their homework on genetic and environmental influences on human intelligence before expressing opinions on those issues, and I have learned Again, I have pointed you to a treasure trove of information. > because general intelligence is investigated in human subjects with IQ tests as the main instrument. Not really. Raven’s progressive matrices (RPM) are popular. Another method is a barrage of different intelligence tests (the more the better).