In 2020, Pesta et al. published an article entitled “Racial and Ethnic Group Differences in the Heritability of Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis” in the journal Intelligence. The authors framed their analysis as an examination of the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis, which holds that the heritability of intelligence varies as a function of socioeconomic status. Pesta et al. concluded that the heritability of intelligence does not differ across racial and ethnic groups in the United States. They claimed their results challenge the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis and support the hereditarian position that mean differences in IQ among racial and ethnic groups are attributable to genetic differences rather than environmental disparities. In this commentary, we outline severe theoretical, methodological, and rhetorical flaws in every step of Pesta et al.’s meta-analysis. The most reliable finding from Pesta et al. is consistent with the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis and directly contradicts a hereditarian understanding of group differences in intelligence. Finally, we suggest that Pesta et al. serves as an example of how racially motivated and poorly executed work can find its way into a mainstream scientific journal, underscoring the importance of robust peer review and rigorous editorial judgment in the open-science era.

2020 年，Pesta 等人。在《Intelligence 》杂志上发表题为“Racial and Ethnic Group Differences in the Heritability of Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis”的文章. 作者将他们的分析构架为对 Scarr-Rowe 假设的检验，该假设认为智力的遗传性随社会经济地位的变化而变化。佩斯塔等人。得出的结论是，智力的遗传性在美国的种族和民族之间没有差异。他们声称他们的结果挑战了 Scarr-Rowe 假说，并支持遗传论的立场，即种族和族裔群体之间的智商差异归因于遗传差异而不是环境差异。在这篇评论中，我们概述了 Pesta 等人荟萃分析的每一步中的严重理论、方法和修辞缺陷。Pesta等人最可靠的发现。与 Scarr-Rowe 假设一致，并且直接与对智力群体差异的遗传理解相矛盾。最后，我们建议 Pesta 等人。作为一个例子，说明种族动机和执行不力的工作如何进入主流科学期刊，强调了在开放科学时代，强有力的同行评审和严格的编辑判断的重要性。