Science is riddled with controversial topics, one of which is human intelligence and whether variations arise from nature or nurture or between the sexes. Recently though, three researchers at Duke University published a paper that tackles both aspects. The paper describes how the researchers analyzed three decades worth of standardized tests given to American high school students, exclusively paying attention to the brightest of the bright.

The research yielded two conclusions. The first conclusion was that the Flynn Effect[1] applies particularly to the most intelligent students and that the historic difference between the smartest men and women has greatly decreased over time.

The data were drawn from Duke University’s Talent Identification Program (TIP) which is designed to identify the highly intelligent candidates early on. To be included in TIP, candidates must score in the top 5% when taking exams designed for older students. In general, boys do slightly better than girls in math while girls do slightly better than boys do in verbal reasoning. However, looking at the brightest students in math, boys do much better than do girls, though less better than boys used to do. In the early 1980’s, the ratio of males to females in the top 0.01% of math scores in the SAT was 13:1. In the early 1990’s, that ratio had fallen to 4:1 where it has remained unaltered. Other similar tests indicate that the ratio may be closer with results yielding 3:1 or 2:1 on the same metric.

It is unclear as to why there would be a dramatic rise in the aptitude of America’s young female mathematicians followed by stagnation. It is believed that the dramatic rise in mathematically-gifted young women was due in large part to nurture, possibly from a change in attitudes of teachers towards female students. Other explanations also exist though. What is evident though is that the change cannot be a gene-given ability because too few generations have occurred for natural selection to have an impact. The smartest of the smart continue to become smarter, no matter the gender.

 www.economist.com