↓ Skip to main content

Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, March 1996
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Citations

dimensions_citation
117 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, March 1996
DOI 10.3758/bf03210739
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Philippe Rushton, C. Davison Ankney

Abstract

Using data from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), autopsy, endocranial measurements, and other techniques, we show that (1) brain size is correlated with cognitive ability about .44 using MRI; (2) brain size varies by age, sex, social class, and race; and (3) cognitive ability varies by age, sex, social class, and race. Brain size and cognitive ability show a curvilinear relation with age, increasing to young adulthood and then decreasing; increasing from women to men; increasing with socioeconomic status; and increasing from Africans to Europeans to Asians. Although only further research can determine if such correlations represent cause and effect, it is clear that the direction of the brain-size/cognitive-ability relationships described by Paul Broca (1824-1880), Francis Galton (1822-1911), and other nineteenth-century visionaries is true, and that the null hypothesis of no relation, strongly advocated over the last half century, is false.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
United Kingdom 5 5%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 92 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 26 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 9%
Engineering 8 7%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Other 30 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,274,581
of 13,253,522 outputs
Outputs from Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
#245
of 1,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,382
of 130,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,253,522 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,616 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 130,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.