Is the intelligence of men and women different?

Numerous studies agree that the general intelligence of men and women is very similar. However, something different happens when we talk about specific skills: The data indicate relevant and systematic differences in verbal ability, numerical aptitude and visuospatial aptitude. Women obtain higher scores than men in verbal aptitude and in those tests in which language is important. Men stand out especially in numerical aptitude and spatial aptitude (assessed including visualization and mental rotation tasks).

In any case, regarding the ability to manage information, there are numerous studies that do not reflect differences. Deary et al (2007) have carried out a study in which they compare men and women who are siblings and their results show that women stand out on word association, comprehension, and coding speed tests. The men, however, have higher scores in science, arithmetic, mechanical comprehension and electronic information tests.

We can consider the possibility that these differences are due to cultural or educational factors. In this regard, Feingold (1988) analyzes whether the differences between men and women are constant over generations or not. The results show that andThese differences tend to decrease with the passing of generations and, we suppose that we can infer this, from equality in education.

Furthermore, in accordance with the variability hypothesis, It must be said that there are intragroup differences. That is to say, it cannot be said that belonging to one gender or another makes us better suited to one task or another, but rather that variability is the norm. Most individuals are average and the average for men and women is the same; The differences occur in the dispersion. Current intelligence data shows that there is a higher percentage of men who are at the upper end of the intelligence distribution, but there is also a higher percentage at the lower end. However, In the female sex there is greater homogeneity.

Another issue to add to the contextual consideration of these data is the so-called Flynn effect, a phenomenon that is defined by a constant increase in general intelligence scores over generations. This effect, which is observed worldwide, was observed for the first time in the United States between 1930 and 1980. Subsequently, a systematic analysis of this phenomenon was carried out in other countries and it was found that, regardless of origin, a A 50-year-old person who in 1942 obtained a score above 95% of the population, in 2000 it was only above 25%.

As we have commented previously, Could we explain these results by improvements in nutrition, education and/or cognitive stimulation? Apparently, as we have commented regarding gender differences, Feingold highlighted that these are maintained throughout generations. However, in accordance with the Flynn effect, the data obtained in studies such as Teasdale and Owen (1989) show that the education hypothesis does not justify all situations, but that there was even an increase in the measurement of intelligence even in the lowest educational levels.

Regarding the justification of the Flynn effect, it has been analyzed whether nutrition can have something to do with generational evolution and the results obtained seem conclusive, although with certain reluctance. Several authors, for example Eysenck and Schoentale, have analyzed this question and determine that:

– The levels of vitamins, minerals and proteins in children are essential. Low levels of vitamins and minerals reduce the level of intelligence in young people.

– Vitamin and mineral supplements appear to significantly increase non-verbal intelligence in young people.

– The younger the age at which children receive dietary supplements, the greater the effects observed.

– These supplements have no effect on children with adequate levels of vitamins and minerals. This effect is observed after more than a year.

– Vitamin deficiencies are just as important for intellectual performance as mineral deficiencies.

However, we cannot help but question what these data want to tell us and we must take them into account from a critical stance.. The main question that arises is: are we measuring intelligence correctly? Is intelligence an artificial concept? Apparently, currently, the data suggests that general intelligence, as traditionally understood by the collective unconscious, does not make much sense and that we must conceive it as multiple intelligences that allow us to adapt and evolve in life. Despite this, each approach is complementary and we should not dismiss it.

That is to say, analytical and logical-mathematical intelligence is important to develop our academic skills or in other fields; However, creative, musical, verbal, artistic intelligence and a long etcetera are considered equally indispensable for personal and human evolution. In fact, The normal thing is that it stands out in one area or another but not at a global level.

In short, it is clear that each of us is genuine in something and that Intelligence is not something unmodifiable and structural, but rather we can and must discover our potential and promote the growth and development of our abilities and skills, regardless of our gender and social condition.