How critics of racial hereditarian research (mis)categorize empirical studies: Commentary on Bird et al. (2024).

IF 12.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Federico R. León
{"title":"How critics of racial hereditarian research (mis)categorize empirical studies: Commentary on Bird et al. (2024).","authors":"Federico R. León","doi":"10.1037/amp0001500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to Bird et al. (2024), racial hereditarian research (RHR) is scientific racism that should be curbed by the American Psychological Association. They presented an RHR bibliography in which I found eight works of Federico R. León addressing cognitive performance. The eight studies were animated by a socioecological rather than RHR perspective and two of them explicitly contradicted the racial/hereditarian position. I conclude that Bird et al.'s design of the RHR bibliographic classification was erroneous and counterproductive to their own aims and should be modified. I also suggest alternative ways to strengthen anti-RHR positions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48468,"journal":{"name":"American Psychologist","volume":"55 1","pages":"838-839"},"PeriodicalIF":12.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Psychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001500","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to Bird et al. (2024), racial hereditarian research (RHR) is scientific racism that should be curbed by the American Psychological Association. They presented an RHR bibliography in which I found eight works of Federico R. León addressing cognitive performance. The eight studies were animated by a socioecological rather than RHR perspective and two of them explicitly contradicted the racial/hereditarian position. I conclude that Bird et al.'s design of the RHR bibliographic classification was erroneous and counterproductive to their own aims and should be modified. I also suggest alternative ways to strengthen anti-RHR positions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
种族遗传主义研究的批评者如何(错误地)对实证研究进行分类:对Bird等人的评论(2024)。
Bird等人(2024)认为,种族遗传研究(RHR)是一种科学的种族主义,应该受到美国心理协会的遏制。他们提供了一个RHR参考书目,我在其中找到了Federico R. León关于认知表现的八部作品。这八项研究是由社会生态学而非RHR的观点所推动的,其中两项明确地与种族/遗传论的立场相矛盾。我的结论是,Bird等人对RHR书目分类的设计是错误的,对他们自己的目标是适得其反的,应该修改。我还提出了加强反rhr立场的其他方法。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Psychologist
American Psychologist PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
18.50
自引率
1.20%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: Established in 1946, American Psychologist® is the flagship peer-reviewed scholarly journal of the American Psychological Association. It publishes high-impact papers of broad interest, including empirical reports, meta-analyses, and scholarly reviews, covering psychological science, practice, education, and policy. Articles often address issues of national and international significance within the field of psychology and its relationship to society. Published in an accessible style, contributions in American Psychologist are designed to be understood by both psychologists and the general public.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信