title: Brain size matters: a reply to Peters.
abstract: Peters (1993) claimed that published research on brain size and IQ is flawed because it did not meet his list of "minimum conditions" that (a) subjects should be matched for height, weight and age, (b) analyses should be conducted separately within sex, (c) subjects should not vary in prenatal and nutritional history, (d) people with IQS appreciably below the population mean of 100 should not be studied, and (e) brain size measures should be done "blind". However, these "conditions" have either been met or are unnecessary and/or inappropriate. We show, contrary to Peters' claims, that (a) brain size is related to mental abilities, (b) brain size varies by sex and race, and (c) mental abilities vary by sex and race. Finally, we suggest that brain size constraints on behavioural complexity may be best understood from an evolutionary perspective.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London. RUSHTON@SSCL.UWO.CA
authors.forename: J P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Rushton
authors.forename: C D
authors.initials: CD
authors.lastname: Ankney
mesh_terms: D001519:Behavior; D005075:Biological Evolution; D001921:Brain / Q000033:anatomy & histology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007360:Intelligence; D008297:Male; D009747:Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; D044469:Racial Groups; D012737:Sex Factors