ArticleIntelligence
The genetics of specific cognitive abilities.
Article in Intelligence. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Genetic Origin of Uneven Cognitive Profiles in Heritable Neurodevelopmental Conditions and Individual Differences: Computational Investigations.Developmental science · 2026Article
- Disorder-Specific Genetic Effects Drive the Associations Between Psychopathology and Cognitive Functioning.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2026Article
- Associations between social media and crystallized and fluid performance trajectories in early adolescence.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2025Article
- A genetic common factor underlying self-reported math ability and highest math class taken.Molecular psychiatry · 2025Article
- Education as a Modifier of Genetic Influence on Cognitive Ability in Older Adults.Behavior genetics · 2025Article
- The Genetic Specificity of Cognitive Tests After Controlling for General Cognitive Ability.Behavior genetics · 2025Article
- Multi-polygenic score prediction of mathematics, reading, and language abilities independent of general cognitive ability.Molecular psychiatry · 2025Article
- Genetic overlap between multi-site chronic pain and cognition: a large-scale genome-wide cross-trait analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Endophenotype 2.0: updated definitions and criteria for endophenotypes of psychiatric disorders, incorporating new technologies and findings.Translational psychiatry · 2024Review
- Cognitive performance from childhood to old age and intergenerational correlations in the multigenerational Young Finns Study.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Cognitive synaptopathy: synaptic and dendritic spine dysfunction in age-related cognitive disorders.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2024Review
- Psychosis Endophenotypes: A Gene-Set-Specific Polygenic Risk Score Analysis.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2023Article
- Carroll's Three-Stratum (3S) Cognitive Ability Theory at 30 Years: Impact, 3S-CHC Theory Clarification, Structural Replication, and Cognitive-Achievement Psychometric Network Analysis Extension.Journal of Intelligence · 2023Article
- Article
- The genetics of specific cognitive abilities.IntelligenceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most research on individual differences in performance on tests of cognitive ability focuses on general cognitive ability (g), the highest level in the three-level Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) hierarchical model of intelligence. About 50% of the variance of g is due to inherited DNA differences (heritability) which increases across development. Much less is known about the genetics of the middle level of the CHC model, which includes 16 broad factors such as fluid reasoning, processing speed, and quantitative knowledge. We provide a meta-analytic review of 747,567 monozygotic-dizygotic twin comparisons from 77 publications for these middle-level factors, which we refer to as specific cognitive abilities (SCA), even though these factors are not independent of g. Twin comparisons were available for 11 of the 16 CHC domains. The average heritability across all SCA is 56%, similar to that of g. However, there is substantial differential heritability across SCA and SCA do not show the developmental increase in heritability seen for g. We also investigated SCA independent of g (SCA.g). A surprising finding is that SCA.g remain substantially heritable (53% on average), even though 25% of the variance of SCA that covaries with g has been removed. Our review highlights the need for more research on SCA and especially on SCA.g. Despite limitations of SCA research, our review frames expectations for genomic research that will use polygenic scores to predict SCA and SCA.g. Genome-wide association studies of SCA.g are needed to create polygenic scores that can predict SCA profiles of cognitive abilities and disabilities independent of g.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.