Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41089409›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary human sciences2025

Impediments to countering racist pseudoscience.

Kevin N Lala, Gillian Brown, Kalyani Twyman, Marcus W Feldman

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary human sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. EHS editorial 2025.Evolutionary human sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kevin N LalaSchool of Biology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2457-0900
Gillian BrownSchool of Psychology & Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0675-0780
Kalyani TwymanSchool of Biology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
Marcus W FeldmanDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0664-3803

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although virtually all academics who study human 'race' agree that it is a social construct, members of the general public still commonly regard 'race' as a biological property (i.e. they think that 'races' are genetically distinct). Even though empirical data from genetics and other fields do not support biological conceptions of race, this erroneous viewpoint is widely held, suggesting that there are impediments to effective communication of the relevant science. Here, we suggest five such impediments: (1) belief in genetic determinism, together with an over-reliance on an essentialist view of human groups, (2) overly simplistic interpretation of biological inheritance, (3) belief in the naturalistic fallacy and the associated naturalization of non-biological variation among racialized groups, (4) failure of the academic and educational communities to take responsibility for teaching the science of 'race' and racism, and (5) apologism towards racist founders of academic fields, including the evolutionary sciences. We address how and why each of these factors supports the spread of racism and suggest strategies for containing this spread.

Indexed as

genetic determinisminheritanceraceracismteaching

Identifiers

PMID41089409
PMCPMC12516599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.