Neuroimaging technologies such as the electroencephalogram (EEG) have been utilized to predict intelligence quotients (IQ) across various populations. Ethical analyses should examine whether the use of these methods, which purport to establish a biological basis for intelligence are potentially harmful and stigmatizing.
Research that aims to evaluate whether there is a biological basis for differences in intelligence is reflective of a desire to legitimize racialized ideology as an empirical fact that is seemingly devoid of bias. These implications lead to further stigmatization of individuals that are ethnic minorities and reinforce eugenics ideology. Eugenics cannot be separated from these analyses as intelligence has been conceptualized as a genetically desirable trait that is resistant to change over time. Furthermore, the development of IQ tests is based on eugenics philosophy as these assessments aimed to support the claim that ethnic minorities are intellectually inferior to individuals of European descent. Despite advancements in the understanding of intelligence, some contemporary researchers use flawed biological approaches to demonstrate differences in IQ between racial groups which reduces the likelihood that social determinants will be eradicated.
Ethical analyses that evaluate the use of standardized tests and their relationship to neurological biomarkers must focus on implications related to respect for persons and non-maleficence. Violations of these principles are directly related to eugenics as the attempt to determine a biological basis of intelligence only benefits individuals that are non-ethnic minorities. Ethicists must consider the significant consequences of intelligence research that uses neuroimaging approaches as this data may be used to justify reductions in high school graduation and college admission rates for ethnic/minority students.
EEG applications
The electroencephalogram (EEG) has traditionally been used to diagnose seizures and epilepsy. However, this technology is now being applied to research that measures intelligence as it allows for examinations of functional connectivity networks. Functional connectivity networks are connections within the brain that allow for communication between different brain regions. Measures of the EEG that are evaluated in intelligence research include the posterior dominant rhythm (PDR). The PDR is a neurological biomarker that is reflective of sensory integration and is measured by cycles per second. Individuals that are deemed to have a “normal” PDR typically have a PDR that is between 8 and 12 Hz whereas a PDR below 8 Hz or above 12 Hz may be indicative of a cognitive disorder. While the posterior dominant rhythm (PDR) has utility in evaluating sensory integration and cognitive functioning, it is not a determinant of intelligence. Thus, because variation in PDRs may be attributable to medication effects, attention deficits, or other causes, research that asserts that a slower or faster PDR is associated with higher or lower levels of IQ remains inconclusive.
EEGs and standardized tests
Research that uses EEGs to measure intelligence indicates that children of low socioeconomic status (SES) reflect slower PDRs and perform worse on cognitive tests that measure quantitative reasoning, reading comprehension, and working memory. These articles not only stigmatize children from low SES backgrounds but suggest that their SES significantly influences their cognitive maturation across the lifespan. This is attributable to the assertion by some EEG researchers that the PDR is a heritable trait that affects performance on standardized IQ tests and is resistant to change over time.
Research that utilizes EEGs and standardized intelligence measures relies upon flawed methodological approaches. Specifically, analyses of EEGs and their comparative databases for predictions of intelligence reflect that the databases are underpowered and do not contain adequate sampling to account for factors related to race, ethnicity, and/or SES. These implications suggest that because these databases are not generalizable to diverse populations, the conclusions derived from this research are likely to lead to incorrect predictions that reinforce negative stereotypes.
Additionally, considerations of standardized test scores according to ethnicity groups have historically reflected that ethnic minorities score lower on these assessments. Researchers suggest that these differences in test scores are attributable to limited access to quality education and cultural biases in the test design. Thus, the attempt to correlate the posterior dominant rhythm (PDR) with a standardized test score is not only based on a flawed methodological approach but is harmful. The harms associated with this research are attributable to the attempt to provide a biological justification for the myth that minorities are intellectually inferior which has been debunked in previous research.
Ethical implications of standardized tests
While psychometrists may assert that standardized academic achievement tests should not be classified as measures of intelligence, these assessments evaluate performance on similar factors that have been historically included in IQ tests. These implications have led some universities to remove standardized test scores from their admissions requirements. For universities that have not removed this requirement, these tests reduce the likelihood that students from minority backgrounds will be invited for matriculation.
Ethical analyses that evaluate the implications of the use of standardized tests and neurological bases of intelligence must consider the significant consequences that may come from this research. Given that the current political climate in the US has resulted in overturning advancements in school admissions for ethnic minorities and individuals of low SES, the implications of asserting that intelligence is a static biological trait that affects academic performance will negatively skew admissions and graduation data for these populations. These considerations also suggest that because this research may serve as a justification to exclude minority students from higher education institutions, it may also limit employment opportunities that would lead to economic advancement.
Conclusion
The use of neuroimaging techniques to evaluate the relationship between IQ and SES has significant and harmful consequences for ethnic minorities. The attempt to establish a biological basis for IQ is historically rooted in eugenics philosophy as this ideology aimed to legitimize the assertion that ethnic minorities are intellectually and genetically inferior to individuals of European descent. The implications for research that aims to establish that IQ is genetically related to neurological functioning will likely lead to harms that will disproportionately affect minority populations. These considerations deserve the attention of the ethics community as the future consequences of this research may lead to a perpetuation of systemic injustices that plague minority populations due to continued oppression via the educational system and reduced opportunities for economic advancement.
Kris Williams, Ph.D. is a former Clinical Neurophysiology Post-Doctoral Fellow of the Brai3n Clinic and is currently a bioethics student at Columbia University.