Cookie policy: This site uses cookies to simplify and improve your usage and experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information on how we use and manage cookies please take a look at our privacy and cookie policies. Your privacy is important to us and our policy is to neither share nor sell your personal information to any external organisation or party; nor to use behavioural analysis for advertising to you.

Physicists are more intelligent than social scientists, paper says

Social scientists are of ‘lower average intelligence’ than those in natural sciences - at least at elite universities, authors argue

Woman praying at desk

Source: Getty

Give us this day: wisdom to tell statistical significance from scientific significance

If you have glimpsed social scientists alone in their offices with hands clasped in prayer, you might have assumed that they were fearing Armageddon for their discipline in an era of high tuition fees.

But, according to a new paper, the real explanation may be that social scientists are of “lower average intelligence” than their scientific colleagues – at least at elite universities.

“Intelligence and religious and political differences among members of the US academic elite”, published in the Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, draws primarily on a 1967 study of 148 male academics at the University of Cambridge to demonstrate that the scientists at top institutions are more intelligent than the social scientists.

It then cites a 2007 study of academic religiosity at top US universities as evidence of the greater godliness of social scientists.

The difference is statistically significant only for physics and political science. But the paper’s co-author, Edward Dutton, adjunct professor (docent) in anthropology at the University of Oulu in Finland, said that the smaller differences between other subjects “went the same way”, while physics’ high mathematical content made it “the most scientific of the sciences”.

The paper also argues that scientists’ higher intelligence accounts for their political moderation. In a 2005 survey of 1,643 US academics, larger proportions of physicists and engineers than social scientists described themselves as moderate – although smaller proportions of biology, maths and chemistry academics did so.

The paper’s other co-author, Richard Lynn, emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Ulster, has previously published controversial studies linking intelligence differences to race and sex. In 2008 he argued that scholars’ lower religiosity compared with the general public was explained by their greater intelligence.

Robert Dingwall, a freelance sociologist, criticised the latest paper’s use of “a hodge-podge of studies” to find “some weak correlations”.

He said: “I may be mainly a qualitative social scientist, but even I know enough to question an unsystematic review that does not consider the difference between statistical significance and scientific significance.”

Dr Dutton admitted that a “niggle” of doubt remained, which required replication with a larger sample to eliminate. However, many data problems that he had anticipated “didn’t seem to be that problematic” when the paper was peer-reviewed.

He said that he could imagine some academics saying the paper is “specious and doesn’t make any sense”. But, he added, “you really need [a month] to consider it”.

paul.jump@tsleducation.com

Times Higher Education free 30-day trial

Rate this article  (3.24 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (6)

  • Darren Stephens

    Which reminds me of that famous mathematician and political moderate, Theodore Kaczinski, aka the Unabomber. Though there was no doubting his intelligence, for a given value of "intelligence", of course.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Paul Spencer

    Really? Next you'll be telling us that there is a scientific study underway to find the genetic underpinnings of "Physics Envy"!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It's clcikbait

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why is THE reporting on such a week, divisive and frankly useless piece of research?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • " Edward Dutton, adjunct professor (docent) in anthropology at the University of Oulu in Finland"

    FWIW, this is somewhere between mis-leading and inaccurate: it looks like Dutton doesn't work at the University of Oulu. Docent is an academic degree, not a job. It's similar to the German habilitation.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • David N. Andrews M. Ed., C. P. S. E.

    Bob O'Hara: "FWIW, this is somewhere between mis-leading and inaccurate: it looks like Dutton doesn't work at the University of Oulu. Docent is an academic degree, not a job. It's similar to the German habilitation."

    Entirely incorrect. As you would have found out, had you bothered to verify your idea first.

    1- Ed Dutton IS dosentti at the University of Oulu, in the Faculty of Humanities - Department of Cultural Anthropology.
    2- In Finnish universities, 'dosentti' (docent) is NOT an academic degree: it is an academic POSITION, equivalent to that of 'reader' (UK-style universities) or 'adjunct professor' (US-style universities).

    Hint- before saying something, make sure it's correct.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Remember you need to be a registered THE member and logged in to comment on stories. Please read our terms and conditions for posting guidance.

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comments (6)
  • Rate
  • Save
  • Print
  • Share
  • Comments (6)
  • Rate
  • Save
Jobs