Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!oberon!sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim
From: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.misc
Subject: Re: Knowledge and the Academics
Message-ID: <6724@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Jun-87 18:54:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: ism780c.6724
Posted: Thu Jun 25 18:54:13 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jun-87 05:30:57 EDT
References: <16224@brahms.Berkeley.EDU> <160200002@inmet> <2172@mmintl.UUCP> <123@snark.UUCP> <16745@cca.CCA.COM>
Reply-To: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica CA
Lines: 23
Xref: mnetor sci.bio:480 sci.misc:369

In article <16745@cca.CCA.COM> g-rh@CCA.CCA.COM.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes:
< 	Well now, the evidence is not nearly so strong as you claim.
< The principle results on identical twins were those of Cyril Burt's,
< which is where the conventional figure of 80% heritability comes from.
< However Burt's data and results were forged.   (I don't know if this is

There was an article in a U.S. News and World Report a while back ( I
can't be more specific, since I read it in a waiting room somewhere )
on this.  It said that a large study of twins and other siblings had
recently been completed ( I think they said that it was the largest
such study ever conducted ), and that the results were that such things
as intelligence and personality were very strongly determined by
heredity.  For instance, introvert vs. extrovert was something like
70% determined by heredity, and intelligence was similar.

Does anyone have more information on this?  Was the USN&WR article
accurate, or is this another case of a popular magazine screwing
up their science reporting?

Also, what does it mean to say that something is 70% determined
by heredity?
-- 
Tim Smith, Knowledgian		{sdcrdcf,seismo}!ism780c!tim