IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v84y2021ics0160289620300829.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

White-Black differences in tech tilt: Support for Spearman's law and investment theories

Author

Listed:
  • Coyle, Thomas R.

Abstract

Tilt refers to an ability bias and is based on within subject differences between two abilities, indicating strength in one ability (e.g., math) and weakness in another ability (e.g., verbal). The current study examined tech tilt for Whites and Blacks, two groups with an average ability difference (favoring Whites) of about one standard deviation on tests of general intelligence (g). Tech tilt was based on differences in technical (mechanical, electronic) and academic (math or verbal) abilities on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery. These differences produced tech tilt (tech > academic) and academic tilt (academic > tech). Tech tilt correlated negatively with math and verbal abilities on college tests (SAT, ACT, PSAT), with weaker effects for Whites. White-Black differences in relations of tech tilt with the college tests were neutralized after removing g. In addition, tech tilt predicted jobs and college majors in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math). Relations of tech tilt with STEM criteria were generally larger (and more often significant) for Whites, but only for tech tilt based on technical and verbal abilities. The results are consistent with Spearman's Law of Diminishing Returns (SLODR). SLODR assumes that relations among tests should be weaker for higher ability groups (Whites compared to Blacks) and that non-g variance (related to non-ability factors such as vocational choice) should be more pronounced for higher ability groups. The negative relations of tech tilt with college tests support investment theories, which assume that investment in one ability (technical) comes at the expense of competing abilities (academic).

Suggested Citation

  • Coyle, Thomas R., 2021. "White-Black differences in tech tilt: Support for Spearman's law and investment theories," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:84:y:2021:i:c:s0160289620300829
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2020.101504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289620300829
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2020.101504?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Coyle, Thomas R., 2019. "Tech tilt predicts jobs, college majors, and specific abilities: Support for investment theories," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 33-40.
    2. Wai, Jonathan & Hodges, Jaret & Makel, Matthew C., 2018. "Sex differences in ability tilt in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 35-year examination," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 76-83.
    3. Coyle, Thomas R., 2020. "Sex differences in tech tilt: Support for investment theories," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Coyle, Thomas R., 2022. "Sex differences in spatial and mechanical tilt: Support for investment theories," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Coyle, Thomas R., 2023. "Sex differences in tech tilt and academic tilt in adolescence: Processing speed mediates age-tilt relations," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Coyle, Thomas R. & Greiff, Samuel, 2021. "The future of intelligence: The role of specific abilities," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    4. Coyle, Thomas R., 2022. "Processing speed mediates the development of tech tilt and academic tilt in adolescence," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Coyle, Thomas R., 2023. "Sex differences in tech tilt and academic tilt in adolescence: Processing speed mediates age-tilt relations," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Coyle, Thomas R., 2022. "Sex differences in spatial and mechanical tilt: Support for investment theories," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    3. Coyle, Thomas R., 2022. "Processing speed mediates the development of tech tilt and academic tilt in adolescence," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Li, Dai & Wang, Yizhen & Li, Lantian, 2023. "Educational choice has greater effects on sex ratios of college STEM majors than has the greater male variance in general intelligence (g)," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Coyle, Thomas R. & Greiff, Samuel, 2021. "The future of intelligence: The role of specific abilities," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Becker, David & Coyle, Thomas R. & Minnigh, Tyler L. & Rindermann, Heiner, 2022. "International differences in math and science tilts: The stability, geography, and predictive power of tilt for economic criteria," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    7. Dunkel, Curtis S. & Madison, Guy, 2022. "The possible role of field independence/dependence on developmental sex differences in general intelligence," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    8. Stern, Charlotta & Madison, Guy, 2022. "Sex differences and occupational choice Theorizing for policy informed by behavioral science✰," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 694-702.
    9. Geary, David C., 2022. "Spatial ability as a distinct domain of human cognition: An evolutionary perspective," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. Sadowski, Ireneusz & Zawistowska, Alicja, 2020. "The net effect of ability tilt in gendered STEM-related choices," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    11. Coyle, Thomas R., 2020. "Sex differences in tech tilt: Support for investment theories," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    12. Wai, Jonathan & Lakin, Joni M. & Kell, Harrison J., 2022. "Specific cognitive aptitudes and gifted samples," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. Zullo, Matteo, 2022. "(No) Trade-off between numeracy and verbal reasoning development: PISA evidence from Italy's academic tracking," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    14. Oberleiter, Sandra & Fries, Jonathan & Schock, Laura S. & Steininger, Benedikt & Pietschnig, Jakob, 2023. "Predicting cross-national sex differences in large-scale assessments of students' reading literacy, mathematics, and science achievement: Evidence from PIRLS and TIMSS," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    15. Loehlin, John C., 2019. "Cognitive clustering—How general?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 19-22.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:84:y:2021:i:c:s0160289620300829. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.