As a Ghanaian, I have compelling reasons to disregard the racially biased IQ rankings published by World Data Info. These rankings, purportedly measuring the intelligence levels of various countries, rely on outdated and discredited studies that fail to provide an accurate or scientific assessment of a population’s intellectual abilities. A primary source of this data is the controversial 2002 book IQ and the Wealth of Nations by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, which has faced significant criticism for its unreliable findings and problematic methodology. This book is widely seen as perpetuating harmful stereotypes rather than providing a meaningful comparison of intellectual capacity across nations.
The rankings present absurdly low average IQ scores for some countries, such as 61 for Ghana, 51 for Nepal (which is for someone fairly retarded per American standards), and 77 for India (a nation that has produced more tech CEOs in recent times than any other). These numbers have drawn sharp criticism, as they are based on questionable sources, including studies that sampled individuals from specialized educational settings rather than the general population. For example, in Equatorial Guinea’s case, an IQ sample was taken from students at a developmental school in Spain, which is by no means a representative reflection of the nation’s intelligence. Using such atypical data to represent entire populations distorts any reasonable assessment of cognitive capability.
World Data Info also cites research by Donald Templera and Hiroko Arikawa, who claimed to have found a correlation between skin pigmentation and IQ. While these researchers stated that this relationship was not due to skin color itself but to climate-influenced pigmentation, their approach remains deeply flawed and scientifically dubious. Intelligence is influenced by many factors, primarily social, educational, and economic conditions, and these factors play a far more substantial role in IQ variation than pigmentation. Presenting this as part of the data only reinforces outdated, unscientific notions of racial difference in intelligence.
The data’s credibility is further undermined by World Data Info’s emphasis on geographic ancestry and skin color as determining factors in intelligence, despite disclaimers that deny any direct link. This approach is misleading and perpetuates harmful stereotypes, especially considering that within any given population, IQ scores vary significantly based on socio-economic status, access to quality education, and other external conditions. Suggesting that pigmentation could be a meaningful measure of intellectual capability is not only outdated but risks reinforcing racial biases that have no place in modern science.
In reality, intelligence and IQ tests are widely seen as limited measures of cognitive ability, as they are profoundly affected by various factors including education, nutrition, and the surrounding environment. These tests often do not account for cultural and socio-economic differences and have been shown to be biased, particularly against non-Western countries where standardized testing may not reflect individual potential or local cultural norms. As a result, many psychologists and educators have questioned the validity of global IQ comparisons, arguing that they ignore the unique contexts of each nation and unfairly stigmatize certain populations.
Given these extensive flaws and the biased assumptions underlying the data, Ghanaians and others worldwide can confidently dismiss these rankings as a misguided attempt to quantify intelligence through an unscientific and racially biased lens. Rather than provide a meaningful look at intelligence levels across nations, this type of ranking serves only to reinforce outdated prejudices and assumptions. Rejecting these rankings is a step toward embracing a more nuanced and equitable understanding of intelligence that respects diverse backgrounds and experiences.
