Abstract

Over the past century, criminological study on intelligence has gone through a lot of ups and downs. Numerous studies in the first quarter of the 20th century labelled criminals as "mentally retarded” or “mentally sick”. The connection between criminal behavior and intellectual capacity has drawn a lot of attention in the literature. We provide evidence for the empirical connection between crime and education in this essay. A significant discovery was the inverse relationship between criminal activity and education levels. However, it must be made sure that education leads to crime as the direction of causality. The effect of education on crime and intelligence gathering is covered in this article. To effectively describe our topic, we investigate intelligent systems and models. Crime-fighting education at the school level is crucial for everyone in order to lower crime rates, according to research on the relationships between crime, intelligence, and education.

Key Words

Crime, Intelligence, Education

Introduction

Our society experiences a lot of uneasiness and unease due to crime. Crime victims frequently experience trauma, which can have detrimental long-term effects on their health. Those who are not victims of crime can also develop insecurities due to crime. Additionally, this can make people unhappy. The elderly in particular, fear going out at night. The confidence of other guys is likewise negatively impacted by high crime rates. Mainly because of the significant economic and social benefits it produces, crime reduction is high on the public policy agenda. In truth, there are many ways to help reduce crime as part of the research on the factors that influence crime. For instance, a substantial amount of social science research takes into account the potential to spend on crime-fighting resources (such as increased police presence or new crime-fighting technologies) or certain crime-fighting strategies. Other research concentrates more on the traits of criminals and analyzes which traits are most strongly linked to increased criminal activity. In the latter scenario, if these regulations were successfully implemented, they might be utilized to combat crime.

We concentrate on one such aspect, education and intelligence, which has drawn some attention in the quantitative literature on the predictors of crime. Numerous studies have been done in this literature that relates people's education to their involvement in crime, often finding that those with less education are more likely to do so. 1 It is challenging to ensure that the direction of causality goes from education to crime, which a drawback is linked with practically everything in this study (and not the other way around). This is crucial if one wants to think about effective policy responses to scientific findings, of course. Criminologists might suppose that this serves as a basic summary of how a person's educational attainment affects their criminal or antisocial behaviour. However, parents may view this as a conversation about how crime and violence in schools affect children's safety and ability to learn. The legislature may interpret this as comparing the amount of money Pakistan spends on crime prevention to the amount spent on enhancing Pakistani educational facilities or other similar organizations around the world. Therefore, newcomers might not anticipate all of these techniques.

While it is acknowledged that a variety of personal and environmental factors (such as gender, age, peer support, poverty, education, ethnicity, poor impulse control, empathy, mental health, personality, etc.) may have an impact on criminal behavior, the relationship between low IQ levels and criminal participation continues to receive a lot of attention (Diaz, Belena, & Baguena, 1994; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2004). In fact, a meta-analysis exploring the association between cognitive and affective empathy and criminal behaviour discovered that it vanished once IQ and socioeconomic level were taken into account (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2004). This is not meant to discount the idea of empathy, but the capacity to perceive others' feelings may be a key indicator of intellect and is ultimately linked to violence (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2004). In general, studies looking into the causes of criminal conduct, particularly juvenile delinquency, continue to show that having a low IQ makes someone more likely to commit a crime (Diaz et al., 1994).

The current use of scientific methodologies in crime research at all levels has increased attention to the subject of crime, which has always been a severe social issue. In fact, before genuine scientific interest may arise, the sciences that shed light on human behaviour and behaviour, such as biology, psychology, sociology, and psychiatry, must advance. The scope of the issue is still little understood, and the huge and lucrative field of research is mostly untapped, despite great advancements in several areas. The early understanding that crime was an issue almost exclusively within the province of psychiatry rather than law or sociology, the realm of normal human relationships, was perhaps the most significant advancement. Since all crime is a byproduct of the complexity of human nature, which reacts in tortuous and inexplicable ways to the complexity of the social order, there are many different angles and approaches to analyze this criminal problem. In the past, basic information about criminals was limited to the dull details of social and economic lives. Contrarily, examining behavioural responses, psychological attitudes, intellectual and emotional gifts, physical growth, habits, and preferences is also necessary for the study of crime. 

IQ and Crime Relationship

It is crucial to understand how intelligence—often measured via psychological exams and expressed as an IQ score—relates to criminality. Predicting crime and managing the level of crime in society are essential. Analyzing the causes of violent crime is a necessary first step in the search for predictors. Like clockwork, sociologists, psychologists, and legal experts attempt to identify the crime scene by looking at internal or external, stable or contextual elements. One school of thought contends that personal attributes, such as neurobiological traits (levels of impulsivity), cognitive capabilities, or personality traits, influence criminal behaviour. Another set of beliefs contends that culture, social background, values and attitudes, and level of economic position all influence crime. IQ tests a person's capacity for thought. Poor situational decision-making and inadequate appraisal of the effects of certain acts are caused by low IQ. Low IQ can also result in subpar cognitive growth and academic achievement, which can result in poverty and low socioeconomic position (SES). Crime may result from any one of these circumstances. Low IQ people are more likely to decide to engage in criminal behaviour, be convinced to commit the crime, and support the punishment. Most research indicates that IQ only indirectly influences criminal behaviour. The environment or how well students achieve in school typically attenuate this effect. Through group IQ, a new pattern in the association between IQ and criminality has emerged. According to this method, collective IQ influences both criminal conduct and individual behaviour. Hernstein and Murray's contentious book The Bell Curve, which argued for the impact of crowds on various criteria, including IQ and crime, is where the idea of crowd intelligence first emerged. His techniques and findings have inspired a flurry of additional inquiries despite receiving harsh criticism. There were two tactics applied. The first is a comparative survey of adolescent offenders and detainees. According to the findings, inmates with lower IQs exhibited more violent behaviour more frequently, received longer sentences, and had greater recidivism rates than inmates with higher IQs.

Teens that are delinquent have lower IQ scores. Another tactic is to keep track of the group's IQ and other criminal indicators. The research was done on a national level (lower IQ countries have higher crime levels), state level (lower IQ states have higher crime levels), and jail level (lower IQ prisons have more violence). Although the idea of group IQ (and national IQ) is debatable and criticized, the results of many studies seem to hold true. It is still debatable whether we should deduce individual behaviour from group traits, particularly in groups as big and diverse as state populations or countries. Experience has no bearing on the correlation between IQ and criminal behaviour. Between young non-criminals and crime dropouts, Rome and Malmo discovered considerable IQ differences. Individual and group IQs were found to significantly explain aggressive behaviour, according to Diamond, Morris, and Barnes. Ruston and Templar explored the connection between national IQ and crime in their vast investigation (homicide, rape, and felony assault). They came to the conclusion that crime rates are influenced in part by national IQ after discovering strong negative correlations between all factors. It is significant to emphasize that their data have weak explanatory power (CI only explains 6.25 per cent of homicides, 8.41 per cent of rapes and 4.41 per cent of aggravated assaults). The birth rate, GDP, HIV prevalence, and skin tone are more closely correlated with IQ. The most plausible causes of IQ disparity can be attributed to education resources and spending, which have a known effect on GDP. The best indicator of bad academic performance is the labour market's structure, as well.




How Education Can Impact on Crime

Since crime is defined as a deviation from the norm, many theories attempting to explain why people engage in criminal activity begin with the supposition that the deviations themselves are to blame. Since the beginning of time, crimes have been linked to the individual's "internal structures" (such as physical and mental health issues, and mental decline), as well as to the environment in which the crime was committed or to the family's particular situation (such as political and social anomalies, war conditions or disruption of family life). Education is regularly brought up in the context of how it affects or is affected by criminal behaviour in young people; hence the connection between education and crime is widely examined. Even when a crime is explained, it is rarely possible to predict what would happen in an objective situation. To my knowledge, there is no evidence to support the idea that traditional sociological characteristics are associated with crime. Despite the fact that people who breach a specific rule differ substantially from those who follow it in every way, both groups respond to incentives. There are costs and benefits to both legal and illegal activities. Rather than relying on assumptions about specific personal characteristics and social conditions that influence "law-abidingness," violent tendencies, risk appetite, or general criminality preferences, one can distinguish preferences for objective chance and consider the extent to which given preferences can be determined by influence to explain illegal behaviour. Since Fleisher and Smigel-Leibowitz pioneered this approach in the 1960s, and Becker made significant contributions in the 1970s and '70s, I used this method in my crime study (Ehrlich, 1970, 1973). (1968).

Education's potential impact on crime has a long list of theoretical underpinnings. It appears that education may influence criminal participation in at least three ways: through financial effects, time availability, and risk tolerance or aversion (based on socioeconomic literature currently available). Almost certainly, the vast majority of criminal crimes will be reduced as a result of these factors. Each of these channels will be examined in further detail below. Lawful employment pays more and has a higher opportunity cost for illegal behaviour because of education. In this way, incentives to invest in human capital reduce crime by raising future wages (Lochner, 2004). As a result of criminal activity, one might expect to be jailed. Earnings rise as a result of schooling, which necessitates more time spent outside the workforce (Lochner and Moretti, 2004; Hjalmarsson, 2008). As a result, persons with greater financial stability are less likely to engage in criminal activity. Education has long been associated with higher incomes, better job prospects, and a decrease in criminal activity. According to many logical theories that linked education and crime, Ehrlich (1975) conducted empirical research to test his predictions. Grogger (1998) investigated the link between criminal conduct and income. Having high school graduation decreases crime efficiency, and criminals on average have less education than non-criminals, according to the authors. Adolescent criminality responds to financial incentives, according to Grogger (1998). In addition, he speculates that the rise in teenage crime rates may have been influenced in part by actual wage reductions over time. In the 1970s and '80s, Machin and Meghir study the link between the crime scene and the low-wage labour market in England and Wales (2004). After determining that crime rates reduced in the 25% of locations with the slowest wage growth, the authors concluded that "increasing human capital accumulation through the education system or other means...improving individual labour market productivity...would reduce crime.".

The Intelligence Process

Intelligence

The process of giving information meaning by interpretation might be referred to as intelligence. It is also used to characterize organizations or industries that gather or process this information, as well as to define the outcomes of these activities or industries. Intelligence can be defined as processed information in its most basic form. Information that law enforcement agencies gather, use, and safeguard to plan and support criminal investigations is referred to as "intelligence" for law enforcement use exclusively.




Intelligence: Knowledge (Processed Information) Designed for Action 

There is always some degree of interpretation involved with intelligence, which always results in uncertainty and risk. The quality and quantity of the information determine the level of speculation and risk. Typically, intelligence is classified into two categories:




Strategic Intelligence

It focuses on the overarching objectives of law enforcement organizations. It typically looks at the present and developing trends, shifts in the criminal environment, dangers to safety and public order, openings for control operations and the development of counter-programs, and potential directions for modifying laws, programs, and policies.




Operational Intelligence

The investigating team typically receives assumptions and inferences about particular components of any kind of criminal operation from it. These will comprise presumptions and inferences about certain criminal organizations, people, or groups engaged in illicit activity, detailing their tactics, weaknesses, capabilities, and intents in order to conduct efficient law enforcement operations.




Criminal Intelligence Analysis

"Criminal intelligence" – what is it? Criminal investigators are among the majority of people who associate the phrase with collector-style systems used to store and retrieve the data we gather on crimes and offenders. We have gradually implemented increasingly advanced systems to aid in storage and retrieval as the volume and variety of information we collect has increased. The adoption of information technology (IT) has been remarkably successful in this specific setting. There is little doubt that without these technologies, we simply would not be able to undertake the duty of recording and collecting criminal information as a service. For crime detectives, using IT to save and retrieve criminal information is now virtually second nature. Intelligence gathering does not result from information gathering alone. Prior to acting, information must be thoroughly evaluated. Analyzing criminal intelligence can help it become even more valuable. When the amount and complexity of accessible intelligence are too great for straightforward actions, analysis is required to produce meaningful results. The information we get about crimes or offenders cannot currently be properly utilized by the intelligence services themselves or their clients (i.e. operational crime detectives) to produce true "criminal intelligence." Investigators may still not be able to fully utilize this important resource without carefully evaluating this material and conducting an analysis with analysts, despite the modern storage systems and simple access to criminal intelligence. the knowledge produced by this procedure. A theory called Criminal Intelligence Analysis (CIA) outlines how we use the intelligence and data we gather about crimes and criminals to look into crimes and criminals. It offers the methods for building the "natural intuition" that skilled researchers constantly employ in their subconscious thought processes and deductive reasoning. Additionally, it offers tools that enable us to comprehend the data we gather and impart that understanding to others.




Intelligence Analysis and Organized Crime

Crime turning from individual to organized or group-based is directly tied to the development of criminal intelligence analysis. The effectiveness of law enforcement organizations to combat criminal organizations depends on the efficient use of intelligence. The agency receives the knowledge it needs through intelligence analysis to efficiently manage its resources. When given the right tasks, intelligence analysis products can assist in creating strategic plans to solve present issues and get ready for potential future issues. Analysis of criminal intelligence enables law enforcement agencies to effectively combat crimes. They might use it to recognize and comprehend the criminal organizations that are active nearby. Law enforcement officials may start analyzing existing crime trends once criminal groups have been identified and their habits are understood in order to anticipate and thwart the growth of alleged future criminal activities. The basis for making decisions and the information needed to choose suitable targets for an inquiry are provided by intelligence. Criminal intelligence analysis can be used to support investigations, surveillance activities, and case prosecution, but it can also help law enforcement agencies manage their finances, resources, and other duties related to crime prevention. Cosa Nostra was the definition of "organized crime" in the early 2000s. Today, the landscape of organized crime is very different. For riches and power, numerous new, well-organized criminal organizations were formed. These organizations include drug cartels, illegal motorcycle gangs, organized crime syndicates from Russia, Asia, and Africa, as well as numerous street gangs that are, to name a few, Asian, Korean, Hispanic, black, and white supremacist. As networks that are fluid and nearly unstructured, like the criminal network in West Africa, continue to emerge, the degree of complexity is further rising. It should be mentioned that collaboration among various organized crime groups and networks is frequent.

Criminal organizations continue to engage in murder, extortion, fraud, drug trafficking, and human trafficking. Some criminals are now dabbling in new fields, like high-tech crime. The rapid expansion of online resources in recent years has created new income opportunities for crooks. For law enforcement, the rise of high-tech crime is a difficult and developing area. Criminal gangs today are more advanced and active than ever. In order to lessen the impact of criminal activity on our communities, law enforcement must be ready for an increasingly complex situation. Law enforcement organizations must develop thorough, definite, and futuristic methods to deal with the threat posed by organized criminal groups if they are to succeed in this goal. Criminal intelligence analysis has the potential to be a valuable tool in the arsenals of law enforcement when it is successfully disseminated and applied. The UK is one of the nations that has created national intelligence models to help standardize the use of criminal intelligence. These nations have the most experience in this field. For exchanging intelligence, information technology is crucial. The failure to share intelligence and information effectively hampers international efforts to combat terrorism, particularly in this era of sophisticated transnational crime, including terrorism.




Measuring the Size of the IQ-crime Correlation

If persons with low IQs commit more crimes than people with high IQs, on average, is the central question of IQ crime study. That is, do IQ and criminality have a negative relationship? According to prior studies, a qualified "yes" is the optimal response. Criminals and offenders had average IQ scores that were 8 to 10 points lower than those of non-offenders, or almost half the standard deviation. Around r = -0.20, there was a negative correlation between IQ and criminal behavior (Hirschi and Hindelang; Wilson and Herrnstein). The association between IQ and criminality is demonstrated by the following five well-known research.

4,552 Danish men born at the conclusion of World War II were investigated by Terrie Moffitt and her colleagues. They investigated criminal records from the Danish National Police register as well as intelligence test results gathered by the Danish military (to screen prospective recruits). The average IQ score of men who committed two or more crimes before the age of 20 was one full standard deviation lower than that of non-offenders, and there was a substantial negative correlation between IQ and criminality, r = -.19.

In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 430 seventh-graders were the subject of a study by Donald Lynam and colleagues. They assessed criminal behavior and intelligence. IQ scores of children who have committed severe crimes, including carjacking, breaking in, or drug sales, are 8 to 10 points lower than those of youngsters who have not. At r = -0.22, the connection between IQ scores and criminality was significantly higher for verbal IQ than for performance IQ (r = -0.33 vs. -0, 06).

Between the ages of 3 and 30, Hakan Stattin and Ingrid Klackenberg-Larsson followed 122 Swedish men. They calculated the number of people under the age of thirty who had criminal records and measured the IQs of children aged three, five, eight, eleven, fourteen, and seventeen. Average IQ for frequent criminals, namely those who had committed four or more crimes, was just 91; for sporadic offenders, it was 97; and for non-violent offenders, it was 102. Surprisingly, at (Spearman) rho = -.25, IQ at age three was significantly correlated with criminal history. Around rho = -.20, IQ is also linked to crime in later life.

Scott Maynard and Barbara Morse conducted an IQ test and self-reported criminal behavior survey on 257 high school students in San Diego, California. With a correlation coefficient of -0.88, IQ was linked to less serious crimes such petty theft, offenses involving alcohol, vandalism, truancy, and running away. IQ has a negative correlation (r = -.16) with significant crimes such as gang fights, carjackings, larceny, and robberies.

Education as Crime Prevention

The view that crime may be reduced most of the time through increased crime prevention is one of the major concepts behind the general concept of the impact of education on crime. Additionally, education is the most effective method of crime prevention. Most individuals would agree that education can play a significant role in keeping people from committing crimes. Given the aforementioned debate, higher levels of education frequently result in a variety of other factors that are thought to decrease criminal or antisocial conduct. The research often provides two justifications for the effectiveness of education in reducing crime and antisocial behavior. The first is that people's preferences can alter as a result of education (and thus their choices). Another argument is that education lessens time preference (i.e., realizing the effects of one's actions frequently makes one put off meeting demands directly). Some claim that education increases time preferences for future consumption by teaching students the advantages of working now to prepare for the future and decreases time preferences for current consumption by educating them the potential pitfalls of instant satisfaction. The upcoming). Numerous academics think that formal education, or academic success, has a significant influence on how pupils are taught to prioritize the future through the study of history, sociology, and other disciplines. The representations of events and challenges in adult life that formal education and instruction might portray are inevitable future issues for all teenagers. Therefore, the gap between present enjoyment and the future should be closed more efficiently by educated people. Many academics argue that an individual will assess the potential repercussions (i.e. punishment) of his present criminal or antisocial action more heavily the more educated he is. Higher education should discourage people from committing crimes by educating them about the advantages of delaying pleasure. The quick satisfaction of preferences and wishes through illicit conduct is seen to become less significant to people as a result.




The Intelligence (IQ) and Crime Connection with Education

When analyzing potential connections between education and criminal behavior, current research supports a number of tendencies. According to experience, both greater and lower educational levels have a major impact on criminal behavior. Additionally, evidence suggests that those with learning difficulties are more likely to engage in violent behavior (and therefore have lower educational, intellectual and coping skills). The interwoven causal patterns of events that take place in learning, which are concentrated on education, are the main cause of these relationships. Prosocial behavior or actions deemed to be supporters of a society's moral principles is frequently predicted by academic performance. Most would contend that this is true because in most countries, academic success is linked to a number of other factors, including financial success, good self-esteem, and internal control. The reasons underlying the widespread assumption that folks with high IQs are typically less prone to commit crimes than those with low IQs may be explained by this particular model. The main premise when looking into the relationship between criminal behavior and IQ is that greater IQ is linked to better academic success. As was already noted, a number of social aspects are also linked to strong academic success. People with lower IQs might perform worse in school, which would diminish their self-esteem, and perform worse financially, which would increase their tendency for criminal conduct. In order to stop the establishment of these negative traits, it appears that it is crucial to prioritize schooling and address early learning difficulties. Future criminal activity and the ensuing rise in crime rates can be avoided in this way. When examining the relationship between education and crime, the relationship between a person's level of intelligence and their criminal behavior is a very difficult and contentious topic. The majority of empirical investigations discover a negative relationship between IQ and criminal behavior. In other words, while one rises, the other falls.

Popular arguments are also made against IQ being a factor in criminal behavior. Standardized IQ testing, according to some, primarily gauge the knowledge and morals of the middle class, not the inherent intelligence of people. The conclusion is that minorities typically score lower on IQ tests because of their diverse cultural backgrounds. These same groups also engage in higher criminal activity as a result of systemic disadvantages like discrimination and poverty. IQ and crime are objectively connected, meaning that those who perform poorly on IQ tests also tend to commit crimes; however, this connection does not imply causation and rather reflects the available data. intelligence that is skewed toward certain cultures (see Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences). as above, clever The structural disadvantage of rising crime rates, according to a variant of this argument, also results in less educational chances, which lowers people's capacity and incentive to perform well on IQ tests. Many contend that the IQ-crime association only exists because both are caused by structural disadvantages, making it at best a "spurious" correlation from a statistical perspective. Because IQ and crime are substantially connected within groups of race and class and when statistically controlling for race, class, test ability, and test-taking ability, these types of discrimination hypotheses have received little support in empirical studies despite their widespread appeal. Consider motive.

Conclusion

Criminality has caused a great deal of fear and anxiety in our society. Crime reduction is a top priority in public policy, in large part because of the numerous economic and social advantages it brings. There are a number of avenues criminals might take to find ways to lessen crime. We focus on education and intelligence, which has received some attention in the quantitative literature on crime predictors. Still, the link between low IQ and criminal activity is widely discussed.

According to a meta-analysis of the impact of cognitive and emotional empathy on criminal behaviour, the link between poor empathy and crime was eliminated when IQ and socioeconomic status were taken into account. Not that the idea of empathy should be discounted, but it's possible that understanding other people's emotions has a significant impact on intelligence and is eventually linked to violence. Every crime is a result of human nature reacting to the social order's intricacies in convoluted and confusing ways. Investigations of behavioral responses, psychological attitudes, intellectual and emotional abilities, physical growth, habits, and preferences are necessary for the study of crime. Additionally, all relevant private and personal information about each criminal's day-to-day activities. The significance of this issue is still hardly ever understood, and the research area is still mostly unexplored.

In conclusion, it is challenging to refute the idea that investing in education can significantly reduce the social costs of crime. Years of schooling are consistently linked to a lower chance of criminality, according to empirical data (ie, higher education, educational attainment, and intelligence). However, it was also discovered that years of education actually enhanced the risk of engaging in other behaviors, such as tax fraud and embezzlement. Interestingly, people with higher levels of education typically have more accepting views and social standards toward illegal behavior. Because they experience crime less frequently and are less likely to become victims of violent crime, highly educated people may be more tolerant.

References

• Beraldo, S. (2010). Do differences in IQ predict Italian north–south differences in income? A methodological critique to Lynn. Intelligence, 38(5), 456–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.06.007
• Diaz, A., Beleña, A., & Jose Baguena, M. (1994). The role of gender in juvenile deliquency: Personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(2), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90167-8
• Diamond, B., Morris, R. G., & Barnes, J. (2012). Individual and group IQ predict inmate violence. Intelligence, 40(2), 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2012.01.010
• Ehrlich, I. (1975). “ On the Relation between Education and Crime,” Chapter 12. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
• Fleisher, & Belton., M. (1966). The Economics of Delinquency, Quadrangle Books, Inc, Chicago,
• Grogger, J. (1998). “Market wages and youth crime.” Journal of Labour Economics 16(4), 756-791.
• Hirschi, T., & Hindelang, M. J. (1977). Intelligence and Delinquency: A Revisionist Review. American Sociological Review, 42(4), 571. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094556
• Isen, J. (2010). A meta-analytic assessment of Wechsler’s P>V sign in antisocial populations. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(4), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.02.003
• olliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2004). Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta- analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9(5), 441–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2003.03.001
• Lochner, L. (2004). Education, work, and crime: a human capital approach*. International Economic Review, 45(3), 811–843. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-6598.2004.00288.x
• Lochner, L., & Moretti, E. (2004). The Effect of Education on Crime: Evidence from Prison Inmates, Arrests, and Self-Reports. American Economic Review, 94(1), 155–189. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282804322970751
• Lynn, R., & Meisenberg, G. (2010). National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations. Intelligence, 38(4), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.007
• Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T. (2012). National IQs: A review of their educational, cognitive, economic, political, demographic, sociological, epidemiological, geographic and climatic correlates. Intelligence, 40(2), 226–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2011.11.004
• Lynn, R. (2010). IQ differences between the north and south of Italy: A reply to Beraldo and Cornoldi, Belacchi, Giofre, Martini, and Tressoldi. Intelligence, 38(5), 451–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.07.001
• Templer, D. I., & Rushton, J. P. (2011). IQ, skin color, crime, HIV/AIDS, and income in 50 U.S. states. Intelligence, 39(6), 437–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2011.08.001
• Levine, S. Z. (2011). Elaboration on the association between IQ and parental SES with subsequent crime. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(8), 1233–1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.02.016
• McGloin, J. M., Pratt, T. C., & Maahs, J. (2004). Rethinking the IQ-delinquency relationship: A longitudinal analysis of multiple theoretical models. Justice Quarterly, 21(3), 603–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820400095921
• Romi, S.; Marom, D. (2007). Differences in intelligence between nondelinquent and dropout delinquent adolescents, Adolescence , Summer, 42(166), 325-337.
• Rushton, J. P., & Templer, D. I. (2009). National differences in intelligence, crime, income, and skin color. Intelligence, 37(4), 341–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2009.04.003