You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

JGWeissman comments on Poly marriage? - Less Wrong Discussion

-9 Post author: h-H 06 June 2012 07:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (127)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 07 June 2012 06:16:41PM 7 points [-]

Incest laws in general makes no sense.

I believe I've previously pointed out inbreeding depression to you; from Jensen 1969:

In Japan approximately 5% of all marriages are between cousins. Schull and Neel studied the offspring of marriages of first cousins, first cousins once removed, and second cousins. The parents were statistically matched with a control group of unrelated parents for age and socioeconomic factors. Children from the cousin marriages and the control children from unrelated parents (total N=2111) were given the Japanese version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The degree of consanguinity represented by the cousin marriages in this study had the effect of depressing WISC IQs by an average of 7.4%, making the mean of the inbred group nearly 8 IQ points lower than the mean of the control group. Assuming normal distributions of IQ, the effect is shown in Figure 9, and illustrates the point that the most drastic consequences of group mean differences are to be seen in the tails of the distributions. In the same study, a similar depressing effect was found for other polygenic characteristics such as several anthropometric and dental variables.

The mating of relatives closer than cousins can produce a markedly greater reduction in offspring's IQs. Lindzey (1967) has reported that almost half of a group of children born to so-called nuclear incest matings (brother-sister or father-daughter) could not be placed for adoption because of mental retardation and other severe defects which had a relatively low incidence among the offspring of unrelated parents who were matched with the incestuous parents in intelligence, socioeconomic status, age, weight, and stature.

No doubt one could dig up more recent results with a suitable search.

Comment author: JGWeissman 07 June 2012 06:21:37PM 0 points [-]

The parents were statistically matched with a control group of unrelated parents for age and socioeconomic factors.

Do "socioeconomic factors" include the parents' IQ?

Comment author: gwern 07 June 2012 06:30:08PM 2 points [-]

Given the strong influence of IQ on socioeconomic status, even without controlling for IQ explicitly, there's still going to be substantial controlling for IQ that way.

Comment author: JGWeissman 07 June 2012 06:45:23PM 2 points [-]

That would not be enough control if IQ has influence on whether someone marries their cousin.

Comment author: gwern 07 June 2012 06:55:19PM 2 points [-]

Are you arguing for the sake of arguing a methodological point, or do you seriously think that this point has a >50% chance of making the theoretically predicted and empirically confirmed phenomenon of inbreeding depression just go away?

Comment author: JGWeissman 07 June 2012 07:11:24PM 2 points [-]

I don't think it makes the inbreeding effect go away completely, but it seems worth considering if there are other contributing factors to the observed effect. (Probability less than 50%, but I think worth tracking.)

I would be careful about dismissing "methodological points". The methodological standards are there for a reason.