What is the average IQ for American African
Executive summary
Most mainstream reviews and meta-analyses of U.S. testing data place the average IQ for African Americans roughly one standard deviation below the non‑Hispanic white mean—commonly reported around 85 on the IQ=100 scale—though some recent summaries and authors report somewhat higher figures (around 90–91) depending on test, cohort, and adjustments [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What the empirical summaries report
Longstanding literature and reviews find a persistent mean difference between African Americans and white Americans of roughly 10–15 IQ points, with several widely cited syntheses putting African American averages near 85 while other compilations and later reanalyses have estimated values closer to 90–91; for example, multiple reviews state African Americans average about 85 compared with roughly 100 for whites [1] [2] [5], while Charles Murray’s recent summary and some other tabulations list African Americans nearer to 91 [4].
2. Why published averages differ
Reported averages diverge because researchers use different tests, sampling frames, historical cohorts, and statistical adjustments: some tabulations use school or military samples from mid‑20th century, others use contemporary standardized tests or pooled data across decades, and some adjust for socioeconomic composition, language, or test version changes—decisions that shift point estimates by several IQ points [6] [2] [3].
3. The role of environment, measurement, and change over time
A broad body of research documents that IQ scores are malleable and responsive to environmental changes—Black Americans made notable gains in average scores across the latter 20th century, narrowing the gap by several points, and analyses attribute much of these gains to environmental improvements rather than immutable factors [6] [3] [7].
4. Key contested explanations and the debate over heredity
There is an active and contentious debate over how much of group differences—if any—are genetic versus environmental; some researchers and review articles emphasize environmental drivers such as poverty, schooling, and stereotype threat, and cite evidence that adjusting for socioeconomic factors reduces much of the measured gap (for example, poverty and home‑environment adjustments reduced the difference substantially in longitudinal analyses) [8] [7], while other authors and book‑length treatments argue for partial genetic contributions and present cross‑population comparisons that they interpret as supporting hereditarian views [1] [5].
5. Methodological caveats and ethical cautions
Interpretation of group means requires caution: IQ tests measure performance on particular tasks and are influenced by schooling, language, cultural experience, test format, and test‑taking conditions [9] [7]; distributions overlap substantially, meaning averages do not describe individual potential [2]; and some sources and authors cited in the literature (including older works) carry acknowledged methodological biases or ideological agendas that affect interpretation [1] [9].
6. Trends, recent reanalyses, and what to take away
Recent reanalyses show the Black–White gap narrowed over the late 20th century—estimates of that narrowing vary but are documented in published reviews—and contemporary compilations still typically report African American means lower than the white mean, with common point estimates ranging from the mid‑80s to around 90–91 depending on methods and samples [6] [3] [2]; however, there is strong agreement across sources that environmental factors matter, that the gap has shifted over time, and that substantial overlap exists between groups [3] [7] [2].
7. Bottom line
A measured, evidence‑based summary from the cited literature is that average IQ scores for African Americans in the United States are commonly reported roughly one standard deviation below non‑Hispanic whites—often cited near 85—though alternate compilations and more recent reanalyses yield somewhat higher averages near 90–91; differences in samples, tests, time periods, and statistical adjustments account for much of the variation across reports, and the causes of the gap remain a contested mixture of environmental explanation, measurement issues, and unresolved debate about genetic contributions [1] [2] [3] [4] [8].