
Poverty, not trauma, affects cognitive function in refugee youth: study (2019) - ignored
https://news.yale.edu/2019/10/24/study-poverty-not-trauma-affects-cognitive-function-refugee-youth
======
SkyBelow
Paper:

[https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cdev.1...](https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cdev.13320)

If I'm reading the results table in the linked paper correctly, it seems that
household wealth was only a significant predictor of working memory in the
combined group and the refugee group but not in the non-refugee group,
indicating a possible interaction that it is trauma that increases the
susceptibility to poverty.

Also, one of the strongest predictions of working memory in all groups was
gender, which may be an indicator that confounding factors haven't been broken
down. For example, with gender, one would ask the question are males really
that much better at working memory, or is there a treatment of male children
that would result in the noted difference. In the same way, poverty may result
in different treatment during a refugee event or similar mass trauma that may
have a larger impact on cognitive function. A simple hypothesis would be that
wealthier refugees have better access to food which means that there is less
cognitive decline associated with poor nutrition during childhood brain
development that occurs during a war time event.

~~~
xyzzyz
_Also, one of the strongest predictions of working memory in all groups was
gender, which may be an indicator that confounding factors haven 't been
broken down._

Only if you erroneously assume that the sex cannot be predictive of
differences in working memory. We know it's not the case: there are sex
differences in average scores in subtests (or in group factors). However, most
results point in the direction of female advantage in short term memory.
Jensen's 1998 book for example quotes Cohen's d between -0.2 and -0.3,
favoring females.

~~~
jacobolus
> _Only if you erroneously assume ..._

The previous commenter made some qualified questioning speculation. Leaping to
conclusions about what his or her unstated assumptions must have been and then
calling them “erroneous” seems a bit hostile.

* * *

How does one tease out the difference between inherent biological differences
vs. differences caused by a lifetime spent in the differing social/cultural
environment facing boys vs. girls?

How robust are working memory differences between sexes across time, across
different countries, across different subcultural groups, etc.?

~~~
xyzzyz
_Leaping to conclusions about what his or her unstated assumptions must have
been_

If you don’t assume that the subtest scores are the same across sexes, the
“qualified questioning speculation” that there is something wrong with control
variables makes no sense.

 _How does one tease out the difference between inherent biological
differences vs. differences caused by a lifetime spent in the differing social
/cultural environment facing boys vs. girls?_

This kind of unentanglement is usually done through twin studies: you compare
how well correlated are monozygotic vs dizygotic twins. Since it’s reasonable
to assume that both monozygotic and dizygotic twins share the same or at least
very similar environments, if the correlation between monozygotic twins on a
given trait is greater than in dizygotic twins, it means that genetic
causation plays a role, while if the correlation is the same, there it is
likely no genetic causation. Of course, it’s a bit hard to find monozygotic
twins of different sexes, but similar ideas are used in that case.

The point is, we do have the tools to unentangle nature from nurture, and in
general, all points in the direction of genetic causation when it comes to
cognitive traits. I recommend reading the Jensen’s 1998 book I mentioned.

~~~
jacobolus
Twin studies don’t help you with this particular question. Beyond that, there
are plenty of scholars who question the common interpretation of twin studies.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study#Criticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study#Criticism)

> _all points in the direction of genetic causation when it comes to cognitive
> traits_

To be precise, _some_ evidence points in the direction that _some_ variation
in cognitive traits is “heritable”.

It is obvious to everyone that there are substantial effects on cognitive
traits due to malnutrition, disease, exposure to toxins, physical violence,
persistent emotional trauma, and so on, as well as a substantial amount of
variation that we currently don’t have explanations for (not to mention
significant experimental noise and epistomological questions about the design
and interpretation of the experiments). It is at least plausible that large-
scale differences in the treatment of boys vs. girls could have effects on
cognitive traits.

For example it was long thought by some people that there were inherent
differences between boys’ vs. girls’ mathematical aptitude, as judged by
scores on various standardized tests, but in some countries with more equal
social/educational environments those differences in scores entirely
disappear. A web search turns up
[https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/women-
and-m...](https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/women-and-math-the-
gender-gap-bridged)

> _I recommend reading the Jensen’s 1998 book_

It should be mentioned that Jensen’s work has been highly controversial and
has kicked off a lively debate. Some of the biggest promoters of Jensen’s work
have been quite unsavory characters. Like all scholarly work (and especially
all work seized on more by activists than scholars) it should be read
critically and taken in the context of a wider discourse.

* * *

Disclaimer: I am no expert on this subject. Just a layperson who has
occasionally read about it, mostly in popular media.

~~~
xyzzyz
_To be precise, some evidence points in the direction that some variation in
cognitive traits is “heritable”._

Yes, this is more precise, but "heritability" is a technical term that I try
to avoid, because when some people are not familiar with its technical
meaning, it leads to all kinds of confusion when others do use it in the
technical meaning. On the other hand, "heritability" very much implies genetic
causation in every meaningful sense.

 _It is obvious to everyone that there are substantial effects on cognitive
traits due to malnutrition, disease, exposure to toxins, physical violence,
persistent emotional trauma_

It is by no means obvious. It depends on what you count as "substantial", what
degree of malnutrition, what diseases, what toxins, what kind of physical
violence, etc.

 _It is at least plausible that large-scale differences in the treatment of
boys vs. girls could have effects on cognitive traits._

It is plausible, alas I have not seen much evidence for that effect. There is
scarce evidence for malnutrition having effect of cognitive ability, but there
is _some_. However, I haven't seen any evidence on shared or non-shared
environment causing any sex differences in cognitive ability.

 _but in some countries with more equal social /educational environments those
differences in scores entirely disappear._

I think this is rather more of an artifact of their educational systems
putting finger on a scale where it wants. Consider, for example, that in both
Iceland and Sweden, mentioned in the article as places where girls matched or
exceeded boys achievement, 5 out of last 6 contestants on IMO were boys, and
similar disparity happened in previous years. Instead of focusing on outliers,
I recommend looking at the whole picture.

 _It should be mentioned that Jensen’s work has been highly controversial and
has kicked off a lively debate. Some of the biggest promoters of Jensen’s work
have been quite unsavory characters. Like all scholarly work (and especially
all work seized on more by activists than scholars) it should be read
critically and taken in the context of a wider discourse._

This is an argument without an argument, and smear by association. Jensen is
_the_ most renowned scientist in the field of psychometry and intelligence
research. You imply that there's something wrong with him, but do not actually
give any concrete criticism.

------
adelHBN
A point that merits consideration is whether or not refugee camps perpetuate
poverty. For example, did wealthy Syrians end up in refugee camps? And if so,
have they remained there? The same question can be asked about Palestinians
decades ago. The point is this, as someone who immigrated to the U.S. from the
Middle East as a minor, I think while the squalid conditions of refugee camps
certainly affect cognitive function in refugee youth, the refugee camp youth
probably came from (or were born into) lower socioeconomic strata of their
home country. Does my question make sense? Is my assumption correct?

------
modwest
Trauma is poverty's handmaiden.

[https://www.keranews.org/post/kids-living-poverty-living-
chr...](https://www.keranews.org/post/kids-living-poverty-living-chronic-
trauma-experts-say)

Based on the abstract in the OP, the study seems to focus on acute war-related
trauma. Poverty can be a kind of slow-rolling, unending trauma of its own. Not
criticizing the article/headline, just a cautionary note to avoid
extrapolating too much from this.

------
johnnyAghands
I hope data like this can help society in ridding this disease -- poverty is a
disease. Looking at the results and anecdotal evidence it feels like this is
obvious.. but the fact of the matter is unless you've been through it, it's
very unlikely you can truly appreciate the magnitude of the results.

I hope studies like these and the changing demographics of power (with respect
to age and race) will start focusing on this complicated problem.

What still seems unknown to me is what specific environmental traits of
"poverty" have the strongest negative impact? I mean, we've all heard of "rags
to riches" stories --- how do they differ?

~~~
nradov
Eliminating extreme poverty would be nice, but unfortunately overreactions to
COVID-19 in some countries are currently driving the world economy into a
depression and increasing poverty. While the pandemic is clearly a terrible
public health crisis, poverty also kills people. It just takes longer than the
virus. Expect to see higher rates of suicide, substance abuse, and chronic
disease in the next few years.

~~~
jpindar
There's going to be a lot of homeless people as soon as the various state's
eviction bans are lifted.

~~~
toomanybeersies
I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Who are landlords going to find to replace their tenants that didn't have a
job for 6 months? Another unemployed tenant?

~~~
js8
That's a rational look at things. But if they believe they can (find
replacement tenants), they will try, possibly making things worse.

------
hyperpallium
I thought working memory (WM) was mostly number of items recalled, and for
most people it's 5-7. The actual test they used would benefit from exposure to
video games (poverty would affect access):

> a screen that displayed one, two, or three dots for 2 s and instructed to
> remember where the dot(s) were located (Figure S2b). The screen then went
> blank (for 0.1 or 3 s), after which it changed color indicating that
> participants should touch the screen precisely where the dot(s) had
> appeared.

Not a serious criticism, more about the nature of WM and how to measure it.

------
ngold
Imagine being so poor you can't concentrate on what tomorrow is. That is what
being poor does to you. It robs you of thinking.

~~~
Ghjklov
I've been there. Once you start thinking to yourself that there is no long
term future ahead of you, the kind of choices you make becomes almost like a
sick joke. Buy some fruit and vegetables to eat so that you can feel nourished
and live a long life, or eat some feel good salty sugar loaded fast food
because you have no fucking future anyway? Study and gain employable skills or
play video games right now because you're going to die homeless next month
after you can no longer pay rent due to a pandemic?

~~~
jlawson
>you're going to die homeless next month

Help me understand how someone could believe something along these lines for
more-or-less their entire life. The fact is that poor people live long lives
of many decades; they observe others around them just like them living many
decades. There's nothing close to a rational reason to discount the future
that hard.

How does one end up believing that every month is their last when it clearly
isn't? I know people who are persistently poor act like they believe it, but I
didn't think they literally consciously thought it was true.

~~~
Ghjklov
People don't believe they'll literally drop dead next month. But they believe
they'll get kicked out of their apartment if they can't pay rent. If that
happens, they might end up losing their job after not being able to show up
for a few days in order to find a new place if that's even possible. Being
poor is miserable. You know how you might lament that due to your full time
job you have so little time to spend on your interests and hobbies? Likewise,
poor people have very little time or the mental bandwidth to think about doing
things that only pay off in the long term. They're focused on surviving to
next month. So they spend money on groceries instead of on coding lessons or
something which won't get them a better job any time soon. They're probably
right anyway. What's the point of learning to code when companies wouldn't
hire them in a million years instead of a college graduate or someone with
previous experience in the field. So you can imagine how many people are
condemned to forever working food service jobs or other such work.

~~~
jlawson
I guess it just doesn't check out with me. I've been around poor people. I've
lived with them. I'm sure some of them are working constantly (probably more
the ones with kids, which they shouldn't have had in the first place), but
generally they don't seem to be particularly busy. Most of them, if they
wanted to sit down and start learning web tech from online tutorials (or
improve their future in any other way), had the time and resources. They were
just not interested. Even things that would _save_ time like 'stop smoking pot
7 days a week' \- just nope.

------
pgt
Poverty = trauma?

------
BurningFrog
Then again low cognitive function leads to poverty.

Do they try to disambiguate that at all?

~~~
claudiawerner
It would be surprising (to me, anyway) if the case is that the low cognitive
function of _war-affected Syrian youths_ is the cause of their own poverty.

~~~
dcolkitt
Intelligence is highly hereditable[1]. Intelligence is also highly correlated
with earning potential, in middle-income Western Asian nations[2]. (It's
correlated everywhere, but I cite that specifically because the study in the
link was carried out in Jordan.)

Therefore it's highly likely that high IQ refugee children, have high IQ
refugee parents, who are earning a higher household income after they resettle
into their new country. For example a doctor from Syria could likely retrain
as a doctor in Jordan. Statistically speaking his kids are probably more
intelligent than someone who was a janitor in Syria.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ#cite_note-6](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ#cite_note-6)
[2]
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01602...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289615000446)

~~~
claudiawerner
Interesting. A possibly relevant point from the Wikipedia article:

>A common error is to assume that a heritability figure is necessarily
unchangeable. The value of heritability can change if the impact of
environment (or of genes) in the population is substantially altered.[15] If
the environmental variation encountered by different individuals increases,
then the heritability figure would decrease. On the other hand, if everyone
had the same environment, then heritability would be 100%. The population in
developing nations often has more diverse environments than in developed
nations.[citation needed] This would mean that heritability figures would be
lower in developing nations. Another example is phenylketonuria which
previously caused mental retardation for everyone who had this genetic
disorder and thus had a heritability of 100%. Today, this can be prevented by
following a modified diet, resulting in a lowered heritability.

------
Hermel
But trauma is what increases their likelihood of committing crimes later in
life, according to an excellent paper in AER (?) I recently read but can’t
look up right now. :)

~~~
6510
Yes! And it also makes for the kindest most generous people.

------
twomoretime
>This research was funded by Elrha’s Research for Health in Humanitarian
Crises (R2HC) Programme ([https://www.elrha.org/project/yale-psychosocial-
call2/](https://www.elrha.org/project/yale-psychosocial-call2/)), which aims
to improve health outcomes by strengthening the evidence base for public
health interventions in humanitarian crises

I know that the intentions appear to be benevolent but I'd just point out that
this isn't really an unbiased source, so it may be prudent to take their
results with a grain.

------
motohagiography
The problems of poverty in this abstract appear to be framed in terms of the
authors' perceived solutions.

What if we looked at the link between self perceptions of victimisation, life
outcomes, and symptoms of poverty? I'd posit it's the necessary condition. The
overlap in solutions, particularly education, financial independence, social
equity are all there, but the difference would be chicken vs. egg, where
authors like this would say the victimized identity is caused by the lack of
these solutions, whereas many working people would say that inculcating and
encouraging the beliefs that support that identity cause and reinforce the
barriers to those solutions. The argument that individuals experience poverty
for lack of a bureaucracy that is concerned with it should seem a bit
specious.

Or as W.H. Auden put it, "The friends of the born nurse Are always getting
worse."

