The Mismeasure of Minds: Debating Race and Intelligence between Brown and The Bell Curve by Michael E. Staub (review)

This book traces a series of psychological studies between the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling and the publication, just over forty years later, of Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles A. Murray’s controversial but influential work The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (New York, 1996). The Mismeasure of Minds: Debating Race and Intelligence between Brown and The Bell Curve illustrates the attempts of many psychologists “to quell the (always again resurgent) hypothesis that there existed race-based intelligence differentials” (p. 8). Michael E. Staub shows how the reception of psychological studies shaped and was shaped by the context of constant tension between the call for government action to alter social environments and the rejection of federal intervention on the basis “that biological inheritance will inevitably trump most ameliorative efforts” (p. 7).

The Mismeasure of Minds tells the story of the growing significance of and respect for psychological studies, effectively intertwining this history with the familiar narrative of federal programs, social activism, and conservative retrenchment during the post–World War II era. Staub’s work illustrates the commonalities to be found in the rise of ostensibly race-neutral language in psychology, just as in political, public, and policy discourse, and how that language masked attempts to reform education or promote federal spending on social programs. For example, Staub begins by tracing the shift in the uses of psychological studies as a justification for federal antipoverty and enrichment efforts to the use of studies—or even unproven terminology, such as learned helplessness—as a means to defund programs just five years later. Staub goes on to uncover the “tangled and troubled history” of “minimal brain dysfunction” and its treatment with Ritalin and the racial status and class background of children since the 1960s (pp. 77, 40). Perhaps most interesting, Staub recounts the “complicated and historically heavy political baggage” of emotional intelligence and impulse control, which he demonstrates had been a “profoundly racialized” and “class-tied concept” (p. 137).

In this richly researched and wide-ranging work, the author does an excellent job of describing the developments in the study of psychology and neuroscience in a comprehensible manner that does not detract from his narrative drive. At times the prose becomes somewhat involved, which sometimes obfuscates meaning. However, the structure of each chapter is highly accessible, providing the reader with a clear outline of the issue and its historical and historiographical contexts, with subheadings to aid navigation of the detail-rich content. Amid this wealth of research, a little of the bigger picture is missing. It would have been interesting to hear the author’s views on the broader changes in the ways scientific studies and expert knowledge were used, abused, and overlooked in policy making and political rhetoric.

The Mismeasure of Minds is a comprehensive study in which Staub most effectively “demonstrate[s] . . . how extraordinarily influential and relevant psychological experimentation and theorizing has been for both government policy and popular opinion” (p. 9). It offers a new and fascinating perspective on a familiar story of race in the decades after Brown, illustrating how scientific research on topics from learned helplessness and minimal brain dysfunction to split brain theory and emotional intelligence are integral to understanding the social, political, and policy developments of these decades.