You are on page 1of 1

Book Reviews


Bibliographie des Langues Aymard et KiEua, Vol. 2. PAULRIVET and GEORGESDE

(Travaux et MCmoires de 1Institut dEthnologie, Tome LI.)
UniversitC de Paris, 1952. 656 pp. $10.60.

This is the second volume of a thoroughly comprehensive bibliography of all source

materials containing data on the following languages of the Andean area: Pukina,
Mochica, Aymara, and Quechua. The first volume of this monumental work, published
in the same series in 1951, dealt chronologically with the period from the Spanish conquest to 1875, and contained some 485 entries, while this volume deals in the same
manner with the period from 1875 to 1915 and contains 1,020 entries. Although the
authors do not discuss such linguistic problems as the possible relationship among the
languages considered, they have nevertheless supplied excellent summaries of all
sources, and in a large number of instances the title pages of the original works are reproduced. All in all this is a work of great patience, diligence, and scholarship, the result
of a devotion to a task for some forty years. It is to be hoped that this excellent bibliography will spark new investigations on the many unsolved linguistic problems of the
Andean area.
Corltell University

Intelligeltce and Cultural Differences. KENNETHEELLS,ALLISONDAVIS,ROBERTJ.

Chicago: University of Chi,
cago Press, 1951. xii, 388 p ~ . tables.

Studies by anthropologists involving both anthropological and psychological techniques have, by and large, been disappointing, primarily, it would seem, because
anthropologists are not willing to supplement or complement psychological techniques
with their own, but instead uncritically take over insufficiently validated psychological
devices and apply them among primitive peoples where any attempt a t validation is
hopeless. The results obtained from this kind of practice are disappointing both for the
anthropologist and the psychologist. An examination of psychological literature will,
I believe, demonstrate that the anthropological studies most useful to psychologists
are those where the anthropologist has used his own techniques to test the hypotheses
and assumptions used by psychologists. The work of Malinowski and Margaret Mead
may be cited in this connection. I n using psychological implements in the field, anthropologists not only tend to accept the instruments blindly, but fail to evaluate them in
the light of that knowledge of human organization and behavior that they as anthropologists should possess (Dennis, 1951).
Intelligence and Cultural Dijerences is an example of what can be done when anthropologists and psychologists cooperate. It is a detailed report on the material summed up
by Allison Davis in his Social Class Influences Upon Learning (1948). All but the first
50 pages or so were written by Eells. The other authors provide brief chapters on the
problem and its setting.
Virgil Herrick summarizes what was already known about the relation of the IQ to
cultural background. Robert Havighurst discusses what cultural differences may affect
performance on intelligence tests. Allison Davis discusses how cultural bias and intelligence tests arise and what the basic issues in the relation of intelligence tests to cultural
background are. Ralph Tyler discusses some aspects of the predictive value of intelligence tests. From these preliminary chapters it should be clear that cultural bias should
have an important influence on intelligence test scores.
In the second and by far the larger portion of the book Eells describes a field study