Editing J. Philippe Rushton (section)

===Application of ''r''/''K'' selection theory to race===
{{main|Differential K theory|l1=Differential ''K'' theory}}
Rushton's book ''[[Race, Evolution, and Behavior]]'' (1995) attempted to use [[r/K selection theory|''r''/''K'' selection theory]] to explain what he described as an evolutionary scale of characteristics indicative of nurturing behavior in which [[East Asian people]] consistently averaged high, [[black people]] low, and [[white people]] in the middle. He first published this theory in 1984. Rushton argued that East Asians and their descendants average a larger brain size, greater intelligence, more sexual restraint, slower rates of maturation, and greater law abidingness and social organization than do Europeans and their descendants, whom he argued average higher scores on these measures than Africans and their descendants. He hypothesized that ''r''/''K'' selection theory explains these differences.

Rushton's application of ''r''/''K'' selection theory to explain differences among racial groups has been widely criticized. Differential K theory in particular was described in a 2020 statement by Rushton's former department at Western Ontario University as "thoroughly debunked."<ref name=":0" />

One of his many critics is the [[Evolutionary biology|evolutionary biologist]] [[Joseph L. Graves]], who has done extensive testing of the ''r''/''K'' selection theory with species of [[Drosophila]] flies. Graves argues that not only is ''r''/''K'' selection theory considered to be virtually useless when applied to human life history evolution, but Rushton does not apply the theory correctly, and displays a lack of understanding of evolutionary theory in general.<ref>{{cite journal | last=Graves | first=J. L. | year=2002 | title=What a tangled web he weaves Race, reproductive strategies and Rushton's life history theory | journal=Anthropological Theory | volume=2 | pages=2 131–154 | doi=10.1177/1469962002002002627 | issue=2 | citeseerx=10.1.1.731.3826 | s2cid=144377864 }}</ref> Graves also says that Rushton misrepresented the sources for the biological data he gathered in support of his hypothesis, and that much of his social science data was collected by dubious means. Other scholars have argued against Rushton's hypothesis on the basis that the concept of [[race (classification of humans)|race]] is not supported by genetic evidence about the diversity of human populations, and that his research was based on [[folk taxonomy|folk taxonomies]].<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Sternberg | first1 = Robert J. | last2 = Grigorenko | first2 = Elena L. | last3 = Kidd | first3 = Kenneth K. | year = 2005 | title = Race, and Genetics  | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 60 | issue = 1 | pages = 46–59 | doi = 10.1037/0003-066X.60.1.46 | pmid = 15641921 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.174.313 }}</ref>

Later studies by Rushton and other researchers have argued that there is empirical support for the theory,<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1016/j.intell.2007.04.001| title = Temperature and evolutionary novelty as forces behind the evolution of general intelligence☆| year = 2008| last1 = Kanazawa | first1 = S.| journal = Intelligence| volume = 36| issue = 2| pages = 99–108}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | last = Templer | first = Donald I. | author-link = Donald Templer | title = Correlational and factor analytic support for Rushton's differential ''K'' life history theory | doi = 10.1016/j.paid.2008.05.010 | journal = Personality and Individual Differences | volume = 45 | issue = 6 | pages = 440–444 | year = 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | doi = 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.03.002 | last1 = Rushton | first1 = J. | last2 = Bons | first2 = T. | last3 = Hur | first3 = Y. | title = The genetics and evolution of the general factor of personality | journal = Journal of Research in Personality | volume = 42 | issue = 5 | pages = 1173–1185 | year = 2008  | citeseerx =  10.1.1.623.9800}}</ref> though these studies too have been criticized.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Wicherts|first1=Jelte M.|last2=Borsboom|first2=Denny|last3=Dolan|first3=Conor V.|title=Why national IQs do not support evolutionary theories of intelligence|journal=Personality and Individual Differences|volume=48|issue=2|pages=91–96|doi=10.1016/j.paid.2009.05.028|year=2010}}</ref>

Psychologist [[David P. Barash]] observed that ''r''- and ''K''-selection may have some validity when considering the so-called [[demographic transition]], whereby economic development characteristically leads to reduced family size and other ''K'' traits. "But this is a pan-human phenomenon, a flexible, adaptive response to changed environmental conditions&nbsp;... Rushton wields ''r''- and ''K''-selection as a Procrustean bed, doing what he can to make the available data fit&nbsp;... Bad science and virulent racial prejudice drip like pus from nearly every page of this despicable book."<ref name="Barash95">{{cite journal | author = Barash D.P | year = 1995 | title = Book review: Race, Evolution, and Behavior | doi = 10.1006/anbe.1995.0143 | journal = Animal Behaviour | volume = 49 | issue = 4| pages = 1131–1133 | s2cid = 4732282 }}</ref>