次の英文を読んで、後の問いに答えなさい。

“The invalid assumption that correlation implies cause is probably among the two or three most serious and common errors of human reasoning.” Evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould was referring to purported links between genetics and an individual's intelligence when he made this familiar complaint in his 1981 book The Mismeasure of Man.

Fast-forward three decades, and leading geneticists and anthropologists are 《A》levelling a similar charge at economics researchers who claim that a country's genetic diversity can predict the success of its economy. To critics, the economists' paper seems to suggest that a country's poverty could be the result of its citizens' genetic make-up, and the paper is attracting charges of genetic determinism, and even racism. But the economists say that they have been misunderstood, and are merely using genetics as a proxy for other factors that can drive an economy, such as history and culture. The debate holds cautionary lessons for a nascent field that blends genetics with economics, sometimes called genoeconomics. The work could have real-world pay-offs, such as helping policy-makers to “reduce barriers to the flows of ideas and innovations across populations”, says Enrico Spolaore, an economist at Tufts university, who has also used global genetic-diversity data in his research.

But the economists at the forefront of this field clearly need to be prepared for harsh scrutiny of their techniques and conclusions. At the centre of the storm is a 107-page paper by Oded Gator of Brown University, and Quamrul Ashraf of Williams College.

The paper argues that there are strong links between estimates of genetic diversity for 145 countries and per-capita incomes, even after accounting for myriad factors such as economic-based migration [    あ    ] genetic diversity in a country's population is linked with greater [    い    ], the paper says, because diverse populations have a greater range of cognitive abilities and styles. By contrast, [    う    ] genetic diversity tends to produce societies with greater [    え    ], because there are fewer differences between populations. Countries with intermediate levels of diversity, such as the United States, balance these factors and have the most productive economies as a result, the economists conclude.

[    お　   ], prominent scientists, including geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School, and Harvard University palaeoanthropologist Daniel Lieberman, say that the economists made blunders such as treating the genetic diversity of different countries as independent data, when they are intrinsically linked by human migration and shared history. “It's a misuse of data,” says Reich, which undermines the paper's main conclusions. The populations of East Asian countries share a common genetic history, and cultural practices-but the former is not necessarily responsible for the latter. “Such haphazard methods and erroneous assumptions of statistical independence could equally find a genetic cause for the use of chopsticks,” the critics wrote.

They have missed the point, responds Gator, a prominent economist whose work examines the ancient origins of contemporary economic factors. “The entire criticism is based on a gross misinterpretation of our work and, in some respects, a superficial understanding of the empirical techniques employed,” he says. Galor and Ashraf told Mature that, [    か    ], they are using it as a proxy for immeasurable cultural, historical and biological factors that influence economies. “Our study is not about a nature or nurture debate,” says Ashraf.

Gator and Ashraf are not the first economists to use genetic-diversity data. Spolaore has also found that the differences in genetic diversity between countries can predict discrepancies in their level of economic development. But he is clear that this is not necessarily a causal relationship: “In my view it's not genetic diversity itself that is [    き    ] this correlation,” he says. “A lot of this could be culture.”

Some say that the field needs a dose of rigour. Many studies linking genetic variation to economic traits make basic methodological errors, says Daniel Benjamin, a behavioural economist at Cornell University. He is part of the Social Science Genetics Association Consortium, a group that brings together social scientists, epidemiologists and geneticists to improve such studies. Problems that medical geneticists have known about for years - such as those stemming from small sample sizes - crop up all too often when economists start to work with the data, he says.

For instance, while searching for genetic associations with factors such as happiness and income in a study of 2,349 Icelanders, Benjamin and his colleagues found a statistically significant association between educational attainment and a variant in a gene involved in breaking down a neurotransmitter molecule. But the researchers could not replicate this association in three other population samples - a test for false positives that is standard practice in medical genetics-and «B»the team now has reservations about the association. If the field is to develop fruitfully, “I think it's essential for us to have geneticists involved”, says Benjamin. “We couldn't do it without their help and insight.”

(Ewen Callaway, “Economics and genetics meet in uneasy union”,Nature490, 11 October 2012)

注
• proxy:代用となるもの
• nascent:新しい
• per-capita:一人当たりの
• myriad:無数の
• palaeoanthropologist:古人類学者
• intrinsically:本質的に
• haphazard:でたらめな
• nature or nurture:生まれか育ちか
• discrepancy:相違
• epidemiologist:疫学者
• neurotransmitter:神経伝達物質
• replicate:再現する
• false positive:偽陽性

• 問1. 下線部《A》の‘levelling’とほぼ同じ意味で用いられているものを1つ選び、その番号を答えなさい。
  • (1) Constructors started levelling the ground for the new station.
  • (2) The party attempted to level the various classes in the nation.
  • (3) Accusations were levelled at other countries' leaders.
  • (4) He levelled his opponent with one blow to the chin at the arena.
• 問2. 本文の内容に合うように(    ア    )～(    エ    )にそれぞれ漢字2文字を書き入れなさい。
  経済学者は遺伝的多様性から経済発展を(    ア    )することができると主張しているが、遺伝学者や人類学者は前者は後者の(    イ    )ではなく、(    ウ    )関係は(    エ    )関係を必ずしも含まないと批判している。
• 問3. 空所[    あ    ]～[    え    ]に入れる語句の組み合わせとして最も適当なものを1つ選び、その番号を答えなさい。
  • (1)
    • あ:High
    • い:interpersonal trust
    • う:low
    • え:innovation
  • (2)
    • あ:High
    • い:innovation
    • う:low
    • え:interpersonal trust
  • (3)
    • あ:Low
    • い:interpersonal trust
    • う:high
    • え:innovation
  • (4)
    • あ:Low
    • い:innovation
    • う:high
    • え:interpersonal trust
• 問4. 空所[    お    ]に入れるのに最も適当なものを1つ選び、その番号を答えなさい。
  • (1) Indeed
  • (2) For instance
  • (3) In addition
  • (4) On the other hand
• 問5. 空所[    か    ]には、次の語句をある順序に並べ替えた表現が入る。2番目と5番目に入る語句の番号を答えなさい。
  • (1) economic development
  • (2) directly influences
  • (3) far from
  • (4) genetic diversity
  • (5) claiming that
• 問6. 空所[    き    ]に入れるのに最も適当なものを1つ選び、その番号を答えなさい。
  • (1) correlative with
  • (2) independent of
  • (3) responsible for
  • (4) caused by
• 問7. 下線部《B》の意味を日本語で表しなさい。
• 問8. 本文の内容に合致するものを2つ選び、その番号を答えなさい。
  • (1) The economists conclude that the United States has the most productive economy because of its population having a greater range of cognitive abilities and its society halving greater interpersonal trust than any other country.
  • (2) The critics say that the economists misused data, because the genetic diversity of different countries was regarded as dependent data when they are linked by human migration and shared history.
  • (3) Gator and Ashraf answered that they substitute genetic diversity for immeasurable cultural, historical and biological factors that exercise an effect on economic development.
  • (4) Spolaore says that the differences not only in genetic diversity but also in culture between countries cause their discrepancies in the level of economic development.
  • (5) Benjamin says that in order to avoid problems that economists tend to have when they link genetic variation to economic traits, they should ask geneticists ;for help and insight.