<p>I do not want to post the exact details of my IQ here because I have never taken an actual IQ test. I’ve taken the Hoeflin Power Test which geniuses today seem to be obsessed with, and I found it to be a breeze. This test has been criticized by psychologists as being pure number crunching. I have no idea what my IQ is, and my college GPA wasn’t even all that great (3.0). I was a Sociology major and my practice GRE scores are 800 Q 530 V.</p>
<p>The two are probably not closely correlated. Someone could have a very high IQ, but not have taken the requisite math courses to score well on the SAT. Similarly, a high IQ does not always translate into good writing skills. I am not sure why anyone would care anyway… colleges don’t care about your IQ. If you want to know your IQ, go get your IQ tested.</p>
<p>IQ doesn’t correlate to sat scores. At all. </p>
<p>Mensa takes in a lot more factors for IQ than math, writing and reading skills. They test memorization, processing speed, etc. etc.</p>
<p>If you take an SAT before 1995, then that score actually has a decent correlation. The SAT has like a .23 correlation now with IQ (dont quote me on that, I read it somewhere, a long time ago, the number might be way off, but trust me its very very low.)</p>
<p>Mensa will no longer consider SAT scores for induction. Taking the test prior to 1995 is no longer possible.</p>
<p>An SAT score today means something very different to then.</p>
<p>“These studies indicate the SAT is primarily a test of g… .72 (correlation)” (2004)
[Scholastic</a> Assessment or g?](<a href=“http://pss.sagepub.com/content/15/6/373]Scholastic”>http://pss.sagepub.com/content/15/6/373)</p>
<p>Of course, the test has changed since 2004 but I doubt it has changed that much. I think there is definitely a strong correlation between whatever is tested by iq tests and what the SAT measures. But the test only works as a comparative measure of general intelligence against other peers. For example, the dude in Africa who has been farming since he could walk isn’t going to test well on the SAT, regardless of his intelligence. So I think that if you grew up with a least a moderate amount of consistent schooling (through, say, 9th grade) and you have spoken English all of your life, then the SAT will roughly test your intelligence.</p>
<p>As far as a 2100 I am sure that there are people who have gotten 2100’s and have been brilliant, but I think it is less likely that people who have a 700 average will be brilliant when compared to the people who have an 800 or close to 800 average.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mensa will take older SAT scores for acceptance (I know because I used mine). But obviously I took it before 1995. 
I think the reason they won’t take them now isn’t because the test has changed much, but because there is so much more prep going on than there used to be. Back then we wandered in and took it… once. I only knew one person who took it twice, and his parents were college professors AND he was close to a 1600 (perfect back then) and wanted to achieve that goal. Which he did. But we had no prep books, no prep classes, and I don’t think I even knew you could take it twice until I met that one person in college who had.</p>
<p>“But the test only works as a comparative measure of general intelligence against other peers. For example, the dude in Africa who has been farming since he could walk isn’t going to test well on the SAT, regardless of his intelligence.”</p>
<p>Pretty much this.</p>
<p>Both the SAT and IQ tests are not perfect measures of intelligence. IQ scores in America have risen steadily since the test was first used (they have to compensate for this). That means both scores are affected by environment and education. I don’t think that there is a perfect way to measure intelligence.</p>
<p>IQ scores lose meaning quickly outside the two standard deviations from the mean (80-120). There are too few data points in the tails, and one test question has far more weight out there than it was meant to.</p>
<p>Other tests have tried to jump in, but really, if you are in the upper 2% of intelligence, what more do you need to know? IQ tests were started to predict success in school. </p>
<p>Intelligence breaks down into so many different parts - artistic, mathematical, spatial, emotional. In addition, ability to delay gratification, cultural background and willingness to work hard weigh heavily in scholastic achievement. </p>
<p>Now the Miller Analogies test - that was fun, and was used by graduate schools back in my day. How is a camera like a turtle?</p>
<p>I wouldn’t try to connect them. We know brilliant kids who did great. We know “regular smart” kids who did great. My eldest has been IQ tested and landed in the top percentile, skipped grades, all that. She did “well enough” on her SAT but nothing to jump up and down about and plenty of kids in her class outscored her by a lot! She’s not even going to retake because the ACT was a better test for her and shows her in the best light. Frankly though, I’d be happy if she could just pass a driver’s test.</p>
<p>Reality is, you don’t need to know your IQ. It can be helpful when you are advocating for a child’s education but you are an adult. You are done with schooling. Any success or failure you have will be based on the skills you’ve obtained and the effort and attitude you put in. I will say that I wouldn’t put too much stock in any test you can take online or in a book at Barnes and Noble. This doesn’t mean you aren’t gifted… just that true IQ’s come from psychologists and not cheap!</p>
<p>1600 prior to 1995 was very very rare, your friend is in a group of elites… I graduated in 1990. That year, 10 out of 1.2 million students obtained 800M/800V</p>
<p>2 SD from the mean is further than 80-120, the spread is 70-130 (or 68-132) depending on which exam used.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, he was very bright, and I think it earned him a full merit scholarship to our state university. He went on to be a professor of Mathematics.</p>
<p>I had my IQ tested when I was in fourth grade, I got 84. I took the SAT 2 times with decent studying and scored 2160. I don’t know what that means, but I’ll let you interpret it.</p>
<p>
It probably means they gave you the wrong IQ test.</p>
<p>2prepMom: How <em>is</em> a camera like a turtle?</p>
<p>Needless to say, I have been tested at 170+, so I doubt there is much correlation for me, as in I pour ruination on your correlations. Not bragging, just saying don’t give up on high IQ.</p>
<p>Just my opinion- but I don’t think there is any correlation.
To state a slightly irrelevant example: I watched an interview of a girl who scored 2400 on her SATs,in which she said that this was probably because she read a lot.
And then she went on to say that Jane Eyre was her favorite author. AUTHOR.
I have lost faith in humankind.</p>
<p>I’m in my late 40s so this is one million years ago, but we had one kid who scored close to 1600…and i’m talking years of kids…not just our one class…he ended up going to MIT (none of us had even heard of the school so we weren’t impressed). He became, well, I can’t tell you because of privacy but I guess I’ll say that he become very successful and very very rich. And he’s happily married too. Some guys get all the luck…</p>
<p>SAT doesn’t measure intelligence. Neither IQ tests really do, not even with the included deviations. Richard Feynman’s IQ was tested as 125: yet he was one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century. Lots of people with scores with IQ scores of 180 probably never had a tenth of his insights, and not a hundredth of his accomplishments. Furthermore, there is little reason to believe that IQ tests have improved so greatly over the years that they now actually measure intelligence. If they had, then they would have a convincing(and comprehensive) supporting theory, but they don’t. They just test some particular aspects of intelligence, nowhere near the billions of connections in our brain. Practice makes perfect: usually the more IQ tests you take, the higher your score. The question simply can’t test a large part of one’s intelligence. The comparative reliability of IQ tests(i.e. people have similar scores of different IQ tests) can actually be induced by the fact that IQ test typically don’t differ that much from one another.</p>
<p>On on the other hand, there is a noticeable statistic correlation between high scores on SAT and intelligence, mainly because more intelligent people:
a)learn logically, and therefore are faster learners(so they have a better preparation)
b)think faster, see patterns, save time
b)have better intuitions, and can more easily adapt and guess the answer if they don’t know</p>
<p>But this matter of statistics obviously says next to nothing about one particular test taker’s highest possible IQ. What is the highest possible IQ for someone who scored 2100 on the SAT? 230. What is the highest possible IQ for someone who scored 1500 on the SAT? 230. What is the highest possible IQ for someone who scored 600 on the SAT? 230. The score, however, may say something about someone’s lowest possible real IQ(assuming, of course, that IQ can be really meaningful).You can’t have an IQ of 80 and score a 2400.</p>