<p>With that sort of flattery, you may proceed without contest from me. :)</p>
<p>what an arrogant assssssss</p>
<p>^ If you’re referring to me, I hope your tone is one of sarcasm in parallel to my own.</p>
<p>2300 is high even for a 140.</p>
<p>Let me show you some numbers. You can get pretty mathematical about this.</p>
<p>A 2300 is in the 99.65%ile according to [SAT</a> Scores](<a href=“http://www.satscores.us%5DSAT”>http://www.satscores.us)</p>
<p>A 99.65%ile on the IQ scale is a 143 (SD 16) or 140 (SD 15) according to <a href=“http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQtable.aspx[/url]”>http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQtable.aspx</a></p>
<p>Buuuuut, we can’t assume that the average person taking the SAT is of average intelligence. In fact, they are probably reasonably smarter than the average person. I would estimate that the average SAT taker has an IQ of 108 (70%ile).</p>
<p>So we need to raise the two scores we calculated earlier (143 and 140) by 8 points.</p>
<p>So, using 108 as the average IQ score of SAT takers, and assuming a correlation of 1.0 between IQ and SAT score, getting a 2300 requires an IQ of 151 (SD 16), 148 (SD 15).</p>
<p>I think the correlation is significantly less than 1.0</p>
<p>Studying for the SAT can improve your score significantly. Studying for an IQ test won’t improve your IQ score much (assuming tests are taken under similar conditions).</p>
<p>Since I posted I guess I’ll contribute to this thread</p>
<p>2250 low prep (140 ish)</p>
<p>Picking a random number (not really), I’m guessing the correlation is somewhere around .7.</p>
<p>^ Disagree. My studies into it have reviled a correlation of approximately .731</p>
<p>^Haha. I actually found that amusing.</p>
<p>I do not know what data you’re using, but I got a correlation of approximately .7183243. What was your sample size?</p>
<p>Thats it?</p>
<p>I’m only 6 weeks old and I already have 4 PhDs </p>
<p>And I don’t take IQ tests, I create them *****</p>
<p>: )</p>