<p>SAT correlates with your academic ability. IQ correlates with your academic ability. So by extension, SAT correlates with IQ.</p>
<p>A high IQ does not cause a high SAT score but it does correlate to one, which is what this whole thread was arguing about.</p>
<p>Okay. I think we get the point.</p>
<p>SAT scores have uppper limits, while IQs do not.
How can you tell who is smarter from two people if they both get perfect 2400s?</p>
<p>SAT</a> measures more than student performance, research shows it is also a reliable measure of IQ</p>
<p>
[quote]
SAT measures more than student performance, research shows it is also a reliable measure of IQ
Each year thousands of high school students take the Scholastic Assessment Test, or SAT, hoping to gain admission to the college of their choice. Colleges and universities use SAT scores to help project a prospective student's performance. But research shows there is more to the SAT, that it is really an intelligence test. </p>
<p>Meredith C. Frey and Douglas K. Detterman, researchers at Case Western Reserve University, have shown that students' SAT test scores correlate as highly as, and sometimes higher than, IQ tests correlate with each other. This is strong evidence that the SAT is a de facto intelligence test. Their findings will be published in the June issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the American Psychological Society. </p>
<p>While this finding may be surprising to many who take the test, it was no surprise to the researchers. The origins of the SAT can be traced back to intelligence tests that were originally given to screen entrants into the armed forces. Many who study intelligence had suspected that the SAT was an intelligence test though it seems no one had ever investigated the relationship. </p>
<p>The Case investigators studied the SAT for two reasons. First, they were looking for an easy way to obtain a measure of IQ for students who participate in their experiments on more basic cognitive processes. Giving an IQ test can take 30 to 90 minutes, and with a correlation between IQ and SAT scores, researchers now have a fairly accurate estimate of an individual's IQ without the need to administer a lengthy test. Second, it is useful to know the relationship between the SAT and IQ so that SAT could be used as a measure of IQ in cases where patients' IQs decline due to head injury or diseases like Alzheimer's. It is often important to know what a person's level of intellectual functioning was before the onset of the decline and many people have taken the SAT. According to the researchers, for those who have never taken an IQ test, the SAT could be used as a substitute.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think it is a good indication of IQ, but I'm more interested in causation above else.</p>
<p>pshh...do all the research they want. I could conduct my own research proving why the SAT shows absolutely no relation to IQ. They reason is quite simple, some people are simply bad test takers. You could have a bad day, hormonal fluctuations, etc. And some people just work extraordinarily hard to get a desired score. I know for fact that the smartest people are definitely not always the ones with the highest scores. Sometimes but not always. </p>
<p>Anyways we all know that IQ is not a measure of intelligence so this whole debate really doesn't matter.</p>
<p>yea..I've seen numerous ridiculously dumb ppl getting ridiculously high scores</p>
<p>^Look, stupid people aren't going to do 2100+. I'm sure they are of at least average intelligence. IQ Tests and the SAT aren't really good indicators of intelligence though. I'll concede that it MAY indicate a little bit of intelligence - for example if you prep a ton and then never break 1700-1800. Intelligence has many factors and is impossible to measure with the IQ and SAT. The SAT merely measures how much you prepared OR how well you do on SAT type tests.</p>
<p>You guys... it is called an 'association' between two scores.</p>
<p>not that it matters</p>
<p>So funny!!! People in my country will cry out loud if the Education Ministry hold such types of tests to choose students of high caliber! CR, Math and Writing are all bull. They should be used to test children 6 or 7 yrs old.</p>
<p>high IQers tend to have higher SAT scores. that is because if one is smarter then he/she will learn faster than a dumb then within same time of school and/or test prep, high IQers can manage to gain more knowledge thus greater probability for higher SAT score.</p>
<p>however, SAT score is not in function of IQ.
suppose that SAT is in function, and IQ is the quotient between one's intelligent age(tested on a test) over one's real age, and multiply to 100 to get integer value(that is why the average is 100). So if someone get a SAT score of 2000 at age of 17, and in one year he didnt gain more knowledge nor ability, and he retake the SAT while in age of 18, he get the same score of 2000. SAT score mantains constant but IQ decreased because the real age increased but the intelligence age stay constant. contradiction.</p>
<p>I<strong>Don't</strong>know is obviously confused. You can't be stupid and score above 2k on a REASONING TEST. Doesn't matter how much prep you do, if your an idiot, you're pretty much hopeless.</p>
<p>I<em>dont</em>know is just mad because he thinks he is "smart" but he cannot get an above average score.</p>
<p>^Nah nah~ Quite the opposite, I think I'm stupid but I can still break 2300. lol..</p>
<p>^Screenshots or it didn't happen.</p>
<p>I like to go with what the Princeton Review says about the SAT: "the only thing the SAT measures is... how well you can take the SAT." Or something like that.</p>
<p>From my own experiences, I've known some "dumb" kids who have gotten good scores on the SAT (or any general standardized test) but who have bombed on AP tests. For example, there was this girl in my AP Chemistry class who I didn't really consider very smart by the way she acted but she did really well on the SAT (2200 or something) and got a 1 on the AP Chem test. That's sort of a digression because we're not talking about the AP tests, but my point is that I think she has excellent reasoning skills for things that she doesn't need work to learn but when it comes to anything else she's out of her depth completely. I dunno :S</p>
<p>So... I've stopped looking at people and how they look, how they act, etc. and have decided that there <em>are</em> different types of intelligences, even if some aren't specifically geared towards the SAT. Do I believe <em>everyone</em> is intelligent? Hell no. But we all have specialties that can help us in different areas of life.</p>
<p>Hope that doesn't sound too preachy o_o</p>
<p>Back in the old days, we didn't prep for these SAT tests, at least the people I knew didn't. We just took the test and got our results. And no one took it more than twice, many of us stopped at just taking it once.
I think the SAT, taken for the first time and without prep, does match up with IQ scores.<br>
It sure did for me.</p>
<p>^^To go one step further, when you take it in seventh grade for the first time with no prep and you score very well, then we are talking IQ-SAT correlation (that would be the Duke University TIP and it's called above level testing). For many it is the first indication of true giftedness.</p>
<p>Oh. Wait. So nowadays, if you THINK you're stupid, or you THINK somebody else is stupid-then you/they must really be stupid? Seriously, if you show me a screenshot of your 2300, I'm going to bang my head against a concrete wall. Repeatedly.</p>
<p>I got a 2300+ and I accidentally poured orange juice into my cereal last week...</p>
<p>^^Easy buddy~~I was saying I wasn't very smart (compared to my peers) but I still had faith that I could get a decent score on the SAT. I'm taking it in nov. so let's wait and see.</p>
<p>P.S. Like #49 said, as a college entrance exam, the SAT is pretty stupid, in terms of ranges and depths of knowledge and mental intensity, compared to those in countries like China and Japan, where I'm sure few of you could ever survive if you were in those countries.</p>