Do Sats correlate with IQ?

[Saint Casanova]

I’m not from the US, but can’t you study for them like every other test ??

Also, the maths section looks extremely easy. This is a hard question apparently ?

 

[Deleted member 82370]

Yes

 

[Saint Casanova]

Yes

Over for Americans. Look at how easy this shit is ?

 

[Deleted member 82370]

Over for Americans. Look at how easy this shit is ?View attachment 3116274

They are trained differently

 

[Saint Casanova]

They are trained differently

Here in the UK, we need to study 10-12 subjects for our GCSEs (16 year old exams) and they have so much more content as well.

 

[Deleted member 82370]

Here in the UK, we need to study 10-12 subjects for our GCSEs (16 year old exams) and they have so much more content as well.

Lot of hard work

 

[Saint Casanova]

Lot of hard work

UK system is much fairer for getting into a top uni as well. All you need is the grades and an interest in your subject. It’s not like the states where you need to cure cancer just to be considered jfl

 

[Deleted member 82370]

UK system is much fairer for getting into a top uni as well. All you need is the grades and an interest in your subject. It’s not like the states where you need to cure cancer just to be considered jfl

Tbh they should adopt it as well

 

[Deleted member 81422]

Over for Americans. Look at how easy this shit is ?View attachment 3116274

Dunning kruger fren.

You will get worse than expected

 

[Chowdog]

I’m not from the US, but can’t you study for them like every other test ??

Also, the maths section looks extremely easy. This is a hard question apparently ?

this op

 

[Saint Casanova]

Dunning kruger fren.

You will get worse than expected

Not really, this is piss easy and I’ve already got my results. Top grades in GCSEs and A-levels.

I’m sorry your maths aptitude is subpar so you need project. Unfortunate.

 

[gooner23]

I’m not from the US, but can’t you study for them like every other test ??

Also, the maths section looks extremely easy. This is a hard question apparently ?

no i know a dude who went from 950 - 1580 more about work ethic even goes with leetcode and software engineering

 

[Saint Casanova]

no i know a dude who went from 950 - 1580 more about work ethic even goes with leetcode and software engineering

Seems to be the case but unfortunately lots of copers here. However, work ethnic is partly genetic so it explains why. Those with a subpar iq probably lack the work ethic to make something out of their life anyways tbh.

 

[Deleted member 30402]

It was originally a copy pasted IQ test in the 70s, but minorities were scoring lower, so the libs cucked the exam. It still generally correlates with IQ tho.

 

[widdi]

yes at around r = .85

 

[Saint Casanova]

It was originally a copy pasted IQ test in the 70s, but minorities were scoring lower, so the libs cucked the exam. It still generally correlates with IQ tho.

I’ve been reading that IQ’s correlation with wealth and success is quite weak r=0.21 I believe so what’s the point of even bothering with them ??

I think raw intelligence has a much greater correlation with success but IQ overall is a weak measuring device for it.

 

[widdi]

I think raw intelligence has a much greater correlation with success but IQ overall is a weak measuring device for it.

no its not. IQ has a very high g loading

I’ve been reading that IQ’s correlation with wealth and success is quite weak r=0.21 I believe so what’s the point of even bothering with them ??

I'm pretty sure that the correlation between IQ and lifetime income is a decent amount higher

 

[ElTruecel]

yes at around r = .85

View attachment 3116333

Nah not anymore not since the 90s jfl.

 

[Deleted member 30402]

I’ve been reading that IQ’s correlation with wealth and success is quite weak r=0.21 I believe so what’s the point of even bothering with them ??

I think raw intelligence has a much greater correlation with success but IQ overall is a weak measuring device for it.

I’ve seen studies that say the correlation between IQ and wealth is 0.5 which is 25% of the variance. So IQ isn’t everything, but it’s still a strong predictor of general success in life.

 

[Saint Casanova]

no its not. IQ has a very high g loading


I'm pretty sure that the correlation between IQ and lifetime income is a decent amount higher

I think most exams and even job psychometric tests will have a decently high g loading because the central limit theorem is applied either way.

There are many aspects to intelligence and IQ broadly measures a few. Some aspects are more set In stone than others as well.

It was between IQ and net worth. Anecdotally, I know many successful business owners who aren’t bright at all. In terms of being successful in the STEM industry, I think that’s where the correlation would be much higher.

 

[Saint Casanova]

I’ve seen studies that say the correlation between IQ and wealth is 0.5 which is 25% of the variance. So IQ isn’t everything, but it’s still a strong predictor of general success in life.

I’ve seen studies which go as low as 0.2 however. By wealth you mean net worth right ?

Yearly earnings have a higher correlation. Around 0.4 it seems. I wonder why there’s such a gap between IQ and net worth compared to IQ and yearly earnings.

 

[widdi]

Nah not anymore not since the 90s jfl.

That’s literally just your opinion

 

[widdi]

I think most exams and even job psychometric tests will have a decently high g loading because the central limit theorem is applied either way.

There are many aspects to intelligence and IQ broadly measures a few. Some aspects are more set In stone than others as well.

It was between IQ and net worth. Anecdotally, I know many successful business owners who aren’t bright at all. In terms of being successful in the STEM industry, I think that’s where the correlation would be much higher.

how does g-loading relate to the central limit theorem? I don’t follow

 

[gooner23]

That’s literally just your opinion

the reason there was a correlation back then was lack of prep material, everyone has access to it, bad indicator nowadays imo

 

[Saint Casanova]

how does g-loading relate to the central limit theorem? I don’t follow

I’m saying most tests follow a normal distribution or some skewed version of it so there will always be a strong correlation with Iq regardless how good of a metric it is

 

[esoterik]

UK system is much fairer for getting into a top uni as well. All you need is the grades and an interest in your subject. It’s not like the states where you need to cure cancer just to be considered jfl

get over your self, dont act like uk is better, nor more intelligent

 

[Saint Casanova]

get over your self, dont act like uk is better, nor more intelligent

UK is shit but in terms of academic fairness, it’s far ahead of the US. How can you deny that?

 

[widdi]

I’m saying most tests follow a normal distribution or some skewed version of it so there will always be a strong correlation with Iq regardless how good of a metric it is

That has nothing to do with g-loading. If I normed a bad IQ test to follow a normal distribution that wouldn’t change the low intercorrelation of subtests, from which g is derived.

 

[esoterik]

UK is shit but in terms of academic fairness, it’s far ahead of the US. How can you deny that?

i didn't say it wasn't, i said intelligent. more inventions came from the us than you can imagine

and no academics don't correlate with intelligence

 

[MA_ascender]

I think it's because the US made high school easy to graduate, but it's probably insanely hard to get into superior education.

 

[widdi]

the reason there was a correlation back then was lack of prep material, everyone has access to it, bad indicator nowadays imo

I don’t have info about the SAT, but the act had a roughly .71 point gain from practice, or .13 d. This is not out of the norm for IQ test gains from practice iirc.

https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/R1710-investigating-test-prep-impact-2018-07.pdf

 

[Saint Casanova]

https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/R1710-investigating-test-prep-impact-2018-07.pdf

What’s the upper limit someone can increase their IQ with practice ? Can’t find a definitive answer

 

[widdi]

I agree that the SAT is a bad estimator for IQ at the tails. If someone gets a 200 on the SAT they don’t actually have an IQ of 50, and it’s hard for it to differentiate between someone who’s 130 IQ and 150 IQ because there’s very little room for silly mistakes. But it’s pretty good for most people.

 

[gooner23]

I don’t have info about the SAT, but the act had a roughly .71 point gain from practice, or .13 d. This is not out of the norm for IQ test gains from practice iirc.

https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/R1710-investigating-test-prep-impact-2018-07.pdf

1. Over 65% of students who prepared engaged in 1-3 test preparation activities, while only 7% engaged in 8 or more activities.

no i know a dude who went from 950 - 1580 more about work ethic even goes with leetcode and software engineering

 

[widdi]

1. Over 65% of students who prepared engaged in 1-3 test preparation activities, while only 7% engaged in 8 or more activities.

maybe if everyone prepped insanely hard it would be a bad measurement of intelligence, but they don’t which is why it’s still pretty good. Yeah individuals can improve a lot, that’s consistent with opposite luck of the draw effects wrt to random error. Some dude could have a latent IQ of 115 and draw 95th percentile error in either direction to produce a difference like this

 

[widdi]

What’s the upper limit someone can increase their IQ with practice ? Can’t find a definitive answer

don’t know but you wouldn’t be increasing your G, you’d just be increasing your ability to practice

 

[looksmaxxed]

probably not because everyone is supposed to study for sats, but only nerds and cucks do that. so you're not getting a true representation of ability

 

[gooner23]

maybe if everyone prepped insanely hard it would be a bad measurement of intelligence, but they don’t which is why it’s still pretty good. Yeah individuals can improve a lot, that’s consistent with opposite luck of the draw effects wrt to random error. Some dude could have a latent IQ of 115 and draw 95th percentile error in either direction to produce a difference like this

i guess but it would be a much stronger correlation to hard work than iq, taking average scores over the year is also bad nowadays because of scoring curves missing 1 question can knock you form a 36 - 33 in the act, but then again i never took the act or sat