Tags
I’ve blogged about this before but I wanted to revisit it now that I have better data.
Harvard undergrads 1991: SAT IQ 147; expected WAIS IQ 129
Harvard undergrads from the class of 1995 (and thus took their SATs around 1991, had a mean SAT score of 1390. National norm studies suggest that if all American 17-year-olds, not just the college-bound elite, had taken the SAT in this era, the mean would have been 787 with a standard deviation (SD) of 193. Thus by general population standards, 1390 was +3.12 or IQ 147 (U.S. norms); 147 (white norms).
However because Harvard students were selected by SAT scores, they were selected in part for SAT overperformance. We saw this with Dartmouth students who scored only about 61% as well on the WAIS IQ test as they did on the SAT. Assuming the same would have happened to Harvard students circa 1991, instead of scoring 47 points above the U.S. mean, on the WAIS they’d score 47(0.61) = 29, so IQ 129 (U.S. norms); IQ 128 (white norms). Indeed a study by Harvard scholar Shelley H Carson found that in the early 21st century, Harvard students averaged around 130 IQ on the abbreviated WAIS-R and that was BEFORE deductions for inflated norms.
Harvard Law students 1980s: LSAT IQ 152; Expected WAIS IQ 137
I could not find the mean LSAT scores of Harvard Law students from the same era, but I did find a source (see table 7 of this paper) that the top 19 law schools in the 1980s had mean LSAT scores of 40 to 45 out of 48. It is likely that Harvard Law was the law school with a 45 point mean. My own preliminary research suggests that a 45 out of 48 on the 1980s LSAT equated to an IQ of 152 (U.S. norms); IQ 152 (white norms).
They too would regress to the mean except instead of regressing to the general U.S. mean of 100, LSAT takers are pre-selected by university so they would have regressed to the much higher mean of LSAT takers which would have been 116.
- Average Harvard Law student WAIS IQ = (LSAT IQ – 116)(0.61) + 116
- Average Harvard Law student WAIS IQ = (152 – 116)(0.61) + 116
- Average Harvard Law student WAIS IQ = (36)(0.61) + 116
- Average Harvard Law student WAIS IQ = 138 (U.S. noms); 137 (white norms)
Some readers might argue that if the WAIS-SAT correlation is 0.61, the WAIS-LSAT correlation should be lower, given it’s a more restricted sample, however surprisingly, people who take graduate school admission tests appear to be at least as variable as the general population.
Some readers may wonder why I regress Harvard Law students to the LSAT population when I don’t regress Harvard undergrads to the SAT population but rather the general population. The reason is, above about the top 1%, all members of the general population took the SAT, so regressing them to the SAT population would have been redundant.
Conclusion
Even though the Harvard Law > Harvard undergrad IQ gap was only 5 points when measured by the tests used to select them respectively (LSAT IQ 152 vs SAT IQ 147); the gap should nearly double if they were given a test independent of the admission process (WAIS IQ 137 vs WAIS IQ 128). This is a reminder that we should never measure the IQ of a group by the test used to select them and consistent with the general rule that law students are about 10 IQ points smarter than undergrads, though unlike Harvard, at a typical university circa 1990, the respective scores would have been around 120 vs 110.
Pumpkin Person 
viq is theoretical ability. Piq is basically calc or measurement ability.
I think for higher salaried jobs you need piq insofar as there’s so little people with it it causes scarcity and therefore higher wages.
but open borders with Asia is driving down wages for engineers and comp sci people.
and GMs are no more able to remember a random arrangement of the pieces than amateurs. this is where the VIQ in the more general sense comes in. GMs see sense in actual game positions where amateurs just see random. they are able to remember these positions better than amateurs because they have a more elaborate sense making apparatus. but if the position is truly random they’re no better than an amateur.
the same is true of the ability to calculate. the difference between kaparov and a mere expert is nil. kasparov’s advantage is he’s able to recognize won or lost positions with less calculation than a mere expert. so when they calculate the same kasparov’s calculation is much better.
this is one explanation of why high VIQ avg PIQ jews have so many world chess champions. because chess isn’t just PIQ.
why did you denounce Mel gibsons anti paedo movie? We’re you instructed to?
Never seen it but it was a pro-pedo movie because it deflected attention away from the Epstein case. Q Anon adjacent porn for dads with brain worms is how one journalist put it. And Mel Gibson had nothing to do with it, that’s just a conspiracy theory.
ridiculous. The movie emphasised the epstein stuff. The jewish media bashed it to deflect attention from epstein. Case closed. If the media hated it it basically means it’s a fantastic movie.
I doubt the movie ever mentioned epstein. The media bashed it but if they really hated it they’d ignore it, not build it up as the most controversial movie of the year. The media loves promoting QAnon stuff because it reduces legitimate questions about Epstein to one big nutty conspiracy theory that can be dismissed:
That’s why the idea that the media is against Trump is low IQ drivel
If the “swamp” was really against him, they’d just ignore him. He’s blasted on the news 24/7 because it drives clicks and views. If the elites really wanted him dead, he’d be dead. The “deep state” can’t be all powerful but also incompetent.
If pumpkin your regression formula is accurate then the mega test normalization is questionable. A reduction of 15 points must be applied to all scores. Since Langan scored 42 the first time he should now be IQ 155 – Hoeflins equipercentiling on the SAT drives down the score within the WAIS construct.
I have also been creating my own bell curves in Excel. The original curve was made when 4.2 billion people existed. I updated it to 8.2 billion cica 2024
Now 10% are below IQ 70 and 1% are below IQ 55
An IQ of 160 is now 1 in 1,892
The SD is still 15 so IQ 200 has 1 person at the top and bottom.
–
I still question if WAIS is a good test. Many tests together need to be factor analysed together, regression to a standard test is bogus because (0.71)^2 = 50% unknown variance.
The more data we can accumulate on a population the less unknown variance. Samples need to be larger with more points of collection per person. Google and Facebook have graph analysis algorithms. That could be where things need to go.
If pumpkin your regression formula is accurate then the mega test normalization is questionable. A reduction of 15 points must be applied to all scores.
False. People who took the Mega were self-selected based on their desire to take the Mega, and assuming desire to take the Mega Test correlates about as well with Mega score as it does with SAT score or their WAIS score, then their Mega distribution would roughly match their SAT and WAIS distribution
Now if they had normed the Mega test on Ivy League undergrads who are preselected for high SAT scores and used the SAT as the norming test, then the Mega test would have inflated norms.
so you were wrong that SAT regression happened by 15 points?
or are you saying that only the Harvard students regressed and the normal population did not?
sadly was right that his SAT score didn’t regress because he was part of the general population not Harvard the selected group?
again was your formula accurate for all 17 year olds or was it not. This determines if mega test scores should be lowered or not.
or are you saying that only the Harvard students regressed and the normal population did not?
Any high SAT group (Harvard or otherwise) will only regress if group membership was dependent on scoring high on the SAT.
People who took the Mega Test are a high SAT group also, but they will not regress because they were self-selected based on their desire to take the Mega Test, not because their SAT scores were high.
The mega test was based on SAT extrapolation. And SAT was not exactly higher that supposed. So where’s the error? The must be an error or your formula would not exist.
To your response,
ok so then they did well on the SAT not because of them doing the SAT first but because the mega was showing higher ability that transferred to the SAT
a person higher on SAT would not get higher mega score but only if the mega was normed to show the reverse extrapolation.
a high wais score can do poorly on the SAT but because the test was designed to measure a selection the wais measure intelligence better like the mega would do. A regression up not down from SAT
Think of every IQ score people get as an average of both their true IQ and their luck IQ. If you guess correctly on the SAT, or if you’re strongest skills are verbal and math, or if you had a good night sleep the night before, your luck IQ on the SAT will be very high.
Now when people are selected for scoring high on the SAT (like in Harvard) they are selected not only for a high true IQ, but also for a high luck IQ because lucky people will dominate those who are selected.
The problem is luck runs out so when they take the WAIS, they still score high on true IQ, but their luck IQ is only average so their WAIS scores regress to the average.
Now when people self-select to take the Mega, they were not selected for getting lucky on any test (because they haven’t been tested yet), they were simply selected for desire to take the Mega Test so their luck IQ should typically be average on every test they take: Mega, SAT or WAIS.
I take medication for depression. I had a bad time earlier in life after highschool graduation so even with good scores then my overall performance went down. Genetically I think my resilience prevented me from drinking. But I spent two years alone which degraded me. Peak performance happens at age 24 but I am not high in fluid Intelligence anymore. I had to take care of family members which prevented me from going to college. Now that I am older I have time to read books. Before I did not know which books but today I do.
Is my intelligence the same as it was before?
Crystal intelligence is much better. Yet I don’t know how I compare to the general population my age. Is there a way to find out? I am on welfare.
Economic reductionism is so low IQ.
CRT isn’t really the proper evolution of marxism, though.
^^^LITERALLY RETARDED^^^
Visiting my hick town again, and I always forget how much more friendly people are here.
It’s almost unsettling. I’m always like, “what are they plotting?”
If the south does “rise again” it’s going to be because they start embracing cultural and economic progressivism. Not because conservatism started magically working.
This place finally got public transit a couple years ago, and it’s only recently starting to recover from the 2008 financial collapse. People get mad here that their property taxes are increasing, and they don’t even realize that it’s directly linked with the value of their home skyrocketing.
No surprise that the urbanization is a result of the increased diversity this place is experiencing.
the south is more rural than the north. the difference is more rural not south vs north.
have you been to upstate new york or maine?
it’s even worse!
Mugabe couldn’t win a debate against me. He’s too uneducated. Has he even read a book??
has melo heard of CGT = critical gaza theory
Arent you the zionist?
LOL! Black men are PISSED that Obama is publicly shaming them for not voting for Harris!
Go Obama!
They should be ashamed.
obama might have just got trump elected