# LSAT/IQ Conversion Table

#### Dillon

• 475
##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #20 on: October 23, 2004, 04:14:13 AM »
absolutley bull.  I volunteered as a subject for an official, standarized, professionally administered IQ test for psychology grad students to observe, and scored in the genius range.  And yet this stupid test fucks me over.  The LSAT is not geared for people who like to take time and contemplate and philosophize over answers.  And quite frankly, I'd rather have a lawyer who takes that extra five minutes to make sure she's looked at the question from all angles.

I always prefer lawyers who don't need to take extra time.  It's a lot cheaper that way!

#### bahamamama

##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #21 on: October 23, 2004, 06:13:35 AM »
It's tempting to employ Al Gore's IQ:SAT ratio of 134:1355 as a formula for estimating Bush's probable intelligence quotient — an exercise in fuzzy statistics that predicts a score of 119.

So they calculate it like this,

Test  Gore  Bush
SAT   1355  1206
IQ     134     x
____________________
134*1206
x = -------- = 119
1355

Is that so?

#### zxcvbnm

• 196
##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #22 on: October 23, 2004, 12:55:22 PM »
We've hashed through this Bush/IQ thing so many times it's gotten tiresome. For the record, his 1206 SAT score equates to about a 129 IQ. Not too shabby. Of course, that was a long time ago...

#### Rizz98

• 218
• 3.91/165
##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #23 on: October 23, 2004, 03:30:47 PM »
They're completely incompatible tests - it's not even worth comparing, even though it's done.

I don't think you quite know what you're talking about.

I know what I'm talking about in context of myself, but I have to admit, I'm a bit too harsh in saying "completely incompatible."

My LSAT predicts I have an SB IQ score of 133.
However, I've taken the SB in the past, and gotten a 147.

That's a pretty drastic difference, no?

#### superiorlobe

##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #24 on: October 23, 2004, 03:35:47 PM »
Keep in mind that there are different IQ scales.  Most have 100 as the average, but they don't all have the same standard deviation.  So 100 might be equivalent on all the scales, but 120 on one scale might equal a 130 on another scale.  You have to specify which scale you are talking about.

Also, it is more informative to talk about the number of standard deviations above or below the mean than it does to talk about the raw IQ score.  An IQ of 120 is less impressive on a scale with a standard deviation of 18 points than a 115 is on a scale with a standard deviation of 10 points.

HTH

#### superiorlobe

##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #25 on: October 23, 2004, 03:37:35 PM »
absolutley bull.  I volunteered as a subject for an official, standarized, professionally administered IQ test for psychology grad students to observe, and scored in the genius range.  And yet this stupid test fucks me over.  The LSAT is not geared for people who like to take time and contemplate and philosophize over answers.  And quite frankly, I'd rather have a lawyer who takes that extra five minutes to make sure she's looked at the question from all angles.

For \$200 an hour I would rather hire a guy who can think quickly than one who likes to contemplate and philosophize over the answer.

#### zxcvbnm

• 196
##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2004, 04:22:57 PM »
They're completely incompatible tests - it's not even worth comparing, even though it's done.

I don't think you quite know what you're talking about.

I know what I'm talking about in context of myself, but I have to admit, I'm a bit too harsh in saying "completely incompatible."

My LSAT predicts I have an SB IQ score of 133.
However, I've taken the SB in the past, and gotten a 147.

That's a pretty drastic difference, no?

So? Maybe you underperformed on the LSAT, or over-performed on the Stanford-Binet. Who knows? Or just maybe, just *maybe*, the two tests don't have a perfect 1.0 correlation (as no two tests ever do). I really don't understand how people can take the fact that a formula doesn't perfectly predict their own score, and from that, deduce that it's completly bunk, or that LSAT and IQ tests have zero correlation with each other. Quite clearly, they do. If a conversion formula gives better results for *all* people than any other formula one could devise, then it's a good one; it needn't (and couldn't) predict every single person's score with spot-on accuracy.

#### doesy

##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #27 on: October 23, 2004, 08:56:44 PM »
For the record, his 1206 SAT score equates to about a 129 IQ.

So, honey, which formula did ya employ this time to grant to the moronic Bush an IQ of 129? Something similar to that one that you gave us for the LSAT??? Of course, you are wrong when translating a SAT score of 1206 to an IQ of 129, when the 1355 SAT score of Gore only translates to an IQ of 134 ... don't ya see that your desperate attempts to give to stupid people like a good portion of our leaders a  somehow "respectable" IQ score are failing miserably? And FYI, I found a link that includes the post of "nevnacig" about the Bush/Gore thing,

http://www.csbsju.edu/uspp/Election/bush011401.htm

#### malevolent

##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #28 on: October 23, 2004, 09:05:28 PM »
This topic has been discussed in the past on this site, here I find that thread,

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/index.php/topic,1650.0.html

#### zxcvbnm

• 196
##### Re: LSAT/IQ Conversion Table
« Reply #29 on: October 23, 2004, 09:24:35 PM »
For the record, his 1206 SAT score equates to about a 129 IQ.

So, honey, which formula did ya employ this time to grant to the moronic Bush an IQ of 129? Something similar to that one that you gave us for the LSAT??? Of course, you are wrong when translating a SAT score of 1206 to an IQ of 129, when the 1355 SAT score of Gore only translates to an IQ of 134 ... don't ya see that your desperate attempts to give to stupid people like a good portion of our leaders a  somehow "respectable" IQ score are failing miserably? And FYI, I found a link that includes the post of "nevnacig" about the Bush/Gore thing,

http://www.csbsju.edu/uspp/Election/bush011401.htm

My desperate attempts? Don't be dumb. I'm not a partisan Bush fanatic. I already cast my ballot for Kerry. I have no real interest in making Bush seem smarter than he is, and if the discussion were about his intelligence *today* (and not when he was a 17 year old taking the SAT), the story would be different. Do I need to spell out for you what I was implying with "that was a long time ago..."?

Anyway, the formula I employed was a very simple one that any reasonably not-stupid person could derive on his or her own. Today's average SAT score is 1019, with a standard deviation of 207. Bush's 1206 SAT score is about a 1280 on today's recentered scale. The average IQ of the SAT-taking populace is assumed to be 110. There, now you can do the math.

And 1355 on the old SAT would equate to about a 140. Feel better now, honey?