GMAT scoring anamoly

[achandwa]

Not that I would fret if I get "only" 760 instead of a 770 after scoring v46/q49 . But can someone explain the following anamoly just for my curiosity?

The following is the data gathered from posts on this forum:
Total score 760 with raw score of V46/Q49 (total raw: 95, avg 47.5)
Total score 770 with raw score of V42/Q51 (total raw: 93, avg 46.5)

This is also inline with data at https://www.apexwriters.com/targetgmat.jsp

You get a greater total score with a lower total raw score! The difference being the greater Q score. So does this mean that Q is weighted heaver than V on the GMAT?
Thanks, Ashish

[rajarshir]

Thats a good question and I am not entirely sure. However a 49 in Quant was a only a 89 percentile on my scorecard while a 46 Verbal was a 99 percentile. So perhaps percentiles in either sections are used to come up with the final score?!

[beatthegmat]

I believe verbal is weighted more heavily as well--in any case, with a 760 or 770 you should be in great shape!

[optimisticsam]

I believe your score is calculated on how you did in each section as a percentile.

Since a 99% is achieved at a lower score in verbal (maybe... 45?) the 45 will seem to have more "weight" then a 50 in Quant which may only translate to a 90%.

Obviously, there is comparatively less competition in the verbal section because everyone is on an equal playing field when it comes to math (it is the universal language afterall).

In contract, natural English speakers have a leg-up, so to speak, on much of their competition. So, there is a higher total number of high scores in Math as compared to verbal, hence, a higher score in verbal seems to carry a little more weight.

Any other thoughts on this? Is my reasoning correct?

[beatthegmat]

I believe your score is calculated on how you did in each section as a percentile.

Since a 99% is achieved at a lower score in verbal (maybe... 45?) the 45 will seem to have more "weight" then a 50 in Quant which may only translate to a 90%.

Obviously, there is comparatively less competition in the verbal section because everyone is on an equal playing field when it comes to math (it is the universal language afterall).

In contract, natural English speakers have a leg-up, so to speak, on much of their competition. So, there is a higher total number of high scores in Math as compared to verbal, hence, a higher score in verbal seems to carry a little more weight.

Any other thoughts on this? Is my reasoning correct?

I'm a little embarassed to admit that I don't have that much knowledge around GMAT scoring. However, optimisticsam's explanation does sound familiar (I think I read the same info in an article long ago), and it seems to make logical sense.

[Stacey Koprince]

They don't officially say but, yes, verbally is weighted a little bit more heavily.

You can't just compare the numerical 2-digit math score to the numerical 2-digit verbal score because the percentiles are not the same for the same scores.

Optimisticsam, yes, your reasoning is correct!

[rwrangler]

It also seems that Verbal is weighted more even on a percentile basis. I just took my first GMATprep test and scored 680 (89 percentile). My verbal score was 93 percentile and my quantitative was 65 percentile. How can my overall raw be 89 percentile unless verbal has more weighting?