How does this work?

How does this work?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
Thank Tree7Thanks

This is a discussion on How does this work? within the Socionics Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; I did the Sociotype test and it says "Your Sociotype: ILI-1Ni NiTe (INTp) Intuitive Logical Introvert - The Critic" But ...

  1. #1

    How does this work?

    I did the Sociotype test and it says
    "Your Sociotype: ILI-1Ni NiTe (INTp) Intuitive Logical Introvert - The Critic"

    But it also says
    "Other Possible Types ILE (ENTp): 99% as likely as ILI."

    I do not know much about Socionics. This does not make sense to me. Why is the type that is 99% as likely as my suggested type Ne-Ti.
    Why does the N change from I to E? Why does the T change from E to I? It is 1% difference. I think 1% difference would mean something less drastic than a complete change from Ni to Ne and Te to Ti would it not?

    Can somebody explain this to me please I do not understand how ILE can be 99% as likely as ILI when it completely changes the attitude of the two first functions.
    brightflashes thanked this post.



  2. #2

    Ever since this question came up I've also been wondering about it. How could one person get a test result back that could be both a type & that type's function-in-attitude's shadow?

    Dissy, if you remember, can you let us know which test you took? I'm assuming it was from sociotype.com. I apologise that I cannot answer your question. I never really got into foreign typology systems as my preference for personality study lies in Jungian + other theories which are not type systems, so I haven't even really studied this system. The closest to it I have studied is Beebe and that's obviously not the same at all.

    Does anyone have the answer to this question? It's a really good one.

  3. #3

    Yes it was from sociotype.com. I understand it is not just Ni to Ne and Te to Ti that changes in that 1% it is every single function that changes attitude in every position. It does not make sense. I also have done a socionics test called aimtoknowbeta or something I do not quite recall and that returned ILI so I put that as my type here. This does not answer the question in my original post but it is something.
    brightflashes thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4

    Socionics tests sadly are quite poor and the one you did I remember got me ILI, LII, EII, IEI randomly. It looks detailed, but it seems to be a facade.

    If unsure about your type, struggling to determine between two, you'll need to review model A and possibly G for those types.
    Last edited by Engelsstaub; 06-02-2019 at 09:54 AM.

  6. #5

    Quote Originally Posted by Engelsstaub View Post
    Socionics tests sadly are quite poor and the one you did I remember got me ILI, LII, EII, IEI randomly. It looks detailed, but it seems to be a facade.

    If unsure about your type, struggling to determine between two, you'll need to review model A and possibly G for those types.
    Can you explain HOW a test could return that result though? Is the function-in-attitude applied at the end? It seems like a very widely different type to return given that the whole function stack changes.

  7. #6

    Quote Originally Posted by brightflashes View Post
    Can you explain HOW a test could return that result though? Is the function-in-attitude applied at the end? It seems like a very widely different type to return given that the whole function stack changes.
    I don't know really, I haven't designed the test. Generally it's within INxx range, as usual. I haven't done that one for ages though.

  8. #7

    Quote Originally Posted by Engelsstaub View Post
    I don't know really, I haven't designed the test. Generally it's within INxx range, as usual. I haven't done that one for ages though.
    Ah I see. For example, it's pretty common knowledge that taking the MBTI, the actual instrument, the attitudes are supplied at the end, so for Dissy to get both INTp and ENTp (99% as likely), it's like wait a sec, are these attitudes only added at the end? I would have thought that socionics would test for the functions-in-attitude given that it's so function heavy.
    Dissymetry and Engelsstaub thanked this post.

  9. #8

    Quote Originally Posted by brightflashes View Post
    Ah I see. For example, it's pretty common knowledge that taking the MBTI, the actual instrument, the attitudes are supplied at the end, so for Dissy to get both INTp and ENTp (99% as likely), it's like wait a sec, are these attitudes only added at the end? I would have thought that socionics would test for the functions-in-attitude given that it's so function heavy.
    Maybe the test creators were lazy. Nothing to be amazed about considering the fact that models are quite complicated and making questions asking about let's say Fi in slot 5 or Se in 4 would be quite a daunting task.

    Such a test would probably need to take first set of questions, then select another set based on it. The algorithm could be much more complex than just taking answers and adding numbers to compare. Must consider many factors, like let's say between ILI and IEI need to analyze dimensionality of Fe, because ILI can be quite sensitive and absorb emotions occasionally (like they write in all those INFJ articles), but can't create harmony effectively.

    Just summing up numbers can be the reason why tests fail so much even if those tests calculate functions.

    Model G seems to be good for self-typing, but there is little in written form and for some types there are just extremely long hangout vids and I consider watching several hours of that for each type a waste of time. I wish Gulenko just added Wikisocion articles on it.

    For ILI there's a shorter video thankfully:

    But for let's say SEE, only those extremely long hangouts. Quite sad.
    Last edited by Engelsstaub; 06-02-2019 at 11:04 PM.
    brightflashes thanked this post.

  10. #9

    Dissy's issue isn't with self-typing at ALL. His issue is with the metrics. I'm also curious about the metrics, too:

    • The whole thing is based on an 8 function stack (function in attitudes)
    • His whole stack would have been either itself or its shadow.
    • Given that this is - by far- the most popular test in English on the Internet, the idea that 1% can completely change a type so holistically is disturbing.


    Dissy is an ILI-Ni and that is obvious to me and should be obvious to him as well (as far as I know, the last time we talked it was). I am also an ILI-Ni subtype, but I find the subtypes redundant which is why I don't include it in my siggie.

    I have a new question for you: Why is it that a person cannot ask a simple question on this site without being schooled in something completely unrelated to said question?

    I'm not picking on you specifically. It's just a frustration of mine that I've found has somehow increased over the past year. Everyone wants to flex their brain, but no one seems to want to engage in honest back and forth conversation on a simple topic.

    (Sorry in advance for being the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back; I swear this isn't aimed at you specifically)

  11. #10

    With me it's just proclivity to philosophize. Sorry if I become boring of annoying with that.

    Sometimes we are not 100% sure about an answer and if a few of them move just a little bit it can swing the result of a test. Tests are imperfect, questions can be ambiguous. The fact that test gives some alternatives to consider is a good thing (at least the creator was modest). Those % can be consider arbitrary and I'd treat them as a suggestion to do own research on types before making a conclusion.

    ILI is Ni-Te
    ILE is Ne-Ti
    But functions 7 and 8 in model A are also well developed and this is the source of confusion. It's hard to make questions precise and certain enough to determine between those two, since you need to consider their roles. It may be possible, but one needs to study models and types really hard to make a better test.
    brightflashes thanked this post.


     
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. How would this tech idea work?
    By The Poet in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-17-2019, 09:31 AM
  2. [INFJ] [ENFP/INFJ] does this INFJ think I'm being annoying..? How does he feel about me?
    By limj1 in forum INFJ Forum - The Protectors
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 10-08-2018, 11:33 PM
  3. How long does an INFP Grip last and how can you overcome this?
    By Jonah22 in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-21-2018, 04:15 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-10-2018, 12:11 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:09 PM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0