Personality Cafe banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Introverted intuitive type
Joined
·
5,561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I put off watching a youtube video where Dario Nardi presents his work on cognitive function preference and how it relates to different regions of the brain being activated. It was a rather long video but I recommend watching it if you take this stuff seriously, and also to double-check anything I might say.







Dario Nardi brings up a lot of good points about the functions. What struck me in particular is when he mentioned that without knowing which regions of your brain are active when you're doing different tasks, you're really just engaging in a lot of subjective speculation about your own function preferences.

Unfortunately, we don't all have access to EEG scanners and a professor to run lots of tests on us over the course of many weeks in order to determine our function preferences, but what we can at least engage in is a study of the brain, and try to make an educated guess about it instead of just wildly speculating based on really arbitrary lines of reasoning based on missing or incomplete information.

It starts by becoming familiar with the regions of the brain that Nardi studied. Note what each region is used for primarily, and then try to test yourself on your own by subjecting yourself to novel tests that engage those regions of the brain. Then you can compare which regions of the brain you felt the most comfortable with using to Nardi's studies and maybe get a more informed idea about your possible type/function preferences.

Although, you still have to bare in mind - and you'll see this yourself if you watch his lecture - that even if you had a perfect map of your brain region activity and all of that, you'd still only have about a 50% chance that your brain activity was nearly identical to some specific type preference. There's still a very large chance that it might be off in some ways. However, the chance of it being totally different is almost nill, so there's that.

Make sure, too, that when you do test yourself, you do it in a way that denies you access to your most comfortable brain regions. So, for instance, he gives an example of a student who learned a French method for doing math that involved sounding out the problems in their mind, which activated the regions on either side of the brain that handled hearing sounds and forming words, which meant that the student couldn't be around people talking or lots of background noise if he wanted to do math. He needed total quiet so that those regions of his brain weren't being stimulated except by himself.

That's what you have to keep in mind when designing a test for yourself. Figure out ways of "getting out of your comfort zone" and forcing yourself to approach problems by accessing a region of your brain you wouldn't normally, and simultaneously denying yourself access to regions you normally would.

If that sounds complicated, I agree with you, but without access to the kind of setup Nardi has, I guess it's the best we folks can do if we're trying to get closer to an objective understanding of our preferences. I mean, it's still subjective, but it's better than blind guessing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
957 Posts
I found this on an old thread, I think it's a nice summary of his findings

Extraverted Sensing (Se)
Se types:
Show a "tennis hop" brain pattern.
Easily go "in the zone" in a crisis situation.
Quickly integrate body and sensory information.
Easily bored and need external stimulation.
Focus on literal or common interpretations.
Favor details that are dramatic or in motion.

The "tennis hop" brain pattern is one in which all regions of neocortex out low amplitude and out of sync. This is an effective state that requires little energy while the shifting frequencies allow the brain to quickly direct whichever regions are needed for a surprise, incoming task.

Introverted Sensing (Si)

Si types:
Brain activity reflects their background, training, and job expertise.
Get "in the zone" when reviewing past events.
Tend towards rote memorization, repetition, and in-depth reviews of daily events—all habits that help them burn new neural pathways.
Good at recalling information without a context and recalling kinship data.
Favor T5, which processes social feedback and T6, that helps us consider the future.

So Si seems to lead to reinforcement and specialization over time. ISTJs and ISFJs are both visual (favor O1 and/or O2). ISxJs favor Fp2 over Fp1, while ESxJs do the opposite.



Extraverted Intuiting (Ne)

Ne types:
Often show a "Christmas Tree" pattern.
Often experience creative highs.
Provide fast, creative responses (sometimes too creative)
Find it difficult to get "in the zone," and can do so only after practicing and internalizing an activity over weeks, months, or years.
Use regions that support imagination.

A "Christmas Tree" pattern is one in which the neocortex is active all over, each region is of high amplitude and out-of-sync with others. This pattern indicates cross-contextual thinking. This pattern is also very energy intensive, and may produce distractions and contradictions.


Introverted Intuiting (Ni)

Ni Types:
Show a whole brain, zen-like pattern
Show this pattern when they attack an unfamiliar, novel pattern.
Their zen state works best when focusing on a single question, without distraction.
Enter the zen state when ask to envision the future.
Usually benefit from a sensory focus

Their whole-brain, zen-like pattern occurs when all regions of the neocortex are in sync and dominated by brain waves that are medium-low frequency and very high-amplitude. Other types only show this pattern when they engage in their specific area of expertise, unlike Ni-ers, who also show it when tackling a new problem.

ENxJs usually benefit from a physical or sensory focus. NJs tend to be generalists compared to their SJs cousins.


Extraverted Thinking (Te)

Te types:
Show most efficient use of mental energy as they rely on evidence-based decision-making.
Rely on T3, O1, C3 and Fp1. Tend to use other areas very little, even on tasks that would normally invoke them.
Rely on measurably sensory information
Focus on goals and stimulated by task completion and error correction.
Tend to move to action before accurate or what-if processing, so quick efficiency can become a pitfall.
Show high activity in F8, which handles deeply felt personal values, often expressed negatively.
Female Te types show more diverse brain activity and are more responsive to social feedback.

IXTJs are more visual, attentive to tone of voice, and focus on implementation detail over quick decision-making. ESTJS attend more to details, are more open to brainstorming, and listen intently to authority figures. ENTJs can enter a creative mode similar to INTJs.


Introverted Thinking (Ti)

Ti types:
Show high use of four regions that afford complex logical reasoning: F3, F4, P3, P4
Use F3 to linearly derive solutions. (highest for ESTPs followed by INTPs)
Use F4 to categorize and define concepts. (highest for INTPs, followed by ESTPs)
Use P3 to integrate visual-kinesthetic data. (highest for ISTPs then ENTPs)
Use P4 to holistically weigh numerous pros and cons of many uncertain or risky factors. (highest for ENTPs followed by ISTPs)
Above regions are located away from direct sensory contact, so have a "deep" or "detached" quality.
Tend to enter a dissociated state when arguing or meeting someone new. In this state, their neocortex shuts out raw emotions in order to enjoy objectivity.
Least interested in listening.
Engage the above regions + Fp1 and Fp2 when examining a topic from multiple angles and integrating the angles into a coherent way.

INTPs are likely to quickly stop listening as they assess the relevance of what others are saying.


Extraverted Feeling (Fe)

Fe types:
Focus on social responsibility.
Stimulated by communicating their explanations and decisions.
Use Fp1 to suppress emotional impulses from deep in the brain in favor of sophisticated cognitive responses.
Use Fp2 less, so may sometimes suddenly switch from highly composed to very angry.
Use F5 a lot, which helps them adjust to social feedback.

ExFJs show high activity in T3, but least activity in visual regions O1 and O2. ESFJs are more left-brained, high in C3 and F7. ENFJs are might right-brained, showing high activity in F4 and T4.


Introverted Feeling

Fi types:
Are consummate listeners who listen in a holistic way.
INFPs can deeply listen for up to 10 minutes at a time, ISFPs listen briefly and then move to action.
Show high activity in T3 and T4, which handle language.
Carefully compose their own speech, attending to both content and delivery.
Show high activity in F8, and are stimulated by rankings of importance.
Show the least activity in interior regions that aid logic.
Rely on left-brained (Fp1) decision making.

INFPs may get to the core of a person's psychology by listening for so long. INFPs are less likely to defend their own views or take action, though when they stop listening, region Fp1 becomes very active as they make a strong (and perhaps final) decision.

ISFPs are attentive when others withhold information (like social feedback).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
660 Posts
His work is certainly exciting to think about. It's just too qualitative. Far from being accepted by the scientific community. I certainly think that he is onto something and if I suspend my Te, I do think he's capturing what Jung referred to as the cognitive functions, but we'll have to wait for him to take his work further.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Well, keep in mind that his sample size comprised of only 60 UCLA college aged, 19-22ish students (lol I go to this university currently! But unfortunately he left in 2012 though :c) -- I feel like he should have taken more diverse sample size in terms of age? Also, the way he structured his experiment was that he got this sample size two weeks to study the MBTI and assess themselves on what type they identify with... there could also be the chance that they mistype themselves? Also, there might be other brain activity going on there that can't be detected by the EEG (since it only captures activity in the neocortex) that are interesting to explore. I think Nardi was capped by his budget, hence his tiny sample size and why only the EEG machine?

I think he had like, 8 ENFPs or something, which I found really odd. Anyway, if his sample size is only 60 people, and assuming that he wanted to equally divide between 16 personalities, that would only average about 4 types of each kind. Can you even draw conclusions on something like that and make broad sweeping generalizations of all personality types that operate like this?

His research is definitely very interesting to ponder on though! I just wish it was done on a larger scale because as it is, I feel like it's kind of inconclusive. Because cognitive functions are based on how we operate in our minds, right? So it would follow that perhaps similar brain patterns would be similar among the same personality types (albeit variations here and here).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,376 Posts
Well, keep in mind that his sample size comprised of only 60 UCLA college aged, 19-22ish students (lol I go to this university currently! But unfortunately he left in 2012 though :c) -- I feel like he should have taken more diverse sample size in terms of age? Also, the way he structured his experiment was that he got this sample size two weeks to study the MBTI and assess themselves on what type they identify with... there could also be the chance that they mistype themselves? Also, there might be other brain activity going on there that can't be detected by the EEG (since it only captures activity in the neocortex) that are interesting to explore. I think Nardi was capped by his budget, hence his tiny sample size and why only the EEG machine?

I think he had like, 8 ENFPs or something, which I found really odd. Anyway, if his sample size is only 60 people, and assuming that he wanted to equally divide between 16 personalities, that would only average about 4 types of each kind. Can you even draw conclusions on something like that and make broad sweeping generalizations of all personality types that operate like this?

His research is definitely very interesting to ponder on though! I just wish it was done on a larger scale because as it is, I feel like it's kind of inconclusive. Because cognitive functions are based on how we operate in our minds, right? So it would follow that perhaps similar brain patterns would be similar among the same personality types (albeit variations here and here).
I believe he's done more personal research since. I don't know if he's published any of it though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
I believe he's done more personal research since. I don't know if he's published any of it though.
Research... or business...

From http://www.darionardi.com/Welcome.html:

Dario’s system and methodology for neuroscience of personality is covered a pending patent. ...

Recently, Dario is developing use of EEG with small TV and film audiences, gamers, students, and work groups to objectively evaluate and improve the effectiveness of particular media, material, and processes, such as the likely reception of a pilot TV show.
 

·
Heretic
ESI 5w4 9w8 2w1
Joined
·
10,709 Posts
That is the trouble with trying to do anything useful in this department.
You may end up broke and without anything.
Better just monitize it while it still has the allure.

Me myself just play poker,
I had some people wanting to learn MBTI and did one little seminar on request.
It felt totally fake for me and pay vs effort was not worth in in a million years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,510 Posts
I really appreciate what Dario did but my problem is that I don't think he actually understands the Jungian functions (not his fault only, I blame Berens mostly because he worked with her) nor does he know how to properly identify people's types outside of simplistic MBTI typing methods.

Hence I feel I cannot trust his results at all because I am not sure his methodology is sound. Someone else also mentioned problems with his sample size which is another can of worms unrelated to his ability to apply and understand Jungian typology.
 

·
Heretic
ESI 5w4 9w8 2w1
Joined
·
10,709 Posts
I really appreciate what Dario did but my problem is that I don't think he actually understands the Jungian functions (not his fault only, I blame Berens mostly because he worked with her) nor does he know how to properly identify people's types outside of simplistic MBTI typing methods.

Hence I feel I cannot trust his results at all because I am not sure his methodology is sound. Someone else also mentioned problems with his sample size which is another can of worms unrelated to his ability to apply and understand Jungian typology.
Well that is the way it goes.
I'm fine with it, as long as I can rip of penny pinching Si doms and reckless Se/Ne doms,
while staying the hell out of the Ti doms way in poker. =D
I've long since given up on any this having any significant impact trough me on a grand scale.
It always stops at the quadra "checkpoint" anyway.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top