Would anyone mind doing a list of tests?

[ThePeddler]

They had one in "What's my type?" before the deletion thingy... I thought it was a good idea, and I would do it, but I have no idea where the tests are located. And I know that tests are considered unreliable, But i do think that they are a good starting point.

Here's Hugo's test, ver. 6 : http://www.people.iup.edu/rdxm/
Rick's New Test: http://socionics.us/tests/1/0.htm
Rick's Old Test : http://socionics.us/tests/responses.shtml
MachinTruc's: http://sourceforge.net/projects/easytim/
Rmcnew's : http://www.the16types.info/stest.php
IDK Who's : http://socionics.com/sta/sta-1-r.html?0:::


More, please?

[posablethumb]

Your proposed types are:

ISFp, no subtype

OR

INFj, N subtype

[eunice]

Your proposed types are:

INFp, N subtype

OR


INFj, N subtype

[posablethumb]

second test:
Your test result is:

LSE - Logical Sensing Extratim
"Director"
Strong functions:

Primary type message:
Managing worthwhile, productive, and wholesome activities.


3rd test:
1. 1st answer
2. 4th
3. 1st
4. 2
5. 4
6. 4
7. 1
8. 5th

[KSpin]

It sucks because I know what each of the questions is asking, and I know subconsciously how to skewer it into what I think I already am. You can guess the results I got.

[Mea]

Haha. I think he's asking if anyone would compile a list of socionics tests.

[Mea]

Anyway. Some of mcnew's tests.

http://www.the16types.info/stest.php
http://the16types.info/stest22.php

And the one at socionics.com?

http://socionics.com/sta/sta-1-r.html?0:::

[Jeremy1988]

Hugo's Test, version six:

ENFj, N subtype

OR

INTj, T subtype

Rick's New Test:

IEI - Intuitive Ethical Introtim

Rick's Old Test:

1. Response Two.

2. Response One.

3. Response Four.

4. Response One.

5. Response Two.

6. Response Three.

7. Response Two.

[Ezra]

Rick's Old Test

1. 2nd answer
2. The last answer
3. "
4. "
5. "
6. "
7. "
8. "


Hugo's Test

Your proposed types are:

ESTj, no subtype

OR

ESTp, S subtype



Rick's New Test

ILI - Intuitive Logical Introtim
"Critic"

Primary type message:
Recognizing underlying processes and deriving benefit from them.

Apparently 23% of people who took the test got this result - the highest percentage.

Socionics.com

The first time I did this I came out ESTj, the second time ENTj.


I'll do mcnew's tests when I get back from college this afternoon. The video one didn't work for me - I just got "Loading..."

[Creepy-bg]

I spent too much effort on that table to redo it ATM... hmmm.... maybe the next time "inspiration" :wink: is flowing through my system I'll remake it. (but not now)

[Not A Communist Shill]

Ah...we need some new tests and things...get on to it you lazy so-and-so's. Or, rmcnew could just let Hugo come back...mwahaha.

[FDG]

I had never taken Hugo's test!

Your proposed types are:

ENTj, T subtype (gulenko's set of subtypes so it'd be Ni subtype in meged)

OR

ESTp, S subtype

it didn't solve jack shit! It's not fucking possible that those two types are so fucking similar

[machintruc]

edited

[XoX]

I had never taken Hugo's test!

Your proposed types are:

ENTj, T subtype (gulenko's set of subtypes so it'd be Ni subtype in meged)

OR

ESTp, S subtype

it didn't solve jack shit! It's not fucking possible that those two types are so fucking similar

I did it and got INFp (N) or ISTj (S). Hah. I'm not sure if I've done this one before. He made like 6 of them which were similar but a bit different.

[aestrivex]

this time taking it, it gave me INTp no subtype or ISTj Ti subtype.


the descriptions in that test are not dreadful, but they definitely are not perfect.

[KSpin]

this time taking it, it gave me INTp no subtype or ISTj Ti subtype.


the descriptions in that test are not dreadful, but they definitely are not perfect.

I got INTp no subtype or INTj N subtype.

[Not A Communist Shill]

On the Hugo test, I got ISFp, S subtype or INTj, no subtype

Changing the last question, from whether I found the INTj subtypes question difficult to answer, I got ISFp, no subtype or INTj, N subtype.

I chose the first one, but I'm not sure how difficult it was to decide :

Analyst, good scientist, conceptualist, you give primary attention to global issues. You are a generator of ideas. Achievements that are full of promise are important to you.

You are concrete and ordered. You are an organiser in a science. You do not trust very abstract ideas. You are like a scholar in a specialised subject. You are a strict adherent of reasonable systems.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[eunice]

Your proposed types are:

INFp, N subtype

OR


INFj, N subtype

@ Raisonpure: I guess it explains why we seem similar sometimes.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Does anyone have ideas for a new test? Maybe if we throw around ideas, someone will do all the hard work .

The Stratievskaya profiles described each type by each function - a test could be made using for each functions (or all together) by asking you to make a choice between this description and this other description for example (we'd have to find some way to abbreviate each description - it's difficult to read one profile, let alone all sixteen).

I don't think many people would have read all the profiles (I've barely read the INTj one) which gives an added benefit.

I read the ESFj description recently, and discovered that ESFjs care about the health of others in great detail, but tend to do this at the expense of their own health (I suppose it's kinda of obvious actually) - being forced to read the nuances of each function for each type may give an accurate test.

Can someone force someone else to do this - I could help with the qs, but I can't do computer test thingies.

[Ezra]

mcnew's tests are too long.

[Gilly]

mcnew's tests are too long.

Yeah, and none of them work. Tests are pretty much useless for Socionics.

[ThePeddler]

I don't think test are completely useless. While it is true that they aren't right 100% or even 75%, it is also true that they could be right. Anyway, The good thing about tests is that they give a starting point. Just knowing one thing for certain will cut down the possible types by half.
I think test combined with self-awareness have the potential to be great. Say a test says you're emotion-creating, Compliant, and far-sighted. So you look into those traits and decide for certain that you're emotion-creating, but aren't sure about compliant or far-sighted. With that one dichotomy, you have already halved the possible types you can be. I think that is better than trying to be every single thing, it's less confusing.
So while it's true that test can be/are usually wrong, I think that a well made test would be useful. It's better than starting from scratch.

[somethingsomething]

Hugo's socionics test: Infp, no subtype, or Entp, T subtype
Rick's new test: ILI...but I think I messed up with my answers
Rick's old test:
1. No, annoying
2. Now and then
3. Every now and then
4. Yes
5. No, annoying
6. Indifferent
7. Now and then
8. Yes

[reyn_til_runa]

Hugo's - (shocker)

INTp no subtype
or
ENTp no subtype

Problem with tests & socionics: a test by it's very nature will most often require that someone dichotomize his behaviors and attitudes. if it is true that we are better off NOT typing ourselves by the socionics dichotomies, but by a more fluid picture of the functions, then we cannot hope to understand ourselves "fluidly/functionally" while testing ourselves "rigidly/dichotomously." In a sense, I like Hugo's test because it leaves room for the imprecision of stated dichotomies (by asking which question is more difficult to answer), but at the same time, it doesn't seem able to handle pretty basic input data, such as "I am both "mobile and spontaneous" and "relaxed." If these key words actually stood for something objective, and the semantics were more or less agreed upon, then we shouldn't end up with the situation where answering both of these in the affirmative allows for contradictory types to emerge. it makes no difference if the person taking the test agrees the outcome of a test. if it is a viable test, there should be some objective material upon which the test is built, and this material should serve as a way to check one's answers AGAINST THE TEST rather than against himself, which is unreliable and useless (unless taking tests for the hell of it is your favorite past time).

Anyway, here are my answers. prepare to be amazed.

A.1
B.1
C.2
D.2

a.2
b.1

Stage 2

A. 1
Yes it was quite difficult.

B.2
Yes it was quite difficult.

[Ezra]

mcnew's tests are too long.

Yeah, and none of them work. Tests are pretty much useless for Socionics.

It's true.

It's almost as if they work based on considering only the dichotomies when phrasing or forming a question.

[machintruc]

My test (easyTIM) isn't that long and has some accuracy. It returns probabilities for EACH of the 16 types.

I'd say you have 70-80% probability to find your type in the 4-5 most probable types with easyTIM 0.1.5.

[reyn_til_runa]

My test (easyTIM) isn't that long and has some accuracy. It returns probabilities for EACH of the 16 types.

I'd say you have 70-80% probability to find your type in the 4-5 most probable types with easyTIM 0.1.5.

where is it?

[ThePeddler]

Yeah, I like MachinTruc's test. It's simple and it makes sense. And also it gives you a percentage of possible types, that's what i really like. One of higher types have to be your type.

[rockclimber]

Your proposed types are:

ENFj, N subtype

OR

INFj, F subtype




Your test result is:

EII - Ethical Intuitive Introtim
"Humanist"

Primary type message:
Being exemplary and instilling ideal values.

[VatesSaeculum]

Hugo's:

INFp, no subtype

OR

ISFj, F subtype

Rick's New Test:

IEI

EasyTIM:
1.IEI
2.EII
3.LII
4.ILI
5.SLI

Rmcnew's :

EIE or EII

IDK Who's: InfX

[ThePeddler]

Hugo's : INFp, F subtype or ENFp, N subtype

Rick's New :
IEI - Intuitive Ethical Introtim
"Romantic"
Strong functions: introverted intuitionextraverted ethics

Primary type message:
Recognizing meaning in the events of life around you.

MachinTruc's :
---------------
IEI : 20.7
EII : 19.64
LII : 19.14
EIE : 17.09
ILI : 16.95
ESI : 16.89
SEI : 16.39
---------------

I'm going to do the longer one's later...

[raisonpure]

Your proposed types are:

INFp, N subtype

OR


INFj, N subtype

@ Raisonpure: I guess it explains why we seem similar sometimes.

Nah, it doesn't. I don't get accurate results on that test. INFj/INTp pops up more often.

Now I get:
ENFj, N subtype

OR

ESFp, no subtype

...

ENFj, N subtype

OR

ISFj, no subtype

Test Results from easyTIM 0.1.5
EIE : 16
LII : 17.49
ESI : 15.95

[posablethumb]

easyTIM

IEI : 18.45

ILI : 16.85

ILE : 16.39

LII : 16.29

EII : 15.09

[aestrivex]

if anyone wants to see easy tim version 1.6 or 1.7, contact me. machintruc took them off his website essentially because he's a prejudiced moron.


the tests stank anyway. his version (1.5) is at least as good, if not better.

[rockclimber]

according to easyTIM I'm LII

[ThePeddler]

You don't take just the highest..You take at least the top five...