Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Renin dichotomies empirical testing

  1. #1
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,626
    Mentioned
    156 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Renin dichotomies empirical testing

    Have the russians done anything similar?

    I was thinking earlier on how if we give questionnaires and suppose the truthfulness of the answers

    then load the questionaries in a sheet

    and perform factor analysis among types that share an increasing number of dichotomies

    we should find an up/dowrising correlation trend between the factor and the number of shared dichotomies

    this would indeed show at least the empirical presence of an unexplained entity which can plausibly be referred to the dichotomies
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  2. #2
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The biggest problem here is that a large percentage of people are lost likely typed incorrectly.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  3. #3
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,935
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe people could list the 3-5 dichotomies they are most sure describes them, and then see how that compares to their type? Or people could just rank all of them from most certain to least certain, fairly roughly, and then someone with the expertise can do whatever statistical analysis.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  4. #4
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    Maybe people could list the 3-5 dichotomies they are most sure describes them, and then see how that compares to their type? Or people could just rank all of them from most certain to least certain, fairly roughly, and then someone with the expertise can do whatever statistical analysis.
    Definite: Serious, Resolute, Dynamic, Strategist, Resource centered/protecting (otherwise know as Compliant)
    Not as obvious, but still clear: Result, Declarer, Democracy
    Leaning towards the side of: Careless, Positivism, Emotive
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  5. #5
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,935
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee
    hey! are you the one with the expertise? if yes, then do you have a link to *original* descriptions of the dichotomies which are not just regurgitations/copies of the ones already available? i'd love to have a look
    No, I was thinking more along the lines of thehotelambush .
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  6. #6
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,935
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Pretty sure of, in order: Reasonable > Constructivism > Static > Asker > Democracy > Negativism > Process
    Possibly: Merry?
    All the rest are difficult to decide for me.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  7. #7
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Looks like the wikisocion isn't complete in their descriptions yet.
    If you're gonna do something like this, then it would be helpful to link people to good definitions of reinin's dichotomies.

    So, as defined by http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5773 (just cuz it was the easiest available link for me):
    Negativist, Declarative, Static, Tactical, Interest-Protecting all fit me.
    The others I'm a bit unsure about either due to my not quite understanding something in the definition, my having issues with a definition, or my being aware of parts of both within me.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  8. #8
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


    Looking at the 5 out of 5 and the 4 out of 5s:

    Negativist, Declarative, EP, NP, EF = enfp (5 out of 5)
    Declarative, IJ, SJ, IT = istj (4 out of 5)
    Negativist, Declarative, NP, IT= intp (4 out of 5)

    Roflmao,so, the only thing that of this list of for sures that separates me from istj is being a negativist, and from the intp is being static.

    (Of course the differences are more marked if we add in Gulenko's Infantile.)

    Still, it's pretty funny….
    Some of you will understand the joke,
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  9. #9
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    I think most of the Reinin Dichotomies are generally a bunch of confirmation bias food. If anything we're talking very general trends that are easily influenced by the enviornment to the point of being silly to try to type by.

  10. #10
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,626
    Mentioned
    156 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bionicgoat
    I think most of the Reinin Dichotomies are generally a bunch of confirmation bias food. If anything we're talking very general trends that are easily influenced by the enviornment to the point of being silly to try to type by.
    Yeah, I think I didn't explain myself properly.

    We first (I, I'll try) build a normal socionics test. Inside the test there are questions linked to renin dichtomies, but not explicitly stated (of course). We then run a factor analysis to see if people with the greatest number of similar answers in similar questions related to renin dichotomies also get as type result the types associated with said dichotomies.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the problem with reinin dichotomies, among others, is that they are defined (at least from all of the material i've seen) in an extremely vague manner. i have tried to stomach the reinin dichotomies for a long time and have never exactly grasped what the hell they really mean.

    at the conference earlier in august, there was some discussion about the validity of the reinin dichotomies. in particular, hotelambush at one point mentioned something about the emotivist-constructivist dichotomy reflecting something like emotivist types get to know their partners before jumping in to a relationship whereas constructivist types do not. to me, this is a behavioral trait that can be immediately identified as having nothing whatsoever to do with type. i do not understand what most of the reinin dichotomies actually mean, but my suspicion is that they all reflect these similarly bizarre characteristics and have no validity at all.


    to go from these strange and highly dubious definitions and construct test questions that accurately portray the nature of the dichotomies (especially for some of the really strange dichotomies like tactics-strategy or process-result) is not going to be a particularly fruitful task.

  12. #12
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Some of the dichotomies blur together. When you're trying to explain or understand one of them, what you're saying often ends up sounding like it could be attributed to another dichotomy.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  13. #13
    Elro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    2,796
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Some of the dichotomies blur together. When you're trying to explain or understand one of them, what you're saying often ends up sounding like it could be attributed to another dichotomy.
    That definitely doesn't make this sound like pseudoscience!
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Holy mud-wrestling bipolar donkeys, Batman!

    Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.


    I pity your souls

  14. #14
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, these dichotomies aren't an integral part of Socionics by any means. They're just an add on, like a sunroof. To some extent the problem lies in the translations. For example, did you know that the Right vs. Left (or Process vs. Result) is based on the concept of Involution vs. Evolution? Thinking about it in those terms changes the meaning of that dichotomy to some extent, and it makes more sense.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •