I have always wondered the type of people that socionic experts study. Celebrity examples appeal to the masses but lack close scientific observation. Instead they are based on secondary material, i.e. photographs, etc. I have been wondering: what is the environment that conducts socionic studies of voluntary participants?

Carl Jung developed his psychological types from his neurotic patients as he was a practising psychologist. A lasting impression of his psychological types is each dominant function manifests specific neurotic symptoms.

Myers-Briggs developed their theory of personality types from their students as they were elementary teachers. Their interpretation of personality types is personable.

When you consider the fact that the relationship between psychologist and patient was not something entirely new, and the same can be said of teacher and student, psychological types and personality types reveals the nature of Carl Jung and Myers-Briggs as much as it does human nature. I mean to say developing a theory was not actually apart of their job description but I'm meandering, so, back to the point.

could a guinea pig change socionics from an abstract study and morph it into a legitimate science like psychology? I mean if you had a psychologist intent on developing a methodic study of socionic types would not that authenticate socionics?

Sleep studies is a a fairly simple example of a guinea pig used in psychology. Depth perception is another. Infants crawl across a glass table but half the glass table is covered by cloth. The infant starts from the clothed side of the table and is directed toward the unclothed side. The infant demonstrates depth perception if they stop at the end of the cloth and none if they continue. The point of experiement is to discover at what age depth perception develops in infants.

Apart of what makes psychology a legitimate science is measurement and experiment. A scientific fact is observable by multiple scientists. A scientific fact is proposed by one scientist but proved or disproved by another, hence scientific community.

I suppose the real question to ask is: would you trust your baby in the hands of a socionic expert? sounds like a joke but in all actuality I'd likely wager the majority of people would not.