Personality and Physical Appearance

[Red Villain]

http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/12...ity/10134.html

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~rmw/Warner_..._JPSP_1986.pdf

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1210130000.htm

Unconscious socionics?

To me it appears VI is becoming an established fact. The question now is: Do certain personality types correlate to certain physical characteristics. Discuss.

[Reuben]

I remember a thread where some Ne types were discussing about certain activities linked to different IEs actually resulted in physical characteristics overtime etc. sharper eyes for ST types, wispyness for Ne dominant types, sleepy eyes for Ni types, loving eyes for Fi types etc.

I don't know, I just tend to want to put people I like in my mouth.

[Leader]

Im starting to realize that personality is more important than we could possibly imagine. VI definitely exists, and it works if you're accurate enough. The more I think about socionics the more I understand that it effects everything. From how we perceive life, things that happen around us and where we go in life, down to the very way we look and essence of our DNA. Who was it that made the thread about us being biological robots, that's making more sense.

[Galen]

It's important here to distinguish between simply looking at somebody and VI, because they're two different entities. VI is centered around the dynamic portions of the face, aspects that can be controlled both consciously and unconsciously by the brain: the eyes, mouth, eyebrows, etc. I would argue that personality is something that can definitely be conveyable by physical appearance: how you carry yourself, your habitual facial expressions etc. But since Socionics is not based around "personality" per se (or so I see it), just looking at someone in the sense of their personality won't be the most accurate means of discovering sociotype.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Relativity is a major component to typing.

[mfckr]

You might find this interesting; also a horde of papers here.

Still probably among the most interesting I've seen to date [link]:

Abstract

In addition to signaling identity, sex, age, and emotional state, people frequently use facial characteristics as a basis for personality attributions. Typically, there is a high degree of consensus in the attributions made to faces. Nevertheless, the extent to which such judgments are veridical is unclear and somewhat controversial. We have examined the relationship between self–report and perceived personality using both faces of individuals and computer graphic composites. Photographs were taken of 146 men and 148 women who each also completed a self–report personality questionnaire from which scores on the big five personality dimensions were derived. In study 1, we identified a relationship between self–reported extraversion and perceived extraversion in individual faces. For male faces alone, we also found some accuracy in the perception of emotional stability and openness to experience. In study 2, composite faces were made from individuals self–reporting high and low scores on each of the five dimensions. These composites were rated for personality and attractiveness by independent raters. Discriminant analyses indicated that, controlling for attractiveness, independent ratings on congruent personality dimensions were best able to discriminate between composite faces generate from individuals high or low on the self–report dimensions of agreeableness, extraversion, and, for male faces only, emotional stability.

[Nico1e]

A while back, I went on a wild goose chase and didn't find enough information. Somehow I got to some obscure site somewhere that I will never find again. And it talked about normal anatomical variations, as they relate to socionic type.

I have read about normal anatomical variations before. For instance, people's blood vessel structures differ. Some people actually don't have particular arteries that other people have. And some of these are large, major arteries, not just small ones, not just capillaries - for instance, the femoral arteries in the legs. http://www.springerlink.com/content/t421047577322612/ (*edit, lol, on rereading this I got the impression I was saying 'they don't have any femoral arteries at all.' That's not what I mean. They have them, but just in a different arrangement.*)

According to the website which I will never find again, they had a similar theory for parts of the brain and the brain stem, and according to the theory, the variations in how the brain stem connected to the base of the skull affected personality type.

I'm taking this with a grain of salt, because when I read it, it looked as though they had first looked at parts of the brain, and then afterwards said that 'it would make sense if personality type was determined by this variation.' I wasn't sure if they had actually typed people first, and then observed the variation afterwards. It's hard to explain what I mean, especially because I can't link to the website to look at the exact words that they used to give me a suspicious impression.

I tried looking for this, for a while, looking at the way people's necks attached to their skulls, and it was too hard for me to see it, and I just sort of got bored with trying to do that, so it was just a 'passing fad' with me.

However, the overall idea still makes sense to me - to keep the baby and throw out the bathwater - the idea that normal anatomical variations might possibly be the cause of a person's sociotype. Even if people disagreed about *that particular* thing (the way the neck connects to the skull), the theory is still a good idea.

And probably a lot of it is something microscopic and internal, something you can't easily see. It might be a variation in the way that nerves connect to each other, or something.

I sometimes half-jokingly, and half-seriously, say that I can VI somebody, or somebody looks like somebody else, and yeah, I do half believe it, but I can't do it reliably or specifically enough, and for the time being I'm more focused on understanding what all the functions are, and VI is postponed until some day later in the future if and when I am actually working with people in person.

[Red Villain]

You might find this interesting; also a horde of papers here.

Still probably among the most interesting I've seen to date [link]:

Abstract

In addition to signaling identity, sex, age, and emotional state, people frequently use facial characteristics as a basis for personality attributions. Typically, there is a high degree of consensus in the attributions made to faces. Nevertheless, the extent to which such judgments are veridical is unclear and somewhat controversial. We have examined the relationship between self–report and perceived personality using both faces of individuals and computer graphic composites. Photographs were taken of 146 men and 148 women who each also completed a self–report personality questionnaire from which scores on the big five personality dimensions were derived. In study 1, we identified a relationship between self–reported extraversion and perceived extraversion in individual faces. For male faces alone, we also found some accuracy in the perception of emotional stability and openness to experience. In study 2, composite faces were made from individuals self–reporting high and low scores on each of the five dimensions. These composites were rated for personality and attractiveness by independent raters. Discriminant analyses indicated that, controlling for attractiveness, independent ratings on congruent personality dimensions were best able to discriminate between composite faces generate from individuals high or low on the self–report dimensions of agreeableness, extraversion, and, for male faces only, emotional stability.

This is great, thank you Ashton

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

The High Extraverted guy and the Low Extraverted guy look really cute together. =p

Low Emotional Stable dude looks like a sociopathic/psychopathic troll.

The Low Conscientiousness guy seems like he actually has Higher Conscientiousness than the Lower one.

The low agreeable and low openness men look like they don't want to be bothered by anything. The high introverted guy is really cute like 'please fuck me warmly and tenderly.'

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Now, the ladies...

Both girls look kinda agreeable to me so ehh...

Once again, the conscientiousness thing seems backwards to me.

Extroversion/inversion looks okay.

As for the rest, blah, women are harder to read. They are more subtle. No wonder they manipulate the human race effectively.

[jessica129]

Why does it feel like I'm looking at a picture of me and my brother? creepy

[mfckr]

This is great, thank you Ashton

That paper's really interesting Ashton, thanks!

Sure, np. There's a cache of papers on the same topic here if you want more.