Good socionics test
Does anyone know about REALLY good socinics test? The only one I know which tends to be accurate in most of the cases is the sociotype.com/test. But all the other tests I made seemed to be fearly inaccurate, or were just MBTI tests that pretended to be socioncs. So any ideas?
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...do=form&fid=11
Try this one, it's not a MBTI one at least. I'm not sure if you've filled it out before but you can always fill it out again!
Thanks, that was an interesting oneOriginally Posted by mu4
There isn't one. The best way to determine it is to do a test then immediately follow it up with the talk with the person who evaluated your test. This is the way that MBTI experts operate when finding the "best fit type". And it's the only real way to do it imo.
Still, real life chat(or indeed video chat as well) can substitute the full MBTI procedure. But the test by itself? It can't substitute jack shit! It's only a TOOL and what's the use of a TOOL without an EXPERT to OPERATE it?
I thought the one that subtle made was pretty good actually
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
There is no objective information proving any typing test today is good, neither in Socionics nor MBT (wich uses same types, so you may look at their tests too, in wich they don't use preferences and 8 functions simultaneously).
The most complex and probably best typing test in Socionics on today is by Talanov, also exist similar by Talanov & Gulenko. It has only Russian variant, as I know. And most bad thing - Talanov is a Reinin's dichs believer wich inputed them in some versions of his tests and hence that tests have systematic errors. From this best test you may expect to get result correct in <70% of cases, I doubt more.
There is no objective basis to think so and no data about high real match of that test with someone. So to call it "accurate in most of the cases" you have no meaningful reasons.The only one I know which tends to be accurate in most of the cases is the sociotype.com/test
I suppose all tests are correct in <50% of cases as it's the situation among all today typers. Except maybe Talanov's test. And maybe MBTI as it was developed for long with participating of people with normal psychological education.But all the other tests I made seemed to be fearly inaccurate
As it's doubtful that some test in Socionics used non-Jungian model for introverted types, existence of "MBTI tests that pretended to be socioncs" is impossible. There is no other significant contradiction between MBT and Socionics. Where MBT tests use only preferences, their results are not worser than preferences tests labeled as "Socionics".or were just MBTI tests that pretended to be socioncs
To objectively make "REALLY good socinics test" needs REALLY good work and verification, what needs REALLY good education and resources. Also it needs REALLY good theory wich should be correct, while many in typology is doubtful like RD for example.
maybe you can translate it for us?
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
I find that test often gives people the quasi-identical type. Probably because of its utilization of j/p dichotomy in the test questions
Which one is that?
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Socionics-Test
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Ah so you meant Subteigh, ok
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
