New socionics test beta uploaded

[Angel von Himmel]

The graphics should be fixed now, if anyone notices anything else give me a buzz.

[Angel von Himmel]

I am assuming that the S denotes strong and W weak. What does it mean if the function scores as weak?

Apaprently I am still INTP, but Te Ni Se Fe instead? I had always thought I was Ti Ne/Se but that was on MBTI, I guess this is one of the differences between socionics and mbti?

Thought I'd mention that the icons aren't showing on the result page.

NEW = 14
NIS = 13
TES = 14
TIW = 20
SEW = 18
SIW = 20
FEW = 22
FIW = 28

Strong:
Weak:

INTp -
Strong:
Weak:

The test indicated that you were primarily INTp, but there are traces of another type as well (Strong ,Weak: .the test should have possibly give you some secondary types as well in the functional analysis.

Note that the results are interpreted according to this model, which is similar to model X ...

[Angel von Himmel]

Those guest were me ...
Nevermind, you had weak (NEW = 14)
... I can not edit it because I was on as a guest. You without a doubt an INTp according to that analysis.

[Angel von Himmel]

I am assuming that the S denotes strong and W weak. What does it mean if the function scores as weak?

The test determines a persons functional analysis through several checks and balances, one of which is to gauge your main strong functions in comparison to your main weak functions. One of the greatest determiners of type is to compare a persons' main strong functions to their main weak functions.

However, because of my strong bias against the test deciding a persons type for them, I have designed the test to give a person enough info to gauge the type for themselves. The only problem for this is that not everyone knows how to interpret the results, which means that test takers not familiar with socionics may possibly need to ask someone knowledgable what their results mean for them.

Or, they can just trust that the main type the test gave them was accurate. Dangerous, but some people just do not like to think for themselves and that is just fine for them.

[Angel von Himmel]

I did a quick calculation and you spent an average of 7 seconds answering each question it would take about 45 minutes to answer the test.

Hmmm, if 7 seconds per question is about 45 minutes and 25 seconds per question is 1 hour and a half, I would say that the average person probably spends close to 2 hours doing nothing but the test.

[Angel von Himmel]

This is not the final version of the test ... eventually I want to work in some sort of save feature and make it so the questions display themselves randomly one question at a time. This will reduce a persons capability to miss questions and will allow someone to take the test as quick or as slow as they want without spending a great deal of time completeing the test all at once.

[Angel von Himmel]

Also, this is not the final version of the functional analysis ... I still have plans and ideas on how to make it more understandable and personable. It still looks like a rough beta and that is exactly what it is actually.

[The Exception]

I did a quick calculation and you spent an average of 7 seconds answering each question it would take about 45 minutes to answer the test.

It would have took me 30 minutes but I was told I missed three questions and I spent almost 15 minutes finding them

I scored as INTj again.

Laura

[Cone]

You INTjs take tests way, way too quickly. The reason I never took the test is because it would take me 5 hours at least, with my exacting personality.

[Angel von Himmel]

You INTjs take tests way, way too quickly. The reason I never took the test is because it would take me 5 hours at least, with my exacting personality.

They're yes or no questions!!! What's there to be exacting about????

Because INTps have a tendency to get caught up in minor details that no one else notices and they lose entusiasm and interest.

It is also a question on the test, you will see it if you look closely.

It is a result on weak ...

[Angel von Himmel]

I think on the next version of the test I will make a feature that saves a persons' result and gives them a url so they can show other people what they got on the test.

[Cone]

Because INTps have a tendency to get caught up in minor details that no one else notices and they lose entusiasm and interest.

Well, look at that. I found out my type without even having to take the test!

But yes, I look into simple questions way too deeply in order to get the true answer. Most of the time, however, I find that this deep-level processing just gets me to some useless, ambiguous answer, so eventually I have to take the question on the surface.

[Hugo]

Way too many questions. Mopre questions than the original.

[Angel von Himmel]

Way too many questions. Mopre questions than the original.

I am looking for ways to cut down the number of questions without sacrificing the quality of the results. I do not know how to gauge the same quality of results without asking what the test askes.

[Angel von Himmel]

As soon as we (me and ) are able to figure out why I can not run perl scripts from the socionics website I have sort of a save feature and a link you can show to friends on what you scored and your functional analysis.

[Angel von Himmel]

I have an updated version of my current test coming out soon ... maybe two diffrent versions one shorter. I am looking into ways to limit the number of questions without sacrificing the quality of the results.

Also, I am also working on a relationship test ... it will try to help you gague what sort of a relationship you have with someone else (duel, identical, super-ego, mirror, etc.) ... knowing where you stand and what sort of a relationship you have with other people is very important in determining your own type and the types of other people around you as well.

[Angel von Himmel]

I am able to run perl scripts from my website now, and I put my newest edition of the typology test up for anyone who wants to take it ...

By the way, the test now saves your results to a url, so for those of you who are getting tired of taking this test every time I put a new version out this should be the last time you should have to take it if you like the stored results. You guys have done alot for me with the critiqueing, and I do appreciate that. I actually put a little advertisement for this website in the test results ... :wink:

Comments are welcome, and it is still 376 questions. I only changed the cgi file this time around.

I will have my own saved results listed in a URL here when I am done retaking the test for everyone to see!

[Angel von Himmel]

The link to the test is the same, I just changed the cgi that follows ...

http://socionics.wsphere.com/socionicstypetest.html

[Angel von Himmel]

Got my results, I am not sure why I got as both a weak and strong function, though. Might be an odd bug, but does not harm the results any.

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...036689119.html

[Angel von Himmel]

Note that I am not responsible for consistent reliable results on the graphical interface, that is your responsibility because the test only interprets what you give it ... ^_^

[Creepy-fairgeek - on vacation]

Great, now I can take it a 3rd time to see how INTp I still am, and hopefully when I take it that time all these new spiffy details will be working.

The biggest problem I have with being exacting is constantly second-guessing my answers & then changing them. I finished the test in about 45 minutes, but I took a 10 minute break to grab some food. Then I checked over the test and changed about 15 answers only to learn that I had skipped one, which took me 10 minutes to find. Total time: about 1 hour.


Suggestion: split the test into pages, but allow the users to return to previous pages to change answers. Would be great if it showed percentages in the results, too.

[Angel von Himmel]

Great, now I can take it a 3rd time to see how INTp I still am, and hopefully when I take it that time all these new spiffy details will be working.

The biggest problem I have with being exacting is constantly second-guessing my answers & then changing them. I finished the test in about 45 minutes, but I took a 10 minute break to grab some food. Then I checked over the test and changed about 15 answers only to learn that I had skipped one, which took me 10 minutes to find. Total time: about 1 hour.


Suggestion: split the test into pages, but allow the users to return to previous pages to change answers. Would be great if it showed percentages in the results, too.

[Angel von Himmel]

This is also the last time I will probably make an announcement for this test ... I will continue working off and on on this test to make it more efficent and functional, but I would like to simultaneously start work on my relationship test and will probably be announcing a beta of that within the next month sometime.

[Angel von Himmel]

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin/beta3testresults.cgi?2202185642990.html

I like the save feature a lot. However, I did get as both a strong and a weak function, same with . Hmm. I think that even if you have a tiny weakness (say 1 point), it puts it as a weak function. That's probably why they're showing up like that.

Nice job though. This version is a lot better than the first beta version.

Yeah, I remember why I coded it that way now origionally. I use to have it to where it would only show the weak functions that were dominant over the strong functions and the strong functions that were dominant over the weak functions, but I had to test something and changed the way it showed up graphically. I liked it a little better and kept it that way.

The graphics are not what matters anyways ... what matters is what is in the grey box; that is the raw data the test uses to make up the graphical part and the typing.

[XcaliburGirl]

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...245975973.html

Hmm... I came out INTp. Don't know what to make of it.

[Angel von Himmel]

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...245975973.html

Hmm... I came out INTp. Don't know what to make of it.

I think it is possible that I need to reword alot of these questions; there was a very low consistency on the functional analysis and it did not bother to even give out an agenda. It almost seems like the test maybe is not clear and concise enough to appeal to some test takers.

This is another reason why I need to code a test that can give out the same results with a diffrent approach apparently; not everyone is going to get good consistent results their first time out with this style of test.

[Angel von Himmel]

[Angel von Himmel]

Assuming that the test taker has been able understand the questions as they are asked and has an understanding of themselves to a reasonable degree, this is how the test theoretically attempts to interpret data.

Now, not everything about the way the test interprets data and displays it will be accurate 100% of the time, which is why there is a gray box with raw data that anyone can look at and interpret and challenge the way the test interprets data according to what the information the test taker has given. If the test taker is bad at testing, there will be lots of fluctuating and inconsistent data spewn about. It is easy to spot once you know how the test is designed to function.

[Koneko]

Once again, INFj ^_^!

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...907711788.html

[Eidos]

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...560164379.html

ENTJ

Strong

= 30
= 30
= 26
= 0
= 22
= 2
= 22
= 0

Weak

= -6
= -10
= -8
= 18
= -6
= 14
= 2
= 19

Strong functions:
Weak functions:

[XcaliburGirl]

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...245975973.html

Hmm... I came out INTp. Don't know what to make of it.

I think it is possible that I need to reword alot of these questions; there was a very low consistency on the functional analysis and it did not bother to even give out an agenda. It almost seems like the test maybe is not clear and concise enough to appeal to some test takers.

This is another reason why I need to code a test that can give out the same results with a diffrent approach apparently; not everyone is going to get good consistent results their first time out with this style of test.

I always seem to contradict myself on these kinds of tests. The semantics get to me. I especially had trouble with the "Is ______ more important than _______?" questions.

[Slava]

I got ENTP

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...689461381.html

[Angel von Himmel]

I just noticed a few bugs with the code, and are fixing them right now as I type.

In case you are wondering why the graphical interface is reporting a function that is not your strongest function on the grey analysis with the raw data, it is because I did not anticipate that anyone would go over 25 points on a function and did not code detection for functions that proceed over 25. This is why it may seem like it is reporting an odd function as the strongest function.

It really is not that big a deal if you pay attention to the grey analysis, because that is really the stuff that determines type. The graphical part is just what the test does with the data and does not affect anything really.

[The Exception]

My results:

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...613390972.html

My question is, how does the test come up with the hidden agenda? I'm puzzled because I scored as INTj, yet my hidden agenda came up as even though on questions such as Is is more important to be healthy than ____________________, I chose healthy every time.

Laura
INTj

[Koneko]

I'm getting the impression that questions on the hidden agenda aren't directly addressable. People seems to end up pointing out their first function in the end. Probably it's too subconscious to be asked that way. Sincere testers may not find a hidden agenda if it's hidden. But I just cannot figure out which "subconscious appealing questions" can be good at there...

For the "to be healthy" one... maybe this could work:

"Do you feel your whole life can't continue when you get the slightest headache?" or...
"Do believe "comfort" and "anesthesia" to be almost the same?"

INxJ "always think they feel like shit and get used to that". That's how I see my health-agenda neurosis in particular.

Dunno what's a cunning question for other agendas... but should be addressing consequences in a different way, what do other ppl think about that?

[Angel von Himmel]

My results:

http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...613390972.html

My question is, how does the test come up with the hidden agenda? I'm puzzled because I scored as INTj, yet my hidden agenda came up as even though on questions such as Is is more important to be healthy than ____________________, I chose healthy every time.

Laura
INTj

The questions I have for them I have found to be misleading for everyone except for ENTps, ESTps, and some greedy ENTjs who score ... [I'm not joking about that either, it is a trend I have noticed while doing an analysis]

[Angel von Himmel]

I'm getting the impression that questions on the hidden agenda aren't directly addressable. People seems to end up pointing out their first function in the end. Probably it's too subconscious to be asked that way. Sincere testers may not find a hidden agenda if it's hidden. But I just cannot figure out which "subconscious appealing questions" can be good at there...

For the "to be healthy" one... maybe this could work:

"Do you feel your whole life can't continue when you get the slightest headache?" or...
"Do believe "comfort" and "anesthesia" to be almost the same?"

INxJ "always think they feel like shit and get used to that". That's how I see my health-agenda neurosis in particular.

Dunno what's a cunning question for other agendas... but should be addressing consequences in a different way, what do other ppl think about that?

Yeah, I have tried writting questions for the agendas like that, but it is difficult because they become very sterotypical and not everyone may address and manifest their hidden agenda the same exact way.

Like for example the and agendas ... you can stereotypically say that the agendas are manifested, for example, like someone with a as a hidden agenda has no confidence in other people and would rather manifest that confidence in themselves or that someone with as an agenda has no confidence in themselves, so they seek to win the confidence of other people with various actions.

Another example would be the and hidden agendas, where someone with a agenda would try to learn who they are by understand other people or someone with would try to understand themselves to understand other people.

It might be difficult, but I know there are questions that can be asked. The question is how to ask these questions in a way that would kick people into gear and vote yes for their real hidden agenda.

I think there are like 40 some odd of these I need to replace ...

You consider it more important to love than to be loved
You consider it more important to love than to be perfect
You consider it more important to love than to be wealthy
You consider it more important to love than to know
You consider it more important to love than to believe
You consider it more important to love than to understand
You consider it more important to love than to be healthy
You consider it more important to believe than to be loved
You consider it more important to believe than to be perfect
You consider it more important to believe than to be wealthy
You consider it more important to believe than to know
You consider it more important to believe than to love
You consider it more important to believe than to understand
You consider it more important to believe than to be healthy
You consider it more important to understand than to be loved
You consider it more important to understand than to be perfect
You consider it more important to understand than to be wealthy
You consider it more important to understand than to be healthy
You consider it more important to understand than to know
You consider it more important to understand than to love
You consider it more important to understand than to believe
You consider it more important to be healthy than to be loved
You consider it more important to be healthy than to be perfect
You consider it more important to be healthy than to be wealthy
You consider it more important to be healthy than to know
You consider it more important to be healthy than to love
You consider it more important to be healthy than to believe
You consider it more important to be healthy than to understand
You consider it more important to be loved than to love
You consider it more important to be loved than to understand
You consider it more important to be loved than to believe
You consider it more important to be loved than to be healthy
You consider it more important to be loved than to be perfect
You consider it more important to be loved than to be wealthy
You consider it more important to be loved than to know
You consider it more important to be perfect than to love
You consider it more important to be perfect than to understand
You consider it more important to be perfect than to believe
You consider it more important to be perfect than to be healthy
You consider it more important to be perfect than to be loved
You consider it more important to be perfect than to be wealthy
You consider it more important to be perfect than to know
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to love
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to understand
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to believe
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to be healthy
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to be loved
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to be perfect
You consider it more important to be wealthy than to know
You consider it more important to know than to love
You consider it more important to know than to understand
You consider it more important to know than to believe
You consider it more important to know than to be healthy
You consider it more important to know than to be loved
You consider it more important to know than to be perfect
You consider it more important to know than to be wealthy

[Angel von Himmel]

By the way, I did some bug fixing and added a few new things ...

I changed a few things about the results page ... it displays the Introvert/Extrovert Equivalents again and I added the version number
on the bottom of the page.

Example:
http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...314196453.html

And the test tells you now if it has received inconsistent data or whether there is some sort of mistype between how the test taker thinks they are and what their functional analysis says about them.

Example:
http://socionics.wsphere.com/cgi-bin...876059949.html

"No matching functional type found!" for when the test can not make a proper analysis with the information is was given and "Typology mismatch!" for when the test notices that there is a descrepency between what the test taker believes and what their functional analysis says about them.

That is what the test looks like when you put yes for every answer and submit it by the way ...

[Creepy-]

I almost did not complete it, to many questions!Albeit the test did accuratly score me (scored intj, which i am).

[Angel von Himmel]

I think I have figured out a test format that would be more efficent and not so time consuming; next month I am going to try to release a version of the test that takes half the time, with the same amount of questions.

I almost did not complete it, to many questions!Albeit the test did accuratly score me (scored intj, which i am).

You know, there is a psychological reason why I place the "type people think they are" in a way that would make people think the type in big blue lettering is their type.

One reason is so that they would not think that the test is full of crap when the test tries to analyze their functions and comes up with a type that the test taker denies out of preconceived notions. Not all people are readily aware that a collection of certain behaviours they manifest actually would cause them to be typed diffrently if they would only realize and acknowledge that they should be typed diffrently. In most cases I would just have people readily assume that they way they have psychobabled their own results should be the way that they are typed; saves me allot of hassle in the long run.

The second reason is that not everyone seems to give the test enough consistent information to do a functional analysis on them; this really is not the test or anyones fault. Not everyone should be expected to understand all of the questions or to be in any sort of physical state or even the right sort of person to take a test like this. In this case, these sort of people get poor results in turn. In return it is my job to make a test that would benefit these types of people once I can identify them. No point in doing the same pessimestic and miserable thing the school system does to poor students who do not seem to learn the way the system assumes. Jack them full of drugs and stick them in special classes or assume them "troubled." That is educational suicide.

Now, there have people that have gotten excellent results on the functional analysis and the test agreed that the type these test takes believe they are is their correct type after looking at their functions.

Solipsis, this is not your case ... the test did not type you as INTj, you typed yourself as INTj as indicated by the big blue lettering. The test tried to tell you your functional analysis says diffrently, but you do not seem to be interested. Mind you this is ok by me, because the test tried to argue that I am ENFj all the time and I still type myself as ENTp even though I am becoming more and more aware that I am probably more ENFj by my actions as I learn about socionics and the functions. So do as you like, just do not be afraid of admitting you were wrong if you start to find out diffrently.