Social Interaction Model

[Kurt Gabin]

People with different types of informational metabolism have different characteristic speech styles, which they use for flirting and also in everyday activities. A change in communication style signals the interlocutor about his special status and occurs through a change of three socionic dichotomies:

- Process – Result (True Positivism – Negativism)
- Positivism – Negativism (Grumpiness – Courtesy)
- Questimness – Declatimness

Positivism – Negativism is a feature that in classical socionics is mistakenly associated with a focus on the presence or lack of something in the context of the information being processed, but observations show that the Process – Result feature is responsible for this. Tims, which are traditionally classified as Processional, have positive inert (located on the left in Model A) and negative contact (located on the right in Model A) functions. For Resultants, on the contrary, positivist functions are contact, and negativist functions are inert. This feature is also associated with the principle of changeability of quadras: if the base function contains an aspect that was not represented in the previous quadra, it has a minus sign, but if this is not a new aspect, then the base function has a plus sign.

Positivism - Negativism, apparently, describes Grumpiness and Courtesy, that is, unfriendly or friendly behavior towards strangers and the opposite behavior towards familiar people. I make this conclusion based on my observations and based on the results of research by the Research Center for Socionic Analysis, in which they consider correlations of socionic characteristics with currently existing recognized psychological questionnaires (although they do not make such bold conclusions). As you can see, this sign also manifests itself primarily in interaction with other people, but unlike the previous one, it is not limited to the relationship of two quadras.

Questim - Declatim is a dichotomy reflecting the focus in speech on dialogue or monologue. It also manifests itself most clearly in communication with other people.

These dichotomies also have the following important property: the intersection of Process - Result and Positivism - Negativism creates the well-known Rings of Revision, and the same Process - Result, but together with Questimness - Declatimness forms the Rings of Benefit.

Let's replace the name of Process - Result with Justifying - Critisizing, and Positivism - Negativism with Grumpy - Courteous and list these rings:

RoR

Courteous Critics: LII, SLE, ESI, IEE
Courteous Justifiers: SEI, EIE, ILI, LSE
Grumpy Critics: ESE, IEI, ILE, SLI
Grumpy Justifiers: ILE, LSI, SEE, EII

RoB

Criticizing Questims: LII, IEI, ESI, SLI
Criticizing Declatims: ESE, SLE, ILE, IEE
Justifying Questims: ILE, SEE, EIE, LSE
Justifying Declatims: SEI, LSI, ILI, EII

In addition, there is a group at the intersection of Grumpiness - Courtesy and Questimness - Declatimness, which is called Worldview and unites semi-duals and mirage types:

Grumpy Questims: ILE, IEI, SEE, SLI
Grumpy Declatims: ESE, LSI, ILE, EII
Courteous Questims: LII, EIE, ESI, LSE
Courteous Declatims: SEI, SLE, ILI, IEE

When communicating with an activator, Questimness changes and a person’s speech becomes similar to the speech of his opposite type, that is, he portrays a conflicter of his activator (see the Ring of Benefit).
When communicating with a dual, the Positivism - Negativism (Grumpiness - Courteousness) the Process - Result (Critisizing - Justifying or true Positivism - Negativism) changes and the person portrays the activator of his dual, that is, a mirror type in relation to himself (see the Ring of Revision).
When communicating with a semi-dual and a mirage type, Positivism - Negativism (Grumpiness - Courtesy) and Questimness - Declatimness change, which allows you to imitate the style of speech of the interlocutor's dual (see the Worldview group).

From this it is clear that the dual is not an ideal partner for a relationship, but is simply an alternative for an activator. Semi-dual and mirage relationships are in the third place and are a “fake” of the dual, just as he is a “fake” activator.

One can also note the special role of the Superego - people with this type of relationship have the same “romantic” or "social" dichotomies and are in this sense identical types.

Masks in socionics have been known for a long time, but from the above it follows that it is possible to structure this behavior - to identify eight communication styles and assign each pair of types in a superego relationship their own base style and three additional ones, which they can easily imitate and use to diversify speech and express a special attitude towards the interlocutor. V. Talanov already did something similar, but although he used the same dichotomies, he limited himself to four functions, not eight.

So, let's give a name to these eight Communication Styles:

ILE-SEE, Process (Justifying), Questim, Positivist (Grumpiness) – Impudent Communication Style
SEI-ILI, Process (Justifying), Declatim, Negativist (Courtesy) – Delicate Communication Style
ESE-ILE, Result (Accusing), Declatim, Positivist (Grumpy) – Reckless Communication Style
LII-ESI, Result (Accusing), Questim, Negativist (Courtesy) – Skeptical Communication Style
EIE-LSE, Process (Justifying), Questim, Negativist (Courtesy) – Annoying Communication Style
LSI-EII, Process (Justifying), Declatim, Positivist (Grumpy) – Detached Communication Style
SLE-IEE, Result (Accusing), Declaring, Negativist (Courtesy) – Careless Communication Style
IEI-SLI, Result (Accusing), Questim, Positivist (Grumpy) – Concerned Communication Style

Accordingly, valued communication styles (that is, those that are used either by default or with activator, dual, mirage and semi-dual interlocutor) are as follows:

ILE-SEE: Impudent, Delicate, Skeptical, Careless
SEI-ILI: Delicate, Impudent, Reckless, Concerned
ESE-ILE: Reckless, Skeptical, Delicate, Annoying
LII-ESI: Skeptical, Reckless, Impudent, Detached
EIE-LSE: Annoying, Detached, Concerned, Reckless
LSI-EII: Detached, Annoying, Careless, Skeptical
IEE SLE: Careless, Concerned, Detached, Impudent
IEI-SLI: Concerned, Careless, Annoying, Delicate

This shows opposing communication styles (the opposite style B is a style that is not found in anyone who values ​​style A):

Impudent - Annoying
Delicate - Detached
Reckless - Careless
Skeptical – Concerned

Just as aspects in Model A are divided into valued and non-valued based on Extraversion - Introversion, the characteristic that separates valued and non-valued communication styles is Grumpiness - Courtesy. Just as we can distinguish intuitives and sensors, ethicists and logicians, in the base Model A, we can group opposing styles into Topics. They are accordingly:

Actor
Borders
Importance
Feasibility

It’s not hard to notice that Topics join the same types as Rings of Benefit, and in the Social Interaction Model they join types either with equal or completely opposite sets of Communication Styles.

Ultimately, using a form of function representation similar to Model A (just for the purpose of convenience), the Social Interaction Model looks like this:

TOPIC: ACTOR

ILE - SEE

+--------------+--------------+
| Impudent     | Delicate     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Concerned    | Reckless     |
+--------------+--------------+
| Skeptical    | Careless     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Annoying     | Detached     |
+--------------+--------------+

EIE - LSE

+--------------+--------------+
| Annoying     | Detached     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Skeptical    | Careless     |
+--------------+--------------+
| Concerned    | Reckless     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Impudent     | Delicate     |
+--------------+--------------+

TOPIC: BORDERS

SEI - ILI

+--------------+--------------+
| Delicate     | Impudent     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Careless     | Skeptical    |
+--------------+--------------+
| Reckless     | Concerned    |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Detached     | Annoying     |
+--------------+--------------+

LSI - EII

+--------------+--------------+
| Detached     | Annoying     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Reckless     | Concerned    |
+--------------+--------------+
| Careless     | Skeptical    |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Delicate     | Impudent     |
+--------------+--------------+

TOPIC: IMPORTANCE

ESE - LIE

+--------------+--------------+
| Reckless     | Skeptical    |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Detached     | Impudent     |
+--------------+--------------+
| Delicate     | Annoying     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Careless     | Concerned    |
+--------------+--------------+

SLE - IEE

+--------------+--------------+
| Careless     | Concerned    |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Delicate     | Annoying     |
+--------------+--------------+
| Detached     | Impudent     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Reckless     | Skeptical    |
+--------------+--------------+

TOPIC: FEASIBILITY

LII - ESI

+--------------+--------------+
| Skeptical    | Reckless     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Annoying     | Delicate     |
+--------------+--------------+
| Impudent     | Detached     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Concerned    | Careless     |
+--------------+--------------+

IEI - SLI

+--------------+--------------+
| Concerned    | Careless     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Impudent     | Detached     |
+--------------+--------------+
| Annoying     | Delicate     |*
+--------------+--------------+
| Skeptical    | Reckless     |
+--------------+--------------+