The Neuroscience of Personality

Last week I received my copy of "The Neuroscience of Personality", Dario Nardi's book about his MBTI researches. This book has many merits, first of which is that it's the first study conducted to prove the typology theories, and in doing so it uses scientifical engines (EEG[1]) that allow us to have a real view of the most important thing involved in psychology: the mechanism of our brains.

I'll be glad to share the saucy things I've discovered with you, in the hope of reaching new insights and drop some theoretical stereotypes that in the end help no one, and I believe just can cause hate and damage.

By analyzing this, you'll see that both MBTI and Socionics offer good perspectives, but they're both flawed in some parts; possibly it's by the combination of the 2 that some steps ahead will be realized. Let's start.

The neocortex can be divided in around 16 regions, Prefrontal (Fp), Frontal (F), Temporal (T), Parietal (C, P), and Occipital (O); each of these regions is further divided for the left and right hemispheres.
http://i64.tinypic.com/2ealcpg.png
Fp1: Chief Judge
Fp2: Process Manager
F7: Imaginative Mimic
F3: Deductive Analyst
F4: Expert Classifier
F8: Grounded Believer
T3: Precise Speaker
C3: Factual Storekeeper
T4: Intuitive Listener
C4: Flowing Artist
T5: Sensitive Mediator
P3: Tactical Navigator
P4: Strategic Gamer
T6: Purposeful Futurist
O1: Visual Engineer
O2: Abstract Impressionist

Each MBTI type analyzed followed recurring patterns in the brain activity, in common with the individuals of the same type.
Here's how each brain alights according to types:
http://i63.tinypic.com/2h6uikp.png
http://i67.tinypic.com/23wps9f.png
The colors show in blue the regions most used, in light blue the commonly used, in grey the ones still used in some occasions, and in black the ones almost left unused.

The first thing that we can notice when looking at the EEG scans is about the P/J dichotomy; all the types that use a dominant rational function, either extroverted or introverted, show a higher activity in the Fp1 area. Translating MBTI terms in Socionics, this means that the MBTI IP types are actually J types, confirming the "infamous" J/P switch for the introverts.

The entire Prefrontal region is nevertheless used by all the types in a significant amount, and both Fp1 and Fp2 result as greatly used, in particular, this is how much each type favors Fp1 and Fp2:

ISFP: Fp1 68%, Fp2 32%
ENFJ: Fp1 63%, Fp2 37%
ENTJ: Fp1 63%, Fp2 37%
ISTP: Fp1 59%, Fp2 41%
INFP: Fp1 52%, Fp2 48%
ESFJ: Fp1 52%, Fp2 48%
ESTJ: Fp1 52%, Fp2 48%
INTP: Fp1 51%, Fp2 49%
-
INFJ: Fp1 49%, Fp2 51%
ENTP: Fp1 48%, Fp2 52%
ENFP: Fp1 48%, Fp2 52%
INTJ: Fp1 48%, Fp2 52%
ESFP: Fp1 48%, Fp2 52%
ISTJ: Fp1 47%, Fp2 53%
ESTP: Fp1 46%, Fp2 54%
ISFJ: Fp1 45%, Fp2 55%

Translating all these results into Socionics we'll have that Rationals rely on Fp1, while Irrationals rely more on Fp2.

What distinguishes the Introverts from the Extroverts is, in general, a greater activity in the frontal part for the Extroverts, while Introverts tend to use more the regions in the back of the brain; anyway, this is not a rule and there are different exceptions.

Another important dichotomy that shows through the scans is that Sensory types tend to use more the left regions (analytic), and Intuitive types use more right regions (holistic).

Thinking types show more activity in the regions of reasoning ( F3, F4, P3, P4 ); Feeling types have more access to C4, whereas Thinking types use C3 more.

Although we can identify the regions of the brains and ascribe them to the main functions of each type, we can't assign a cognitive process to those regions. For example, region F7 handles several functions including mimicking others' behaviors, asking "what if?" and drawing conclusions based on context. These elements sound like the definition of Extraverted Intuition, but most people show some activity in this same region, and this doesn't mean that most of them use Extraverted Intuition. An important consideration to make is that brain activity does not equal behavior/preferences. An example to this is that most people who enjoy brainstorming activities do not show the holistic Christmas tree pattern that is typical of Ne types and that shine at trans-contextual thinking [see below].
-
Further on, every type uses some region in common with his "opposite" type. An ISFP (FiSe) relies on some of the same regions used by an INTJ (NiTe) or an ENTJ (TeNi), and this happens for every type with the same modalities we find for the Socionics organization of the quadras, confirming like this both the quadras of Socionics and the J/P switch again.

Another interesting thing happens when we look at the brains of an INFP (FiNe) and an ESTP (SeTi), they are complementary. This last point raises some questions: 1) Are they duals? 2) Why does the duality theory used in socionics give the greatest importance to matching rationals with rationals and irrationals with irrationals, over every other dichotomy (and isn't this against a duality-complementary theory itself?)? 3) Does this mean that when switching to socionics, EIIs will naturally complete SLEs, and so forth for everybody else?

It's interesting even to notice that the INFP and ESTP brains are the only ones to be perfectly complementary.

Something to ponder on.



[1]EEG, or electroencephalogram, involves the recording of spontaneous electrical activity along the scalp produced by the firing of neurons within the outer layer of the brain, the neurocortex, associated with numerous cognitive functions including language, memory, thought and consciousness. Although EEG cannot delve into the middle or deep layers of the brain, those deeper cognitive functions can still be detected by the activity in the neocortex.


Notes-
58 subjects were used for the final results published in the book, but many more have been analyzed, in the arc of 5 years, from 2006 to 2011. All the subjects were selected among the students of the UCLA, they were 18-25, healthy and with an usually high IQ. All the subjects were self-typed, and only the subjects who had no doubts about their MBTI type have been tested.
The test lasted several hours and different activities, from meditation to writing, to speed-date, were performed while the subjects were wearing their EEG cap.
Up to today, the results have not been debunked by Dario Nardi, or anyone else.

Dario Nardi's test still remains one of the most accurate assessments for the Junghian elements.

Some stuff are quite fun, 0 factual recall on IEI. 0 weight many factors at once at SEE. 0 mirrors other behavior on LIE. However all types do projection of the future, none are black in that area.

All rational types have dark blue in "explain and decide"

edit; actually the more i look at it, the more forged it looks and less just data.

Requoting from a thread on Personality@afe

Quote:

---

Extraverted Sensing (Se)
Se types:
Show a "tennis hop" brain pattern.
Easily go "in the zone" in a crisis situation.
Quickly integrate body and sensory information.
Easily bored and need external stimulation.
Focus on literal or common interpretations.
Favor details that are dramatic or in motion.

The "tennis hop" brain pattern is one in which all regions of neocortex out low amplitude and out of sync. This is an effective state that requires little energy while the shifting frequencies allow the brain to quickly direct whichever regions are needed for a surprise, incoming task.

Introverted Sensing (Si)

Si types:
Brain activity reflects their background, training, and job expertise.
Get "in the zone" when reviewing past events.
Tend towards rote memorization, repetition, and in-depth reviews of daily events—all habits that help them burn new neural pathways.
Good at recalling information without a context and recalling kinship data.
Favor T5, which processes social feedback and T6, that helps us consider the future.

So Si seems to lead to reinforcement and specialization over time. ISTJs and ISFJs are both visual (favor O1 and/or O2). ISxJs favor Fp2 over Fp1, while ESxJs do the opposite.



Extraverted Intuiting (Ne)

Ne types:
Often show a "Christmas Tree" pattern.
Often experience creative highs.
Provide fast, creative responses (sometimes too creative)
Find it difficult to get "in the zone," and can do so only after practicing and internalizing an activity over weeks, months, or years.
Use regions that support imagination.

A "Christmas Tree" pattern is one in which the neocortex is active all over, each region is of high amplitude and out-of-sync with others. This pattern indicates cross-contextual thinking. This pattern is also very energy intensive, and may produce distractions and contradictions.


Introverted Intuiting (Ni)

Ni Types:
Show a whole brain, zen-like pattern
Show this pattern when they attack an unfamiliar, novel pattern.
Their zen state works best when focusing on a single question, without distraction.
Enter the zen state when ask to envision the future.
Usually benefit from a sensory focus

Their whole-brain, zen-like pattern occurs when all regions of the neocortex are in sync and dominated by brain waves that are medium-low frequency and very high-amplitude. Other types only show this pattern when they engage in their specific area of expertise, unlike Ni-ers, who also show it when tackling a new problem.

ENxJs usually benefit from a physical or sensory focus. NJs tend to be generalists compared to their SJs cousins.


Extraverted Thinking (Te)

Te types:
Show most efficient use of mental energy as they rely on evidence-based decision-making.
Rely on T3, O1, C3 and Fp1. Tend to use other areas very little, even on tasks that would normally invoke them.
Rely on measurably sensory information
Focus on goals and stimulated by task completion and error correction.
Tend to move to action before accurate or what-if processing, so quick efficiency can become a pitfall.
Show high activity in F8, which handles deeply felt personal values, often expressed negatively.
Female Te types show more diverse brain activity and are more responsive to social feedback.

IXTJs are more visual, attentive to tone of voice, and focus on implementation detail over quick decision-making. ESTJS attend more to details, are more open to brainstorming, and listen intently to authority figures. ENTJs can enter a creative mode similar to INTJs.


Introverted Thinking (Ti)

Ti types:
Show high use of four regions that afford complex logical reasoning: F3, F4, P3, P4
Use F3 to linearly derive solutions. (highest for ESTPs followed by INTPs)
Use F4 to categorize and define concepts. (highest for INTPs, followed by ESTPs)
Use P3 to integrate visual-kinesthetic data. (highest for ISTPs then ENTPs)
Use P4 to holistically weigh numerous pros and cons of many uncertain or risky factors. (highest for ENTPs followed by ISTPs)
Above regions are located away from direct sensory contact, so have a "deep" or "detached" quality.
Tend to enter a dissociated state when arguing or meeting someone new. In this state, their neocortex shuts out raw emotions in order to enjoy objectivity.
Least interested in listening.
Engage the above regions + Fp1 and Fp2 when examining a topic from multiple angles and integrating the angles into a coherent way.

INTPs are likely to quickly stop listening as they assess the relevance of what others are saying.


Extraverted Feeling (Fe)

Fe types:
Focus on social responsibility.
Stimulated by communicating their explanations and decisions.
Use Fp1 to suppress emotional impulses from deep in the brain in favor of sophisticated cognitive responses.
Use Fp2 less, so may sometimes suddenly switch from highly composed to very angry.
Use F5 a lot, which helps them adjust to social feedback.

ExFJs show high activity in T3, but least activity in visual regions O1 and O2. ESFJs are more left-brained, high in C3 and F7. ENFJs are might right-brained, showing high activity in F4 and T4.


Introverted Feeling

Fi types:
Are consummate listeners who listen in a holistic way.
INFPs can deeply listen for up to 10 minutes at a time, ISFPs listen briefly and then move to action.
Show high activity in T3 and T4, which handle language.
Carefully compose their own speech, attending to both content and delivery.
Show high activity in F8, and are stimulated by rankings of importance.
Show the least activity in interior regions that aid logic.
Rely on left-brained (Fp1) decision making.

INFPs may get to the core of a person's psychology by listening for so long. INFPs are less likely to defend their own views or take action, though when they stop listening, region Fp1 becomes very active as they make a strong (and perhaps final) decision.

ISFPs are attentive when others withhold information (like social feedback).

I actually found this thread on another site and wanted to see what other people thought

---

"In the zone" = a state that involves all brain regions, in a low-frequency mode. Calm state. Would appear all grey. It appears when doing the particular activities that the types feel more natural.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pinoline

the first study conducted to prove the typology theories

---

Not the 1st. Also from neurology point some tries Talanov did in past, at least.

The main problem for such researches - no objective proof there are types identification methods with high accuracy. So they may measure "no one knows what". The other problem - such studies need to be repeated to be trusted, due to a lot of falsifications and low quality analysis in Jung's type.

> By analyzing this, you'll see that both MBTI and Socionics offer good perspectives

it's same Jung's types

> Translating MBTI terms in socionics, this means that the MBTI IP types are actually J types, confirming the "infamous" j/p switch.

MBT IP types have dominating irrational function due to Jung. If they get other result, then either they did not used MBTI to identify the types, or all their research is bs. Or the results were interpretated wrongly.

This same experiment needs to be replicated, but using perfectly typed people in Socionics.

The problem is that we can't really say if the p/j assigned right.

P4: Strategic Gamer

I suck at games but I can weigh many factors at once. My spatial system is partially broken due to eye control condition, though.


F7: Imaginative Mimic
:shifty: he he :na:
How come Hamlet is only light blue?

He he INTP T4 and T5. :shock: Seems to be particularly good combo to have in black.


SO INFJs are crappy on recalling and taking facts and weighing multiple variables. Sounds like good combo. He he. It is also good match as their spaghetti-like thinking is far from linear (well I'm not very attentive to it myself either). Perfect match for IEI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lavos

This same experiment needs to be replicated, but using perfectly typed people in Socionics.

---

Its done in a way that the person self-type. They are recommended to go on google and search around a few days before the test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigerfadder

Its done in a way that the person self-type. They are recommended to go on google and search around a few days before the test.

---

So, how can it be reliable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shapeless

So, how can it be reliable?

---

Its the only way. Eventually with enough data there will be improvement and such. I would trust Sol less to type others than the average other person to selftype.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigerfadder

Its done in a way that the person self-type. They are recommended to go on google and search around a few days before the test.

---

The type that a person self-types is not necessarily their real type. Also, that was MBTI, IOW, total crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lavos

The type that a person self-types is not necessarily their real type. Also, that was MBTI, IOW, total crap.

---

I think they get consulting also, but essentially its self typed. It is the only way to start. Or let sol do it. ;)

Quote:

---

The Myers-Briggs Type Theory is sometimes confused with socionics, although there are some differences between these two theories. Let us describe them shortly:

1.Different methods of type evaluation. MBTT almost completely relies upon tests, while socionics from the beginning developed alternative methods – determining type by interviewing, observation, etc. Verbal testing is considered as a secondary, not primary method, because it says nothing about the nature of types. This does not mean that tests are not known in socionics

2.Somewhat different definitions of the 4 basic type criteria. In MBTT, the type is defined as 4 basic choices: extraversion (E) or introversion (I), sensing (S) or intuition (N), thinking (T) or feeling (F), judgment (J) or perception(P). Socionics uses terms logic/ethic – instead of thinking/feeling, and rationality/irrationality – instead of perception/judgment.

---

"Introduction into Socionics", Dmitri Lytov and Marianna Lytova (2005)

1)It's Socionics to rely on self-typing methods, not MBTI.

2)Yes, most tests in MBTI rely on dichotomies only, therefore are bad. Dario Nardi's test is a Junghian indicator instead, with the closest definitions of the functions to Jung. I'd bet the participants of this survey took his test in a good account to be typed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

Another interesting thing happens when we look at the brains of an INFP (FiNe) and an ESTP (SeTi), they are complementary. This last point raises some questions: 1) Are they duals? 2) Why does the duality theory used in socionics give the greatest importance to matching rationals with rationals and irrationals with irrationals, over every other dichotomy (and isn't this against a duality-complementary theory itself?)? 3) Does this mean that when switching to socionics, EIIs will naturally complete SLEs, and so forth for everybody else?

---

Se completes Ni - and vica versa (also, Fi completes Te). Se and Ni are irrational functions; Fi and Te are rational functions. Due to this can we say, that adequate irrational functions complete each other (as adequate rational functions complete each other, too): regarding to duality, it is a consequence, not a condition.
Se does not completes Fi (but they can support each other).
ESTp's (SeTi) dual is INFp (NiFe), not INFj (FiNe).
So what we can see on the EEG-pattern in case of ESTP vs INFP (INFj, FiNe) is the brutal lack of similarity and overlap between the two TIMs = opposites. ESTp brutally lacks of Fi and Ne; INFj brutally lacks of Se and Ti. They are incompatible, because they have no reception or expectation for each other's dominant functions (e.g. fire lacks of water, water lacks of "fire" - they are opposties, they are incompatible and they will diminish each other in adequate measure).
An ESTp will seek Ni and Fe; an INFj will seek Te and Si. ESTp and INFp are compatible, they need each other and the support they can provide each other, and they need an overlapping base, at least a "basket", they can seek the appropriate information (e.g. dual-seeking Se seeks Se...). Here, You can think about two compatible puzzle: they fit together, they form a whole, they support and build each other! e.g. if You look at the ESTP and INFJ (INFp, NiFe) EEG-pattern, You will see, they are compatible, but they have much in common, too!

ENTP / ENTp (or ILE) should have much more activity in the F4 region, which is shown in this article:

http://www.insightsforchange.co.uk/a...es_Jul2012.pdf

This is neat. Even if the study is flawed because it uses MBTI instead of Socionics and due to incorrect self typings, this is the kind of realm Socionics needs to get into if anyone's going to take it seriously. Until we start doing brain scans of people that are accurately self typed by others and themselves then Socionics will continue to be disregarded as a pseudoscience. Even though Socionics is merely an abstract map of one aspect of our personality, if we can pinpoint regions in the brain that are more active with specific types consistently then Socionics has a chance to become scientific. I hope they do a study on Socionics with brain scans because MBTI is flawed in several ways that undermine it, but the results are still promising despite not being perfect.

My first reaction is, why do I have this big hole in the middle of my brain? :confused2:

Then it's kind of interesting that my husband has the same hole. No wonder we get along. :biggrin:

Then I looked to see the visible correlations in the same picture map for the other types. Very interesting visual complimentarity of INFj - ESTj, and also I see this complimentarity, visual opposite-ness in ENFj - ISFj and ESFj - INTj. I did not see it so much in INFp-ESTp, but @ooo's comment on their perfect conplimentariness must have to do with something other than the visual patterns of the brain map.

It's interesting also to see who has the least amount of black and gray spots. If I counted correctly, that would be ESTp. They have the fewest black holes, and fewer gray ones, as well. Apparently, ESTp uses more of their brain than the rest of us. I will have to tell my son that. I am sure he will agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason

My first reaction is, why do I have this big hole in the middle of my brain? :confused2:

---

XD
that should be the amygdala!

Quote:

---

It's interesting also to see who has the least amount of black and gray spots. If I counted correctly, that would be ESTp. They have the fewest black holes, and fewer gray ones, as well. Apparently, ESTp uses more of their brain than the rest of us. I will have to tell my son that. I am sure he will agree.

---

I didn't notice that, thanks for pointing it out!!!

About the J/P switch thing...

ISTJ and ESTP show identical Fp1(light blue) and Fp2 (dark blue)
ESTJ and ISTP show identical Fp1 (dark blue) and Fp2 (light blue)

INFP and ENFJ show Fp1 (dark blue) and Fp2 (light blue)
INFJ and ENFP show Fp1(light blue) and Fp2 (dark blue)

Also...

ESTP and ISTJ share 4 regions in same tone Fp1, Fp2, P3, 02
ESTP and ISTP share 3 regions same tone A1/T3,P4, 02
ESTJ and ISTP share 3 regions same tone Fp1, Fp2, A1/T3
ESTJ and ISTJ share 3 regions same tone F8, 01, F7

ISTJ and ISTP share 1 region in same tone P3
ESTP and ESTJ share 1 region in same tone A1/T3

INFP and ENFJ share 4 regions in same tone Fp1,Fp2, T6, 02
INFJ and ENFP share 4 regions in same tone Fp1,Fp2,T5,T6
ENFP and INFP share 2 regions in same tone T4/A2, T6
ENFJ and INFJ share 2 regions in same tone A1/T3, T6

ENFJ and ENFP share 1 region in same tone T6
INFJ and INFP share 4 regions in same tone F7,F6, A1/T3,T6

In conclusion, there's just 1 identical region working in ISTP and ISTJ brains, ISTJ in mbti has more relation to ESTJ and ESTP than with ISTP. ISTP brain works more similar to ESTJ and ESTP than ISTJ.

INFJ and ENFP(4 regions in common) brains work similarly than INFP and ENFP (2 regions).
INFJ and INFP also share 4 regions working identically.
ENFJ and ENFP share just 1 region working identically.


So, I don't think those graphics support the J/P switch thing.



Finally, It just doesn't make me drop my theoretical stereotypes, it actually provides support to them.

INFx could be both, INFp or INFj in socionics (or other type mb). ISTP is likely ISTp while ISTJ is likely ISTj in socionics.

Also it supports other previous insights which are @sbbds being really smart with her 10 brain regions working, while, ISTP, ENTP, INTP, ESFP have 9 regions working in contrast with the 8 of the rest (yep, fools those who think esfps are dumb, esfps are really smart and capable ppl). It also shows TP brains work more than TJ brains.

So my observations were always right.

Kind of feel duped by Nardi once someone pointed out a few things but it is my own fault for not checking and only because I think he has misrepresented himself in a way. I am interested in his research but his PHD doesn't seem to have anything to do with neuroscience or psychology. His certification in relation to personality is in MBTI. I can still find some value in his stuff though.

Quote:

---

Dario Nardi, Ph.D. is a world renowned author, speaker and expert in the fields of neuroscience and personality. He holds a current position as senior lecturer at University of California (Los Angeles), where he won UCLA's Copenhaver Award for Innovative Use of Technology in 2005 and UCLA's Distinguished Teacher of the year in 2011. His books include "Neuroscience of Personality" and "8 Keys to Self-Leadership", among other titles, and he is the creator of the Personality Types and Love Therapy app for the iPhone. Since 2007, Dario has focussed his time on conducting hands-on brain research, utilizing insights of real-time EEG. He regularly keynotes international conferences and facilitates workshops teaching health professionals in multiple countries the art and science of the brain.

---

Quote:

---

Educational Background
Dario conducted his doctorate work in Systems Science (1995-1998) at the State University of New York (www.binghamton.edu/ssie/) and gained his bachelor's degree in aerospace engineering (1988-1992) from the University of Southern California (http://ame-www.usc.edu/), where he enjoyed USC's Academic Scholarship for Excellence, a full-tuition undergraduate scholarship.


His educational background also includes East Asian languages and cultures and creative writing. Dario began studying Japanese as a high school freshman in 1984. In 1987, he acted as the student representative to greet the then-Crown Prince (now Emperor) of Japan in his trip to Washington D.C. Later, in 1989-1990, Dario attended Waseda University in Tokyo for his college sophomore year where he took courses in both English and Japanese.


As part of his dissertation work, Dario created SOCIALBOT, an animated interactive character that uses everyday English to share socially-relevant information. The informing approach to design was "social situated action" where intelligence involves coordination between agents. Socialbot is detailed here www.Socialbot-app.com and here www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfwa-ScdizI.

---

http://www.darionardi.com/

Quote:

---

Bachelor's Degree in Neuroscience

Bachelor's degree programs in neuroscience are highly interdisciplinary. Calculus, chemistry and biology courses typically consume the first year. Subsequent courses may cover subjects such as:

• Neurochemistry of behavior
• Biology computational tools
• Learning and neurobiology
• Neuropharmacology
• Molecular biology of cells

Master's Degree in Neuroscience

Completion of a baccalaureate program in neuroscience or related fields like chemistry or psychology is generally required to enter neuroscience graduate studies. Programs are available as terminal degrees and pre-doctoral training. Most master's programs in neuroscience are extremely research-intensive, leading up to a master's thesis. Some examples of research areas in this field include motor and sensory systems, disease and neurobiology, aging, cell signaling and plasticity. Neuroscience graduate coursework may include the following topics:

• Studies in synaptic transmissions
• Functional neuroanatomical processes
• Integrative neuroscience studies
• Genetics and genomics lab
• Motor control
• Autism

Doctorate Degree in Neuroscience

Careers in the highest levels of academic and clinical research require the completion of a Ph.D. program in neuroscience. This program can also be used to augment education in other careers, such as medical doctor and biological psychologist. A strong academic background in psychology, biology and physical science is required from program applicants.
To prepare graduate students for academic careers in neuroscience, some programs include a teaching component. Research and coursework in neuroscience at this level may include:

• Memory and neuronal mechanisms
• Mechanics of individual perception
• Biological music communication concepts
• Phase-plane neural oscillator analysis
• Neurotoxicology

---

Popular Careers

The bachelor's program is primarily a gateway to a graduate degree. Some entry-level options, however, may include:

• Research assistant
• Pharmaceutical sales
• Technical writer

Neuroscience comprises a variety of fields to explore for those with advanced degrees. Ph.D. holders are also eligible to teach at the college level. Some careers in neuroscience are listed below; some professions, such as neuroscience nurse and neuroradiologist, require additional degrees and/or licensure.

• Neuroanatomist
• Neurochemist
• Neurophysiologist
• Neuroscience nurse
• Neuroradiologist
• Biological sciences professor

---

I assumed his PHD was neuroscience. :shifty:

At least EEGs are safe and he probably has a tech to administer them but I don't think this is going to be taken as serious research by those who are not into socionics, MBTI and/or Jung.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cody

About the J/P switch thing...

ISTJ and ESTP show identical Fp1(light blue) and Fp2 (dark blue)
ESTJ and ISTP show identical Fp1 (dark blue) and Fp2 (light blue)

INFP and ENFJ show Fp1 (dark blue) and Fp2 (light blue)
INFJ and ENFP show Fp1(light blue) and Fp2 (dark blue)

Also...

ESTP and ISTJ share 4 regions in same tone Fp1, Fp2, P3, 02
ESTP and ISTP share 3 regions same tone A1/T3,P4, 02
ESTJ and ISTP share 3 regions same tone Fp1, Fp2, A1/T3
ESTJ and ISTJ share 3 regions same tone F8, 01, F7

ISTJ and ISTP share 1 region in same tone P3
ESTP and ESTJ share 1 region in same tone A1/T3

INFP and ENFJ share 4 regions in same tone Fp1,Fp2, T6, 02
INFJ and ENFP share 4 regions in same tone Fp1,Fp2,T5,T6
ENFP and INFP share 2 regions in same tone T4/A2, T6
ENFJ and INFJ share 2 regions in same tone A1/T3, T6

ENFJ and ENFP share 1 region in same tone T6
INFJ and INFP share 4 regions in same tone F7,F6, A1/T3,T6

In conclusion, there's just 1 identical region working in ISTP and ISTJ brains,
ISTJ in mbti has more relation to ESTJ and ESTP than with ISTP. ISTP brain is works more similar to ESTJ and ESTP than ISTJ.

INFJ and ENFP(4 regions) brains work similarly than INFP and ENFP (2 regions).
INFJ and INFP also share 4 regions working identically.
ENFJ and ENFP share just 1 region working identically.


So, I don't think those graphics supports the J/P switch thing.



Finally, It just doesn't make me drop my theoretical stereotypes, it actually provides support to them.

INFx could be both, INFp or INFj in socionics (or other type mb). ISTP is likely ISTp while ISTJ is likely ISTj in socionics.

Also it supports other previous insights which are @sbbds being really smart with her 10 brain regions working, while, ISTP, ENTP, INTP, ESFP (yep, fools those who think esfps are dumb, esfps are really smart and capable) have 9 regions working in contrast with the 8 of the rest. It also shows TP brains work more than TJ brains.

I always knew I was right.

---

TP brains have to work harder because they don't work as well. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

TP brains have to work harder because they don't work as well. :)

---

Nice try, as always TJ types just need to work harder to compensante the one or two turned off regions. That's not a plus. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cody

Nice try, as always TJ types just need to work harder to compensante the one or two turned off regions. That's not a plus. :p

---

Hah! We don't need no stinking turned-on regions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqomZQMZQCQ

yeah @Aylen, and 58 people are too little a sample to draw accurate results for 16 categories. I've conducted more thorough researches in my spare time tbh, but without any tekkie support:reallymad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cody

About the J/P switch thing...

ISTJ and ESTP show identical Fp1(light blue) and Fp2 (dark blue)
ESTJ and ISTP show identical Fp1 (dark blue) and Fp2 (light blue)

INFP and ENFJ show Fp1 (dark blue) and Fp2 (light blue)
INFJ and ENFP show Fp1(light blue) and Fp2 (dark blue)

Also...

ESTP and ISTJ share 4 regions in same tone Fp1, Fp2, P3, 02
ESTP and ISTP share 3 regions same tone A1/T3,P4, 02
ESTJ and ISTP share 3 regions same tone Fp1, Fp2, A1/T3
ESTJ and ISTJ share 3 regions same tone F8, 01, F7

ISTJ and ISTP share 1 region in same tone P3
ESTP and ESTJ share 1 region in same tone A1/T3

INFP and ENFJ share 4 regions in same tone Fp1,Fp2, T6, 02
INFJ and ENFP share 4 regions in same tone Fp1,Fp2,T5,T6
ENFP and INFP share 2 regions in same tone T4/A2, T6
ENFJ and INFJ share 2 regions in same tone A1/T3, T6

ENFJ and ENFP share 1 region in same tone T6
INFJ and INFP share 4 regions in same tone F7,F6, A1/T3,T6

In conclusion, there's just 1 identical region working in ISTP and ISTJ brains, ISTJ in mbti has more relation to ESTJ and ESTP than with ISTP. ISTP brain works more similar to ESTJ and ESTP than ISTJ.

INFJ and ENFP(4 regions in common) brains work similarly than INFP and ENFP (2 regions).
INFJ and INFP also share 4 regions working identically.
ENFJ and ENFP share just 1 region working identically.


So, I don't think those graphics support the J/P switch thing.



Finally, It just doesn't make me drop my theoretical stereotypes, it actually provides support to them.

INFx could be both, INFp or INFj in socionics (or other type mb). ISTP is likely ISTp while ISTJ is likely ISTj in socionics.

Also it supports other previous insights which are @sbbds being really smart with her 10 brain regions working, while, ISTP, ENTP, INTP, ESFP have 9 regions working in contrast with the 8 of the rest (yep, fools those who think esfps are dumb, esfps are really smart and capable ppl). It also shows TP brains work more than TJ brains.

So my observations were always right.

---

All 10 of my brain regions are busy thinking about p00p and how awesome and cute you are :love2:

I’ve posted about this in multiple threads but, Nardi’s work is highly questionable on a scientific level. His methodology is flawed. He’s not really a scientist. He has a low pool of participants too, and charges them a lot of money. Source: https://amp.reddit.com/r/mbti/commen...t_introverted/(scroll down), http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive...o-nardi-5.html , and Nardi’s own website where he lists the price of participating in his scammy research that’s full of holes lol. Even if he has studied science, this work discredits him as a professional.

Just because something gives the appearance of scientific knowledge doesn’t mean it is scientific knowledge.

It doesn’t help either that he looks just like that POS Bertrand (well, if he cut his Rapunzel hair).

Info from Aylen from his site:

Quote:

---

Educational Background
Dario conducted his doctorate work in Systems Science (1995-1998) at the State University of New York (www.binghamton.edu/ssie/) and gained his bachelor's degree in aerospace engineering (1988-1992) from the University of Southern California (http://ame-www.usc.edu/), where he enjoyed USC's Academic Scholarship for Excellence, a full-tuition undergraduate scholarship.


His educational background also includes East Asian languages and cultures and creative writing. Dario began studying Japanese as a high school freshman in 1984. In 1987, he acted as the student representative to greet the then-Crown Prince (now Emperor) of Japan in his trip to Washington D.C. Later, in 1989-1990, Dario attended Waseda University in Tokyo for his college sophomore year where he took courses in both English and Japanese.


As part of his dissertation work, Dario created SOCIALBOT, an animated interactive character that uses everyday English to share socially-relevant information. The informing approach to design was "social situated action" where intelligence involves coordination between agents. Socialbot is detailed here www.Socialbot-app.com and here www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfwa-ScdizI.

---

​So he’s basically some rich boy weeb who could afford to go to fancy schools all over the world, yet isn’t smart enough to create sound methodology and not make an ass out of himself. Then he thinks he deserves to ding poor students for his shoddy services like a sycophant.

Btw I created lecture materials for Waseda recently. This year it was ranked as the top performing private university in the country. I don’t even want to think about how painfully expensive it would be to go there and study as an international student just to satisfy your weeb desires. Repulsive af.

Then again, he got a full-tuition undergrad scholarship and met the emperor LOL and I can respect that.

So where is ENTP's Fi PoLR showing up?
Anyways I have always thought that I do analyze/listen but do not speak according to ethics aka spewing out awkward stuff. :thinking:

It appears that Nardi looked into a new field of research and made some brilliant first moves but failed to doggedly stick to gathering overwhelming amounts of evidence or proving his conclusions to others beyond a shadow of doubt.

Could he be ILE?

Personally, I think that this avenue of research is promising and others should follow it up.

He's just found a way to make money off MBTI/Jung fanboys.

Like most pseudoscience out there, they're so desperate to find some approval from "science" or other legitimate-sounding things. So they latch onto people like Nardi and praise the hell out of them. Easy money to be exploited.

Even if the data is completely correct and there's correlation between brain activity and "types", I don't think it means much. That's why the "science" doesn't give a crap about MBTI/Jung.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

It appears that Nardi looked into a new field of research and made some brilliant first moves but failed to doggedly stick to gathering overwhelming amounts of evidence or proving his conclusions to others beyond a shadow of doubt.

Could he be ILE?

Personally, I think that this avenue of research is promising and others should follow it up.

---

I was under the impression that Victor DarkAngelFireWolf69 typed him as LII-H, but I can't prove that. It's just something I had heard. I wonder if his research speaks somewhat to Sociotype and somewhat to accentuated function. I totally agree that it's a decent start but needs a ton more work in reality.

I see him as basically an opportunistic idealist throwing a shoe into the machine of academia so that others can enter with more based on Jung’s work if they desire. He is like a noble lemming, sacrificing his reputation as a serious scientist for new age spiritual pursuits aka his personal interest.

He is deffo ILI IMO. Also heard he is gay but that’s irrelevant except it may have something to do with his unique way of thinking.

Show me ILI who radiates new idealistic views of the world in some sort of utopia and I show you LII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

I see him as basically an opportunistic idealist throwing a shoe into the machine of academia so that others can enter with more based on Jung’s work if they desire. He is like a noble lemming, sacrificing his reputation as a serious scientist for new age spiritual pursuits aka his personal interest.

He is deffo ILI IMO. Also heard he is gay but that’s irrelevant except it may have something to do with his unique way of thinking.

---

That's fair enough. I'm all for idealists, and I find people who focus too much on "reputation" to be irritating anyways because such discussions usually detract from content when new ground is being broken. Not that his content is great just yet; it needs a ton of work as well to clarify and improve. But, he does seem like an intelligent systems scientist on the whole.

He certainly has a strong Ni accentuation, as his work should clearly display (doesn't he invent RPG games or something like that?). ILI is possible, but I don't know him well enough to tell and there are so many different paradigms that your thinking of him as ILI and DarkAngelFireWolf69 as LII-H might actually coincide quite a bit.

aestrivex said:

Quote:

---

Dario Nardi,

I am glad that you have decided to respond in this venue. It gives me more respect for you and your character than I've ever had before. I am going to attempt to give you the benefit of the doubt at every point where it is possible to do so.

In reading your response, it is possible that your work is a bit more valuable than I have previously given credit for. However, there remain a lot of problems which make me very skeptical of your methodology which I will try to illustrate as best I can. I am still of the mind that the end result of your work is probably that your findings are not really "true," but you have the opportunity to attempt to convince me otherwise (of which, the process is indeed more important than the success of convincing me).

You deserve to know a bit about me. My name is Roan LaPlante. I am a research assistant at the Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging. I am primarily a methods researcher; I work with MEG methods and software development. My lab is currently focused on analyzing the network connectivity and language function of epileptic patients before and after invasive surgery to remove the epileptogenic focus. My educational background is in Computer Science, Psychology, and Neuroscience.

---

and in conclusion he said:

Quote:

---

I have given you my name and stated my opinions loudly on the internet for anyone to read. The opinions were based on my experience and the work you have done that was available to me. If I have made incorrect assumptions, then I have made incorrect assumptions, and I apologize for making incorrect assumptions. But in no way do I apologize for
1) "not doing research" simply because i did not purchase a book, having exhausted all other available sources of information
2) summarizing the points you have made in your work in my own words
3) speaking my mind

And if you believe that I am not entitled to an opinion, thats fine with me, and you can stick it up your ass.

https://www.personalitycafe.com/cogn...ml#post3560806

---

:lol:

Edit: Thanks for the links @sbbds I got my morning laugh over coffee. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Varlawend

That's fair enough. I'm all for idealists, and I find people who focus too much on "reputation" to be irritating anyways because such discussions usually detract from content when new ground is being broken. Not that his content is great just yet; it needs a ton of work as well to clarify and improve. But, he does seem like an intelligent systems scientist on the whole.

---

It’s relevant because it all adds up towards his career as a researcher, who should strive to put out quality research publications, not speculative garbage. What makes you think he seems like an intelligent systems scientist, besides his PhD title or reputation?

Now, I'm skeptical to take Nardi's book as very accurate, or even very useful, at the stage it is. It's an interesting work in progress though, I hope he'll keep working on it, hopefully with the help of someone more prepared in neuroscience than he is.

One real problem is that, I was reading just yesterday, it's hard to associate the different conformations and wirings of our brains to cognition and behavior. We're still far from knowing the brain and it would be counterproductive to create false stereotypes based on some scalp assumptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

It’s relevant because it all adds up towards his career as a researcher, who should strive to put out quality research publications, not speculative garbage. What makes you think he seems like an intelligent systems scientist, besides his PhD title or reputation?

---

I looked into his work a few years ago and found it to be fascinating in design and novelty albeit quite inconclusive, but I don't remember it all that well. I'm not that interested in personal judgments about someone I barely know. I'm neither a huge supporter or detractor of his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Varlawend

I looked into his work a few years ago and found it to be fascinating in design and novelty albeit quite inconclusive, but I don't remember it all that well. I'm not that interested in personal judgments about someone I barely know. I'm neither a huge supporter or detractor of his.

---

I suggest you look into the links I posted where a person with more of a background in neuroscience debated with Nardi for a bit about his work on PersonalityCafe and outlined many of the methodological issues his work has.

If one wants to create a pretty design with no scientific backing behind it they can become an artist. Shouldn’t call cave paintings science. And then charge $100+USD to people, mostly poor students who don’t know any better and are duped into it for them to volunteer as a research participant. And peddle that crap as legitimate scientific research work to other people in the form of books. That’s being a sycophant and I’m going to make personal judgments about that. And being a weeb based on his background is indisputable as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

I suggest you look into the links I posted where a person with more of a background in neuroscience debated with Nardi for a bit about his work on PersonalityCafe and outlined many of the methodological issues his work has.

If one wants to create a pretty design with no scientific backing behind it they can become an artist. Shouldn’t call cave paintings science. And then charge $100+USD to people for them to volunteer as a research participant.

---

I've already engaged with many people that are major detractors of Nardi's work, including some personal friends. I agree that it's not great science or anything. I think his claims have been excessive regarding it, but I don't feel all that harshly towards him as a person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Varlawend

I've already engaged with many people that are major detractors of Nardi's work, including some personal friends. I agree that it's not great science or anything. I think his claims have been excessive regarding it, but I don't feel all that harshly towards him as a person.

---

I enjoy your calm demeanour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

All 10 of my brain regions are busy thinking about p00p and how awesome and cute you are :love2:

I’ve posted about this in multiple threads but, Nardi’s work is highly questionable on a scientific level. His methodology is flawed. He’s not really a scientist. He has a low pool of participants too, and charges them a lot of money. Source: https://amp.reddit.com/r/mbti/commen...t_introverted/(scroll down), http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive...o-nardi-5.html , and Nardi’s own website where he lists the price of participating in his scammy research that’s full of holes lol. Even if he has studied science, this work discredits him as a professional.

Just because something gives the appearance of scientific knowledge doesn’t mean it is scientific knowledge.

It doesn’t help either that he looks just like that POS Bertrand (well, if he cut his Rapunzel hair).

---

Indeed. And not everything that is written in books appealing to sources or a research its true or correct. Sources should be investigated and researches need to be done in a scientific way to be valuable. But there are a lot of things that are believed to be true today using as excuse researches (often unscientific and with manipulated results) as support to propagate lies. For example the studies of Kinsey. The thing is, ppl look to support what they'd like to be true, instead of looking for real proof (long process) or set postulates of what's more likely true or not. For such, I prefer to show the real effects or manifestations of the thesis instead of to face my anthesis with the thesis, so others could end up concluding for themselves the antithesis with a plus of experience. I also get some fun in the process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cody

The thing is, ppl look to support what they'd like to be true, instead of looking for real proof (long process) or set postulates of what's more likely true or not. For such, I prefer to show the real effects or manifestations of the thesis instead of to face my anthesis with the thesis, so others could end up concluding for themselves the antithesis with a plus of experience. I also get some fun in the process.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

If one wants to create a pretty design with no scientific backing behind it they can become an artist. Shouldn’t call cave paintings science.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ooo

We're still far from knowing the brain and it would be counterproductive to create false stereotypes based on some scalp assumptions.

---

This is really interesting.

So interesting why people think somehow Socionics should be excused from being applied the same standards.

YEAH BRO DARIO NARDI'S WORK IS SO UNSCIENTIFIC. I read it about it on some forum post on the Internet, so it must be true.

Socionics is not SUPPOSED TO BE scientific! It's more like, uh, an art.

I wonder if these people suffer from some sort of brain damage.

we might consider our own experience as sufficiently valid, that's something we do on a daily basis. it's another thing to test our "experience" scientifically though, we have to meet the scientific standards, and there things might crumble. it happens all the times, even within the already established scientific theories, things do crumble.

Dario Nardi's work is good, but not yet perfect. we can't draw results from it because it lacks the numbers to be a valid standpoint.

At least in the context of socionics, people who put out books on typology without previous expertise or engagement with the community are usually just trying to make a quick buck off of it. (This includes probably every English-language book on socionics except Filatova's.) They rebrand it as their own and spread misinformation because they care more about reputation and money than intellectual honesty or actual insight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Singu

This is really interesting.

So interesting why people think somehow Socionics should be excused from being applied the same standards.

YEAH BRO DARIO NARDI'S WORK IS SO UNSCIENTIFIC. I read it about it on some forum post on the Internet, so it must be true.

Socionics is not SUPPOSED TO BE scientific! It's more like, uh, an art.

I wonder if these people suffer from some sort of brain damage.

---

See the above post. It's because he's charging money for it.

DarkAngelFireWolf69 also charges money for training, courses and seminars:

https://translate.google.co.jp/trans...%2Ftraining%2F

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

Info from Aylen from his site:



​So he’s basically some rich boy weeb who could afford to go to fancy schools all over the world, yet isn’t smart enough to create sound methodology and not make an ass out of himself. Then he thinks he deserves to ding poor students for his shoddy services like a sycophant.

Btw I created lecture materials for Waseda recently. This year it was ranked as the top performing private university in the country. I don’t even want to think about how painfully expensive it would be to go there and study as an international student just to satisfy your weeb desires. Repulsive af.

Then again, he got a full-tuition undergrad scholarship and met the emperor LOL and I can respect that.

---

Maybe he’s a rich boy week, but for his main education, a SUNY school and USC are decidedly unfancy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by golden

Maybe he a rich boy week, but for his main education, a SUNY school and USC are decidedly unfancy.

---

;p US tuition fees are all expensive to me. Although I'm aware yeah it could be a lot fancier.

This is what I like: we have someone with an actual Ph.D. doing real personality research, research that even involves the brain! Most of the 'real' research on personality usually just involves the Big Five, and that touches on what I was saying here. I.e., the usual approach to academic personality typing is just "shut up and calculate" without any understanding of the psychological mechanisms behind the behaviour. That is why it was comparable to quantum mechanics to me... It also touches on here in that his results show that the traits are simply correlated, and therefore not like the hard sciences. Anyway, I suspect the research is not perfect, but it is a big step forward over the Big Five approach or something which is simply subjective, with no scientific basis at all. If I remember correctly, he won an award for his research and he was teacher of the year at UCLA... That's far better than someone guding the research subjectively with no qualifications! (Which is unfortunately the case for almost all Jungian personality typing and the Enneagram - and including myself!...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jason_m

This is what I like: we have someone with an actual Ph.D. doing real personality research, research that even involves the brain! Most of the 'real' research on personality usually just involves the Big Five, and that touches on what I was saying here. I.e., the usual approach to academic personality typing is just "shut up and calculate" without any understanding of the psychological mechanisms behind the behaviour. That is why it was comparable to quantum mechanics to me... It also touches on here in that his results show that the traits are simply correlated, and therefore not like the hard sciences. Anyway, I suspect the research is not perfect, but it is a big step forward over the Big Five approach or something which is simply subjective, with no scientific basis at all. If I remember correctly, he won an award for his research and he was teacher of the year at UCLA... That's far better than someone guding the research subjectively with no qualifications! (Which is unfortunately the case for almost all Jungian personality typing and the Enneagram - and including myself!...)

---

This is the most painfully stereotypically Te valuing thing (in the bad blind appeal to authority way, to the point of masochism) I have ever read. Are you an IEE?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

This is the most painfully stereotypically Te valuing thing (in the bad blind appeal to authority way, to the point of masochism) I have ever read. Are you an IEE?

---

I'm sorry, do you know what I get from you? I get 'Donald Trump'... That's my message to the rest of the forum about him and his type...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jason_m

I'm sorry, do you know what I get from you? I get 'Donald Trump'... That's my message to the rest of the forum about him and his type...

---

And what I get from this post is “yeah I am an IEE”, lel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

And what I get from this post is “yeah I am an IEE”, lel.

---

For me, not any different from before... And Trump is dead honest to boot...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jason_m

For me, not any different from before... And Trump is dead honest to boot...

---

PS I think I have you on Facebook and have spoken to you before on Google video

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

PS I think I have you on Facebook and have spoken to you before on Google video

---

If you're not joking, it must be someone else, because I have facebook but I haven't used Google video..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jason_m

If you're not joking, it must be someone else, because I have facebook but I haven't used Google video..

---

Oh yeah his last name doesn’t start with an M nevermind. I just remembered because he was lowkey abrasive at first too lol before warming up more, and was IEE too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

Oh yeah his last name doesn’t start with an M nevermind. I just remembered because he was lowkey abrasive at first too lol before warming up more, and was IEE too.

---

I see. He sounds like a nice fellow, but is not me.

This subject seems akin to mapping what areas of a computer are activated during specific subroutines of an app. I doubt that accurate determinations could be made of where the separation is between app and computer when all one has to work with is energy emissions from a brain and software that can interpret and operate on input in a myriad of ways. Even when scientists fully understand how the brain works, its software will still be separate and distinct, and will have to always be treated as such. Knowing very specifically how an Apple computer works doesn't often help us fix software problems. The neuroscience of personality would seem to have no real objective other than perhaps producing impressive looking MRIs.......:content:

a.k.a. I/O

It's interesting and I'd like to see more of this research done under more rigorously controlled conditions, but I have to wonder how anyone can ever be fully certain of their typing, especially after only a few days' worth of research online, which likely includes links to "experts" MBTI blogs.