Has anyone ever conducted an experiment to test the validity of V.I.?
V.I.
Has anyone ever conducted an experiment to test the validity of V.I.?
Lyricist
"Supposing the entity of the poet to be represented by the number 10, it is certain that a chemist, on analyzing it, would find it to be composed of one part interest and nine parts vanity." (Victor Hugo)
I dont think its logical to completely base it on fact. Considering that VI is someone vi'ing someone else, there is room for error. Certain trends do tend to have patterns though between types.
"Considering that VI is someone vi'ing someone else, there is room for error."
Oh yes, undoubtedly. For that reason I always use the black and white russian photos for V.I. purposes (rather than the photos at say, socionics.com) because the people who were photographed actually determined their types and said, "Yeah, I'm an ESFp" or whatever.
Anyway, I don't doubt that V.I. can be accurate; I just wish that someone would prove it!
Lyricist
"Supposing the entity of the poet to be represented by the number 10, it is certain that a chemist, on analyzing it, would find it to be composed of one part interest and nine parts vanity." (Victor Hugo)
There is a relatively new article about V.I. up on socionics.com that i really like.
http://www.socionics.com/advan/notes.html
lol
Hmm...one part of that article was especially intriguing to me: "Some narrow-minded people say that V.I. cannot be possible because looks are genetic." I wonder why Sergei Ganin did not counter this arguement by saying that type is genetic also. That new website, socionics.us or whatever it is called, does quite give the impression that this is the conventionally maintained view on the nature of the sociotype.
Lyricist
"Supposing the entity of the poet to be represented by the number 10, it is certain that a chemist, on analyzing it, would find it to be composed of one part interest and nine parts vanity." (Victor Hugo)
Strictly speaking, V.I. or any other typing method can't be proven, because the existence of types remains a hypothesis (it's not like gender where different specialists can do a quick check and achieve coinciding results 99.9% of the time). However, it could be tested less rigorously through this sort of test:
A socionics expert or hobbyist or whatever types a bunch of people using photographs, and then meets them in person and is given time to make a qualified decision on their type a second time. What percentage of types remained the same? 90%? 40%?
In actuality, this would be testing an individual's typing method against itself. However, if we tested many socionists against their own V.I. results and found that no one got above 80% (or any number), that would be indicative of the validity and limitations of V.I. in a broader sense.
I haven't heard of this experiment being done (it'd certainly be hard to organize), but I think it's very useful to do individually whenever possible to keep your head out of the clouds and be realistic about your own V.I. limitations.
Sorry, forgot to log in before making the previous post.
"Strictly speaking, V.I. or any other typing method can't be proven, because the existence of types remains a hypothesis"
Oh yeah. Good point...
Anyway, I had a different sort of an idea for an experiment, although I don't know if it would work. I guess that the photos taken by Filatova could be given to people who don't know anything about socionics and then those people would be asked to ascribe personality characteristics to the people in the photos and maybe there could be a way of seeing to what degree the characteristics ascribed to them correlate to the type descriptions...Could that be a valid method of judging the accuracy of V.I.?
Lyricist
"Supposing the entity of the poet to be represented by the number 10, it is certain that a chemist, on analyzing it, would find it to be composed of one part interest and nine parts vanity." (Victor Hugo)
I think that'd be a worthwhile test, but not particularly valid. You'd definitely need more photos of each person (4 at least?) to do this. Then you could have people describe each person, or, better yet, fill in a questionnaire, rating people on different qualities. Or, better yet! - have them fill out a socionics test 'for' that person, trying to derive their probable answers to the questions on the test.
However, my gut feeling is that there would be very minimal correlation. I've tried doing things like this and have found that some people come across more attractive or positive to everyone and others seem downright repulsive... to everyone. To illustrate, which of Filatova's photos is most well-known and recognized? Go to http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/index-type.html and look at the fourth one down on the right... yep, that's him
Anyways, that's just the beginning of the difficulties.
Aha... I thought of a test that would indeed indicate validity.
Take a bunch of photos of people who are married to each other (but are photographed separately) to a V.I. specialist and have him type them.
Then, according to the diagnoses, figure out the intertype relations.
Have a marriage specialist talk to these people and get an accurate idea of the state of their relationship, give them various tests that ask about their marriage satisfaction.
Then, take those results and the V.I. results and see what you get. How often did the typer identify dual and other kinds of relationships? Do these supposedly 'dual' couples correlate at all to the happier, more satisfying marriages? Etc. Etc.
You'd have to work with the idea to get more quantifiable results, but it could be done.
Actually, the previous idea would work as a test of any typing method - V.I. or not. - as long as the diagnoser does not know who is married to whom.
Still, you'd actually be testing not the entire 'field' of V.I. or socionics, but just the skill of the individual diagnoser.
Somebody already does that.Originally Posted by Rick
Really? Who?
http://braintypes.com/questionsandanswers.htm
http://braintypes.com/media_coverage.htm
What he does is... he's hired by people to observe others from a distance, then after a while, he tells them all about their "type".
EDIT: base off of soley physical movements and appearence.
I can see how certain facial expressions could give people an idea of type, but it seems like there would have to be people in every part of the world and of every ethnicity who have every kind of type. I don't see how a certain facial shape or a physical build or eye shape or anything along those lines could be related to type.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Every culture has the 'same old' types and relationships. Once you get past the cultural differences, it's the same ol' socionics.
There might be some sort of correlation between specific physiological traits and type, but it would never be anywhere near 100%, because of gene mixing between types. But, on the hand, there are clearly correlations between certain physiological traits and personality. So why not type?
Im not sure Id accept something under 95% as acceptable terms. But that is me. Personally I like to try to guess on what they are doing and what is motivating them when Im guessing out of boredom. lol one of my fave games with my ENFp friend when we go out to eat is to guess how long couples are going to last and why... so fun to watch people =p Apparently that is an NF's favorite hobby
I like to observe people also, but the difference is they don't know it =p
Psychological stalking! I can hear the mental Jaws music now as your psyche pierces their unsuspecting world~
No, Jadae, it's not stalking, because I don't intend it. Besides, I'm tine, I can't really stalk people...
They'd hear you in the bushes.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Jadae... you seriously do worry me...
because youre taking me too seriously ^_^
because you have a fascination with stalkers
It's an old subject. Two friends have been stalked before. One from a highschool dirtbag and one from a... eww... college instructor. So it's part of our humor. It's too tempting not to take in into Socionics because seriously.... think about what these types of theories are lol. Too rich of a connection not to be humorous =p
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote