Are certain types better at reading other people? Post your results!
Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (Revised, Adult)
Edit: I guess I should put my score, which was 31/36.
Quiz: Reading the Mind in the Eyes
Are certain types better at reading other people? Post your results!
Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (Revised, Adult)
Edit: I guess I should put my score, which was 31/36.
Last edited by calenwen; 03-29-2009 at 02:37 AM.
Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves.
John Muir
33 out of 36.
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
I got 28. That was hard for me. I thought they all looked exactly the same.
i wrote a paper about this assessment (as one of two evaluatory theory of mind tasks, the other based on pragmatics tasks by boaz keysar) hypothesizing that people high in openness and agreeableness would score well. in general i'd expect intuitives and ethical types to do well in theory of mind in general, although basically all people have some degree of theory of mind. i'd basically be interested if people could post their big five scores as well.
I got a 33 and I score low in agreeableness & medium-high in openness. Conscientiousness: very low. Neuroticism: high. Introversion: Middling to high depending on my moodOriginally Posted by aestrivex
i remember the one listed on your facebook. it was fairly similar to mine; agreeableness probably 40-50%.
I only got 21. I lose!
28
Out of curiosity I looked at what I got wrong...
like #5: I put sarcastic, not worried. Thing is I don't really judge "worry" highly, and when I look at it again, it's like it's tempting to just it as sarcastic, as it's not really important.
but then there are instances like #1: I put playful, not irritated. When I look at it now, he's got dark eyes. But to me in past it's been kind of fun to play on peoples irritation. And it's like I can be playful whilst others are irritated.
mm..
then #2 i got wrong, he was "upset" not "terrified". Well, what's the difference really. both will act out of sorts.
then #9 i put "annoyed" not "preoccupied", which actually reminds me... sometimes when someone has been preoccupied I can be like "are you annoyed" or like "is something bothering you" and both preoccupied, and being annoyed by somethign can be kind of similar to me. as well as bothered.
then #26 i put "alarmed" not "hostile". i suppose people can go hostile when they're alarmed.
HEH...
then #29 i put "impatient" rather than "reflective". *I* can get impatient when people are reflective.
So some of what I'm getting wrong is just because I'm taking the wrong "feeling" when there is more than one brought up at once.
Also looking back, a lot of them make sense and it's like it's harder for me when I'm not warmed up... it's like my awareness isn't that instant or always there.
But yeah, interesting. Now I just feel like I should redo it and get better sometime.
Hah other one is I put "guilty" when it was concerned. I suppose I find it kind of amusing the way I get things wrong.
same about the eye makeup. lol
30/36.
IEI-Fe 4w3
I got 25. A few of them were tricky because it's like two were OBVIOUSLY wrong, and there were two that COULD be it... so it was like a 50/50 thing.
You know what else is really freaky?
That eye test...
If I found the eyes sexually attractive (in the man's) I usually got the answer WRONG. I wonder what that tells about us? Maybe sexual attraction covers up reading people psychologically....so you wouldn't analyze them, and you'd talk to them? *shrug* I don't know. But I read somewhere that romance/sexual feelings covers up the ability to accurately read people psychologically because if you could- you wouldn't give them a chance as you'd all too easily see their darker traits.
21/36
I do terrible on these sorts of tests. I'm even below the average for Asperger/High Functioning Autism people (21.9)
How about that?
For most of them, I never felt sure I was right. I could usually rule out one or two possibilities but that was it. So it was alot of guessing.
I wonder if LII's typically score low on these sorts of tests. Reading facial expressions I think would be related to F and E and maybe even dynamic types since I think they'd be more likely to detect a minor change in someone's expression.
On the big five, I typically score high on introversion, high on openness, high average on conscientiousness, low average on neuroticism and the agreeableness score varies- probably somewhere in the middle.
So |R|coxI
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
I got 29/36, and found it surprisingly easy. I thought I would be terrible at it.
Looking at the various scores in this thread, it doesn't appear to be correlated with type at all. Maybe subtype, perhaps? But I've been studying subtype so much lately, I tend to think everything is subtype.
Quaero Veritas.
34/36. Most of them were incredibly easy. Only three or four took me more than a couple of seconds.
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...
I would think harmonizing subtypes might do well at this. Then again, I suspect I may be a harmonizing subtype and I did lousy.I got 29/36, and found it surprisingly easy. I thought I would be terrible at it.
Looking at the various scores in this thread, it doesn't appear to be correlated with type at all. Maybe subtype, perhaps? But I've been studying subtype so much lately, I tend to think everything is subtype.
Probably not very subtype related either.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Thanks, but much of that went over my head :redface:
Doubtful, because mine suck some major ballsack.Does a high score on this test correlate with VI skills?
I guess this has been a humbling day.
Stan is not my real name.
lol that's a refreshing opinion.
...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.
INTp
I got 34/36
Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .
27
"embarrassed" and "confused" are too similar in the vocabularies
in Chrome the flash is needed to be switched on by the button on left of the sites link field
Mb if there were used as examples people of Japan or at least Asian race your results would be higher. It seems as harder for me to type by nonverbal people of noneuropean alike races.
> It could be mostly cultural though (direct eye contact considered rude). I'm considered to have pretty high EQ by those around me.
sure, your results are too low. some additional factors made the testing as nonvalid
Last edited by Sol; 10-05-2019 at 05:01 PM.
She is biracial sol. Not to mention she was born and/or raised in an English speaking country.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Seems this was not enough. I do not see other reasons for her results so much beyond average. I doubt she has an autism.
Well, @Sol is actually right, in this case. I pretty much never interacted closely with non-Asian people even still, except with teachers at school. 90% of my middle/highschool spoke a language at home other than English primarily, according to officially released data. My European father is probably high key autistic and ILI, and was born with an eye deformity that required surgery when he was younger. So he never moved his eyes normally.
Interesting exercise. 29/36. I missed two of the questions because I didn't go with my first thought. It was easier to choose the correct answer by first looking at the pictures and then derive an impression of the image, rather than read the answers first and then try to identify which response fits. Not sure if that means anything. Probably doesn't. : )
Last edited by parcel; 08-29-2009 at 03:20 PM.
EII
Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test
https://www.questionwritertracker.co.../Z4MK3TKB.html
My score: 34/36
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/image...stribution.JPG
Accompanying chart of distribution of scores.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
What was the average? Like 26.2 if I recall and the Asperger's estimate score is in like the low 20s or so.
I only scored 24. I really suck at this kind of thing. I might be Aspie or it may just be weak 1-D Fe to blame.
LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP
Hey, that's what your duals and semi-duals are for anyway
Last edited by male; 12-29-2014 at 08:13 PM.
Psychopaths also do really well on this test
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
35/36
How do people not ace this test every time?
27/36
35/36
ipsa scientia potestas est-adaequatio intellectus et rei
35/36
34/36
31/36
I gave myself to much poetic licence with the words. Really liked this test, thanks for posting.
Some of the women with eye shadow make-up threw me off. Probably what make-up is for anyway, to draw attention to the eye and also to confuse the viewer as to what the eyes are saying thereby creating mystery.
mystery
Last edited by wacey; 12-29-2014 at 06:18 PM.
28/36
32/36
had to be focusing hard to be able to figure out what emotion I was mirroring. but it worked usually
in official big5 test I'm not high on either openness or agreeableness, in similarminds big5 I score higher on openness (b/c it's not standardized for age/sex)
25/36, one higher than 2009.
23. There were just too many that could go one way or the other for me depending on knowing more about the individual. I thought some could have been different or at least were not what I think of when I saw what emotion or thought they were trying to get across. They used a lot of stereotypes and other things besides just the eyes to make a conclusion. Ex. age, male/female
Reply With Quote
