I finally wrote a less complex socionics test - 20 questions

**Catholic Schoolboy** · 07-09-2006, 02:40 AM

You are asking people to go by what they think is thinking and feeling McNew...

You are asking them to make the test tell them they are their "ideal" type.

**Gilly** · 07-09-2006, 02:41 AM

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NT.cgi?po...1&Q15=-1&Q20=1

yeah....no.

**MysticSonic** · 07-09-2006, 02:50 AM

It might be that some of your questions, such as morals vs. laws are not sufficiently distinct from one another to differentiate between the T/F dichotomy.

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-09-2006, 02:50 AM

Originally Posted by Catholic Schoolboy

You are asking people to go by what they think is thinking and feeling McNew...

You are asking them to make the test tell them they are their "ideal" type.

Apparently I have not even been able to manage to make a test that people can readily manipulate .... back to the drawing board.

**Catholic Schoolboy** · 07-09-2006, 02:54 AM

Thank you.

You should just have a list of types....

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-09-2006, 02:55 AM

Originally Posted by MysticSonic

It might be that some of your questions, such as morals vs. laws are not sufficiently distinct from one another to differentiate between the T/F dichotomy.

I think it has moreso to do with the fact that in socionics it is more like Ti/Fi = subjective, then objective and Te/Fe = objective, then subjective and in MBTI it is basically just T = objective and F = subjective, which would explain much of the confusion considering that I went primarily by the latter MBTI way while mixing that in a little with the socionics way.

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-09-2006, 03:21 AM

Originally Posted by Herzy

People aren't cut and dry like a lot of these tests claim. Someone can be a compassionate, but logical thinker. Some people can be more than one thing at once. It's not that people CAN'T manipulate it, it's just that people DON'T WANT TO. Also, people often suck at self-evaluating too, along with the fact that tests don't usually work for many people (use Gilligan as an example - he tests differently on every one of your tests. I'm not saying he sucks at self evaluation, though). So basically, the fact that most of the users here who know their types test out as weird types on your tests shows that you're probably doing something pretty wrong.

Actually, Gilligan and Expat tested nearly the same on all of the tests ...

And as far as doing wrong, I think I may be trying to be too complex with the way the test looks and calculates a type. I can not really explain it otherwise, especially considering that some things I have intentionally made pretty obvious, and people just blow past them and get some weird type. Beats me.

Creepy-bg · 07-09-2006, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by Catholic Schoolboy

Thank you.

You should just have a list of types....

LOL that's the best idea yet!

Q1 are you an INTj? Y/N
Q2 are you an ENTp? Y/N
Q3 ...

it's foolproof!

**Phaedrus** · 07-09-2006, 05:04 AM

This time I read the explanations and, based on that, I changed a few answers. Some questions were still difficult to answer, and I got the wrong test result this time: INTj. It seems that when I think that I am aware of what I am doing, I am doing something wrong -- a proof that I am an irrational type?

Well, I know which type I am, and I seriously suspect that it might be something wrong with the premises upon which this test is built. It might have to do with wrong definitions/descriptions of the INTjs and INTps. I now consider Stratiyevskayas type descriptions of those two types to be roughly correct. Are your premises in line with those or not, Reuben?

My new (worse) result: http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NT.cgi?po...1&Q15=1&Q20=-1

**snegledmaca** · 07-09-2006, 08:38 AM

INTp

link

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-09-2006, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

I now consider Stratiyevskayas type descriptions of those two types to be roughly correct. Are your premises in line with those or not, Reuben?

I mostly do my own thing regardless of other known sources ... I usually keep what works.

**Phaedrus** · 07-09-2006, 02:55 PM

I mostly do my own thing regardless of other known sources ... I usually keep what works.

Yeah, I don't question that. But I'd like to know if you think that someone who scores INTp in your test would be like the INTp that Stratiyevskaya describes, or if you have another "picture" of an INTp. The same goes for the INTj type. Do you agree with Stratiyevskaya's description of INTjs? And are your test premises compatible with how those two types are described?

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-09-2006, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

I mostly do my own thing regardless of other known sources ... I usually keep what works.

Yeah, I don't question that. But I'd like to know if you think that someone who scores INTp in your test would be like the INTp that Stratiyevskaya describes, or if you have another "picture" of an INTp. The same goes for the INTj type. Do you agree with Stratiyevskaya's description of INTjs? And are your test premises compatible with how those two types are described?

I am highly skeptical that any test matches any description 100%, whether that be Stratiyevskaya's or another.

**Phaedrus** · 07-09-2006, 04:39 PM

I am highly skeptical that any test matches any description 100%, whether that be Stratiyevskaya's or another.

You still refuse to answer my questions. What do you personally think the INTps and the INTjs are like? You must have a view on how they are in real life. So, I ask again, is your understanding of them compatible with what Stratiyevskaya writes or not? If I take your test I turn out either INTp or INTj, and I want to know exactly which INTp traits you focus on in the test, and which INTj traits. Or do you base the test on quadra descriptions? These are important questions, because there might be something fundamentally wrong with our understanding of the quadras that might lead to mistypings. And if you have another conception of INTps and INTjs than Stratiyevskaya that is also important, because then we might have another problem.

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-09-2006, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

I am highly skeptical that any test matches any description 100%, whether that be Stratiyevskaya's or another.

You still refuse to answer my questions. What do you personally think the INTps and the INTjs are like? You must have a view on how they are in real life. So, I ask again, is your understanding of them compatible with what Stratiyevskaya writes or not? If I take your test I turn out either INTp or INTj, and I want to know exactly which INTp traits you focus on in the test, and which INTj traits. Or do you base the test on quadra descriptions? These are important questions, because there might be something fundamentally wrong with our understanding of the quadras that might lead to mistypings. And if you have another conception of INTps and INTjs than Stratiyevskaya that is also important, because then we might have another problem.

You are probably not going to be very happy with this answer, but it is pretty much the truth as far as the test is concerned.

The problem with what you are trying to ask of me isn't relevant to the format of the test, because not only did I not form the test with any sort of perception of consideration to the diffrences between INTj and INTp, I actually deviated signifigantly from the format of my previous tests and while focusing less on model-a I attempted to combine some MBTI aspects of the dictonomy [EvI,SvN,TvF,JvP] with socionic specific definitions of E/I and J/P for experiemental purposes, meaning that the method may be skewed somewhat in the same way MBTI testing is flawed. Had I more than 20 questions, upwards to 70, then things might even out. It depends how motivated I am to make 70 questions and how motivated other people are willing to take a test that big that is mostly just experimental is another issue all together.

As far as Stratiyevskaya is concerned I've never gone over his descriptions, so I really do not have an opinion on the matter.

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-10-2006, 02:17 AM

And yet another improved test ...hopefully.

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi

28 questions ...

Have fun! Post links!

**Capitalist Pig** · 07-10-2006, 02:30 AM

link

**Sarah** · 07-10-2006, 02:30 AM

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...1&Q22=-1&Q28=1

It says I'm ESFp.

**aestrivex** · 07-10-2006, 02:31 AM

i think this test is even more of a mess than your previous ones.

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...1&Q22=1&Q28=-1

there are a lot of questions here which focus on the j/p dichotomy which are a mess.

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-10-2006, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by niffweed17

there are a lot of questions here which focus on the j/p dichotomy which are a mess.

It is either that or use the MBTI J/P dictonomy, and this not going to be any more accurate. Atleast I am trying to write J/P questions that are more socionic specific.

**MysticSonic** · 07-10-2006, 02:33 AM

We're getting there.

**aestrivex** · 07-10-2006, 02:34 AM

then perhaps a test focusing on the dichotomy is not the best of ideas...

to be honest, i preferred the tests on your site that focused solely on functional analysis.

**Raver** · 07-10-2006, 02:44 AM

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...=1&Q22=1&Q28=1

This time I took my time and thought more about the answers and questions, but I ended up getting the same result as the others: ENFj

Creepy-Diana · 07-10-2006, 02:45 AM

.

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-10-2006, 03:11 AM

Originally Posted by soggy-flakes

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?post=1&post=1&Q1=-1&Q2=1&Q3=1&Q4=-1&Q19=1&Q5=1&Q6=-1&Q7=1&Q8=1&Q9=-1&Q20=1&Q10=-1&Q11=1&Q12=1&Q13=1&Q14=1&Q15=-1&Q16=1&Q17=-1&Q18=-1&Q21=-1&Q23=1&Q24=-1&Q25=1&Q26=1&Q27=-1&Q22=1&Q28=-1

By the way, alot of the questions were borrowed from the Keirsey Temperament sorter.

a FEW of the questions were borrowed from the temperment sorter ... otherwise it would have been another day and I needed more questions than what I had already written.

**Catholic Schoolboy** · 07-10-2006, 03:26 AM

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...&Q22=-1&Q28=-1

:wink:

**Tov** · 07-10-2006, 03:39 AM

He's half right about the spirituality thing not fully equating to Ne/Ni, it is also too ambiguous of a word with an interpritation that is commonly in tune with religion. Even if you take away the religion aspect people still associate iwith meditation and the sorts. More specific words should be used in place of physical and spiritual. Lets for one moment stop trying to look smart and sophisticated and take a more objective approach. The idea should be to try and make socionics less confusing and complex as far as testing goes.

**Capitalist Pig** · 07-10-2006, 05:07 AM

link

McNew, your tests haven't given me one consistent result yet.

**Phaedrus** · 07-10-2006, 06:10 AM

ENTJ

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...-1&Q22=1&Q28=1

This is the first time I think that I understand the (now) last question, so I thought it was easy to chose A, but maybe you think that I should chose B.

This question from Keirsey I don't like:

Do you perfer to work:
A.) To Dead-lines
B.) Just whenever

As an INTp I tend to postpone work and work when I feel like it, but if something really must be done, I need a dead-line to work effectively. So I might chose A (but didn't this time). I think this question is better:

Does it bother you more to:
A.) Not to be able to finish something important
B.) Not to be able to work at my own pace

Here I tend to chose B.

I think all those questions that are based on the Body/Soul dichotomy are hopelessly difficult to answer. With your definitions help added they might be anwserable, but they are still rather confusing, and I suspect that they might cause the mistyping in my case.

**aestrivex** · 07-10-2006, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by Tov

He's half right about the spirituality thing not fully equating to Ne/Ni, it is also too ambiguous of a word with an interpritation that is commonly in tune with religion. Even if you take away the religion aspect people still associate iwith meditation and the sorts. More specific words should be used in place of physical and spiritual. Lets for one moment stop trying to look smart and sophisticated and take a more objective approach. The idea should be to try and make socionics less confusing and complex as far as testing goes.

oh, i understand what he means.

but the fact is that you're exactly right. being spiritual does not necessarily connotate being imaginative or having one's own conception of things, which would be more appropriate definitions for intuition.

**Zeia** · 07-10-2006, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by MysticSonic

We're getting there.

Agreed

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...1&Q22=1&Q28=-1

Creepy-pokeball · 07-10-2006, 12:28 PM

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...1&Q22=-1&Q28=1

I r the rainbow of NF.

**oyburger** · 07-10-2006, 01:31 PM

Worked for me

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...&Q22=-1&Q28=-1

**Slacker** · 07-10-2006, 01:39 PM

Says I'm ENFp

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...1&Q22=-1&Q28=1

I don't get all these "soul/body" questions though.

**Wavebury** · 07-10-2006, 01:43 PM

lol

I must have mistyped myself

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...1&Q22=-1&Q28=1

**Expat** · 07-10-2006, 03:12 PM

ESTJ

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA.cgi?p...=1&Q22=1&Q28=1

I confess I'm confused by some of the questions.

**Olga** · 07-10-2006, 07:02 PM

I have got ESFP. I did not like questions, they do not make sense and I was not sure - I had to think what they mean. It would be good to bear in mind that the test should be for general public use and so to be as simple as possible. I like eqaution of the world spiritual with intution. Although I do not know how the pelople would understand this word - not very much of daily use I guess.

Today I looked at the church and thought about intuition of time

then I thought about Kaaba

and when I walked I thought why can't I be immidiately where I want to be - instead whatever I do have to take time. I almost felt a force of time against me as if I was not allowed to do it with my speed but with a suggested speed only. What is the meaning of time? or the meaning of process?

It seems to me that time is against free will power teaches you to obey to be submissive -Superid against Ego. Superid is in Afterlife block, so association of intuition and spirituality is correct. Superego is probably more about the God and guidance and other orientated spirituality while Superid is about idvidualisation of a spirit - self -directed spirituality.
Thanks to Rmcnew for a lovely asociation! I will integrate it into model B.

**Kristiina** · 07-10-2006, 09:28 PM

INTP
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NT.cgi?po...1&Q15=-1&Q20=1

Mhh... I keep getting INTp... lately.

**Ms. Kensington** · 07-14-2006, 07:48 PM

got INTP after deliberation

**Angel von Himmel** · 07-16-2006, 07:09 PM

NOTE: this is experimental ...it does signifigantly deviate from the way other tests are constructed. It may or may not be accurate ...

http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA2.cgi

Thread: I finally wrote a less complex socionics test - 20 questions

Thread Tools

Display

IMPROVED TEST - Could be more accurate than the others ...

Meaning of time

New socionics tests ...

Posting Permissions