May I suggest keeping each question down to two possible answers. Narrowing down to one of four possible answers is aggravating and slow.
I had it where it just went two-by-two on the last version ... the problem with that is that it didn't produce accurate results. This one seems to be yielding slightly more effective results even though it is a nuisance.
Very interesting and clever test. You have very interesting concepts imbedded in the questions. On this one, I come out ENTp. However, if I change my answer to the I vs. E question, which I had a lot of trouble answering, I come out INTp.
One of the challenges in these kinds of tests (I hope you don't mind my saying), is that it's very hard to answer questions where each choice has more than one statement (either explicitly or implicitly). I know that doing it this way helps cut down on the number of questions.
It's interesting to have to choose between "I tend to liven up when there are people who readily accept the attention I give to them, as opposed to people giving attention to me" and "I tend to become more lively when people give me attention, as opposed to me giving them attention," because in reality, I want people to accept the attention I give them and I want them to give me attention. I don't see those as mutually exclusive. However, I can say that if I have to be the one to always takes the initiative in relationships, and the other person only passively accepts my attention and doesn't take any initiative herself, I may find that wearying.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...=-1&P=6&post=1
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...=-1&P=6&post=1
I dislike this test. Typings should not be based on questions about introversion/extroversion or rationality/irrationality.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...1=1&P=6&post=1
I'm still all about making a test that first makes you chose N or S and F or T, then if someone scores say... NF... they're asked if they relate more to Ne and Fi or Ni and Fe. From there the questions are used to decide which type of the mirror pair the individual is. The third and fourth functions could perhaps be used for these questions.
I must say, however, that the wording you've used in this test is the best yet.
I'd like to somehow combine introvert/extroverted functions into it, but it is rather time consuming and may take a while.
as long as there aren't questions specifically about E/I and J/P
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...1=1&P=6&post=1
I must say don't like this test, either. I did answer as I thought best, but I disliked the last question -- and that one makes all the difference between ENTj and ENTp?
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Well, in support of it, I think that despite the fact that people don't *like* it, they seem to come out closer to the way they see themselves, even if it doesn't seem as elegant as the tests that don't ask questions directly related to what in Socionics is rational vs. irrational (j vs. p).
Asking j vs. p questions is the time-tested approach, and people seem happier with the results, even if it seems to use the "brute force" method.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...=-1&P=6&post=1
Yay!
Q5 is kind of stupid because while I would consider that perhaps the TV or the remote is having an issue, I would never jump to some silly conclusion that the country that made it is responsible. Just what do you have against Sri Lanka, anyway? Also, I can't imagine anyone of normal intelligence repeatedly trying to turn a TV on for 2 days without changing the situation before finally realizing something is broken.
Also, on your final question, the irrational answer should say "change plans midstream," not "mainstream."
That faith makes blessed under certain circumstances, that blessedness does not make of a fixed idea a true idea, that faith moves no mountains but puts mountains where there are none: a quick walk through a madhouse enlightens one sufficiently about this. (A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.) - Friedrich Nietzsche
I don't think it's entirely bullshit, but it's difficult to measure in such tests. I agree that, in socionics, a test where one question based on j vs p makes all the difference between ENTp and ENTj is not the best.
That is why I prefer the approach of Hugo's test -- after reaching a quadra through functional preference, then a question based on opposing temperaments (not just j vs p) decides.
EDIT: yeah I thought the same about question 5.
J vs P (actually, rational vs irrational) is very difficult to test because there are so few things that can actually be linked solely to that dichotomy. It's rather subtle in what it affects. Questions involving Rat/Irr are likely to expect things that do not hold true for all types of the orientation in question.
That faith makes blessed under certain circumstances, that blessedness does not make of a fixed idea a true idea, that faith moves no mountains but puts mountains where there are none: a quick walk through a madhouse enlightens one sufficiently about this. (A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.) - Friedrich Nietzsche
I agree with Dynamicism, JvP dichtonomies do not work well in socionics, but neither does EvI really. However, not everyone is going to respond well to taking the functional analysis approach even though it is the better of two evils, either ... it is a toss up.When tests are loaded with j vs. p questions, I invariably come out ENTp... which I'm more than obviously not in many ways.
j vs. p is bullshit in Socionics.
why not keep this test but also make one that doesn't use E/I and J/P?
I came out ENFp (inductive).
Question, are all ENFps inductive?
(Tangent about the test itself:
Question 5 irks me:
Your samsung television, which was manufactured in Sri Lanka, does not turn on when you press the remote repeatedly ... you would most likely initially assume: (Choose A or B):
A.) The television is most likely broke, because anything manufactured in Sri Lanka is probably cheaply made and quite likely to break, or maybe the remote is broken instead.
B.) B.) The television is most likely broke, because I hit the on button several times over a two day period of time and it still would not turn on. I might need to fix or replace it
First, i'd assume it had something to do with the remote. So I'd try to turn the TV on manually. If that worked but the remote didn't...i'd assume it was something with the remote. If the manual button didn't work, I'd assume it was something wrong with the tv.
Answer A suggests the remote might be broken instead...but adds in the whole Sri Lanka thing which wouldn't fit.
Answer B doesn't specify which "button" i've hit serveral times a day over a two day period. Is it referring to the remote button....or the manual tv button?
I answered B because of the Sri Lanka rant in A, and i chose to interpret the button as being the tv button.
End Tangent rant.)
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I am starting to suspect that the inductive/deductive questions I have on there are not sufficent enough to tell which one a person immediatelly defaults to when faced with situations, but I do believe that people tend to default more towards one or the other, just that I am not sure a person really realizes which it is they do necessarily.
Very hard questions, but it got close. INFp. The INFj alternative on the last page was in fact more accurate, but it was much longer. Hence it mentioned more negative things and I got in denial, which I think is pretty natural. Perhaps you could get the Te PoLR in there too.
And I had trouble with some of the questions about making conclusions. My curiosity is satisfied with less information then I need to be certain of something, so it felt like I was splitting hairs trying to answer those.
I'm afraid I closed my result page a few hours ago.
INFj
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...=-1&P=6&post=1
Works for me...
“I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking
IEE
ENFp (deductive)
So what's the deductive thing?
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.
I am trying to figure out if there is any correspondence between inductive/deductive thinking and type ... I am currently debating the validity of my questions concerning that.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...1=1&P=6&post=1
LSI
INTj (deductive)
Ann, the TV question wasn't my favourite either. I chose the Sri Lanka answer, because I can see many logical reasons why I shouldn't expect perfection from it (lack of tight EU regulations among other things.). Generally I would also assume that the remote is broken and I'd list all the possible reasons in my head, for example: is it even plugged in?
EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
E3 (probably 3w4)
Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!
Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/
First test that is able to give me NF or extrovert typeHowever I had some trouble answering all questions reliably. I could have easily chosen different answers in many questions which would have changed the answer considerably.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...=-1&P=6&post=1
that TV question is ridiculous... who the hell wouldn't have walked up to the TV to put on what they want? who wouldn't have questioned if the issue was the batteries in the remote?
NEWS TEST!!!! - 8 QUESTIONS!!!
New tests ... object is to get dual types without manipulating the information to get a specific type.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTEST3.cgi
what an awful test.
All Hail The Flying Spaghetti Monster
you couldn't have been the teensiest bit tactful?
It is open ended ...
Whether people like my tests or not is irrelevant in the light of what I personally expect from the test, which might naturally be diffrent than what people might personally expect from the test.you couldn't have been the teensiest bit tactful?
I agree with Niffweed.
This is probably the most difficult test I have done. The choices are not so difficult in the sense that I have no problem deciding between the columns. The problem is that the text itself is so difficult that I simply pick the one I understand more than the other one.
EDIT:
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTEST3.cg...0=0&Q1=-1&Q2=1
Types:
(Results too sporatic to make accurate specifications - generalizing)
ENTp INTj ENFp INFj ENTj INTp
That certainly narrows it down. :wink:
EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
E3 (probably 3w4)
Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/
Types:
(Results too sporatic to make accurate specifications - generalizing)
ENTp INTj ENFj ENFp INFj INFp
link
that wasn't really what i meant. the point is that a test that tells me i'm INTp, INTj, ENTj, ENTp, ISTp, ESTj, ISTj, or INFp doesn't really help me very much. (not that it did, just an exaggerated example).
I probably need to program into the test optional questions to pop up when people get generalized results, so it would be more specific in the end.
heh, i got
ISTj/ISTp. Deductive.
then i took it again with the other choice of a question i had a hard time with (i think it was an ni/si question)0 and got INTp deductive.
Ill try it again later.
EDIT: its later.
http://socion.info/cgi-bin/NTA5.cgi?...1=1&P=6&post=1
its broke.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote