Socionics Types Distribution - Statistics

[RSV3]

If anyone is interested, I put up the distribution of socionics types here http:// http://www.sociotype.com/tools/statistics#Socionics-Type-Distribution. Their based on approx 100k test results, so take them with a grain of salt.

[Narc]

At the very least, this is good to get a ballpark figure of the general frequent internet user subset.

[The Exception]

I'm kinda surprised there isn't more variation in the distribution of types.

[ouronis]

Uhhhh you think 100k isn't enough people to base a fairly good estimate on?

[RSV3]

Uhhhh you think 100k isn't enough people to base a fairly good estimate on?

100k is more than adequate. I was referring to the inherent problems with the data itself: e.g., accuracy of the test results, people taking the test multiple times (thereby skewing the overall results), results aren't based on a random sample of the overall population, etc.

[ouronis]

100k is more than adequate. I was referring to the inherent problems with the data itself: e.g., accuracy of the test results, people taking the test multiple times (thereby skewing the overall results), results aren't based on a random sample of the overall population, etc.

Ok, true. My thoughts as well. "Distribution of Socionics Types on the internet assuming this test is reliable, the theory is true, and there aren't too many repeats." I think these are the problems of every online study. But it is a seriously impressive sample size so I'm inclined to ignore all that except "its on the internet."

[silke]

looks like there are no special rare snowflake types based on this test

SLE and ESE scored slightly below 5%, followed by SEE and LSE at around 5.5%, but that's still close to 6.25% random chance type distribution

[niffer]

These are based on an imperfect test, no regulation of test taking method or frequency, and most importantly voluntary self-report and testing.

It doesn’t represent the population at all. What it represents is what kinds of types sound trendiest for people to come out as based on your unofficially-created test’s parameters.

Given all of this, this information is pointless and misleading for those who don’t know how to interpret data properly. Why bother even presenting it to the public?

[falsehope]

I see LII more common then SEI and ESE, which are most common. These stats are worth shit.

[Number 9 large]

I see LII more common then SEI and ESE, which are most common. These stats are worth shit.

Same with mbti everyone testing as intuitives, while the distribution according to official sources seems to be 75% sensor 25% intuitive, with Si leads being the most common types. (both SEI and SLI put together making up about about 25% of all people)

[Number 9 large]

estimated_frequency_table.gif
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-p...ype.htm?bhcp=1

[Allegra]

Forget about the chart, In your real life experience, which one is more common among men, SLI or LSI?