Si-Valuing vs. Se-Valuing?

[jason_m]

Would these two tests illustrate the difference between 'Si' and 'Se' (or maybe 'Si-valuing' vs. 'Se-valuing'?)?

Si:

http://hsperson.com/test/highly-sensitive-test/

Se:

http://hsperson.com/test/high-sensation-seeking-test/

[Anglas]

The short asnwer is no. Some of these questions are good at determining Se or Si valuer, but too much of them are unrelated to Se and Si. For example:

" When I was a child, my parents or teachers seemed to see me as sensitive or shy."

" I have a rich,complex inner life."
lmao, how do you even answer this

"Being very hungry creates a strong reaction in me,disrupting my concentration or mood."
Thats just a human thing. I assume Si valuing people would be more aware of it though.

[Luk]

Those look like stereotype tests to me. 🤔 The authors imagined a person who is sensitive / sensation seeking and created questions based on those profiles.

You're not answering whether or not you're sensitive. You're answering based on how similar you are to a specific person that's sensitive / sensation seeking.

The problem with that is that if the authors didn't take socionics into account, there's no way to retrofit stereotype tests. They're too specific. There will always be some questions that make no sense in the context of socionics. You could collect some questions from both and get a better-than-random test on Si valuing.

Sensing being about sensations is more of an MBTI thing. In socionics it's more abstract.