On the "look inside" page at Amazon for Gulenkos new book [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/16...ie=UTF8&psc=1], where there is a page from Gulenko's tons of info on IEI, I culled the following IEI VI info, where Gulenko refers to differences between the Ni and the Fe subtypes"
"The most characteristic feature, which makes it possible to assume with certainly that a person belongs to this sociotype, is an elegant appearance....
...The second feature relates to gait and figure. Figures of IEI can be both thin and quite full*, and the more developed the intuitive component [Ni], the more pronounced the propensity to fullness. ..
A more emotional [Fe] version of IEI is easily recognized by vigorous gestures. The eyes are typically narrow, but the intuitive subtypes eyes are wide and curious...."
*[I actually never saw a full-figured IEI. Does anyone have any examples?]
In this book, Gulenko goes on at length about the four DCNH subtypes for IEI (and also for all 16 types) in really interesting detail, though I haven't had it long enough to study it, and can't study it right now. After it came I skimmed it eagerly and now I look forward to having time for in-depth reading. It was not a cheap book, about $30, and I just got rid of 2/3rds of my beloved books, books that survived many previous culling, so it was hard to do, and to add one was a big deal. But it was worth it to finally have a book, and not just the internet, for this topic.
P.S. A question comes to mind about subtypes. I see validated the idea of both kinds of subtypes existing, the typical two and the DCNH as well. My question is, is it generally thought that, for example with IEI, that the Fe type could possibly be ANY of the four DCNH types, and the Ni type the same, making there be, essentially EIGHT kinds of IEIs?
So Gulenko's book goes into depth for the DCNH subtypes for each type, going into long descriptions of the four for each type, bringing it to 64 descriptions altogether in his book. So if each of these cold also be either of the other two subtype divisions as well, that brings us up to 128 types! Then add in factors from Enneagram, Western and Chinese astrology, and more - and we can see how the complaint that you cannot stereotype all people into "only" 16 types doesn't really hold water...