Examples of Deltas

[Suz]

I rather new to socionics. I always felt I had a knack at peg people personality by looking at them. Rachel Ray for instance seems to fit the socionics.com description of ENFp. I peg her as fun and loving to laugh. I always have felt I favor Oprah in personality. I have tons of picture that we share identical expression or mannerisms.

the feature I was group all those celebrity by was the tightness around the cheek and wide smile.

Mkay, that's the image I had of ENFp's too when I first started studying socionics. But it's not quite right.

ENFp's don't value Fe. They love to laugh and are forthcoming with emotions, yes, but only when it serves Fi. Fi is ENFp's creative function. So Fe in service to the creative Fi may make ENFp more intermittent/reserved with their expressiveness than INFj even, I think. Wide smile tends to suggest Fe to me.

For ENFp, think Mick Trimming from Survivor.

Rachel Ray, honestly, I think is Fe-ego. And she tends to be like in-your-face, which seems more Se-valuing. So my verdict is EIE for her. Or i dont know, maybe ESE. . .

p.s. I thought about it a little more and I'm not sure if Rachel Ray's aggressive demeanor represents Se-valuing. And with her love for cooking and appreciating food, I think ESE fits really well actually. Or SEI. She fits the socionics.com physical description of the bouncy, fun type of SEI.

[cwsparklingdazzy]

ENFp's don't value Fe. They love to laugh and are forthcoming with emotions, yes, but only when it serves Fi. Fi is ENFp's creative function. So Fe in service to the creative Fi may make ENFp more intermittent/reserved with their expressiveness than INFj even, I think. Wide smile tends to suggest Fe to me.

After further study, Introverted sensing is demonstrated in most of the pic I posted. Maybe that what I was "sensing" .
America ferrera, hilary swank, neve campbell might just be INFj. Being all these are pictures. They are in the way interacting with the cameraman. If introverted sensing was indeed what I was looking at then that would be their activation function.

SLE seems like the best choice for Rachel Ray. In the picture I posted she seems to be intiating interaction with the cameraman. I guessing that would make her suggestive function extraverted thinking. She is clearly in her head.

Oprah could just be ISFp. In the last pic of her, she is interacting with the cameraman but it seems more focus as if she is calculating her smile. This seems more demonstrative of introverted thinking. She thinking but still able to maintain smile unlike Rachel Ray. While in the last pic of Neve campbell she is more out of control or loose with her smile.
Thanks WorkaholicsAnon

[nifl]

neve campbell might just be INFj.

maybe IEE


seems too ditzy for logic or rationality. no 'dangerous' intertype feelings which i sometimes get with EIE/IEI

[Biscuit]

no 'dangerous' intertype feelings which i sometimes get with EIE/IEI

I have a question about that , how do you make sure your impressions are accurate ?

[nifl]

I have a question about that , how do you make sure your impressions are accurate ?

the more i watch a person, the higher the possibility is for a sure impression. if they give ostensibly not-contradictory type-related mannerismic/non-verbal impressions and thus intertypical feelings, then the chance of being sure in my impression is obviously also higher. if there's enough other and quality data which coincides with the primarily non-verbal typing, then that's additional support. this support is rarely more than secondary, as celebrities rarely can be accurately understood adequately from what they say or what is said about them; it's either selective or even can be false information a lot of times.

even if there's no 'possibly/maybe', etc. it's possible for me to change my typing - including those which i fancied as secure initially -, with or without additional data; being a sensory-logical means that these intuitive and emotional impressions are averagely weaker, more muddled, less secure, more easily influenced which can then lead to a change in opinions about a person. these types need more intense practice to get securer impressions here. when a higher rate of secure impressions is gotten, then my opinions will change less.

[Sol]

I have a question about that , how do you make sure your impressions are accurate ?

He should to have same basis as me.

Same check as with any method can be used with intuitive-nonverbal method.
By fiting facts to supposed types, by a match of results with other methods and different data (common behavior, abbilities, relations, tests), by independent match with other typers.
For example, for well-known people there is much of data about common behavior. You may check how types supposed by impressions fit to types which could be supposed by common behavior. If the match of methods is good and it's regular situation - skills in the method are good and the method works. The more of different data matches to theory - the more trust to a method by which types were supposed.

In case of IR effects, which is main Socionics hypothesis. It's understood and checked by experience of factual impressions from people which types were supposed by different data. 1st of all - for good known irl people. This needs correct own type and correct types of other people to understand IR theory and what impressions IR inspire.

As with any today method there exist significant speculativity. Skills are improving step by step after a time to achieve better match of known facts and impressions related to type traits.

There were experiments with typing matches on socioforum. When were used only questionnaires (hence for logical analysis), - average match they got not significantly better, seems even worse than in my experiment where people used intuitive impressions. So for a typing both T and N are useful. Jung types traits are seen in nonverbal not badly as average match 17-20% from random videos, - it's far more than accidental (~6%) - and that was got by random people without special training in intuitive nonverbal method.

[Northstar]

He should to have same basis as me.