Hey

[Reirei]

I’m new to Socionics (I literally just heard about it today)
So I’m just here to learn more about it

[Cybernetic]

Hello, bonjour, guten tag~ You’ve come to the right place.

[Memento Mori]

Welcome, @Reirei

Forgive my lack of originality lol, but I always try to post a constructive introduction to help people get started here. So here's Your welcoming Lynx care package


You're new to the many models of Socionics theory, so I won't use the confines of an introductory post response to layout the basics of the theory--as the website itself is filled to the brim with excellent articles and threads detailing the ins and outs of the system--but if You're looking for help in determining Your own typing, I'd recommend a couple tests for You:

First, a quicker option. Be sure to leave it set to the "Extended Socionics Test" , and pay mind to and be as precise as You can with the sliders. I have studied this test a good deal, and even small differences are reflected in the results. The test is broken into three parts, each dynamically changing contingent upon Your answers, to pinpoint Your valued IEs ('Information Elements', or "Cognitive Functions" as they are known elsewhere). No test is perfect, but it can point many in the right direction at the least.

Alternatively, this is the more thorough option. This is the SOLTI-160, a Russian Socionics test translated into English. It has an enormous 160 questions, with 5 options for each. This may seem excessive, but the larger number of variables (160 x 5) will ensure the maximal depth of Your results. Feel free to share either of Your results here if You wish.

In any case, we're happy to take Your questions. The "Articles" sections can keep You busy for weeks, and there's a thread for just about everything if You use the "Advanced Search" near the top right of Your screen. You can also access the live chat box, called the "shoutbox", by going to the home page of the site.

Take care, Rei, and don't be a stranger!

[Sol]

I have studied this test a good deal, and even small differences are reflected in the results.

2 problems: 1) tests are made for people who do not know the theory, 2) you got incorrect own type [while possibly having ESI think as now as EIE] with the help of tests as they have far from perfect accuracy.
To use common tests as a main typing method, especially for those who knows the theory, is a bad approach and incompetent advice.

The best typing way for those who read about types is to make videointerview and to be typed by VI as in this situation to fool yourself by tests and others by questionnaires [especialy similar noobs which are 99% of forums members] is much easier than others by stable type-related nonverbal. Also there is IR test in which the existing knowledge about types means a few.