New test proposal

[Not A Communist Shill]

I believe that an important step forward for Socionics would be to make it definable and understandable in terms measurable with more 'reputable' instruments such as the Big Five.

I think a way of doing this would be to take apart present tests as well as to assess which questions\phrases\facets best represent various Socionic types and information elements.

This would be hugely problematic as it would involve, at best, a fairly small sample of Socionics nutters who may or may not be typed correctly in order to find such correlations.

Steps I propose are:
-Finding correlations via a good Socionics test such as the one that used to be on the Socioniko website
-Undergoing a similar process through the 'items' (i.e. facets or phrases) provided on http://ipip.ori.org/ipip/
-Perhaps doing a study of wider correlations with instruments such as the Big Five

[Not A Communist Shill]

It is unlikely that I will forever walk amongst you, hence I should make the necessary resources available to pre-empt any future Ascensions.

@aestrivex sent me the Socioniko test sometime ago via email (the original link to the file was taken down an even longer time ago). I'll include it here as an attachment - maybe @hkkmr could add it to directly to the forum's server as an extra backup?

The test is: © M.Lytova (Stovpyuk), D.Lytov ( @Dmitri Lytov ), 2003, translated by D.Lytov and S.Nakrokhina, 2004.
It should be noted that you should not send anything to the email in the test, the test is closed as far as they are concerned!

People should probably wait until someone with a strong Motivation and above-average levels of Sanity takes on such a project before doing anything.

[Park]

People should probably wait until someone with a strong Motivation and above-average levels of Sanity takes on such a project before doing anything.

I still like Hugo's simple test the best, to be honest.

[Not A Communist Shill]

This is different from the original intent of this thread, but I'm trying to piece together a new test like the previous two I made years ago and then subsequently deleted...include all traces of composition materials.

Ideally this would be a html test uploaded to a server such as this forums', but I wouldn't be able to produce any form of graphical result (which wouldn't isn't strictly necessary, but would be preferable if only for presentation). I'll just put it on okcupid as before for now.

I'll mostly be using the wikisocion for source material and will try to rip off good questions from older tests as well.

I think questions should ideally be split into four statements due to the nature of Model-A...having 2, 8, or 16 options for each question would not be too helpful (maybe 2 options could work for a few quick-fire questions).

This doesn't mean that people won't be able to choose between summaries of four types in a question...asking someone to choose between a description of a SEI, SLE, ESI, LSE etc. could still be useful, although the scoring may be difficult to work out.

I have one temperament question from before based on the bullet-points in each of these descriptions: http://www.socionics.us/wikisocion/IP_temperament.shtml ...I's like to have maybe another 1 or 2 more such questions...also perhaps questions on clubs (which may be a little dubious), romance styles, and any other distinctions that can be well defined.

So, if you see any useful questions on old tests, have ideas on test questions + format or might be able to process chunks of wikisocion descriptions into a streamlined form, post here! ...another issue is the manner in which various options are scored.

[Park]

[Not A Communist Shill]

If someone could dash off some questions testing for I\E, N\S etc. plus Ego block functions, that would be Real Swell, thanks. Maybe two or five for each

[The Martrix]

Best not make any of the questions too obvious as to their point. They need to be almost disguised, or else its just like picking between definitions.

[Not A Communist Shill]

yeah, I attempted to do that before, but those kind of questions can be confusing or difficult to answer...it's probably good to balance the test out with some more conventional questions too

[Not A Communist Shill]

I'm not completely satisfied with these four temperament distinctions:

I see reality as continuous, gradual, often imperceptible change. I have my own views of how reality should be which inclines me to be quick to take action to make sure they are sustained or to ensure they are achieved, before adverse change can get too far.

I see reality as continuous, gradual, often imperceptible change. I am soothed by this and have a relaxed inclination to take things as they come and to adapt to them.

I perceive reality as mostly not changing, and when it does, it's in abrupt leaps from one state to another. I am bothered by the lack of change, leading me into sudden bursts of action, energy, or even just thought.

I perceive reality as mostly not changing, and when it does, it's in abrupt leaps from one state to another. I draw inner stability from stable reality as it makes me confident that things will remain as they are despite minor disturbances. Periods of great upheaval are very disturbing and make me anxious that things will settle down one way or the other soon enough.

in particular, the first sentences seem perplexing and difficult to comprehend...perhaps difficult to match to Real Life. But perhaps in totality, they are ok.

[The Martrix]

I'm not completely satisfied with these four temperament distinctions:



in particular, the first sentences seem perplexing and difficult to comprehend...perhaps difficult to match to Real Life. But perhaps in totality, they are ok.

As I read through the possible options, I'm unconsciously looking for the definition of Ip, and I find it in the second line. They're pretty good definitions though.

[Park]

I could provide original background music for the test, if you want.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Für Elise playing continuously for 20 minutes or so should be fine

[The Martrix]

Für Elise playing continuously for 20 minutes or so should be fine

Even better, here's 60 minutes:

[Park]

Für Elise playing continuously for 20 minutes or so should be fine

Boring, and unoriginal.

[consentingadult]

yeah, I attempted to do that before, but those kind of questions can be confusing or difficult to answer...it's probably good to balance the test out with some more conventional questions too

Actually I think you came up with one of the best Socionics test I've seen, especially in respect to asking clear, unambiguous questions that avoided both Forer effect and don't easily give away what they were measuring.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Boring, and unoriginal.

used to drive me mad while playing chess games against the computer