All The Personality Test Threads Merged Here
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-09-2013, 09:57 AM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
(25-09-2013 09:46 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(25-09-2013 03:57 AM)DLJ Wrote:  I think this is maybe the fifth thread on this subject

Most here are INTJs

I'll fish out the links to the earlier threads when I get home.

But it's worth redoing occasionally to see how one changes over time.

Edit:
This one uses the same link as the OP.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-is-a-test
Also
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ype?page=2
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ies-of-TTA
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...onalitypes

I'm certain there was one more after Dark Light's thread but I can't find it.

I'm fairly certain there has been 2 or 3 since mine, including the Harry Potter one, but I was unsuccessful in my search as well.

I assume you got my data off of my ancient thread, but if not I am an INTJ.

edit: You got mine, never mind. Carry on, nothing to see...

I finally took one of these and came out INTJ.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 10:14 AM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
When I did a similar test about 15 years ago, I came out as INFP. This time:


INFJ
Introvert(100%) iNtuitive(75%) Feeling(38%) Judging(11%)

You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (100%)
You have distinctive preference of Intuition over Sensing (75%)
You have moderate preference of Feeling over Thinking (38%)
You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (11%)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 10:48 AM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
INTP here
Introvert (78%) iNtuitive (62%) Thinking (38%) Percieving(11%)

I don't really like going outside.
It's too damn "peopley" out there....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 11:50 AM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
ISFJ

Interesting...seemed to agree a lot with what DLJ said of his perception of me... Consider

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 11:55 AM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
The scores themselves are not so useful without the margins. Since it's not a quantized distribution (well, not on a coarse enough scale to matter...). And the margins are not so useful without the variance.

STATISTICS. You need some.

I just went through the OP's test and got Moderate I, moderate N, borderline T, borderline J. The IN is ~50%; and definitely not an outlier, from what I recall of having done similar tests a few times before. The TJ is ~10%, quite borderline indeed, as I'd immediately say (crudely, and without knowing the methodology) that based on the number of questions and their interrelation that the certainty in any result is going to be at least +/-5% and probably more than +/- 10% with any certainty.

INtj, if you want un-nuanced data. On this particular test I could easily see myself scoring INfj, INfp, or INtp with very nearly the same likelihood, just due to my own variations in outlook.

DLJ's dead on about the prior selection bias involved in an environment like this forum.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
25-09-2013, 12:26 PM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
(25-09-2013 11:55 AM)cjlr Wrote:  The scores themselves are not so useful without the margins. Since it's not a quantized distribution (well, not on a coarse enough scale to matter...). And the margins are not so useful without the variance.

STATISTICS. You need some.

Yes, true. And even then, we'd have a more nuanced understanding of a fairly blunt tool. Sixteen combinations of four binary traits, into which we classify 7 billion and growing people? I think there's room for increased subtlety.

These type-indicator tests are fun. They can start conversation and spur meta-cognition, and I enjoy them for that. They don't really diagnose or define anything, though.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 12:34 PM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
(25-09-2013 11:55 AM)cjlr Wrote:  The scores themselves are not so useful without the margins. Since it's not a quantized distribution (well, not on a coarse enough scale to matter...). And the margins are not so useful without the variance.

STATISTICS. You need some.

I just went through the OP's test and got Moderate I, moderate N, borderline T, borderline J. The IN is ~50%; and definitely not an outlier, from what I recall of having done similar tests a few times before. The TJ is ~10%, quite borderline indeed, as I'd immediately say (crudely, and without knowing the methodology) that based on the number of questions and their interrelation that the certainty in any result is going to be at least +/-5% and probably more than +/- 10% with any certainty.

INtj, if you want un-nuanced data. On this particular test I could easily see myself scoring INfj, INfp, or INtp with very nearly the same likelihood, just due to my own variations in outlook.

DLJ's dead on about the prior selection bias involved in an environment like this forum.

Wow, like, man!

You're an Aquarian, right?

Big Grin

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 12:35 PM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
ESTJ

Am I the only extrovert here?

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 12:36 PM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
(25-09-2013 12:35 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  ESTJ

Am I the only extrovert here?

There are one or two others...we're watching you all, we're wathing.Evil_monster

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes KidCharlemagne1962's post
25-09-2013, 12:37 PM
RE: Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test
(25-09-2013 11:55 AM)cjlr Wrote:  The scores themselves are not so useful without the margins. Since it's not a quantized distribution (well, not on a coarse enough scale to matter...). And the margins are not so useful without the variance.

STATISTICS. You need some.

I just went through the OP's test and got Moderate I, moderate N, borderline T, borderline J. The IN is ~50%; and definitely not an outlier, from what I recall of having done similar tests a few times before. The TJ is ~10%, quite borderline indeed, as I'd immediately say (crudely, and without knowing the methodology) that based on the number of questions and their interrelation that the certainty in any result is going to be at least +/-5% and probably more than +/- 10% with any certainty.

INtj, if you want un-nuanced data. On this particular test I could easily see myself scoring INfj, INfp, or INtp with very nearly the same likelihood, just due to my own variations in outlook.

DLJ's dead on about the prior selection bias involved in an environment like this forum.

This is something I went into with a little depth on my old thread if memory serves.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: