FRIHOST • FORUMS • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • DIRECTORY
You are invited to Log in or Register a Frihost Account!

Personality test

   Frihost Forum Index -> Science -> General Science
 


Bannik
Sure I know we all hate these, but the jung personality test in my opinion is a perfect way for you to know more about yourself, I did 3 versions of it and always got INTP and its 90% dead on.
try it and tell us your personality, its also good to tell you what careers suit you and a lot of other things, once you get your score google it to find out more.
PS there are lots of questions 50-60

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
http://www.similarminds.com/jung.html
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/mb/default.asp

a really short one for those who cant take the long one
http://bloginality.love-productions.com/

and yes if you are thinking why is this is the science topic, well I really couldn't figure where to put this but since these was created by Jung (psychologist) then it fits into science, also if the test accurate with everyone else as it was with me then it could be a perfect personality measurment.
Indi
Bannik wrote:
and yes if you are thinking why is this is the science topic, well I really couldn't figure where to put this but since these was created by Jung (psychologist) then it fits into science, also if the test accurate with everyone else as it was with me then it could be a perfect personality measurment.

Oh, it's science. It's perfectly valid within this forum.

However, i disagree with the idea that any perfect personality measurement is possible. In fact, i would even throw out the question of whether personality exists or not.

Take the I/E dimension of that test for example. Are you introverted or extroverted? Well, most of us are both... in different situations. You may be introverted at a party of random people, but quite extroverted at a gathering of people who share some interest of yours, even if the parties are the same size and they're all strangers. For example, if you walk into a regular party, you may be shy. But if you really love, say, Star Trek, and you walked into a Star Trek convention, you may be motivated to dress up in pretty ridiculous outfits and belt out Klingon drinking songs with complete strangers.
EanofAthenasPrime
Damn straight. Cool
Bannik
Indi wrote:
Bannik wrote:
and yes if you are thinking why is this is the science topic, well I really couldn't figure where to put this but since these was created by Jung (psychologist) then it fits into science, also if the test accurate with everyone else as it was with me then it could be a perfect personality measurment.

Oh, it's science. It's perfectly valid within this forum.

However, i disagree with the idea that any perfect personality measurement is possible. In fact, i would even throw out the question of whether personality exists or not.

Take the I/E dimension of that test for example. Are you introverted or extroverted? Well, most of us are both... in different situations. You may be introverted at a party of random people, but quite extroverted at a gathering of people who share some interest of yours, even if the parties are the same size and they're all strangers. For example, if you walk into a regular party, you may be shy. But if you really love, say, Star Trek, and you walked into a Star Trek convention, you may be motivated to dress up in pretty ridiculous outfits and belt out Klingon drinking songs with complete strangers.


no argument there but if the test is more right then wrong then it can still be considered a valid form of personality test
Indi
Bannik wrote:
no argument there but if the test is more right then wrong then it can still be considered a valid form of personality test

Not necessarily! ^_-

You ever heard the story of the scientist who took a fly and put it on the table. He yelled "FLY AWAY!!!" at it, and it took off and flew away. Then he took the same fly and pulled the wings off of it. He put it on the table again and yelled "FLY AWAY!!!" at it again. The fly simply sat there on the table. "i conclude," concluded the scientist, "That when one pulls the wings off of a fly, it becomes deaf!"

The moral of the story is that you have to be very careful interpreting the results of an experiment. Are you really testing what you think you're testing?

Take a standard personality test, for example. Suppose i take that test and the results show that i am "sensation-seeking". What can you conclude from that? That i really am sensation-seeking? Or that when i take personality tests, i answer the sensation-seeking questions positively more than the introspective questions?

See, there are two problems here.

The first is that the test is artificial, and has no real relationship with reality. It is asking me to report how i feel about things on paper, or how i think i might respond to hypothetical situations. Neither of those has anything to do with how i might feel in reality, or how i might respond to a real situation.

And that's just the problem with taking the test. The second problem has to do with interpreting the test. Once you've taken the test, is it accurate? You may say yes... but... look up the Forer effect. ^_-

Any time you try to do any kind of research that involves human effects, you have to be really, really careful. Humans are the worst cause of experimental error in all of history, and if you're not really careful, they will bugger up your results in a blink.
Josso
Damn, Jung was very accurate. Most of these I get sent by chain mail or whatever are rubbish but this I am fairly impressed by.

Quote:
Extroverted (E) 50% Introverted (I) 50%
Intuitive (N) 72.97% Sensing (S) 27.03%
Thinking (T) 58.14% Feeling (F) 41.86%
Perceiving (P) 59.09% Judging (J) 40.91%


Quote:
ENTP - "Inventor". Enthusiastic interest in everything and always sensitive to possibilities. Non-conformist and innovative. 3.2% of the total population.
Tyger
I like this test, and like it was said before, these tests can never say someone's exact personality. But it is true that they can give you a vauge idea of what yours is. The only drawback is the fact that you must be 100% honest. Some people intentionally lie, but mostly people rationalize their answers to fit what kind of person they would like to be, rather than what kind of person they really are.

Oh, and on all the tests I was ISTJ. My advice to getting your tests accurate is to not think about it. Put the first thing that goes into your mind, that decreses your rationalization.
Gagnar The Unruly
I came back INTJ, INTP, INFJ, and ISTP. I guess the "I" was the only source of agreement, I guess because I'm quiet at parties. In general, I came out pretty neutral in all the other categories. Tests like these arrive with preconceived notions of how people are going to break down into categories, and every question is designed to put someone in a box. Often, my answer to a particular question is circumstance-dependent, or I would have to make an answer that compromized. In the only test that allowed neutral answers I averaged almost completely neutral. Also, many of the questions are based on what I value in myself or in other people. Often, what I value are areas in which I see the greatest defficiencies, so I may be selecting the opposite of what I see in myself, depending on the way the question is phrased. Lastly, I read that descriptions of the categories on one of the test and almost all of them fit some aspect of my personality. I think there's a lot of cold-reading going on in the personality descriptions. I question the universality or usefullness of this test, unless perhaps it's administered and analyzed by a professional psychologist.
Soltair
Measuring personalities is an impossible task, as trying to gauge intelligence or such. You would need a professionnal group watching you without you knowing over a long period to determinate exactly what kind of person you are. However, these tests have the advantage to present a very good source of distraction Wink

I tried the Political Performance Indicator on Humanmetrics and scored 90%. I hope that's just a bit accurate, because this is a domain that interests me to a high point. But as many people said, I might have answered "knowing" what a politician had to be. (Rational 48%, Authoritarian 14%, Adventurous 5%, Inspired 33%) But it fits in some way, at least for the adventurous/rational part, as I always tend to scan situations trying to take everything in account before having any opinion, which is also some kind of scientific approach.

And these are the results from similarminds.com

Introverted (I) 54.29% Extroverted (E) 45.71%
Intuitive (N) 55.88% Sensing (S) 44.12%
Thinking (T) 71.05% Feeling (F) 28.95%
Perceiving (P) 54.84% Judging (J) 45.16%

INTP - "Architect". Greatest precision in thought and language. Can readily discern contradictions and inconsistencies. The world exists primarily to be understood. 3.3% of total population.

Might also be true, though I notice that I am quite balanced everywhere, except with feelings. That's something quite accurate for this point.
Josso
Got a few friends to take this test - ones I know well - and I must say that it is near enough 100% accurate Smile
jwellsy
That is some spooky stuff.
It was very accurate for me.
Humanmetrics and Similarminds both had me as an INTJ.
Eggheadcafe came up with ISTJ.
Bloginality said INTP.

The first two were probably the most accurate for me.


I would like to find an on-line Emotional Intelligence test like that.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Science -> General Science

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2007 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.