Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer
I think they do cater to iNtuition: They are mostly about recognizing and applying data patterns on the fly, or (for example) quickly defining the connections between word pairs and applying that pattern elsewhere as well.
iNtuitives probably outperform Sensors when neither has any experience with the pattern in question. Sensors who have actually experienced the patterns are probably quick to recognize the same ones again, however.
A slight tangent, but what sort of tests exactly do we think would cater more to Sensors? What sorts of questions should be asked? I assume one area would involve recall/application of detail and/or experiential questions, or complicated computational questions. Aren't those more like the Achievement tests (ACTs?) that are given along with the SATs?
|
Wouldn't generally speaking sensors be better able at recognizing sensory patterns? Following this, wouldn't sensors outperform intuitives in the visual subset of IQ tests, by this token compensating the differential advantage of intuitives in f.e. number series recognition(*)?
(*)I agree completely with Santtu on the matter: experience completely falsifies any attempt at measuring the *correct* speed of computation of number series, provided that by correct we mean: the speed at which they would be evaluated without prior experience.
Quote:
|
I'm not trying to gradient them out, just point out that Ns tend to overthink and "see too much" into getting to a goal, where the S, even with limitations that the N dislikes, can often do better.
|
Why would this be? Sorry for questioning your thought process, but I do not see a clear reason.