# Thread: Stupid Thinkers...

1. Avis,

Do you get my point that 100 people can't be profiled 200 times?

2. Originally Posted by tinkerbell
Avis,

Do you get my point that 100 people can't be profiled 200 times?
:zzz: ... Yes I did now Thanks for pointing at that mistake.

3. Originally Posted by Avis
:zzz: ... Yes I did now
LOL so you are doing analysis on highly questionable data? What the point?

Also the sample sizes are different so dividing one against another is bogus... (but thats my j-ness coming out - and I don't have a lot of it)...

Sorry will shut up, dont' get what you are trying to express, but I'm pretty sure the data in the research needs more explanation to be able to draw very much from it...

4. Originally Posted by Avis

Just wanted to screw around with the table a bit - maybe I got it wrong.
I basically meant it as a reply to Marm's post
:
Sorry AVIS......I didn't see the bottom bit... Not a ball breaker honest...

Marm - yes it is saying there is a higher proportion of the group that they called gifted as ENFP... and they were the largest group.... HOWEVER the sample is questionnable....

5. Originally Posted by tinkerbell
LOL so you are doing analysis on highly questionable data? What the point?

Also the sample sizes are different so dividing one against another is bogus... (but thats my j-ness coming out - and I don't have a lot of it)...
No; in this case it made sense since I divided percentages against one another (so sample size is already taken into account).

Thus, dividing the Norm percentage against the Gifted percentage is showing deviation between.
For example, INTPs represent only 3.54% of the sample group in total (the way I interpreted the table), but account for 12.03% of the sample group's gifted. If there were an even distribution, one would expect that they would only represent 3.54% of the gifted, thus dividing the first against the latter means that there are 3.40 times more gifted INTPs than one would expect from their distribution.

I don't completely trust the figures either, but my post wasn't about discussing their validity. If - and only if - these numbers were in fact correct, dividing the gifted against the norm would show the deviation.
(I hope this made some kind of sense - if it didn't feel free to point it out.)

Originally Posted by tinkerbell
Sorry AVIS......I didn't see the bottom bit... Not a ball breaker honest...
Sorry didn't see your bottom bit myself this time I just made that table out of curiosity because I wanted to have some figures. Being the lethargic poster I am, there were in fact some days between Marm's post and my reply to it

6. Originally Posted by Avis
No; in this case it made sense since I divided percentages against one another (so sample size is already taken into account).

Thus, dividing the Norm percentage against the Gifted percentage is showing deviation between.
For example, INTPs represent only 3.54% of the sample group in total (the way I interpreted the table), but account for 12.03% of the sample group's gifted. If there were an even distribution, one would expect that they would only represent 3.54% of the gifted, thus dividing the first against the latter means that there are 3.40 times more gifted INTPs than one would expect from their distribution.

I don't say that I trust the figures, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. If - and only if - these numbers were in fact correct, dividing the gifted against the norm would show the deviation.
My point is 3.54% is the % of the c5000, the other proportion isn't from that number.... the gifted sample doens't state if it from the normative sample or seperate... it looks seperate... but then you can't do the divide by because the total sample is different....

Personaly speaking:

Nnorm + Ngift = total sample

Total Diff/total sample = % difference

THIS IS A SAD CONVERSATION Sorry ooober anality on my part... the data is shonky (or should I say not reorted well) all of this is accademic

LOL

7. Originally Posted by tinkerbell
My point is 3.54% is the % of the c5000, the other proportion isn't from that number.... the gifted sample doens't state if it from the normative sample or seperate... it looks seperate... but then you can't do the divide by because the total sample is different....
That's exactly the crucial part that remains vague. At first glance, I thought it was from the same sample, but thanks again for pointing it out.

THIS IS A SAD CONVERSATION Sorry ooober anality on my part... the data is shonky (or should I say not reorted well) all of this is accademic

LOL
Au contraire I've always thought ENTPs love this sort of discussion as much as I do

8. Originally Posted by Avis
That's exactly the crucial part that remains vague. At first glance, I thought it was from the same sample, but thanks again for pointing it out.

Au contraire I've always thought ENTPs love this sort of discussion as much as I do
I do, but that doens't negate it being sad...

Table 3 looks like it is wrong in the report, I'm going through the other table... it may be all from one sample size... but need to punch it into excel first

9. This is the proportion of gifted children from the MBTI category...

I had to tweak a tiny bit to the Gifted sample to get it to add up to 100% - but relatively eavenly done.

so Of All INTPs 64% were gifted...

INTP 64%
INTJ 60%
INFJ 58%
INFP 57%
ENTP 55%
ENFP 51%
ENTJ 44%
ENFJ 40%
ISTJ 34%
ISTP 29%
ESTP 21%
ISFJ 17%
ISFP 17%
ESFP 13%
ESTJ 12%
ESFJ 11%

10. and this is the proportion of gifted kids as a percentage of the whole sample

ENFP 5%
INTP 4%
ENTP 4%
INFP 3%
INTJ 3%
ISTJ 2%
ENTJ 2%
INFJ 2%
ENFJ 2%
ESTJ 1%
ESFJ 1%
ESTP 1%
ISTP 1%
ISFJ 1%
ESFP 1%
ISFP 1%

Bottom line xNxP are bright....

Gifted sample = 4828 = which is the column marked N = gifted
Normative sample was 9320 as per the survey... still don't know what the gifted sample means

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•