How do you determine someone's type?

[Gabe]

How do you? Do you look for cognitive processes/ archetypes? Work on the dichotomies (E/I, F/T, S/N, J/P)? Compare type guess to temperment/interaction style models? (I never quite understood the interaction style one)

[INTJMom]

Originally Posted by Gabe

How do you? Do you look for cognitive processes/ archetypes? Work on the dichotomies (E/I, F/T, S/N, J/P)? Compare type guess to temperament/interaction style models? (I never quite understood the interaction style one)

My knowledge is in the "dichotomies" as you call them.

I have to remind myself why I want to know someone's type. My goal is to understand them well enough to associate with them without having conflict. I want to get along with people and since I am naturally inept at it, I use my understanding of MBTI to help me, so I won't experience so much failure.

So for me, just understanding if they prefer E or I, if they use S or N, if they're T or F, and whether they prefer J or P, is enough information for me to work or associate with someone generally successfully. I just observe their behavior and carefully listen to the things they say.

If they want to know they're type, then I use some online resources.

Interestingly, Jung said, "Every individual is an exception to the rule." Accordingly, I don't put people in boxes they can't get out of, but a general understanding helps me.

[Magic Poriferan]

I tend to look for contrast with the dichotomies as well.
But there are also weird little tests you can put people through to figure it out.
I read about this hilarious study where they had two rooms: one full of N's and the other full of S's. The two groups where both told to draw their "spiritual journey". The end results was that the two rooms drew radically different kinds of pictures.
The S's often with an identifiable, pictogram style to them, and the N's with almost completely abstract art. The two rooms did not relate to eachother's art.

Every now and then, there are bright, flashing signs about someone's type that send you in the right direction.

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan

But there are also weird little tests you can put people through to figure it out. I read about this hilarious study where they had two rooms: one full of N's and the other full of S's. The two groups where both told to draw their "spiritual journey". The end results was that the two rooms drew radically different kinds of pictures. The S's often with an identifiable, pictogram style to them, and the N's with almost completely abstract art. The two rooms did not relate to eachother's art.

That is not a bad start. In general, though, the SPs and NTs will muddy the water. (i.e., SJs and NFs would clump near the extremes). N + T means abstract BUT impersonally reasoned (structure), while SPs want detail and identifiability in general and yet are so free-flowing, they go where the picture leads them. So there is some crossover.

if all else fails, get out the Magic MBTI 8-Ball, shake, and read the little message in the window.

[Splittet]

I look at dichotomies and cognitive processes, but more and more cognitive processes, really.

[quietgirl]

I tend to look at cognitive processes & interaction styles. I mainly want to know the interaction style so I can better communicate & attempt to relate with others.

I can usually pick up on one dominating cognitive process and start to decipher that way.

I'm not the best at determining the exact type though. People tend to surprise me.

[FDG]

I use visual identification, and socionics relationships. Over time, I've become pretty good at the first and can easily distinguish the first three letters of a person. For the last, I look at their friends and decide. If an ESTx is friends with INFps and ISTjs, then it's likely that he's an ESTp over an ESTj. The same applies to ENTx, ISFx, etc

It's also rather easy to distinguish between interaction styles of ExTx, ExFx, IxFx and IxTx (except for IxTx women that can superficially look like IxFx, especially INTps)

[DaRick]

Cognitive process + dichotomies. I used to look exclusively at dichotomies, but that approach wasn't really successful.

[snegledmaca]

I don't use dichotomies, cognitive processes, visual identification, relationships, interaction styles or anything other objective, non personalized method like that. I use a personal system of judgment. This only sometimes relates to a jungian type, most people by this system don't have a determined type. And I prefer it over typology.

[wildcat]

Originally Posted by Gabe

How do you? Do you look for cognitive processes/ archetypes? Work on the dichotomies (E/I, F/T, S/N, J/P)? Compare type guess to temperment/interaction style models? (I never quite understood the interaction style one)

A multiple meaning or origin?
Neither.