EQSQ Theory and test

[Sahara]

EQSQ Theory

My results:

Respondent - Average EQ - Average SQ - Brain Type
Males - 39.0 - 61.2 - Systemizing
Females - 48.0 - 51.7 - Empathizing
Your Score - 50 - 63 - Systemizing

Before sitting the systemizing part of the test my result was Extreme empathizer, which I thought really reflected me well, yet after sitting the second part of the test it has put me as systemizer, which is weird.

What are your results, and could someone help explain my results in more "laymans" terms for me.

[Athenian200]

Here are your EQ SQ results:
EQ : 38
SQ : 37

For some reason, it says I'm a systemizer, but my scores are near equal. Why is that?

[Sahara]

I'm not sure athenian, that does seem odd as your EQ is over the SQ by 1 point.

(this is why I needed a bit of help understanding the test, I am sure i should be an empathizer, it sounds more......me)

[Jennifer]

I came out as Systemizing for EQ and SQ.

EQ:
Male average = 39.0
My score = 42
Female average = 48.0
Result = Systemizing

SQ:
My score = 69
Male Average = 61.2
Female average = 51.7
Result = Systemizing

I don't really think it's accurate to associate gender with systemizing abilities. MBTI ISxJ females, for example, are extremely systematic in nature, among other types. Many of the questions that were asked would have answered strongly positive for systemizing ability.

Originally Posted by sahara

My results:
Respondent - Average EQ - Average SQ - Brain Type
Males - 39.0 - 61.2 - Systemizing
Females - 48.0 - 51.7 - Empathizing
Your Score - 50 - 63 - Systemizing

...could someone help explain my results in more "laymans" terms for me.

Well, it seems that when testing for empathizing, you have a feminine ability to empathize (a little higher than average), but for systemizing you have a little higher than the male average.

I'm not totally sure how to read it. We were only given for options (Agree strongly, agree slightly, disagree slightly, disagree strongly), so different people might answer a question differently even in reality their amount of preference was actually similar. (i.e., the test might not be specific/focused enough.) So basing your brain on comparison with the gender's average seems already to have a flaw.

I also do not see these as mutually exclusive. Perhaps empathizing = personal and systematic = impersonal here, but I think the skills can overlap some. As I said about, I consider ISFJs (the females in particular) to be good at the personal interactions AND good at approaching things in a systematic way, and the same runs true for other types. I saw some questions that were tailor-made for ISFJ's ("I keep a running shopping list") versus ones that were not ("I am interested and can easily read train schedules.") You can be systematic or have the skill developed, but not have interest in some of these areas.

I would just say you are good at both, a bit better than the average person, regardless of gender.

If you would like to be more specific in terms of your MBTI type, I would say that INFPs are wonderful at the empathizing part... and if they have particular goals or have developed their inferior (Te), they can be great systemizers as well. I think CreativeChaos would be one example of an INFP with strong systemizing skills, and one of my friends IRL (a male) as shows very strong empathy as well as very strong systemizing when dealing with things other than people.

These are speculations on my part. You know, I bet PTG could really tear this apart for you, with his remarkably systematic brain -- I'd love to see what he has to say .

[htb]

EQ -- 32

SQ -- 111

Can I play with madness?

[Sahara]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

I also do not see these as mutually exclusive. Perhaps empathizing = personal and systematic = impersonal here, but I think the skills can overlap some. As I said about, I consider ISFJs (the females in particular) to be good at the personal interactions AND good at approaching things in a systematic way, and the same runs true for other types. I saw some questions that were tailor-made for ISFJ's ("I keep a running shopping list") versus ones that were not ("I am interested and can easily read train schedules.") You can be systematic or have the skill developed, but not have interest in some of these areas.

I was thinking the same thing about those questions, yet I agreed strongly as I do do running shopping lists, weekly menus based on a two monthly rotation chart, household budgeting etc. I have no choice in those things, only way to run a house with kids i think. However i could see them fitting the ISFJ mould as it was my ISFJ friend that helped me develop those skills.

I would just say you are good at both, a bit better than the average person, regardless of gender.

If you would like to be more specific in terms of your MBTI type, I would say that INFPs are wonderful at the empathizing part... and if they have particular goals or have developed their inferior (Te), they can be great systemizers as well. I think CreativeChaos would be one example of an INFP with strong systemizing skills, and one of my friends IRL (a male) as shows very strong empathy as well as very strong systemizing when dealing with things other than people.

These are speculations on my part. You know, I bet PTG could really tear this apart for you, with his remarkably systematic brain -- I'd love to see what he has to say .

I don't think my Te is developed at all, thats why i was suprised to get, what i assumed was some type of thinking result. Thanks for clearing up that misconception for me, I think I get it a bit better now.

Before sitting the test i was already thinking that the gender biased wasn't right, as there are women on here, and at INTP central, and in my real life that are very strong in their Thinking capabilities. (working on the misconception that Thinking = systemizing )

[Athenian200]

I just remembered that I saw something like this before. Do you know of Simon-Baron Cohen? He had a similar theory and test to this one.

[niffer]

EQ --> 55
SQ --> 56

Same thing happened to me as athenian...apparently I'm systemizing. Pah.

And btw isn't it Sasha-Baron Cohen. The Borat guy? edit: nevermind..

[Dark Razor]

EQ:
Males average : 39
My score: 16

SQ:
Males average: 61.2
My Score : 105

Extreme Systemizing.

[heart]

Score: EQ 40 SQ 99 Systemizing

Well, knock me over....