How self-monitoring are you?

[alcea rosea]

Your score is 57, on a scale of 0 (low self-monitor) to 100 (high self-monitor). You are neither a high nor low self-monitor.

 

[Athenian200]

I got 49/100. It's says I'm closer to the middle.

 

[Totenkindly]

For anyone who has read any of the books or knows a lot about the subect, do you have any idea what percentage of the population are high self-monitors?

Haight should have the work by Snyder I described earlier -- he was actually the one who indirectly recommended it to me.

:horor: 86!!!
*shakes fist at Economica for posting this evil test*

Oh, girl, you're such a Tool of The Man!

 

[Totenkindly]

I think my issue with Snyder is that he did not seem to distinguish between people who have high monitoring because they're naturally chameleons, whose "true self" is to mirror others in order to affirm and support them, versus high monitors who suffer anxiety because they do not have an intuitive grasp of how to navigate through the natural conflict of just "being themselves."

(Or perhaps the problem is that they perceive conflict at ALL when they are "themselves" openly... and thus have anxiety where low monitors have none. Perhaps the friction of differences should not be perceived ideally as a threatening situation.)

Anyway, what I am getting at is that potentially some of the extroverted types naturally begin and end with the outer world -- that is where their identity is -- and the way they mold themselves to it is not actually a rejection of their inner self.

Introverts I would think would be more likely to high-monitor as a costume to protect potential damage done to a weak or unconfident self-image.

But perhaps he wasn't interested in making this distinction, rather just exploring the monitoring behavior on its own merits, rather than being worried over motivation.

 

[miss fortune]

Oh, girl, you're such a Tool of The Man!

you've got to use The Man's approach sometimes to fight The Man!


*sigh* this goes back to my longstanding battle of hating The Man, yet wanting to be The Man

Probably if there were more ESTPs here there would be more high self monitorers

 

[Falcarius]

Your score is 40, on a scale of 0 (low self-monitor) to 100 (high self-monitor). You are neither a high nor low self-monitor.

 

[nottaprettygal]

Haight should have the work by Snyder I described earlier -- he was actually the one who indirectly recommended it to me.

Unforunately his response was, "The percentage is low." I figured that much without reading the damn book.

I think my issue with Snyder is that he did not seem to distinguish between people who have high monitoring because they're naturally chameleons, whose "true self" is to mirror others in order to affirm and support them, versus high monitors who suffer anxiety because they do not have an intuitive grasp of how to navigate through the natural conflict of just "being themselves."

I agree. The online test in the thread definitely had questions geared towards extroverted self-monitors. I'm not concerned with pleasing people or the external world in general. Rather, I want to keep people out of my internal world, so I self-monitor. I wouldn't say that it's because I don't know how to be myself, it's just that I don't think other people deserve to see that side of me.

I think motivation is important, and the fact that the book doesn't make the distinction between extroverted and introverted self-monitors means that I won't be reading it.

 

[Totenkindly]

Unforunately his response was, "The percentage is low." I figured that much without reading the damn book.

lol... he sounds about as helpful to you as he is to me. (And I thought you were the one with an "in.")

I have the book here, I'll see if it says anything.

The online test in the thread definitely had questions geared towards extroverted self-monitors. I'm not concerned with pleasing people or the external world in general. Rather, I want to keep people out of my internal world, so I self-monitor. I wouldn't say that it's because I don't know how to be myself, it's just that I don't think other people deserve to see that side of me.

That's a good point. There's definitely a "privacy/boundary" issue and controlling access so only invested people get access to an individual.

I think there is also a "freedom" issue that you hint at: Low monitors have to risk others trying to interfere in their lives, high monitors gain a certain measure of freedom around others by complying on the surface while meanwhile keeping their cards hidden. So monitoring acts as a social control mechanism meant to keep people out of one's business.

EDIT: Skimmed through the whole book, still haven't found any percentages of population. Just all the medians and testing data.

 

[Totenkindly]

Just realized. That this was a response to the running convo. you were having with Economica, not a response to substitutes post.

True? If not, why did his post make you want to lie down?

Combo of all of them. I was getting dizzy with all the abstractions firing in every direction, and it was my Low Blood Sugar time of day. And sub just sort of blew everything open, right when I thought I almost had a grip on it.

(Then again, maybe you just thought I wanted to lie down, but I was only going to lie down because I was could tell it was what everyone else wanted and inside I was still standing up.)

 

[EsoteriEccentri]

40

 

[Lateralus]

I scored a 57. Some of the questions didn't make sense to me, either.

Impromtu speeches? That seems like it's more of a learned skill than a personality trait.

 

[Kiddo]

58

 

[LucrativeSid]

Anyway, what I am getting at is that potentially some of the extroverted types naturally begin and end with the outer world -- that is where their identity is -- and the way they mold themselves to it is not actually a rejection of their inner self.

Introverts I would think would be more likely to high-monitor as a costume to protect potential damage done to a weak or unconfident self-image.

I agree.

 

[Vortex]

Yeah, I hate to throw a spanner in the works, but although I adapt like a mofo and pretty much chameleon into whatever a situation or crowd most wants/requires, I DO NOT view this as not being myself and I do believe that this behaviour IS exactly in line with my inner self. Because my inner self believes that it's important and useful to do this, and moreover, I'm still always being the same person, still saying the same things, having the same attitudes and opinions - all I'm doing is 'translating' them into a different presentation, one that's more likely to reach the current audience. I don't change what I think or even the way I think, feel or believe. I just change the way I manifest it; I change the way I present it.

I completely agree with this. In my particular case, though, I speculate that my excessive use of this tactic contributes to the 'ENFP-fickleness' others perceive in me and might explain why I don't see it myself. That's probably not the meaning Sub intended, though, and I'll stop here since this train of thought is potentially derailing.

Anyway, I got 68.

 

[PuddleRiver]

24/100

 

[white]

72..

agree with Jennifer there though - I'd rather know the motivations - I doubt low monitors cannot adapt/choose not to adapt. Perhaps they could just be sticking to their own because it is the best for that situation..

 

[FallsPioneer]

Yeah, I hate to throw a spanner in the works, but although I adapt like a mofo and pretty much chameleon into whatever a situation or crowd most wants/requires, I DO NOT view this as not being myself and I do believe that this behaviour IS exactly in line with my inner self. Because my inner self believes that it's important and useful to do this, and moreover, I'm still always being the same person, still saying the same things, having the same attitudes and opinions - all I'm doing is 'translating' them into a different presentation, one that's more likely to reach the current audience. I don't change what I think or even the way I think, feel or believe. I just change the way I manifest it; I change the way I present it.

I do this sometimes.

40/100.

 

[wildcat]

20

 

[TenebrousReflection]

Your score is 29, on a scale of 0 (low self-monitor) to 100 (high self-monitor). You are a MODERATELY LOW self-monitor.

I got the feel from a lot of the questions of having a basis either in authenticity and/or adaptability. The authenticity questions make sense in that context, but I don't see what adaptability/improvizational skills have to do with a lack of authenticity. I don't go out of my way to make people think I'm something I'm not, but I do choose to only show certain sides of myself to certain people and the questions don't distinguish on that basis, but in the sense that I'm consciously aware of what I'm lettign show through a lot fo the time, I think that would be high self monitoring.

Self assessment...
Work environment - very high self monitoring
With family - high to moderate self monitoring
With friends - moderate self monitoring
With close and/or trusted friends - little to no conscious self monitoring (although I suspect some subconscious behaviours of that nature are ingrained in me still).

 

[Atomic Fiend]

59