New personalty test based on Enneagram

[Drea]

Yes, it would have helped to have seen the full list of type scores.

Why would you see that beneficial?
We were thinking to show only a possible sub-type along with the main type.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

We were thinking to show only a possible sub-type along with the main type.

Are the subtypes indicated by the picture or person received with the enneatype? Two others who scored as fives received a picture of September, while I received a picture of Albert Einstein.

If so, what do the subtypes themselves indicate?

EDIT: Or did [MENTION=23115]BadOctopus[/MENTION] just find a picture of September and paste it. Didn't think about that.

 

[Drea]

Well, it gave me type 2. Am not type 2, am type 9. There were like 50 questions to get that far! Too many questions seemed instinct-based to me, as a social dominant nine it does make it tricky to discern.

Thanks for feedback.

Questionnaire uses complex data-mining algorithm to converge as quick as possible to your dominant type, however when one has a strong sub-type, in your case that could be 9 or vice versa 2, then it takes more questions to end. In drive-response theory that subtype exists, and types 2 and 9 are very close to each other.

Maybe you take a test once again, to check if questionnaire finds the same dominant type again?

 

[BadOctopus]

EDIT: Or did [MENTION=23115]BadOctopus[/MENTION] just find a picture of September and paste it. Didn't think about that.

I did do that, yes.

(Because get it? "The Observer"? Yeah, I'll see myself out.)

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I did do that, yes.

(Because get it? "The Observer"? Yeah, I'll see myself out.)

I legitimately thought that it was included as a differentiation of subtype, which actually seemed like it would be a great example if the creator of the test actually watched Fringe.

Saw you and greybeard both get "the observer" result, and I didn't see that Type 5 was labeled that until after email.

Apologies to [MENTION=24340]Drea[/MENTION].

 

[Drea]

Are the subtypes indicated by the picture or person received with the enneatype? Two others who scored as fives received a picture of September, while I received a picture of Albert Einstein.

If so, what do the subtypes themselves indicate?

EDIT: Or did [MENTION=23115]BadOctopus[/MENTION] just find a picture of September and paste it. Didn't think about that.

A picture of Albert Einstein of course represents type 5.

Drive-Response theory proposes a little bit different connections, on which also the core algorithm is trying to find your dominant type.

We will display the sub-type information as we collect sufficient number of tests, to prove our hypothesis. And of course we are also going to reveal the theory.

 

[/DG/]

Thanks for your feedback. Our goal is to find the dominant type, because between 4 and 6 is a big difference.
Do you see your self more as 4 or more as 6?

4 and 6 definitely are different, but they do share commonalities. Namely, the two are both prone to depressive, anxious, self-doubting etc. attitudes, which I definitely identify with. My main motivations are to belong (6) and figure out who I am and what will make me happy in life (4). Some descriptions tend to put me off of 6 (traditions and authority) and some descriptions tend to push me off of 4 (creativity and pompousness). In general, I feel like 6 might be the better fit of the two, but I am not certain.

 

[Drea]

4 and 6 definitely are different, but they do share commonalities. Namely, the two are both prone to depressive, anxious, self-doubting etc. attitudes, which I definitely identify with. My main motivations are to belong (6) and figure out who I am and what will make me happy in life (4). Some descriptions tend to put me off of 6 (traditions and authority) and some descriptions tend to push me off of 4 (creativity and pompousness). In general, I feel like 6 might be the better fit of the two, but I am not certain.

I agree, 4 and 6 are both anxious and self-doubting. The main difference is that 4 wants to be unique (also dress in an unusual way) 6 is looking for security.
Would you rather stick at secure job or rather change jobs or be an independent even for less money...

 

[/DG/]

I agree, 4 and 6 are both anxious and self-doubting. The main difference is that 4 wants to be unique (also dress in an unusual way) 6 is looking for security.
Would you rather stick at secure job or rather change jobs or be an independent even for less money...

I really do not think it's at all as simple as this question. The desire for security and/or individuality can manifest in ways other than a career. Though again, I'm sticking with 6 for now.

 

[Kullervo]

This is the first online test that has recognised me as a 6, so congratulations! I was particularly impressed with the disclaimer you added. Test takers should only answer "yes" if they have illustrated a behaviour before, but this is something many Enneagram tests neglect to emphasise. What you want is not the same as who you are.

 

[/DG/]

This is the first online test that has recognised me as a 6, so congratulations! I was particularly impressed with the disclaimer you added. Test takes should only answer "yes" if they have illustrated a behaviour before, but this is something many Enneagram tests neglect to emphasise. What you want is not the same as who you are.

Yup!

Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I think this is the main problem with many of the MBTI/JCF tests out there: 1. Asking which you value/appreciate more instead of how you are and 2. being so overly general that no healthy person could expect to reasonably answer it.

It'd be really neat if there were more MBTI tests out there that used the format of this particular Enneagram test.

 

[Drea]

This is the first online test that has recognised me as a 6, so congratulations! I was particularly impressed with the disclaimer you added. Test takers should only answer "yes" if they have illustrated a behaviour before, but this is something many Enneagram tests neglect to emphasise. What you want is not the same as who you are.

Thanks for feedback. This is great news ... as we are still improving our data-mining algorithm.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Thanks for feedback.

Questionnaire uses complex data-mining algorithm to converge as quick as possible to your dominant type, however when one has a strong sub-type, in your case that could be 9 or vice versa 2, then it takes more questions to end.

Maybe you take a test once again, to check if questionnaire finds the same dominant type again?

Well I did it again. Still gave me type 2. Same as last time, the Dalai Lama's fuzzy picture comes up then goes away, then Mother Theresa comes up and goes away. (The first time I did it, the Dalai Lama showed up three times, disappeared 3x then poof suddenly I was Mother Theresa!)

I counted the questions this time, 45 until it gave me an answer, and one that I consider incorrect for myself. I actually found that annoying, the disappearance / reappearance of the pictures, the number of questions, not that a lot of questions is a big deal, but when the picture comes and goes, comes and goes, it's clear to me that the test is changing its mind lol.

In drive-response theory that subtype exists, and types 2 and 9 are very close to each other.

I suppose this is something you are going to explain when you publish your work? I am interested to know more of what you mean by this. I do score high in 2, that's not unusual. However, I am quite certain I'm a 9.

 

[Jaguar]

5.

 

[Drea]

Well I did it again. Still gave me type 2. Same as last time, the Dalai Lama's fuzzy picture comes up then goes away, then Mother Theresa comes up and goes away. (The first time I did it, the Dalai Lama showed up three times, disappeared 3x then poof suddenly I was Mother Theresa!)

I counted the questions this time, 45 until it gave me an answer, and one that I consider incorrect for myself. I actually found that annoying, the disappearance / reappearance of the pictures, the number of questions, not that a lot of questions is a big deal, but when the picture comes and goes, comes and goes, it's clear to me that the test is changing its mind lol.

I suppose this is something you are going to explain when you publish your work? I am interested to know more of what you mean by this. I do score high in 2, that's not unusual. However, I am quite certain I'm a 9.

Yes, the drive response theory is about understanding how a character is formed and the name already gives a hint: drive denotes your main drive, and response is how you react in the world to a new event. And we are going to publish papers and a book.

I understand you are pretty sure about being 9 but what makes me think is that if you came 2 already two times I wonder whether your dominant type would actually be 2 or you just answered in that way, both is possible.

If you are interested we can do a more profound test we use in our research for more detailed recognition, for this I need to send you a special invitation (of course at no charges). This would be also helpful for our research study.

 

[Pionart]

Why would you see that beneficial?
We were thinking to show only a possible sub-type along with the main type.

Your type may not be your highest score. Then, there are theories like wing and tritype. But really, I just think it's nice to get all the information, so you can see what fits you and what really doesn't.

 

[á´…eparted]

You are probably personality type 2.

Well, that's new. The biggest issue I had was the fact that I had to say no unless I completely agreed with the statement. There were a lot where I mostly agreed, or knew what they were asking and applied to me, but the details made me say no.

 

[Bush]

I took it twice. First time it bandied about between 3, 4, 5, and eventually 2. Second time, it went through those same options in the same order; but rather than 2 it settled on 1. It was neat to see the algorithm just drill more and more into questions that honed in on a type.

I read the descriptions and, verily, I do see myself in those descriptions (among others). Yes, I can be critical/self-critical/perfectionistic like a 1; I an be self-sacrificing and appeasing like a 2, etc etc. I'm surprised that it tossed away 3 as an option, but then again I'm not as outgoing as most. I am, however, more surprised at how long it kept 3 around for me, unlike most other tests.


I also appreciate the emphasis on 'how you have traditionally been.' The phrasings of the questions emphasizes that, too. (Yes,' I admit; I like my successes to be seen by others in some capacity.')

I'd also think it helpful to list other results if they're close. If 2 beat out 1 by a 1% margin, it'd probably be nice to include it as a potential. "You are probably personality type 2. You may also consider type 1." Worst case, if the person does in fact resonate with 1 (possibly along with 2), he might read the type 2 description, regard it as 'not him,' and think the rest of the endeavor to be a waste of time. If 2 beat out 1 by a 10% margin, though, there's no need to list 1; as those of us who are out to explore typology and thus would likely be pretty curious aren't really your target audience.

Perhaps you could slip in a question at the end -- "What is your type, if you know it?" -- at least to a select few. Perhaps the link you give out to typology forums could trigger a flag that triggers the question to be asked, where normally that question wouldn't be seen? If you have a few questions that turn out to falsely lead the algorithm to skew one toward a type 6, say, you might identify those. In developing tests, I've found techniques like that useful in determining bad questions -- ones that don't measure accurately what you're trying to measure.

Anyhow, I'll be watching this test. I'm a fan.

 

[Drea]

You are probably personality type 2.

Well, that's new. The biggest issue I had was the fact that I had to say no unless I completely agreed with the statement. There were a lot where I mostly agreed, or knew what they were asking and applied to me, but the details made me say no.

This is very interesting feedback. Thank you.
I would be happy to know more about and possibly improve questions and algorithm. Would you mind doing the test again and leaving the comment below the question, where you would have said Yes but you didn't?

 

[Drea]

I took it twice. First time it bandied about between 3, 4, 5, and eventually 2. Second time, it went through those same options in the same order; but rather than 2 it settled on 1. It was neat to see the algorithm just drill more and more into questions that honed in on a type.

I read the descriptions and, verily, I do see myself in those descriptions (among others). Yes, I can be critical/self-critical/perfectionistic like a 1; I an be self-sacrificing and appeasing like a 2, etc etc. I'm surprised that it tossed away 3 as an option, but then again I'm not as outgoing as most. I am, however, more surprised at how long it kept 3 around for me, unlike most other tests.


I also appreciate the emphasis on 'how you have traditionally been.' The phrasings of the questions emphasizes that, too. (Yes,' I admit; I like my successes to be seen by others in some capacity.')

I'd also think it helpful to list other results if they're close. If 2 beat out 1 by a 1% margin, it'd probably be nice to include it as a potential. "You are probably personality type 2. You may also consider type 1." Worst case, if the person does in fact resonate with 1 (possibly along with 2), he might read the type 2 description, regard it as 'not him,' and think the rest of the endeavor to be a waste of time. If 2 beat out 1 by a 10% margin, though, there's no need to list 1; as those of us who are out to explore typology and thus would likely be pretty curious aren't really your target audience.

Perhaps you could slip in a question at the end -- "What is your type, if you know it?" -- at least to a select few. Perhaps the link you give out to typology forums could trigger a flag that triggers the question to be asked, where normally that question wouldn't be seen? If you have a few questions that turn out to falsely lead the algorithm to skew one toward a type 6, say, you might identify those. In developing tests, I've found techniques like that useful in determining bad questions -- ones that don't measure accurately what you're trying to measure.

Anyhow, I'll be watching this test. I'm a fan.

Thank you for very helpful feedback. We will implement question at the end.
And we have on plan to show also the next most relevant result.