So I was almost forgetting to post results and correlations!
I am going to show the results of Keys2cognition test (9 'participants'). TypoC test failed because due to low number of 'participants' (5) and unluckyness, because had a lot of bias inside of it (I evaluated if there was any bias by comparing relations between dichotomy dimensions. None of the dichotomy dimensions are suppose to relate with themselves, for example, introversion is not suppose to correlate with feeling). Keys2cognition had only one random bias: The more intuitive the person, the more extroverted the person is. This is not from MBTI but rather a "random" pattern from people who come to this thread and participated. An odd trend indeed. It is important to state what Im showing doesnt work as a proof, because it has a low number of 'participants' that are not truly random from overall population. However, there´s no study using my model of open function stacks, it will likely not be anytime soon, and I never read any studies relating cognitive functions and MBTI dichotomy dimensions. So, I will likely use this to support my posts and the MBTI view I am building despite there is only 9 members.
In average, by dichotomy, people who came here was more Introverted, Intuitive, Feeling, Perceveing, so Ill use these as reference: When the table has "I" its measuring introversion, the highest value the more introversion, same for N, F and P. So, here is the first table, that just did correlations inside the dichotomy dimensions to find the bias:
The standars for correlations are:
1: Completely correlated
0,8-1: Strong correlated
0,6-0,8: Correlated
0,4-0,6: Weakly correlated (my standards, for general standard its already non-significant)
0,0-0,4: Non significant correlated
Also, the correlations have "issues" that its worth to mention. First, correlation doesnt imply causation, sometimes its just coincidence. Second, in a system with a lot of variables changing the correlations tends to disappear even when there is a causation.
Following by, the next table is the most important here. I2, N2, F2 and P2 are Intuition, Intuitive, Feeling and Perception dimensions measured by the relations presented on the theory topic (post above) (Ne+Ni-Se-Si for intuition and so on). This table correlates them with the MBTI dimensions, so, I2, N2, F2 and P2 comes directs from cognitive functions while I,N,F,P are dichotomy only.
Explaining the result: The N-S, F-T and P-J sucessufully correlated with the formula properly. So, the higher Ne+Ni-Se-Si, the highest value for intuition preference. Same for F-T and P-J. The inverse correlation between Introversion on dichotomy and Intuition from cognitive functions come from the bias showed on the first table. However, I-E fails to correlate. I2, which is the sum of all introverted cognitive functions minus the sum of all extroverted cognitive functions didnt correlate with anything at all, except a very weak correlation between dichotomy feeling and cognitive functions introversion. I am not surprised. The original concept of I-E as draw by Jung is highly different between the MBTI concepts we have the same today. They got so distant between each other that they dont correlate anymore. In a very basic matter, there are at least 3 definitions of extroversion/introversion over MBTI unofficial internet community, and in short they are these:
1) How sociable and outgoing the people is.
2) If gather "energy" from the "inside" or the "outside".
3) Preferency towards the object - if attention is towards the object (external) then its extroversion, if attention is towards self (inside) then its introversion.
Just a quick example, if you are watching the sunset you are doing an introvert activity in 1 and extroverted activity in 2 and 3. So, its possible to be introverted in one and extroverted in another definition, making the person being a quiet extroverted or sociable introvert.
Jung original is related with 3 (3 is a simplification of Jung original concept). Number 3 is E-I concepts in cognitive functions. However, I-E dichotomy is done towards 1 and 2 mostly, they correspond to MBTI I-E concepts in a simple description.
So, although this not exactly classify as a study, it indicates that the idea of open cognitive stacks seems to do just fine in N-S, T-F and P-J dimensions, while fails for I-E dimension for the reason I explained. Its important to state that the both test must be good for this to work since they hold the all concepts for this kind of "measurement".
There is still more. The next table shows the correlation between each cognitive function to each dichotomy dimensions.
Just remember, in theory, the conversion cognitive function to dichotomy is:
Se=E+S+P
Si=I+S+J
Ne=E+N+P
Ni=I+N+J
Te=E+T+J
Ti=I+T+P
Fe=E+F+J
Fi=I+F+P
First thing to notice: Since table 1 showed us the bias relation between Intuition and extroversion, this repeated in the cognitive functions Se,Si,Ne and Ni relations to Introversion measure. However, Te,Ti,Fe and Fi are immune to this bias. None of them relates to their Es or Is on dichotomy levels. So, we can say that increase of Te doesnt imply in any increase or decrease in dichotomy Extroversion and the same for all other cognitive functions as well.
Fe, Fi, Te and Ti all correlated or highly correlated with F/T. Si and Ni highly correlated to S/N dimension, while Ne and Se, curiously, weakly correlated with the S/N dimensions, but all with proper signs (Ne correlated to intuition while Se correlated negatively with intuition). Its important to note that Ne didnt seem to correlate or strongly correlate with any dichotomy dimension at all.
When we take on perceveing, however, nothing properly correlates. However, the perceveing formula, which combines all 8 functions, did highly correlated as shown on the second table. Since there are 8 cognitive functions involved on this dimension, the correlations tends to go weaker due to high numbers of variables. All of them, except Te, had the proper sign. It is important to notice that Fi and Te correlations are near zero (with Te being nearly zero positively correlated with Perceveing).
There are four interesting "noises" on the cognitive functions. Te shouldnt have any relation at all with S/N, but it has. Fe and Fi has correlations with near 0,4 with intuition. There is a slightly correlation with Fi and Fe with intuition - this could be the test flaw or a flaw on the definitions. I have never read anything relating that issue before. Te has a correlation with sensing, an weak one, however, there is an interesting (and big text) by [MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] that might explain where this correlation flaw. It seems that Te has S components, to be more specific I suspect that it has Si components on it. Reckful post link:
Exclusive "Te" characteristics - Page 2
Fe and Fi correlation could be just a consequence with Te correlation with sensing. Te negatively strong correlates with Fe and Fi (I measure that on a work in progress), so, if S correlates with Te, Te correlates negatively with Fe and Fi, then Fe and Fi negatively correlates with sensing (or correlates with intuition). The last one is a close to weak correlation with Se to Thinking, which I never seen any explanation for this, could be test flaw, a bias or flaw on Se definitions. Notice that these definitions I speak of are Keys2cognition Dario Nardi defintions.
And finally, i think its good to mark everyone who participated to this post.
[MENTION=35566]Luminous[/MENTION] [MENTION=29978]Methylene[/MENTION] [MENTION=37565]Sung Jin-Woo[/MENTION] [MENTION=34313]RadicalDoubt[/MENTION] [MENTION=6689]Polaris[/MENTION] [MENTION=30122]Amethyst Archon[/MENTION] [MENTION=37553]LittleCat[/MENTION] [MENTION=35079]Tina&Jane[/MENTION] [MENTION=36258]Quick[/MENTION] [MENTION=39780]noname3788[/MENTION] [MENTION=7]Totenkindly[/MENTION]
Anyway looking forward to your model and I may share some more thoughts about how it could work.
