Frame line test

[yeghor]

 

[PeaceBaby]

I wonder if your monitor resolution would affect your scores? I did this with a 1920x1080 resolution and a 17" screen. On my 24" monitor, same res, I am thinking the pixels would display larger and thus could potentially increase the accuracy.

The first task came more naturally, representing proportion rather than exact length. Trying to visualize the exact line - that was more challenging to remember, and felt more important.

At any rate, my results were 91 / 80:

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

What's with all the people getting 100 on the first one?

You guys got it down to the exact pixel every time?

 

[yeghor]

What's with all the people getting 100 on the first one?

You guys got it down to the exact pixel every time?

Dunno...

 

[Eilonwy]

What's with all the people getting 100 on the first one?

You guys got it down to the exact pixel every time?

In the trial, they said you did well if you were within a certain amount of pixels, so I'm guessing that there was some leeway--maybe 2 to 3 pixels? And I think that I got 100 on the proportion test because I've been drawing my whole life and have practiced proportion.

 

[prplchknz]

Tell me I'm ISFP again. yeah thought so

 

[ndovjtjcaqidthi]

In the trial, they said you did well if you were within a certain amount of pixels, so I'm guessing that there was some leeway--maybe 2 to 3 pixels? And I think that I got 100 on the proportion test because I've been drawing my whole life and have practiced proportion.

I draw too, lol.

 

[wolfy]

 

[Eilonwy]

I draw too, lol.

Well, then throw my theory out the window! Must be something else going on.

 

[Flâneuse]

"We are trying to understand the way people have been influenced by their cultural background, and whether this affects how people process information."

This reminded me of an interesting theory I read about a while ago:

The Geography of Thought documents Richard Nisbett's groundbreaking international research in cultural psychology and shows that people actually think about and even see the world differently because of differing ecologies, social structures, philosophies, and educational systems that date back to ancient Greece and China. As a result, East Asian thought is drawn to the perceptual field as a whole and to relations among objects and events within that field. By contrast, Westerners focus on salient objects or people, use attributes to assign them to categories, and apply rules of formal logic to understand their behavior.

The Geography of Thought, by Richard Nisbett

-------------

IMO both of the tasks in this test are Sensing tasks; it's just that one is focused on the entire picture & its proportions and one is focused on a single object. I thought that SPs would be better at "big-picture/holistic Sensing" than other types and I scanned this thread looking for major differences in how Se-Ni/Ni-Se users scored compared to Si-Ne/Ne-Si users, but I'm not seeing any obvious ones.

 

[Serendipity]

I did 68/62 - Holistic person.


I feel like I did bad. Much lower score than anyone else.

 

[yeghor]

Frame and Line Test

This will help differentiate people who are unsure about whether they are N or S types, it's fun to do anyway.Take a screenshot of your results and attach them as an image.

Here's my score for example (90 and 41, explains why I am so unobservant...)

View attachment 11859

Sensing types notice detail better whereas iNtutive types tend to be big picture thinkers. This tests looks at the differences in a way which removes self reporting bias inherent in questionnaires.

Does this mean Americans are predominantly sensors and Japanese are intuitives?

 

[Such Irony]

64 on the first task, 52 on the second task.

Based on your performance on this test, you are better at perceiving the background. You have a greater appreciation and discretion for the big picture.


I'm surprised there isn't a greater difference between these scores. I felt far less confident on the second task than on the first. At least on the first one, I had some context to go by. When I think of long lines and short lines, the words long and short are kind of meaningless in themselves unless there is something to compare it to. I think relativistically and proportionally.

 

[infinite]

Frame and Line Test

This will help differentiate people who are unsure about whether they are N or S types, it's fun to do anyway.Take a screenshot of your results and attach them as an image.

Here's my score for example (90 and 41, explains why I am so unobservant...)

Sensing types notice detail better whereas iNtutive types tend to be big picture thinkers. This tests looks at the differences in a way which removes self reporting bias inherent in questionnaires.

Nah. I scored 94/60. Has nothing to do with N/S.

I'm honestly curious, why do you think the second test requires noticing more sensory details than the first one? I didn't see a difference in the tests with regard to that. There was some difference but not this, IMO. Not in my case anyway. I will try to elaborate on that below. I do agree that the first task is about a more holistic processing visually but I don't think that this big picture based visual orientation has much to do with how one thinks and sees the world cognitively on a higher level. The two things are too different so even if there is some sort of relation, it will need more in-depth explaining than this simplistic assumption of relating the two together this strongly. It's okay if you see some relation but the assumption that this determines N/S is too far-flung IMO.

So, seeing my results, I did feel the second one was harder somehow... It wouldn't let me pass the trial for several times because I wasn't being accurate enough so it kept telling me I need to understand the task more lol like it depended on understanding on the task... nope. I'm not sure why it felt harder to do than the first one. First one was just so naturally working. I guess I could've scored even higher than 94 if I had bothered to pay more close attention and/or practice a bit... I pay only superficial attention to many things, these tasks included heh. I can pay closer attention if I want to, of course.

Anyway the second task was still not something requiring attention to details like you seem to think. It's more like... in the first task I could just take all things in as one, naturally feel the spatial organization in some holistic way and work off of that, in the second case I just had to reproduce the exact same line. I know that I can do that just fine as long as the original line is not in memory, I'm pretty good at copying and reproducing things very precisely as long as I have the thing to be copied in front of me and not just in memory. When working from memory, I remember the spatial organization itself most saliently. I can zone in on details in my memories of physical objects but they aren't salient by default. I don't know if that alone helped me be so precise in the first task or if there was some other factor as well. But N/S isn't a factor here

Oh btw I'm not Japanese but not American either.

I wonder if your monitor resolution would affect your scores? I did this with a 1920x1080 resolution and a 17" screen. On my 24" monitor, same res, I am thinking the pixels would display larger and thus could potentially increase the accuracy.

The first task came more naturally, representing proportion rather than exact length. Trying to visualize the exact line - that was more challenging to remember, and felt more important.

Heh my monitor is also 1920x1080. I don't know if that's got anything to do with task precision. As for the first task representing proportion, you still had to be precise there. What do you mean by feeling it was "more important" visualizing the exact line? It was certainly interesting but important in what sense?

I'm curious as to the amount of factors that can affect results from the test other than the iNtuition and Sensing dynamic. For instance, short-term memory must be paramount to the test, and thus people with longer short-term memories will thus score higher on both sections. People with photographic memory, as well, would be expected to score 95-100 for both sections I would imagine, not to mention other basic factors such as general fatigue, where the test taker's concentration is focused, general eyesight, the screen of the computer administering the test, etc.

Hmm... I don't know, are there people with longer short-term memories? I do get your point about the people with crazy photographic memory

I wouldn't worry about the other factors you've listed as long as they are controlled for in some way. E.g. do all of the tests on the same computer and do it on a large population.

This reminded me of an interesting theory I read about a while ago:

The Geography of Thought documents Richard Nisbett's groundbreaking international research in cultural psychology and shows that people actually think about and even see the world differently because of differing ecologies, social structures, philosophies, and educational systems that date back to ancient Greece and China. As a result, East Asian thought is drawn to the perceptual field as a whole and to relations among objects and events within that field. By contrast, Westerners focus on salient objects or people, use attributes to assign them to categories, and apply rules of formal logic to understand their behavior.

-------------

IMO both of the tasks in this test are Sensing tasks; it's just that one is focused on the entire picture & its proportions and one is focused on a single object. I thought that SPs would be better at "big-picture/holistic Sensing" than other types and I scanned this thread looking for major differences in how Se-Ni/Ni-Se users scored compared to Si-Ne/Ne-Si users, but I'm not seeing any obvious ones.

I guess I am East Asian based on that then... Your idea is interesting, I'm SP and yeah I'm really bad at focusing on just one object unless it really captures my attention for whatever reason and even then I just see it holistically. I have to force myself to focus on separate details for analysis or whatever if that's actually needed. I can however draw very well, even as a small kid and always enjoyed it. I don't try to categorize verbally in the way it's described for Americans. Using attributes to assign categories to stuff without real depth is just so boring. I don't do formal logic, just instinctive logic. I did well with formal logic in math classes but in real life, I don't care about that much. Fleshing out the formal steps for my logic is always kind of boring.

Well so whatever sense anyone can make out of all this... I think it could just be left brain / right brain differences. Of course it's not as simple as calling it just that. I'm about 50 / 50 in all those left/right brain tests that I've found online (~55% right, ~45% left), I guess it's just my visual processing that's more right brained, and I can be left brained in other things maybe. It's not really MBTI-related IMO.

 

[Hive]

82/76, holistic.

Did you who scored 100 first estimate the size of the line (in fractions, percentages or whatever), count the pixels all the way down and then figure out how many pixels you should draw? Or are you cyborgs?

 

[Eilonwy]

Did all of you who scored 100 first estimate the size of the line (in fractions, percentages or whatever), count the pixels all the way down and then figure out how many pixels you should draw? Or are you cyborgs?

 

[cascadeco]

Eh. Don't think it has much to do with mbti


86 on the first test, 50 on the second

Based on your performance on this test, you are better at perceiving the background. You have a greater appreciation and discretion for the big picture.

 

[Cellmold]

75 & 69, equally competent or holistic....yay me....

Yeah mine was similar:

Honestly I think if you get 100% on either of them then it might suggest a skewed perspective. But that's just an idea and not necessarily anything to do with N or S.

 

[chubber]

 

[prplchknz]

re took:



I scored higher on both tasks
first time
1st task: 48
2nd task: 32