Eric B
ⒺⓉⒷ
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,621
- MBTI Type
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 548
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
Cognitive Styles is a new model, being developed by Linda Berens and Chris Montoya. The four Styles correspond to the pairs of type groups denoted by the last-three-letters, which share in common the two function tandems formed by the preferred functions and their "mirrors" (dominant with inferior, and auxiliary with tertiary).
(I have made the comparison of them to the Socionics quadras since the groups use the same corresponding function-attitudes, though this new model is not based on Socionics, and the same atttitudes in that system sometimes mean something slighly different than in Western type):
NTP-SFJ: Enhancingâ„¢ Style (Ti/Fe, Si/Ne; Alpha)
NFJ-STP: Customizingâ„¢ Style (Ti/Fe, Ni/Se; Beta)
NTJ-SFP: Orchestratingâ„¢ Style (Te/Fi, Se/Ni; Gamma)
NFP-STJ: Authenticatingâ„¢ Style (Te/Fi, Ne/Si; Delta)
Along with this, are group names for the individual tandems as well:
Inquiring Awareness: Si/Ne (SJ/NP)
Realizing Awareness: Ni/Se (NJ/SP)
Ordering Assessments: Te/Fi (TJ/FP)
Aligning Assessments: Ti/Fe (TP/FJ)
Here's how they relate:
The Enhancing style has preferences for Inquiring and Aligning
The Customizing Style has preferences for Realizing and Aligning
The Orchestrating Style has preferences for Realizing and Ordering
The Authenticating Style has preferences for Inquiring and Ordering
The Inquiring Style is held in common by Enhancing and Authenticating
The Realizing Style is held in common by Customizing and Orchestrating
The Ordering Style is held in common by Orchestrating and Authenticating
The Aligning Style is held in common by Enhancing and Customizing
I had been saying for years that these groups should be named. It would help people in their type search (and also those helping them), as the groups are currently addressed by such clunky terms as "Ne-Si user".
Like for a perfect example; I realized I fell into that group right away, but if we had these names back then, I could simply have said "I know I prefer Inquiring and think I prefer Aligning". (Or overall: "I think I relate the most to the Enhancing style").
So when I help someone with looking for the best-fit preferences, for the many supposed "NiTi" types in discussions, who often weigh between INTP and INFJ, because of high Ti and Ni in cognitive process tests; I can now say that they have an obvious "Realizing Awareness", since Ni and Se are high, and Ne is low. So INTP is very unlikely, though the person looks like it because of the Ti + "abstract" (N) focus. I can then suggest another Realizing type, such as ISTP. (In addition to INFJ). ISTP will be Ti dominant, followed by Se.
If they think their Ni is high, we can point out that it may actually be tertiary, which is said to often "inflate" itself, and appear preferred.
When discussing relationship type matches between an NFP and NTP, we can say "you both prefer 'Inquiring', so you'll 'perceive things the same way'".
In a personality clash, instead of "the real clash is Ne/i-Si/e; not Te/i-Fi/eâ€; I can say “the real clash is between an Inquiring and Realizing Awareness preference rather than an Ordering and Aligning Assessmentâ€. More to type, but easier to say or even think than all those "process" codes!
I should also point out, that I was informed that these terms should not be turned into noun forms, like "...-er" that we ARE, as I was inclined to do to further shorthand it. They're processes we PREFER, and really, all of the typology terms, such as the functions/dichotomies, even the types themselves, etc. are supposed to be used like that. We all do this, but when you really think about it, becoming ingrained with that helps lend to confusion when you "use" a function or whatever counter to what you supposedly "are".
Also, this model is really still in development, and the tandem names not yet published (tentative, shared with permission). They hope to publish sometime within the next year. But for now, they give us something that can help simplify type discussion. You can keep up to date on this at:
Linda Berens Institute
www.lindaberens.com
(I have made the comparison of them to the Socionics quadras since the groups use the same corresponding function-attitudes, though this new model is not based on Socionics, and the same atttitudes in that system sometimes mean something slighly different than in Western type):
NTP-SFJ: Enhancingâ„¢ Style (Ti/Fe, Si/Ne; Alpha)
NFJ-STP: Customizingâ„¢ Style (Ti/Fe, Ni/Se; Beta)
NTJ-SFP: Orchestratingâ„¢ Style (Te/Fi, Se/Ni; Gamma)
NFP-STJ: Authenticatingâ„¢ Style (Te/Fi, Ne/Si; Delta)
Along with this, are group names for the individual tandems as well:
Inquiring Awareness: Si/Ne (SJ/NP)
Realizing Awareness: Ni/Se (NJ/SP)
Ordering Assessments: Te/Fi (TJ/FP)
Aligning Assessments: Ti/Fe (TP/FJ)
Here's how they relate:
The Enhancing style has preferences for Inquiring and Aligning
The Customizing Style has preferences for Realizing and Aligning
The Orchestrating Style has preferences for Realizing and Ordering
The Authenticating Style has preferences for Inquiring and Ordering
The Inquiring Style is held in common by Enhancing and Authenticating
The Realizing Style is held in common by Customizing and Orchestrating
The Ordering Style is held in common by Orchestrating and Authenticating
The Aligning Style is held in common by Enhancing and Customizing
I had been saying for years that these groups should be named. It would help people in their type search (and also those helping them), as the groups are currently addressed by such clunky terms as "Ne-Si user".
Like for a perfect example; I realized I fell into that group right away, but if we had these names back then, I could simply have said "I know I prefer Inquiring and think I prefer Aligning". (Or overall: "I think I relate the most to the Enhancing style").
So when I help someone with looking for the best-fit preferences, for the many supposed "NiTi" types in discussions, who often weigh between INTP and INFJ, because of high Ti and Ni in cognitive process tests; I can now say that they have an obvious "Realizing Awareness", since Ni and Se are high, and Ne is low. So INTP is very unlikely, though the person looks like it because of the Ti + "abstract" (N) focus. I can then suggest another Realizing type, such as ISTP. (In addition to INFJ). ISTP will be Ti dominant, followed by Se.
If they think their Ni is high, we can point out that it may actually be tertiary, which is said to often "inflate" itself, and appear preferred.
When discussing relationship type matches between an NFP and NTP, we can say "you both prefer 'Inquiring', so you'll 'perceive things the same way'".
In a personality clash, instead of "the real clash is Ne/i-Si/e; not Te/i-Fi/eâ€; I can say “the real clash is between an Inquiring and Realizing Awareness preference rather than an Ordering and Aligning Assessmentâ€. More to type, but easier to say or even think than all those "process" codes!
I should also point out, that I was informed that these terms should not be turned into noun forms, like "...-er" that we ARE, as I was inclined to do to further shorthand it. They're processes we PREFER, and really, all of the typology terms, such as the functions/dichotomies, even the types themselves, etc. are supposed to be used like that. We all do this, but when you really think about it, becoming ingrained with that helps lend to confusion when you "use" a function or whatever counter to what you supposedly "are".
Also, this model is really still in development, and the tandem names not yet published (tentative, shared with permission). They hope to publish sometime within the next year. But for now, they give us something that can help simplify type discussion. You can keep up to date on this at:
Linda Berens Institute
www.lindaberens.com