What's your personality Type?

[ƒeral]

The first time I took the test I got the ENTJ - Commander one which didn't entirely seem accurate. So I re-read the questions and took a bit more time to actually click on what I agreed or disagreed with.

My Assertiveness never really changed on either one of those two though lol.

I got ENTJ on myer-briggs when I took it back in highschool. INTJ when I took myer-briggs in undergrad. INTJ yesterday on NERIS. I'm tempted to pick your brains just to see how similar/different our personality is, but I'll resist!

 

[Pontiff]

I got ENTJ on myer-briggs when I took it back in highschool. INTJ when I took myer-briggs in undergrad. INTJ yesterday on NERIS. I'm tempted to pick your brains just to see how similar/different our personality is, but I'll resist!

If you have questions, I wouldn't mind answering them, or if there is a long list then a PM is also fine lol.

 

[Gina in Orange]

You got the writer one!! I've been waiting for someone to pop up and say they got this one. Honestly I expected more of this one given the setting we are in.

Every place I've seen the result always talks about it being a very rare one. I definitely can get really drawn into fictional stories and characters like the description. Also the part about holding a lot of internal conversations really rings true. That's probably why I have a much easier time writing dialog than action .

 

[sky.]

This was really interesting!

results

 

[Laa]

I'm pretty much completely mistaken; I saw all of the IN... stuff and assumed it's Myers Briggs. Apparently NERIS is a variant of the Big Five, so yeah I'll just see myself out!

(also sorry about the paywall, I pulled a test up at random. Should have realized!)

I don't think NERIS(R) is a variant on Big Five? It's basically just myers briggs, but with added neuroticism from Big Five, because along the way 16 personalities realized that they were literally missing a whole chunk of the human experience. So in a way, the most scientific part NERIS(R) is the 'assertiveness' part of it, the rest of it still being good 'ol myers briggs as far as I'm aware.

 

[obieblu]

I'm not surprised the IN's are numerous here.

I'm an INTJ. My characters almost never are.

 

[prettysoft]

ENFJ-A

 

[Passion]

I got INFJ-T, Advocate. Not the word I'd jump to describe myself, but the details are pretty sound.

It is kinda funny since I always get INFP-T, but it reflects organizational changes I've made, so the P and J flipped.

Creative and passionate are some pros of INFJ, and they are known to avoid the ordinary. Sounds about right.

 

[ƒeral]

This was really interesting!

results

View attachment 18152

Oh shit the advocates are on the rise! Looks like nobody's gonna beat out the mediators, but go advocates haha.

I don't think NERIS(R) is a variant on Big Five? It's basically just myers briggs, but with added neuroticism from Big Five, because along the way 16 personalities realized that they were literally missing a whole chunk of the human experience. So in a way, the most scientific part NERIS(R) is the 'assertiveness' part of it, the rest of it still being good 'ol myers briggs as far as I'm aware.

Big Five, assuming you are talking about the Truity variant, is actually considered "based on Myers and Briggs' types", according to their own website. Similarly, NERIS is "based primarily on the theories of Myers and Briggs, however it uses new terminology for the four preferences and adds a fifth letter to the type code, signifying an individual's response to stress. Because the framework for the NERIS Type Explorer has been somewhat reinvented, it is not clear to what extent the type results are consistent with those from the MBTI® assessment or other tests based on the theory." Having taken MBTI, including the really lengthy one several times in my life, I can say with some degree of confident that the question frameworks are slightly different. Is it reliable? I don't know. Most of the focus and thus most of the scholarship has been focused on Myer-Briggs specifically.

All of that said though, I would hope this is is the sort of thing people look at with a critical eye regardless of whether it seems accurate or not. At the end of the day, personality tests are an extremely useful tool to guide your _own_ introspection. Kind of forces you to confront some statements and rationalize those to yourself. That process is extremely interesting to me, and I dare say a useful exercise in self-reflection in general. I don't link these kind of things as an end-all, be-all, I certainly don't mean to claim scientific accuracy haha. It's just a interesting & useful tool. x3

I'm not surprised the IN's are numerous here.

I'm an INTJ. My characters almost never are.

Why do you think that is? Curious about your opinion on that.

I got INFJ-T, Advocate. Not the word I'd jump to describe myself, but the details are pretty sound.

It is kinda funny since I always get INFP-T, but it reflects organizational changes I've made, so the P and J flipped.

Creative and passionate are some pros of INFJ, and they are known to avoid the ordinary. Sounds about right.

Another advocate for the tally. I find it extremely interesting that INFJ is considered the third rarest on female personalities - not 1:1, since that was based on Myer-Briggs, and this is not exactly Myer-Briggs, and it's popping up everywhere. In fact, all the 'rarer' ones as popping up everyone. Something about rare personality types and roleplaying, perhaps? xD

 

[Laa]

Big Five, assuming you are talking about the Truity variant, is actually considered "based on Myers and Briggs' types", according to their own website. Similarly, NERIS is "based primarily on the theories of Myers and Briggs, however it uses new terminology for the four preferences and adds a fifth letter to the type code, signifying an individual's response to stress. Because the framework for the NERIS Type Explorer has been somewhat reinvented, it is not clear to what extent the type results are consistent with those from the MBTI® assessment or other tests based on the theory." Having taken MBTI, including the really lengthy one several times in my life, I can say with some degree of confident that the question frameworks are slightly different. Is it reliable? I don't know. Most of the focus and thus most of the scholarship has been focused on Myer-Briggs specifically.

All of that said though, I would hope this is is the sort of thing people look at with a critical eye regardless of whether it seems accurate or not. At the end of the day, personality tests are an extremely useful tool to guide your _own_ introspection. Kind of forces you to confront some statements and rationalize those to yourself. That process is extremely interesting to me, and I dare say a useful exercise in self-reflection in general. I don't link these kind of things as an end-all, be-all, I certainly don't mean to claim scientific accuracy haha. It's just a interesting & useful tool. x3

I don't mean to be rude, but could you source that Truity claim? When I look here, it says "Based on a Big Five assessment developed by psychological researchers, this inventory will tell you everything you need to know about what makes you, you." and anywhere else I look it's about the same. Though of course, Truity isn't the scientific community. The measurements are refined and maintained by psychologists, not Truity.

I get what you're saying, but I'd like to counterpoint and say that there's potentially even more you could learn about yourself from the big five. Like, there's some real eye opening revelations I've gotten over the years by reading about the traits and what they really indicate.

Did you know that extroversion isn't actually strictly related to sociability? It's believed to be a sort of 'potential for positive emotion'. Extroverts, hence, get easier 'hits' of positive emotions, which can drive social behavior; conversation makes for easy dopamine hits, but they don't have to be social to get them. You could be extroverted and never talk to a person, by for example engaging in a lot of worldly activities (surfing, sky-diving, etc). Of course, if there is a person there is an easy hit of dopamine, so... An untalkative extrovert would be unusual, still.
For an introvert, the potential for positive emotion is significantly lower, so to experience anything ecstatic, they have to do something they care about quite a bit. This motivates long-term goals.
Extroversion indicates a desire for a breadth of activities, whereas introversion indicates a desire for depth in their activities.

A lot of the time, I see introversion/extroversion confused with anxiety due to a poor understanding of the traits. So, a lot of introverts will be played in movies as stuttering, anxious, not sure how to make friends, etc. An introvert can, however, be the most charming and confident person in the room. The real trick is, they don't care about socializing as much. Not caring is vastly different from being anxious. It's "Yeah, I could make friends if I wanted to, but eh. The drinks taste nice though." versus "I don't even dare go close to people!"
(I'm, of course, both introverted AND anxious, so... I kind of fit the introvert stereotype, lmao)

It also leads us to the existence of anxious extroverts, who may think they're introverted because they're too scared to make contact with people, locked inside their own heads, parts of them screaming to get out of their house, the other part screaming for them to stay inside.

Soooo... Yeah. I like the big five a lot!

 

[ƒeral]

I don't mean to be rude, but could you source that Truity claim? When I look here, it says "Based on a Big Five assessment developed by psychological researchers, this inventory will tell you everything you need to know about what makes you, you." and anywhere else I look it's about the same. Though of course, Truity isn't the scientific community. The measurements are refined and maintained by psychologists, not Truity.

I get what you're saying, but I'd like to counterpoint and say that there's potentially even more you could learn about yourself from the big five. Like, there's some real eye opening revelations I've gotten over the years by reading about the traits and what they really indicate.

Did you know that extroversion isn't actually strictly related to sociability? It's believed to be a sort of 'potential for positive emotion'. Extroverts, hence, get easier 'hits' of positive emotions, which can drive social behavior; conversation makes for easy dopamine hits, but they don't have to be social to get them. You could be extroverted and never talk to a person, by for example engaging in a lot of worldly activities (surfing, sky-diving, etc). Of course, if there is a person there is an easy hit of dopamine, so... An untalkative extrovert would be unusual, still.
For an introvert, the potential for positive emotion is significantly lower, so to experience anything ecstatic, they have to do something they care about quite a bit. This motivates long-term goals.
Extroversion indicates a desire for a breadth of activities, whereas introversion indicates a desire for depth in their activities.

A lot of the time, I see introversion/extroversion confused with anxiety due to a poor understanding of the traits. So, a lot of introverts will be played in movies as stuttering, anxious, not sure how to make friends, etc. An introvert can, however, be the most charming and confident person in the room. The real trick is, they don't care about socializing as much. Not caring is vastly different from being anxious. It's "Yeah, I could make friends if I wanted to, but eh. The drinks taste nice though." versus "I don't even dare go close to people!"
(I'm, of course, both introverted AND anxious, so... I kind of fit the introvert stereotype, lmao)

It also leads us to the existence of anxious extroverts, who may think they're introverted because they're too scared to make contact with people, locked inside their own heads, parts of them screaming to get out of their house, the other part screaming for them to stay inside.

Soooo... Yeah. I like the big five a lot!

You are right - I misspoke. Truity offers multiple tests on its website and I was looking at the wrong test haha.

I think what everyone learn and don't learn from is different. I certainly see the merit in all the personality tests, Big Five inclusive.

Similarly, I have read the same thing you have an introversion/extroversion - fascinating topic! Particularly as those two terms seem to get defined differently across different scholarship. xD Do you also find the human psyche super interesting in how complex it is?

That said though, and this is where the 'introspection/self-reflection' lens comes in. Accordingly to the free Big Five test in Truity, at least the portion that's not paywalled, I scored a 75 out of 100 on Extraversion. I'm gonna assume that means I'm inclined toward Extraversion at least as how the BigFive define that term.

Insofar as it signifies desire for a breadth of activity - I tend to agree. Insofar as it is comparing breadth vs depth, then I heavily disagree. I like breadth and all, but I'm all about depth. When I'm interested in something, I tend to fixate and really dig. I believe that's correlated with introversion.

Similarly, if we are talking about this in term of dopamine, then yeah, I tend to stick to things I already know I like. Willing to try new things! But the vast majority of my time is not spent on 'new' things nor do I tend to derive great pleasure from it.

I'm not saying I disagree with it entirely - there's certainly kernels of truth in just about any personality assessment, but my point is different things might speak to different people differently. NERIS and Myer-Briggs, for example, truly portray how I behave at work down to a T, and that's the perdicative section those two were particularly invested in.

 

[Laa]

You are right - I misspoke. Truity offers multiple tests on its website and I was looking at the wrong test haha.

I think what everyone learn and don't learn from is different. I certainly see the merit in all the personality tests, Big Five inclusive.

Similarly, I have read the same thing you have an introversion/extroversion - fascinating topic! Particularly as those two terms seem to get defined differently across different scholarship. xD Do you also find the human psyche super interesting in how complex it is?

That said though, and this is where the 'introspection/self-reflection' lens comes in. Accordingly to the free Big Five test in Truity, at least the portion that's not paywalled, I scored a 75 out of 100 on Extraversion. I'm gonna assume that means I'm inclined toward Extraversion at least as how the BigFive define that term.

Insofar as it signifies desire for a breadth of activity - I tend to agree. Insofar as it is comparing breadth vs depth, then I heavily disagree. I like breadth and all, but I'm all about depth. When I'm interested in something, I tend to fixate and really dig. I believe that's correlated with introversion.

Similarly, if we are talking about this in term of dopamine, then yeah, I tend to stick to things I already know I like. Willing to try new things! But the vast majority of my time is not spent on 'new' things nor do I tend to derive great pleasure from it.

I'm not saying I disagree with it entirely - there's certainly kernels of truth in just about any personality assessment, but my point is different things might speak to different people differently. NERIS and Myer-Briggs, for example, truly portray how I behave at work down to a T, and that's the perdicative section those two were particularly invested in.

I used to be super obsessed with psychology, especially as I was learning about myself and people around me, but I kind of felt at some point that I'd learned "what I needed" and now I only visit the topic once in a while. It's still fun when I do, but yeah. I was super into it because I've had mental health issues (autism/anxiety), and researching every emotion and how to react to it is always illuminating! And when I'm scared of the big bad world, I'd read up about narcissism and sociopathy and such. My interest in psychology has been mostly rooted in a strange form of need and practicality.

Well, when you go in depth with something, what kind of activities is it you go in depth with? If it's predominantly creative or academic things, it could be high openness to experience. But I won't force this down your throat anymore than I already have.

In general, I think I've made the points that I want to make, and hence, I shall leave you all to it. Introvert style! *poof*

 

[ƒeral]

I used to be super obsessed with psychology, especially as I was learning about myself and people around me, but I kind of felt at some point that I'd learned "what I needed" and now I only visit the topic once in a while. It's still fun when I do, but yeah. I was super into it because I've had mental health issues (autism/anxiety), and researching every emotion and how to react to it is always illuminating! And when I'm scared of the big bad world, I'd read up about narcissism and sociopathy and such. My interest in psychology has been mostly rooted in a strange form of need and practicality.

Well, when you go in depth with something, what kind of activities is it you go in depth with? If it's predominantly creative or academic things, it could be high openness to experience. But I won't force this down your throat anymore than I already have.

In general, I think I've made the points that I want to make, and hence, I shall leave you all to it. Introvert style! *poof*

No no, please don't feel like you are boring me, haha. I'm not deadset on my ideas and actually quite prefer to challenge them. So you know, I'd love a ramble of the results of your 'research' xD But hey, not gonna force ya either. If you wanna talk psychology, lemme know and I'll hop into your DMs, don't wanna turn a public thread into a back-and-forth.

 

[Laa]

No no, please don't feel like you are boring me, haha. I'm not deadset on my ideas and actually quite prefer to challenge them. So you know, I'd love a ramble of the results of your 'research' xD But hey, not gonna force ya either. If you wanna talk psychology, lemme know and I'll hop into your DMs, don't wanna turn a public thread into a back-and-forth.

No no, I've really covered what I wanted to cover. I mean, I'm not against PM's, but I really have said everything I had to say.

 

[Giantmutantcrab]

I'm apparently a protagonist.

Can I reset the game and start over?

I mean... Or at least work from the last auto save?

 

[obieblu]

Why do you think that is? Curious about your opinion on that.

Instead of writing a full essay, I'll use an oversimplification of "imaginative introverts". In the same way fraternities are going to skew ES.

I think most of my old TT group were INTPs. Y'know the ones who have long debates about which stats are best to min/max.