How Often and in Which Direction Do People Make Mistakes When Declaring Their Sociotype?

FULL STATISTICS OF TALANOV’S QUESTIONNAIRES (2010-2021).

According to the ratio of the frequencies of self-typed and actually diagnosed types in the sample (see Table 1), the most “fashionable” sociotypes in self-typing are, as expected, the logical types LSE, LIE, LII, SLI, ILI and – unexpectedly – the ethical type IEI (why, we do not know). The least popular (that is, displaying a high resistance barrier to assigning oneself the corresponding type in the course of self-typing) are the sociotypes ESE, SEE, EII, SLE. Why – we cannot say with certainty either, although, as a hypothesis, one may suppose that ESE is avoided because of the entirely undeserved reputation of a “blonde” assigned to this type in socionics myths, SEE because of the reputation of a crook, EII because of the reputation of a person unable to stand up for themselves, and SLE because of the reputation of a brute. Although all of this is, for the most part, merely myths.

The nonuniform distribution of self-typing errors – see Tables 2 and 3 - is partly (to a lesser extent) related to the fashion for particular psychotypes, but to a much greater extent it is objective in nature and is caused by natural statistical skews (that is, by the nonuniform distribution of types and, consequently, of additional accents) in the sample of internet respondents.

Thus, among diagnosed SEIs, a substantial proportion declare themselves to be IEI, somewhat less often – SLI. The reason is that IEI and SLI are considerably more frequent types in the internet sample than SEI. Therefore, among those who formally fall into the SEI sector and are therefore diagnosed as SEI, there are many who are actually and in fact almost on the boundary with IEI or SLI – and for this reason they often declare themselves to be representatives of precisely these types, because the subjective probability of choosing between IEI and SEI, and between SLI and SEI, among these “borderline” respondents is in fact close to one half.

The situation is similar for LSE, which is also a rare type in the sample – those actually diagnosed as LSE often declare themselves to be representatives of the more frequent types LSI and SLE, because they may have entirely objective additional accents toward these more frequent types.

SLIs are rarer in the sample than ILIs, and therefore many SLIs quite often have strong additional accents toward ILI. For this reason, these respondents often declare themselves to be ILI.

EIE is often mistakenly declared as IEI – because IEI is objectively a very frequent type in the sample (on a par with EIE and ILI), and therefore strong additional accents toward IEI occur frequently among the EIEs in the sample. By contrast, self-typing errors toward LIE and ESE among our diagnosed EIEs are extremely rare – because LIE and ESE are rare types in the sample, and therefore additional accents toward these types among EIEs from our sample are also very rare (and the ESE type is, moreover, also not very popular among self-typers)

V.T.

Table 1. Distribution of psychotypes (in percent) in the sample of 29909 respondents who declared their type by self-typing

Table 2. Percentage distribution of each declared type by diagnosed types

How often and in which direction do people make mistakes when declaring their sociotype?

(statistics of highly reliable questionnaire-based diagnosis of the actual sociotypes of 29909 respondents who declared their type by self-typing)

Table 3. Percentage distribution of each diagnosed type by declared types

How often and in which direction do people make mistakes when declaring their sociotype?

(statistics of highly reliable questionnaire-based diagnosis of the actual sociotypes of 29909 respondents who declared their type by self-typing)