Interrelation of Socionics Indicators, Functional Ensemble of Temperament (FET), and Big Five

1) BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE FET INDICATOR SYSTEM

In the 1980s, at the Institute of Psychology of the USSR Academy of Sciences (IPAN, now IPRAN), V. M. Rusalov developed the “Structure of Temperament Questionnaire” (STQ; 105 items). The questionnaire was based on the concept of independently dividing temperament characteristics of personality into energetic (ergicity) and speed (tempo) components, which in turn manifest independently in three different domains: the domain of physical activity, the domain of social-communicative activity, and the domain of intellectual activity. In total, the questionnaire included six basic scales. Rusalov’s work was continued and further developed by his colleague Irina Trofimova, who added to these scales the Sensation Seeking Scale (originating from Martin Zuckerman’s Sensation Seeking Questionnaire), the Empathy Scale, the Behavioral Plasticity Scale, the Satisfaction Scale, the Impulsivity Scale, and the Anxiety Scale. As a result, there were already 12 scales, and Trofimova composed a short questionnaire for mass testing, STQ-77 (only 6 questions per scale, that is, 72 substantive questions plus 5 control questions of the lie scale, totaling 77 questions). Subsequently, I. Trofimova moved to work in her specialty and to permanent residence in Canada, but she did not abandon the popularization of this methodology among psychologists and neurobiologists, recommending her questionnaire and the temperament partitioning axis system it reflects for free use by all interested researchers. From the above, it is clear that the FET feature system is not empirical but purely theoretical, deriving from ideas about the different manifestation of temperament properties of the same person in the domains of physical work, communication, and intellectual activity, as well as from the division of temperament characteristics into three categories: energetic (endurance to prolonged and intensive loads), speed-related, and plastic (the ability to switch, that is, to rapid and easy both excitation and inhibition in activity).

2) BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE BIG_FIVE FACTOR SYSTEM

The five-factor personality system is an empirical system that arose at the intersection of factor studies of respondents’ answers to psychological questionnaires (with the Cattell questionnaire used as the main base) and factorization of the results of studies of English language words using the semantic differential method. In both cases, five main factors were ultimately identified, which were eventually combined into a single system of five basic and mutually orthogonal (that is, independent of each other) personality factors. To measure these five factors in our work, the validated IPIP NEO-PI-R questionnaire was used. This questionnaire is an open implementation of the proprietary licensed test. Although it uses different questions than the proprietary licensed questionnaire, it almost exactly reproduces their overall semantic content and the structure of subfactors (aspects) included in each of the five personality factors of the test. For scientific research within the five-factor model, the IPIP NEO-PI-R questionnaire is often used precisely because its application does not require agreements with the authors of the original NEO-PI-R methodology. Each factor of the questionnaire consists of 6 aspects, and for measuring each of them the questionnaire includes 4 questions (that is, 24 questions per each of the five factors, and a total of 120 questions in the questionnaire). As an example, we will describe in more detail the 6 measured aspects for the extraversion factor from this questionnaire:
Friendliness
Friendly people genuinely like other people and openly demonstrate positive feelings toward others. They make friends quickly and find it easy to create close and open relationships. People with low friendliness scores are not necessarily cold and hostile, but they are not drawn to others and are considered distant and reserved.
Gregariousness
Gregarious people are energized and derive pleasure in company. They enjoy the excitement of crowds. People with low scores become overwhelmed by feelings in large crowds and therefore actively avoid them. They do not necessarily dislike the company of others, but they require personal space and personal time to a much greater extent than people with high scores on this aspect.
Assertiveness
People with high assertiveness scores like to speak loudly and clearly, take responsibility, and direct the activity of other people. They usually strive for leadership in a group. People with low scores usually do not speak much and allow others to manage the actions of groups.
Activity Level
Active individuals lead busy lives at a fast pace. They move quickly, decisively, and energetically, and engage in many kinds of activities. People with low scores on this scale set a slower, more leisurely, and relaxed pace.
Excitement-Seeking
People with high scores on this scale quickly become bored without a high level of stimulation. They like bright lights, noise, and bustle. They enjoy taking risks and seeking thrills. People with low scores do not tolerate noise and excitement and have a negative attitude toward thrill-seeking.
Cheerfulness
This scale assesses positive mood and feelings, rather than negative emotions (which are assessed by the neuroticism factor). People with high scores on this scale usually experience a wide range of positive feelings, including happiness, enthusiasm, optimism, and joy. People with low scores are not inclined to enter such an energetic and elevated mood.

3) ON THE RESULTS OF COMPARING SOCIONICS, FET, AND IPIP NEO-PI-R INDICATORS ON A MIXED SAMPLE OF 231 RESPONDENTS

Correlations between the magnitude of socionic traits directly measured in respondents using the V. Talanov questionnaire (form 082) and the main FET indicators (using the STQ-77 questionnaire) and the five BIG_FIVE factors using the IPIP NEO-PI-R questionnaire are shown in Table 1. Table 1-b presents correlations with the 12 socionic functions.
Correlations in principle cannot reach one hundred percent (unity), even if the two compared indicators were based on exactly the same, completely identical meaning. The reason is that each factor is measured using a limited number of questions. Therefore, its experimentally measured (empirical) value always consists of two components: a useful (semantic) component and a purely random (noise) component. That is, F = f + e, where f is the useful semantic component of the factor, e is the purely statistically random (noise) component caused by the limited number of questions used to measure the factor, and F is the result of measuring the factor by the questionnaire. The more questions are used to measure a factor or its individual component (aspect), the higher the resulting correlations. This is clearly visible, for example, when comparing correlations of socionic traits with FET indicators (for each of which 6 questionnaire items are used) and with BIG_FIVE factors (for each of which four times as many questions are used in the questionnaire, namely 24). In the former case, the correlations are, as we see, smaller (see the last yellow row in Table 2).
The BIG_FIVE neuroticism factor turns out to be most closely associated with socionic constructivism, dynamics, judiciousness, and process, while being “spread out” across several socionic traits. This is understandable, since the neuroticism factor is essentially composite, reflecting causally unrelated phenomena—both anxiety and depression, as well as weakness of emotional control. Among functions, it is most strongly associated with strengthening of Qe and Fe and weakening of Se.
The BIG_FIVE extraversion factor corresponds very well with socionic extraversion.
The “openness to experience” factor corresponds well with socionic intuition, having smaller positive projections also onto socionic extraversion and irrationality. It is associated with both Ne and Ni, but the association with Ne is much stronger.
The BIG_FIVE “agreeableness” factor very precisely corresponds to the pole of socionic judiciousness, also having a positive projection onto compliance. Among socionic functions, it fairly well reflects the balance between Ne and Si on the one hand and Ni and Se (especially Se) on the other. It is also associated with strengthening of Fi and weakening of Ti.
Finally, the BIG_FIVE “conscientiousness” factor is closest to socionic rationality. The partial “spreading” of each of the Big Five factors across several socionic traits naturally evokes the desire to construct from all 15 Reinin traits a linear combination that would correlate maximally with each of the Big Five factors. This task was implemented by us using a standard Excel neural network, which selects the optimal combination of weight coefficients for socionic traits to achieve the maximum correlation coefficient between their linear combination and each of the Big Five factors (it is clear that for each factor the linear combination of traits will be its own, according to the distribution of its coefficients). The results are reflected in Table 2.
From it, it is evident that the sum of socionic traits with coefficients very accurately reproduces the independently measured value of each of the Big Five factors—the average correlation between the factors and their socionic trait-based model is 0.85, which is very high (taking into account the inevitability of random components that reduce correlation during measurement, it can be stated that all Big Five factors are reproduced on the basis of socionic trait values one hundred percent).