Clusters of Questimity identified by us in the set of questionnaire statements examined.

(The numbers preceding the statements are the linear correlation coefficients of the respective questionnaire items with the profile of the cluster as a whole).

Cluster 1. Egoism - can demand what is theirs, puts their own interests first.

0.96 I am a very proud and self-confident person - some say that I am supposedly even arrogant.

0.94 In communicating with other people, I often lack self-restraint, patience, and a willingness to compromise and forgive.

0.93 I can say NO - both to others and to myself. My capacity for volitional inhibition is very well developed.

-0.96 I find it difficult to refuse someone’s request and difficult to make a subordinate do their work properly.

Se and both questim functions are on the positive side here, while both declatim functions and both judicious functions are on the negative side. ESI and SEE are at the top, EII and SEI at the bottom. Among questims, LII and IEI score distinctly below average; among declatims, SLE and LSI score above average. This property is very well suited to differential diagnosis within the pairs ESI-EII, ESI-SEI, and SEE-SEI.

This cluster ranks first in terms of the absolute contribution of Questimity; however, the strong Se component mixed with it prevents this cluster from being described as a core cluster for this dichotomy.

Cluster 2. Thinks and makes decisions independently, questions authorities, defends their own truth.

0.87 When I talk to people, my voice often conveys perplexity or protest, objection.

0.86 I become irritated easily while explaining things if my explanations are not understood immediately and correctly.

0.84 In any undertaking, it is very important to me to retain a sense of my independence.

0.83 I find it difficult to do something simply on orders, because I always consider the ultimate purpose of the assignment.

-0.90 I readily allow other people to set tasks for me.

-0.80 Public tranquillity is more important than the truth.

-0.76 When carrying out an assignment, I do not ask unnecessary questions or experience doubts in the course of the work.

What is reflected here is primarily the opposition between Qi and Di. All white questims and EIE are on the positive side; SEI, LSI, EII, ILI, and IEI are on the negative side.

This cluster has the highest correlation with the average profile of all properties linked to Questimity, which suggests that it may play a central role in defining the meaning of this dichotomy. However, the relatively low sigma of the profile of all the items comprising it and the insufficient variance along the Qe-De axis still preclude a definitive conclusion.

Cluster 3. Likes to work alone, using their own method, avoids switching between tasks.

0.92 The slightest noise interferes with my reading and work.

0.84 Many phenomena or people around me shock me and seem unpleasant and therefore intolerable.

-0.94 I can perform several tasks simultaneously without difficulty: for example, watch television or check email while talking on the telephone.

-0.93 I can combine many activities at once.

The properties of this cluster reflect the opposition of strong questim functions and Ti to weak De. Avoidance of multitasking is an important factor in differential diagnosis within the pairs LII-LIE, EIE-LIE, and EIE-IEE.

Cluster 4. Physiological disgust sensitivity, intolerance of any discomfort (associated with the instinct for self-preservation).

0.91 A radio or television playing in the next room often prevents me from falling asleep.

0.86 I am quite squeamish and keep away from sick people.

0.79 I tolerate cold poorly.

-0.90 The feeling of physical disgust is practically unfamiliar to me.

-0.79 I can endure all kinds of unpleasant or painful sensations longer and better than others - perhaps I am simply more indifferent to them.

-0.75 I am very tolerant of other people’s negative emotions.

The opposition of strong Qe (and, to a lesser extent, Qi and Fe) to weak Di, De, and Se. The clear and indisputable leader on this property is EIE. The property can be used to distinguish types within the pairs SLI-LSI, LSE-SLE, and ILI-LII (the decisive logical types are less squeamish in each of these pairs).

Cluster 5. Moral disgust sensitivity to injustice, lies, and violence.

0.93 Any injustice around me upsets me.

-0.89 So-called “hazing” is a normal phenomenon in the army; it should be controlled, but not eliminated.

-0.87 I can listen to someone else’s lies perfectly calmly, even for a long time, without reacting internally in any way.

Questim functions and Fi versus declatim functions and Ni. Most rational types, except LIE and LSI, are at the top; all logical types of the central quadras are at the bottom. The correlation of the type profile with the type profile of the preceding cluster, at +0.68, confirms the hypothesis that feelings of physiological and moral disgust are closely related in nature.

Cluster 6. Inflexibility in behaviour, inability to adapt to circumstances.

0.96 It is true that, compared with other people, I find it very difficult to change my behaviour to adapt to unfair superiors.

0.83 I lack flexibility in my behaviour.

-0.90 I can convincingly feign agreement outwardly for a time while inwardly feeling categorical protest.

Questim functions and Ti versus declatim functions, Fi, and Ni. All peripheral logical types and SLE are on the positive side of this property; all descending intuitive types and IEI are on the negative side.

Cluster 7. Other people irritate them merely by their presence.

0.90 Sharing a room with someone has always been unbearable for me.

0.87 Other people hinder me more often than they help me.

0.81 I become irritated if, while travelling on public transport, the person next to me looks at the newspaper or book I am reading.

-0.94 Which is more characteristic of you? 1) Rejection, fastidiousness, selectivity, detachment, rejection. 5) Attraction, conformity, a tendency to join others and bring others together, sometimes - indiscriminateness in relationships.

-0.85 I am generous in hosting meals and enjoy organising leisure activities and entertainment for friends.

Questim functions and Ni versus declatim functions, Fe, and Ne. ILI are on the positive side here (despite being declatims, they are irritable owing to the contribution of other dichotomies), as are ESI, LII, and SLI; all peripheral ethical types are on the negative side. This property distinguishes the types in the ESE-ESI pair well and reliably.

Cluster 8. Egoism - thinks of themselves first and foremost.

0.84 I think of myself first, then of others.

-0.93 I am usually prepared to sacrifice my own interests and views for the sake of general agreement.

-0.90 Compared with others, I have a special talent for patience and responsiveness, nurturing and self-giving.

Both questim functions and Ni versus Di and Fi. Intuitive types from all quadras except the fourth are on the positive side; all peripheral ethical types, but especially EII, are on the negative side. We hypothesise that intuitive types in general, except EII and IEE, obtained relatively higher egoism scores here because the egoism in question concerns the absence of active concern for the fate of others. Egoism in the sense of advancing one’s own material interests would instead be closer to Cluster 1 (“can demand what is theirs, puts their own interests first”).

Cluster 9. Irritability, impatience, hot temper.

0.95 When offended, I will usually shout and nag until the person who offended me starts shouting themselves, or something nasty happens to them - then I will immediately calm down.

0.93 At least a couple of times a week, I have emotional outbursts of rage and anger in my relationships with people close to me.

0.92 I am a person who is easily irritated.

0.82 I am characterised by great conceit.

0.80 I tend to be impatient if I dislike something.

-0.87 I am tolerant of other people’s irritability.

Qe, Fe, and Se versus declatim, judicious, and serious functions. The absolute leader in irritability is EIE, with SEE in second place. IEI and ESI are also somewhat above average, whereas the remaining introverts are distinctly on the negative side. This cluster ranks first in terms of the relative contribution of the Questimity dichotomy to the total socionically determined variance of the property. However, the minimal lead over places 2-4 and the insufficient contribution along the Qi-Di axis prevent it from being classified as a core cluster for the Questimity dichotomy as a whole.

Cluster 10. Rebelliousness and radicalism, protests against the existing system of subordination, wishes to destroy it.

0.95 My character is marked by rebelliousness, a rebellious spirit, and a tendency towards critical disagreement.

0.88 I often do the opposite simply to avoid being led by someone else.

-0.89 It is true that I dislike disrupting established arrangements.

-0.88 I would prefer to change any social structure quietly and gradually, rather than radically.

-0.86 I usually find it easy to follow the rule “the bosses know best” in life.

-0.86 Everything comes to those who know how to wait, and I possess this flexible talent.

Strong Qi, Qe, Se, and Ne; weak Di, De, Fi, and Si (Questimity with a tendency towards the flexible-manoeuvring temperament). ILE, SEE, SLE, and EIE are at the top; SEI, EII, and LSI are at the bottom. In fact, this property is best suited to distinguishing the leading type within the pairs SEE-SEI and EIE-EII.

Cluster 11. Fault-finding.

0.96 Sometimes I am irritated by the excessively good mood of those around me.

0.91 I have this trait: everything often seems “not right” to me: the potatoes are too hot and the oranges are too sour.

This cluster is closely related to the seventh (“other people irritate them merely by their presence”); however, the role of Qi here is considerably more modest, while the main opposition is between Qe and De. The property distinguishes Beta ethical types from Alpha ethical types very well, and likewise LIE from ILI.

Cluster 12. Avoids hard work.

0.98 I do not get along well with people who make me work or work at a pace that is not natural to me. When choosing a job, I invariably hope for leniency, concessions, and smoking breaks during work.

-0.98 I am hardworking and like to be kept busy with the work assigned to me.

The main opposition here is between those with vulnerable Te and those with leading Te, while the secondary, somewhat weaker opposition is between Qi and Di.

Cluster 13. Avoids being too serious (?)

-1.00 Being serious almost all the time is one of my merits.

A separate property with a pronounced type profile, in which the opposition of Di and Te (on the side of agreement with the statement) to Fe, Qi, and Ne (on the side of disagreement) stands out. LSI, ILI, and EII are at the top; EIE and ILE are at the bottom. What deeper meaning lies behind all this, and why EIE ranks so high here (given that, by virtue of their inherent rationality, representatives of this type usually do agree that they take their duties seriously), are not yet entirely clear to the author.

Cluster 14. Believes that everyone should be on their own.

-1.00 Everyone should have someone who gives them orders and prevents them from becoming confused.

Another separate property, with a profile in which the relative contribution of the Declatimity factor is the highest among all 53 properties examined. ESE and LSI are at the top in terms of agreement with the statement; SLI, LSE, SEE, and ILE are at the bottom.

Why is such a large contribution of Declatimity found here? All that can be said is that a questim will most likely be irritated by TWO aspects of such a formulation at once: both the implication that someone will give orders to THEM personally, and the invitation to consider the fate of third parties about whom they most likely do not care.

It should be noted that this property substantially overlaps with a preference for or rejection of “the values of social archaism” (we previously examined this topic in greater detail here: socionavigator.com/vk/100 )

Main semantic clusters of Questimity identified

n - number of questionnaire statements used to calculate the profile of the semantic cluster

S - diagnostic strength of the property = difference between the mean responses of questim and declatim types

disp - contribution of the Questimity - Declatimity dichotomy to the total socionic variance of the property (the higher it is, the less influence other dichotomies have on the property)

Data source: statistics from V. Talanov’s questionnaires vk.com/oprosniki_talanova

Data compiled by: I. Romanov 05-07.10.2026 CC BY-NC-ND socionavigator.com

Intercorrelations between the semantic clusters of Questimity

(clusters 1-11 in the table are ordered according to their semantic similarity)

Data source: statistics from V. Talanov’s questionnaires vk.com/oprosniki_talanova

Calculations performed by: I. Romanov 06.10.2026 CC BY-NC-ND socionavigator.com