Cognitive Typology

CT’s methodology succeeded in typing me correctly, with exceptional nuance, where other typology systems failed. It continues to guide my journey of personal development to this day. For the first time, I can confidently and independently assess my own psychology at the intersection of my subjective experience, and a consistently applied objective metric. As a theory, CT has succeeded in adopting Jungian concepts without the typical misinterpretations and distortions that are rampant within its predecessors. Its correlation of microexpressions and gestures to their respective cognitive domains is impressive — it is both rigorous in its methodology, as well as intuitively palatable. The potential practical applications within, and even beyond psychology, never cease to amaze me.

“I was thrilled to find Cognitive Type after trying to conduct research about the correlates between trust and function variations between people. I was frustrated with the lack of a standard metric for typing people and looking at their function use. The fact that Jung’s cognitive functions kept coming up in many schemas (and are foundational for typology systems like Socionics, the MBTI and Keirsey) and the fact that there seemed to be consistency between expert typologists made me think there was something very “real” about the functions, but the methodologies for identifying them in users was too variable. Cognitive Type breaks down the patterns people have been seeing for over 100 years but haven’t been able to put their finger upon. The theory has also updated as the data has led.”