Reply To: In-depth questionnaire of all profiles

Home Page Forums Ask a Demographic In-depth questionnaire of all profiles Reply To: In-depth questionnaire of all profiles

Bera
Moderator
  • Type: SeFi
  • Development: ll--
  • Attitude: Seelie

I submitted it too.

I think it can be very useful because maybe we agreed with a certain development level profile as a whole but if you split it in parts, we might not agree with each of the paragraphs. Also, there are nuances. There is a difference between strongly agree and somewhat agree.

It would be great if some patterns were discovered. Maybe many people who share a certain development level will answer some questions the same way and looking at the answers will be informative.

I have to say it’s hard for me to answer some of the questions, because I agree with one part of the question and disagree with the rest. For example :

As a creative (not sure if I can consider myself creative, ok, let’s say this is a word that could describe me  if you think of it as a personality trait – somewhat agree), you’re known for experimenting in various artistic areas (disagree, I don’t do anything artistic) and have a reputation as a connoisseur (strongly disagree). However, although you dabble in many fields, you’re far from frivolous in your pursuits (I agree with this part).

Hence I think some answers might not be relevant, because there are many points in each paragraph that can be agreed or disagreed with. I don’t know what the solution is…in my opinion if there is a “but” the paragraph must be split in 2 separate questions. Because if I say I somewhat agree or somewhat disagree, it can mean I agree with one part and disagree with the other…but this is not that informative since you don’t know what I agree and what I disagree with. I hope this makes sense. Basically – some sentences are too long and contain too many separate points in order for us to be able to completely agree or disagree with them, unless you split them even more.

But it is pretty long already and takes time to answer, so we should think how to solve this issue while also splitting some paragraphs. Maybe split them a bit more and just give every person 20 random ones to answer? If they are connected, like parts of the same paragraph, they can come together, but as separate questions. Like :

As a creative, you’re known for experimenting in various artistic areas.

You have a reputation as a connoisseur.

Although you dabble in many fields, you’re far from frivolous in your pursuits.

Because these are separate issues. How others perceive you – as a connoisseur – is not necessarily connected to what you do – experimenting with art – and also both are separate issues from having frivolous pursuits (which a person who is perceived as a connoisseur can have – or not – for example).

Later edit – By the way, when I first read the profile I didn’t even notice these issues with this particular paragraph, because I read the profile as a whole and strongly agreed with it as a whole.

But indeed if you split it in parts, you can see discrepancies easier.

I would strongly agree with it if it was phrased like this :

As a creative person, you’re known for experimenting in various areas. You may be a connoisseur in certain fields of high interest. Although you dabble in many fields, you’re far from frivolous in your pursuits.

But this is very close to what the description says anyway, no? Essentially the same thing about the person’s energetics and behaviorism but without some particular aspects connected to field of expertise and my own capacity of evaluating other people’s evaluations of myself, that may be accurate or not :)))) which is really a lot to ask from an Fi user with a 9 fix.

Now… in terms of typology it is irrelevant I don’t do art, as long as I dabble in typology, tarot, astrology and law, of course. I still experiment in different areas, just not artistic ones. BUT I can’t say yes, I do art. Because I don’t. :))) Hence the answer is I somewhat agree – and this in light of the fact I get the thinking behind the question.

The point is – you might get answers that don’t perfectly align with the person’s dev level if the question contains parts that are not directly connected to the type/dev level but are just possible consequences of it…possible manifestations, not the essence.

But it doesn’t mean these parts can’t stay in the profile if they still are aligned to some people’s experience and give the profile color and shape. Just they might not work as well in a questionnaire format and might need some rephrasing for this purpose, I think.

  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.
  • This reply was modified 7 months ago by Bera.

© Copyright 2012-2020 J.E. Sandoval
SEE HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

DISCLAIMER

The content on this site is not
intended for medical advice, diagnosis,
or treatment. Always seek the advice
of your physician or other qualified
health provider with questions you
may have regarding a medical condition.
For more information visit this link.