- Type: FiSe
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Unseelie
I like this, and I feel like more could be done with it. I am not a statistician either, but I have had a fair bit of training, so I hope my input can be of some use here.
The way I see this thread (and some recent discussions on the chat), people are interested in what causes someone to be seelie or unseelie. I had a look at your spreadsheet, and it seems like, as you said in your post, you are interested in exploring potential links between Unseeliness and Te. OK, so you ran some basic statistics on proportions of Seelie and Unseelie among different type groups. Good effort. I get the feeling you are treating levels of Fi and Te as explanatory variables, and seelie vs unseelie as the response variable. I would advise you, however, to be careful about making statements implying causality, such as “Fi being conscious significantly increased the likelihood of Seelie.” The reason being, correlation does not necessarily imply causation, as the old axiom goes. Could there not be, for instance, another factor at play, which increases both Fi consciousness, as well as seeliness?
I suspect there might be. I had an idea when I checked my email this morning. I get a reminder every month to participate in a survey on potential links between attachment styles and levels of happiness, etc. At least a few people here have suspected that attachment styles (in early life to primary caregivers) impact the attitudes of the heart. The difficult part is surveying people on this. Questions similar to the survey I participate in might work, though.
In the meantime, I might try making a few plots from the data you collected from the database, if I have time. It would make it easier to get the gist of, than just tabular form.