The Project:

Cognitive Typology (CT) is a research project, with an evolving theory attached to it. It gathers body-mannerism data and forms testable hypotheses about the connection between cognition and physical expressions. The project began from an investigation of whether Jung's Psychological Types have a physically measurable reality to them in bodily expressions; what we call vultology. This exploration led to groundbreaking findings that now underpin the theory.

A Scientific Approach:

CT stands out from conventional typological models by being inherently designed for scientific verification or falsification. Each component of the CT Model is meticulously developed as a testable hypothesis, ensuring that only elements susceptible to objective validation by external parties are included. CT is committed to conducting formal studies on each aspect of its theory, and is in the process of establishing its own Journal to disseminate these findings. CT is not currently validated by independent parties, but is in the process of seeking peer review.

https://cognitivetype.com/what-is-cognitive-typology/

Basic Hypotheses:

Cognitive Typology is based on four basic hypotheses, which establish the framework for the field of vultology as a whole:

1. Consistency of Action Signatures: Every individual’s body mannerisms display a consistent, distinct pattern over time, when analyzed across days and weeks. Despite the universal potential for various expressions, each person exhibits a relatively fixed and unique repertoire of physical expressions, forming their personal action “signature.”

2. Genetic Basis of Action Signatures: Comparative analysis of identical twins, including those separated for extended periods, reveals a shared body mannerism signature. This indicates that these signatures are less influenced by environmental factors and more by genetic predispositions, pointing to an inherent, possibly genetic, origin.

3. Bi-directionality Between Cognition and Action: Existing research supports a bidirectional relationship between cognitive processes and physical expressions. The brain’s sensorimotor and language-processing areas are interconnected, mutually influencing each other. Body movements affect our ability process cognition such as language, and conversely, language-processing impacts our body movement automatically.

4. Detecting Hereditary Cognitions via Action Signatures: Building on the premises that (A) action signatures are inherent to individuals, (B) have a genetic basis, and (C) are linked to certain cognitive activities, it is hypothesized that (D) predispositions towards particular cognitive activities are genetically ingrained. Consequently, individuals with the same action signatures may share similar cognitive styles and genetic or epigenetic characteristics.

https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Cognitive_Typology

Theory Hypotheses:

In addition to the basic hypotheses, the following hypotheses are specific to the existing CT theory:

1. Energetic Clusters: Human movement can be shown to naturally cluster along two action-based axes: Proactivity/Reactivity and Rigidity/Fluidity. This "Energetic" clustering is multi-modality, with most people preferring one of the four clusters, rather than lying in the middle. Additionally, distinct psychological traits group around these action clusters, indicating a cognitive connection between Energetics and cognition.

2. Style Clusters: Human movement can be shown to naturally cluster along two style-based axes: Candid/Measured and Grounded/Suspended. This "Style" clustering is somewhat multi-modal, with most people preferring one cluster of each pair, rather than lying in the middle. Distinct psychological traits also group around these style clusters, indicating a cognitive connection between Styles and cognition.

Together, these two hypotheses produce 4 groups of 4 types, resulting in 16 vultological variations or types.

https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Vultology#Clusters

Relation to Jung:

The phenomenon we are investigating exhibits a strong isomorphism with certain interpretations of Jungian typology. In Cognitive Typology (CT), this observation suggests that we're perceiving the same phenomenon that Jung identified, albeit from a distinct perspective. This opens the door to independently corroborating Jung's typological concepts through tangible, measurable means. However, CT approaches this with a critical eye, not taking Jung's postulations as given. Every aspect of his theory is subjected to thorough scrutiny, retaining only those elements that are backed by empirical evidence. Consequently, CT presents a dynamic, evidence-based revision of Jungian typology, integrating it with empirical observations and experiments, selectively validating components based on data findings.

https://cognitivetype.com/uncovering-correlations-to-jung/

History:

The Cognitive Typology (CT) initiative emerged in 2012, catalyzed by a challenge from Pod'lair, which claimed to have uncovered the ultimate truth of human nature through its mind-to-body signal cues. Pod'lair's open invitation for other Jungian groups to surpass their work was largely overlooked, except by Juan Sandoval, who rose to the occasion. This endeavor led to a different approach, contrasting Pod'lair's reliance on qualitative and intuitive cues. CT developed a different framework based on separate, more tangible and explicit signals. After extensive trial and refinement, Sandoval, together with Renee Bayard, formalized the CT system in their first book publication in 2016.

Credits:

Cognitive Typology (CT) owes much credit to Jonathan Rock and Thomas Chenault from Pod'lair, for their initial work on mind-to-body signals. On the theoretical side of things, much credit is due to Michael Pierce, as well as Carl Jung, Katharine Briggs, Isabel Briggs Myers, Aushra Augusta, Harold Grant, Naomi Quenk, Linda Berens and many other influences too numerous to name. Since CT's formalization in 2016, credit is also due to the certified vultologist team, particularly Calin Copil and many community members who have helped continue to refine and expand the model and database into what it is today.

https://cognitivetype.com/book-origins-credits/

Model 1:

The cognitive phenomenon that CT explores can be discussed without any reference to Carl Jung. However, CT's Model 1 consciously adopts Jungian terminology, proposing that it fundamentally addresses the same phenomenon that Jung saw. Nonetheless, the model diverges by providing more specific and detailed definitions for Jungian concepts such as T/F/N/S/J/P and the eight functions. This divergence is a natural progression in the scientific field, where new insights enhance and refine the work of predecessors. CT acknowledges its intellectual heritage from Jung, even as it reinterprets many concepts to better suit modern scientific inquiry.

https://cognitivetype.com/mission-of-model-1-model-2/

Empirical Domains:

The Empirical Domains (Behavior and Vultology) of Model 1 perform direct experimentation by gathering body-mannerism data and comparing that to demographic, career, and psychometric data to find strong or weak connections between the mind and body. These observations are published as research studies and are used by the analytical domains to construct interpretations of what that means about the nature of cognition.

https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Cognitive_Typology_Methodology#Methodology

Analytical Domains:

The Analytical Domains (Metabolism and Psychodynamics) of Model 1 construct theoretical interpretations from the results of data gathered by the empirical domains. The analytical domains also perform experiments, but aimed towards verifying or falsifying these interpretations. Those analytical theories are also put to the test every time new samples are examined by the empirical domains, leading to a cycle of theory-correction and refinement.

https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Cognitive_Typology_Methodology#Methodology

Four Layers of Emergence:

Model 1 describes cognitive type from the smallest scales to the largest scales, through four successive layers of emergence. The Metabolism domain focuses on brain processing and ontological registration. The Vultology domain examines non-verbal cues and physical expressions that arise from said cognitive activity. The Behavior domain tracks lifestyle patterns, career paths and prominent psychic motifs which result from the former two. Finally, the Psychodynamics domain considers how cognitive functions give rise to our lifelong struggles with our ego, our shadow, and a special relationship to our unconscious.

https://cognitivetype.com/cognitive-typology-emergence/

Metabolism:

Metabolism, or information metabolism, is the first of four layers of emergence in CT theory, lying at the root of all others. It refers to our method of processing information at the cortical level. This brain activity happens at the millisecond scale and occurs before any behavioral effects are observed. Theoretically, this activity is identifiable using brain scans, while language analysis and questionaires are less reliable but simpler methods of identification.

https://cognitivetype.com/metabolism/

Vultology:

Vultology is the second of four layers of emergence in CT theory, emerging from the Metabolic layer. It describes the secondary bodily effects that arise from our method of processing information. This layer is tracked at the scale of seconds, making it possible to know a person's type within roughly twenty minutes of clean footage. As vultology is a step removed from metabolism, it is subject to some noise interferences in how cognition may translate to bodily expression. Nevertheless, with expert training, it's possible to attain ~90%-95% accuracy.

https://cognitivetype.com/vultology/

Behavior:

Behavior is the third of four layers of emergence in CT theory, emerging from the previous two. It describes behaviors, lifestyle patterns, career choices, habits, beliefs and psychological motifs that arise from people with a given vultology and metabolism. This layer is tracked at the scale of days and weeks. Behavior is two steps removed from metabolism and does not have a 1:1 relationship cognition, as no single behavior is absolutely indicative of a type. However, profiles are written that describe statistically significant behaviors that apply broadly to the individuals with that specific vultology.

https://cognitivetype.com/behavior/

Psychodynamics:

Psychodynamics is the fourth layer of emergence in CT theory, emerging from the previous three. It describes the way that cognitive type merges with the rest of the psyche to shape the formation of our egoic personality, as well as our shadow personality and the contents of our unconscious. It offers a means of understanding lifelong struggles with certain archetypes, and the natural affinity we have to those archetypes that resonate with our cognitive type. This layer is tracked at the scale of months and years.

https://cognitivetype.com/psychodynamics/

Model 2:

The connection that CT shares with Jungian typology is explored in Model 1 by its many convergences with it, yet the alignment is not exact. Oppositely, Model 2 presents an independent conceptualization of the phenomenon, steering clear of Jungian terminology. From an academic standpoint, Model 2 allows for empirical investigation without reliance on Jung's theories, which often face skepticism in academic circles. Utilizing a Cognitive Architecture approach, Model 2 employs computational language to hypothesize about brain activity within CT theory and its psychological implications. This precise computational framework opens up numerous novel research avenues, surpassing the limitations inherent in traditional Jungian typology.

https://cognitivetype.com/mission-of-model-1-model-2/

Cognitive Architecture:

The Cognitive Typology Architecture (CTA) is an architecture which describes the construction and management of objects through two core information systems: (P)erception and (J)udgment. The perception system manages spatiotemporal information, while the judgment system handles ideal information. Each system contains a positive (+) and negative (-) polarity, allowing for information to oscillate through the system in a feedback cycle. This creates four charge states (P+, P-, J-, J+) as the main processing modules of the architecture: Information Gathering (P+), Object Delineation (J-), Temporal Contextualizing (P-) and Procedural Processing (J+). These four modules comprise the creation, definition, contextualization and manipulation of objects in the mental and physical world.

https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Cognitive_Typology_Architecture

Pseudocode Analogies:

The Cognitive Typology Architecture (CTA) makes use of computer code to represent its operations. These computer algorithms are first written in program-agnostic pseudocode, which can then be translated to any particular programming language. By encoding brain functions into computer algorithms, the precise effects of those functions can be observed, allowing us to test whether the code produces the expected behavioral outcomes we observe, when the function is run for long periods. The goal of the CTA is to create a cognitive architecture that precisely represents the way in which the 16 types metabolize information, creating a model of human cognition in the process.

https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Computation

Complete Type Code:

The CT model operates with a foundational structure of 16 types, yet it extends beyond this to incorporate additional psychic components. These include 8 developments, 2 emotional attitudes, and 2 categories within the general fallen affect scale. Integrating these elements results in a highly specific classification system, capable of differentiating 1 in 512 unique combinations. Factoring in sex-specific psychological variances further refines the model, doubling its resolution to 1024 distinct subtypes. The CT model can precisely classify types by notations such as FiSe ll-- Seelie Female, which denote very specific subtype characteristics. This allows for a far tighter psychological fit than what traditional 16 type models offer.

https://cognitivetype.com/quick-theory-overview/

16 Types:

In CT, the 16 types are primarily thought of as combinations of the 4 energetics (Pe, Ji, Je, Pi) and 4 quadras (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta). This gives rise to the 16 types as follows:

	Alpha	Beta	Gamma	Delta
Pe	Pe-Alpha NeTi	Pe-Beta SeTi	Pe-Gamma SeFi	Pe-Delta NeFi
Ji	Ji-Alpha TiNe	Ji-Beta TiSe	Ji-Gamma FiSe	Ji-Delta FiNe
Je	Je-Alpha FeSi	Je-Beta FeNi	Je-Gamma TeNi	Je-Delta TeSi
Pi	Pi-Alpha SiFe	Pi-Beta NiFe	Pi-Gamma NiTe	Pi-Delta SiTe

https://cognitivetype.com/mytype/

8 Developments:

In the CT Model, it's acknowledged that every individual can develop their lower three functions in any possible order, or to remain in a certain development perpetually. This gives rise to eight possible developments that individuals may exist within. Developments are not static, and always have the ability to change over the course of years, according to life circumstances and personal transformations.

Code	Development	Integrated Functions
l---	Standard	1st
ll--	Reviser/Conductor	1st, 2nd
l-l-	Double Introverted/Extroverted	1st, 3rd
l--l	Polarized	1st, 4th
lll-	J-Heavy/P-Heavy	1st, 2nd, 3rd
ll-l	Energy Inverted	1st, 2nd, 4th
l-ll	Antithetical	1st, 3rd, 4th
llll	Balanced	1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th

No development is seen as necessarily superior to another, and instead each development represents a different way to distribute one's psychic energy. The Standard (l---) development has the highest concentration of psychic energy in just the first function, while the Balanced (llll) development has the same amount of psychic energy, but split between four priorities.

https://cognitivetype.com/developments/

2 Emotional Attitudes:

Emotional attitudes (EA) refers to common styles of emotional expression which can be read through a person's vultology. There are currently two emotional attitudes that are visually measured: guarded and unguarded. Each style can be displayed in high or low quantities, and if neither attitude is represented strongly, the person is termed neutral. These expressions correspond to a person's relationship to the social world, and how they choose to interact with the environment. Unguarded expressions overlap with agreeableness, while Guarded expressions overlap with disagreeableness.

	Unguarded	Guarded
Ti-Fe	Adaptive	Directive
Fi-Te	Seelie	Unseelie

Guarded and Unguarded have different names, based on whether the person's J axis is Ti-Fe or Fi-Te, due to the different vultological manifestations they have in the two axes.

https://cognitivetype.com/emotional-attitude/

2 Fallen Affects:

Fallen Affect (FA) is a facial signal linked to the neuroticism spectrum. It's measured on a scale of 0 to 5, indicating the intensity of emotional heaviness in a person's facial expression. It's characterized by a persistent downward pull in the eyes, brow, and mouth corners. FA has crossover with Ekman's Sadness signal, but is a persistent aspect of one's countenance, rather than a temporary expression. A FA score of 3 or higher is a predictor of mental distress or mental illness. Psychodynamically, a strong FA reflects ongoing psychological struggles and potential shadow function integration. People with a strong FA have a keener familiarity with the darker elements of human psychology.

Scale	0	1	2	3	4	5
Has FA?	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes

https://cognitivetype.com/fallen-affect/

Sex Differences:

Biological and sociological influences affect how males and females express themselves. These features impart an additional layer of complexity, influencing the manifestation of cognitive types. As a result, males and females have different expressive baselines, which are necessary to learn, to properly identify the types. CT refines its analysis of the 16 types by considering the variances in how these types are expressed in male and female forms, fostering a more nuanced perspective.

https://cognitivetype.com/male-female-psychology/

Other Personality Aspects:

The CT model acknowledges its scope as a "limited hypothesis," recognizing that it does not encompass the entirety of an individual's psychological profile. Despite its high resolution of 1024 types, it addresses primarily cortical activities within a world of billions of unique psychological manifestations. CT underscores the necessity of integrating additional frameworks to attain a more comprehensive understanding of the psyche. Systems like the Enneagram, which emphasize limbic variations and defense mechanisms, are essential complements to CT for a fuller exploration of individual psychological differences.

https://cognitivetype.com/whats-the-difference-between-personality-and-cognition/