Small groups
From Wikisocion
Jump to:
navigation
,
search
This page or section is
incomplete
. Additional contributions are needed.
Socionic types can be combined into groups that share common socionic traits. These are referred to as
small groups
, or
quaternions
if the number of types in the group is four. The most well-known small groups in socionics are
quadras
and
clubs
.
Small groups as a socionic concept generally include four types which have three
Reinin traits
in common. For example, the club of
Pragmatists
is Sensing, Logical, and Aristocratic. There are 140 such small groups.
Small groups
Quadras
Alpha
Beta
Gamma
Delta
Clubs
Researchers
Socials
Pragmatists
Humanitarians
Temperaments
EP
EJ
IP
IJ
Communication styles
Businesslike
Passionate
Cold-blooded
Sincere
Romance styles
Aggressor
Victim
Caring
Childlike
Classical socionics
IM elements
-
Functions
-
Socion
-
Type dichotomies
-
Intertype relations
-
Small groups
Contents
1
Sortable Small Group Table
2
Error Correction
3
Tetrachotomies
4
Dynamic Socionics
5
Further reading
Sortable Small Group Table
#
Diagram
Source
Small Groups
Dichotomy Triad
Types
1
Gulenko
Stimulus Seeking
Uniqueness
Prestige
Self-Confidence
Well-being
E
N
EN
Extrovert
Intuitive
Carefree
Extrovert
Sensory
Farsighted
Introvert
Intuitive
Farsighted
Introvert
Sensory
Carefree
ILE
LIE
IEE
EIE
SLE
LSE
SEE
ESE
ILI
LII
IEI
EII
SLI
LSI
SEI
ESI
1
Model B
Dimension
(Irrational)
-4d
-4d
-4d
-4d
E
N
EN
Extrovert
Intuitive
Carefree
Extrovert
Sensory
Farsighted
Introvert
Intuitive
Farsighted
Introvert
Sensory
Carefree
ILE
LIE
IEE
EIE
SLE
LSE
SEE
ESE
ILI
LII
IEI
EII
SLI
LSI
SEI
ESI
2
Gulenko
Communication Style
Business-like
Passionate
Cool
Sincere
E
T
ET
Extrovert
Logical
Yielding
Extrovert
Ethical
Obstinate
Introvert
Logical
Obstinate
Introvert
Ethical
Yielding
ILE
LIE
SLE
LSE
IEE
EIE
SEE
ESE
ILI
LII
SLI
LSI
IEI
EII
SEI
ESI
2
Model B
Dimension
(Rational)
-4d
-4d
-4d
-4d
E
T
ET
Extrovert
Logical
Yielding
Extrovert
Ethical
Obstinate
Introvert
Logical
Obstinate
Introvert
Ethical
Yielding
ILE
LIE
SLE
LSE
IEE
EIE
SEE
ESE
ILI
LII
SLI
LSI
IEI
EII
SEI
ESI
3
Classic
Temperament
Flexible-Maneuvering
Linear-Assertive
Receptive-Adaptive
Rigid-Stable
E
P
EP
Extrovert
Irrational
Static
Extrovert
Rational
Dynamic
Introvert
Irrational
Dynamic
Introvert
Rational
Static
ILE
IEE
SLE
SEE
LIE
EIE
LSE
ESE
ILI
IEI
SLI
SEI
LII
EII
LSI
ESI
4
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
E
NT
ENT
Extrovert
Democratic
Positivist
Extrovert
Aristocratic
Negativist
Introvert
Democratic
Negativist
Introvert
Aristocratic
Positivist
ILE
LIE
SEE
ESE
IEE
EIE
SLE
LSE
ILI
LII
SEI
ESI
IEI
EII
SLI
LSI
5
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
E
NP
ENP
Extrovert
Tactical
Judicious
Extrovert
Strategic
Decisive
Introvert
Tactical
Decisive
Introvert
Strategic
Judicious
ILE
IEE
LSE
ESE
LIE
EIE
SLE
SEE
ILI
IEI
LSI
ESI
LII
EII
SLI
SEI
6
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
E
TP
ETP
Extrovert
Constructivist
Merry
Extrovert
Emotivist
Serious
Introvert
Constructivist
Serious
Introvert
Emotivist
Merry
ILE
SLE
EIE
ESE
IEE
SEE
LIE
LSE
ILI
SLI
EII
ESI
IEI
SEI
LII
LSI
7
Gulenko
Rings of Benefit
Energy Generators
Energy Carriers
Information Accumulators
Information Generators
E
NTP
ENTP
Extrovert
Process
Asking
Extrovert
Results
Declaring
Introvert
Process
Declaring
Introvert
Results
Asking
ILE
EIE
LSE
SEE
LIE
IEE
SLE
ESE
ILI
EII
LSI
SEI
LII
IEI
SLI
ESI
8
Classic
Club
Researcher
Humanitarian
Pragmatist
Social
N
T
NT
Intuitive
Logical
Democratic
Intuitive
Ethical
Aristocratic
Sensory
Logical
Aristocratic
Sensory
Ethical
Democratic
ILE
LIE
ILI
LII
IEE
EIE
IEI
EII
SLE
LSE
SLI
LSI
SEE
ESE
SEI
ESI
9
Gulenko
Perceptual Groups
Associative
Dissociative
Commutative
Distributive
N
P
NP
Intuitive
Irrational
Tactical
Intuitive
Rational
Strategic
Sensory
Irrational
Strategic
Sensory
Rational
Tactical
ILE
IEE
ILI
IEI
LIE
EIE
LII
EII
SLE
SEE
SLI
SEI
LSE
ESE
LSI
ESI
9
Structural
Functional Axis (Irrational)
Intuitive Base
Intuitive Creative
Sensory Base
Sensory Creative
N
P
NP
Intuitive
Irrational
Tactical
Intuitive
Rational
Strategic
Sensory
Irrational
Strategic
Sensory
Rational
Tactical
ILE
IEE
ILI
IEI
LIE
EIE
LII
EII
SLE
SEE
SLI
SEI
LSE
ESE
LSI
ESI
10
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
N
ET
ENT
Intuitive
Yielding
Positivist
Intuitive
Obstinate
Negativist
Sensory
Yielding
Negativist
Sensory
Obstinate
Positivist
ILE
LIE
IEI
EII
IEE
EIE
ILI
LII
SLE
LSE
SEI
ESI
SEE
ESE
SLI
LSI
11
Gulenko
Romance Style
Childlike
Victim
Aggressor
Caring
N
EP
ENP
Intuitive
Static
Judicious
Intuitive
Dynamic
Decisive
Sensory
Static
Decisive
Sensory
Dynamic
Judicious
ILE
IEE
LII
EII
LIE
EIE
ILI
IEI
SLE
SEE
LSI
ESI
LSE
ESE
SLI
SEI
11
Structural
Ego Element (Irrational)
N
EP
ENP
Intuitive
Static
Judicious
Intuitive
Dynamic
Decisive
Sensory
Static
Decisive
Sensory
Dynamic
Judicious
ILE
IEE
LII
EII
LIE
EIE
ILI
IEI
SLE
SEE
LSI
ESI
LSE
ESE
SLI
SEI
12
Gulenko
Project Groups
Ideation Process
General Results
Concrete Results
Concrete Process
N
TP
NTP
Intuitive
Constructivist
Process
Intuitive
Emotivst
Results
Sensory
Constructivist
Results
Sensory
Emotivist
Process
ILE
EIE
ILI
EII
LIE
IEE
LII
IEI
SLE
ESE
SLI
ESI
LSE
SEE
LSI
SEI
13
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
N
ETP
ENTP
Intuitive
Merry
Asking
Intuitive
Serious
Declaring
Sensory
Merry
Declaring
Sensory
Serious
Asking
ILE
EIE
LII
IEI
LIE
IEE
ILI
EII
SLE
ESE
LSI
SEI
LSE
SEE
SLI
ESI
14
Gulenko
Reasoning
Restructures
Constructors
Diplomats
Guardians
T
P
TP
Logical
Irrational
Constructivist
Logical
Rational
Emotivist
Ethical
Irrational
Emotivst
Ethical
Rational
Constructivist
ILE
SLE
ILI
SLI
LIE
LSE
LII
LSI
IEE
SEE
IEI
SEI
EIE
ESE
EII
ESI
14
Structural
Functional Axis (Rational)
Logical Creative
Logical Base
Ethical Creative
Ethical Base
T
P
TP
Logical
Irrational
Constructivist
Logical
Rational
Emotivist
Ethical
Irrational
Emotivst
Ethical
Rational
Constructivist
ILE
SLE
ILI
SLI
LIE
LSE
LII
LSI
IEE
SEE
IEI
SEI
EIE
ESE
EII
ESI
15
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
T
EN
ENT
Logical
Carefree
Positivist
Logical
Farsighted
Negativist
Ethical
Carefree
Negativist
Ethical
Farsighted
Positivist
ILE
LIE
SLI
LSI
SLE
LSE
ILI
LII
IEE
EIE
SEI
ESI
SEE
ESE
IEI
EII
16
Structural
Ego Element (Rational)
T
EP
ETP
Logical
Static
Merry
Logical
Dynamic
Serious
Ethical
Static
Serious
Ethical
Dynamic
Merry
ILE
SLE
LII
LSI
LIE
LSE
ILI
SLI
IEE
SEE
EII
ESI
EIE
ESE
IEI
SEI
17
Gulenko
Implementation Groups
Transition of feminine to masculine
Most masculine
Transition of masculine to feminine
Most feminine
T
NP
NTP
Logical
Tactical
Process
Logical
Strategic
Results
Ethical
Tactical
Results
Ethical
Strategic
Process
ILE
LSE
ILI
LSI
LIE
SLE
LII
SLI
IEE
ESE
IEI
ESI
EIE
SEE
EII
SEI
18
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
T
ENP
ENTP
Logical
Judicious
Asking
Logical
Decisive
Declaring
Ethical
Judicious
Declaring
Ethical
Decisive
Asking
ILE
LSE
SLI
LII
SLE
LIE
ILI
LSI
IEE
ESE
SEI
EII
SEE
EIE
IEI
ESI
19
Structural
Dual Axis (Irrational)
or
Base
or
Base
or
Creative
or
Creative
P
EN
ENP
Irrational
Carefree
Judicious
Irrational
Farsighted
Decisive
Rational
Carefree
Decisive
Rational
Farsighted
Judicious
ILE
IEE
SLI
SEI
ILI
IEI
SLE
SEE
LIE
EIE
LSI
ESI
LII
EII
LSE
ESE
20
Structural
Dual Axis (Rational)
or
Creative
or
Creative
or
Base
or
Base
P
ET
ETP
Irrational
Yielding
Merry
Irrational
Obstinate
Serious
Rational
Yielding
Serious
Rational
Obstinate
Merry
ILE
IEI
SLE
SEI
ILI
IEE
SLI
SEE
LIE
EII
LSE
ESI
LII
EIE
LSI
ESE
21
Gulenko
Stress Resistance
Frozen by Stress
Resistant to Stress
Trained by Stress
Vulerable to Stress
P
NT
NTP
Irrational
Democratic
Process
Irrational
Aristocratic
Result
Rational
Democratic
Result
Rational
Aristocratic
Process
ILE
SEE
ILI
SEI
IEE
SLE
IEI
SLI
LIE
ESE
LII
ESI
EIE
LSE
EII
LSI
22
Gulenko
Club Displacement
Iridescent Hopes
Waiting
Realistic Plans
Avoiding Failures
P
ENT
ENTP
Irrational
Positivist
Asking
Irrational
Negativist
Declaring
Rational
Positivist
Declaring
Rational
Negativist
Asking
ILE
IEI
SLI
SEE
ILI
IEE
SLE
SEI
LIE
EII
LSI
ESE
LII
EIE
LSE
ESI
23
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
EN
ET
NT
Carefree
Yielding
Democratic
Carefree
Obstinate
Aristocratic
Farsighted
Yielding
Aristocratic
Farsighted
Obstinate
Democratic
ILE
LIE
SEI
ESI
IEE
EIE
SLI
LSI
SLE
LSE
IEI
EII
SEE
ESE
ILI
LII
24
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
EN
EP
NP
Carefree
Static
Tactical
Carefree
Dynamic
Strategic
Farsighted
Static
Strategic
Farsighted
Dynamic
Tactical
ILE
IEE
LSI
ESI
LIE
EIE
SLI
SEI
LII
EII
SLE
SEE
ILI
IEI
LSE
ESE
25
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
EN
TP
ENTP
Carefree
Constructivist
Asking
Carefree
Emotivist
Declaring
Farsighted
Constructivist
Declaring
Farsighted
Emotivist
Asking
ILE
EIE
SLI
ESI
IEE
LIE
SEI
LSI
SLE
ESE
ILI
EII
SEE
LSE
IEI
LII
26
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
EN
ETP
NTP
Carefree
Merry
Process
Carefree
Serious
Results
Farsighted
Merry
Results
Farsighted
Serious
Process
ILE
EIE
SEI
LSI
IEE
LIE
SLI
ESI
SLE
ESE
IEI
LII
SEE
LSE
ILI
EII
27
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
ET
EP
TP
Yielding
Static
Constructivist
Yielding
Dynamic
Emotivist
Obstinate
Static
Emotivist
Obstinate
Dynamic
Constructivist
ILE
EII
SLE
ESI
LIE
IEI
LSE
SEI
LII
IEE
LSI
SEE
ILI
EIE
SLI
ESE
28
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
ET
NP
ENTP
Yielding
Tactical
Asking
Yielding
Strategic
Declaring
Obstinate
Tactical
Declaring
Obstinate
Strategic
Asking
ILE
LSE
IEI
ESI
SLE
LIE
SEI
EII
IEE
ESE
ILI
LSI
SEE
EIE
SLI
LII
29
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
ET
ENP
NTP
Yielding
Judicious
Process
Yielding
Decisive
Results
Obstinate
Judicious
Results
Obstinate
Decisive
Process
ILE
LSE
SEI
EII
SLE
LIE
IEI
ESI
IEE
ESE
SLI
LII
SEE
EIE
ILI
LSI
30
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
EP
NT
ENTP
Static
Democratic
Asking
Static
Aristocratic
Declaring
Dynamic
Democratic
Declaring
Dynamic
Aristocratic
Asking
ILE
SEE
LII
ESI
SLE
IEE
EII
LSI
LIE
ESE
ILI
SEI
LSE
EIE
IEI
SLI
31
Gulenko
Cognitive Styles
Causal Determinist
Holographic Panoramic
Vortical Synergetic
Dialectic Algorithimic
EP
ENT
NTP
Static
Positivist
Process
Static
Negativist
Results
Dynamic
Positivist
Results
Dynamic
Negativist
Process
ILE
LSI
SEE
EII
SLE
LII
IEE
ESI
LIE
IEI
ESE
SLI
EIE
ILI
LSE
SEI
32
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
NT
NP
TP
Democratic
Tactical
Constructivist
Democratic
Strategic
Emotivist
Aristocratic
Tactical
Emotivist
Aristocratic
Strategic
Constructivist
ILE
ESE
ILI
ESI
SEE
LIE
SEI
LII
IEE
LSE
IEI
LSI
SLE
EIE
SLI
EII
33
Classic
Quadra
Alpha
Gamma
Delta
Beta
NT
ENP
ETP
Democratic
Judicious
Merry
Democratic
Decisive
Serious
Aristocratic
Judicious
Serious
Aristocratic
Decisive
Merry
ILE
ESE
SEI
LII
SEE
LIE
ILI
ESI
IEE
LSE
SLI
EII
SLE
EIE
IEI
LSI
34
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
NP
ENT
ETP
Tactical
Positivist
Merry
Tactical
Negativist
Serious
Strategic
Positivist
Serious
Strategic
Negativist
Merry
ILE
ESE
IEI
LSI
IEE
LSE
ILI
ESI
SEE
LIE
SLI
EII
SLE
EIE
SEI
LII
35
x
Undefined
1
2
3
4
TP
ENT
ENP
Constructivist
Positivist
Judicious
Constructivist
Negativist
Decisive
Emotivist
Positivist
Decisive
Emotivist
Negativist
Judicious
ILE
ESE
SLI
EII
SLE
EIE
ILI
ESI
SEE
LIE
IEI
LSI
IEE
LSE
SEI
LII
Error Correction
Each small group is a group of four types that share three dichotomy traits in common. Any combination of two of these three traits is enough information to define the small group. Since each small group is defined by all three traits, defining two selects the small group and implies what the third trait must be.
When using dichotomies to type a person, this redundancy can be used to double check observations. For instance, a person who is introverted and irrational, must be the receptive-adaptive temperament, and must also be a dynamic type. If all four of these traits, the three dichotomy and one small group, the are diagnosed independently and agree with each other, it is much more likely the assessment is correct. It is still possible to get a false positive, but it would require getting two dichotomy traits and the small group wrong. This dichotomy relation of two traits implying a third is true even for undefined small groups. The only difference is the description of the small group cannot be used as a check. In this case, it would still require two mistakes to get a false positive. In practice, it is likely that additional traits will be explored to check an original observation. It is very important to remain objective to avoid confirmation bias.
Even though all dichotomies are mathematically related through small groups, if a trait is not very accurate, it can harm the overall assessment. No method is always correct, so testing for the third dichotomy trait always increased the chances of getting inconsistent results. For traits that are reliable, this is worth it because the small chance of error is traded for a much higher confidence. However, traits that are not reliable harm the entire system, and are likely to contradict other correct observations.
In the case of an inconsistency, another method is needed to resolve the error. Some people apply small groups and dichotomies in a first phase to focus what model A questions to ask in a second phase. Others test as many traits as they can and then average the results.
There is not a consensus which dichotomies and small groups are reliable, so it is up to each individual practitioner to try them out and decide what combinations to use. Hopefully, in the future, rigorous scientific trials can test the accuracy of each concept and method, but for now, most of these concepts are still experimental.
Tetrachotomies
A tetrachotomy is like a dichotomy, but with four elements, instead of two. When applied to the types, each element of a tetrachotomy is a small group.
A tetrachotomy represent an overall theme of the four small groups it divide. Quadra is the tetrachotomy of alpha, beta, gamma and delta. Club is the tetrachotomy of the researcher, humanitarian, socialite and pragmatist small groups. Temperament is the tetrachotomy of flexible-maneuvering, receptive-adaptive, linear-assertive and rigid-stable small groups.
By far, the most common tetrachotomies are combinations of three dichotomies. The table of all 140 small groups are grouped by this kind of regular tetrachotomy. However, it is possible to mix the small groups from two regular tetrachotomies together as long as they share a dichotomy division in common. When two related tetrachotomies are mixed, they result in a conjugate pair of mixed tetrachotomies. There are over a two thousand ways to create unique mixed tetrachotomies, but only four make sense in the context of model A. They are created by mixing regular tetrachotomies #9 with #14 and #19 with #20. All four of these tetrachotomies share the P {irrational, rational} dichotomy. The reason for mixing is the functional and intertype relation structure of model A, which is made asymmetric by rationality. These specific tetrachotomies can be mixed to group all the base functions or all creative functions together.
This is necessary to produce some of Reinin's intertype relation tetrachotomies using type dichotomies, like the square (relaxation) and health group. Square is four types that all have the same leading quadra value and health group is four types with the same leading strength.
Dynamic Socionics
There has been further research on all 35 of the small group systems at the Dynamic Socionics Center, headed by Vladimir Mironov.  The related resources are linked in the further reading section below, and there is also a one of a kind book written on the subject called "Semantics of information aspects" by Kochubeeva LA, Mironova VV, and Stoyalova ML.  All of the resources mentioned in this section as in Russian, so further translation and acquisition of information in English would be greatly appreciated.
Semantics of information aspects book:
http://www.dynamicsocionics.ru/magazin-socionics/product/view/2/3.html
Further reading
Small Groups (Quaternions)
by
Dmitriy Lytov
(in Russian)
Dynamic Socionics Small Groups
by
Vladimir Mironov
(in Russian)
Retrieved from "
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Small_groups&oldid=20547
"
Categories
:
Incomplete pages
Small groups
Classical socionics
Views
Page
Discussion
View source
History
Personal tools
Log in / create account
Navigation
Wikisocion home
Community
Events calendar
Recent changes
Random page
Help
Search
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Printable version
Permanent link
This page was last modified on 13 July 2018, at 02:53.
This page has been accessed 27,260 times.
Content is available under
the GNU FDL
.
Privacy policy
About Wikisocion
Disclaimers