Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Common biases in socionics
¶
One of the challenges in creating objective statements about Socionics
is that the very nature of the field invites the potential for bias. For
a simple demonstration, consider someone trying to ascertain another
persons strong
IM elements
by asking “What do you
think you can do better than everybody else?” The question itself
reflects a competitive nature, which may not be equally shared by all
people. Furthermore, it is likely that some types would phrase this
question differently from others; and similarly, some socionic types
would have an easier time responding to the question when phrased that
way.
Categories of potential causes for systemic biases in socionics include
those shown in the table of contents below.
Type, quadra, or dichotomy-centric biases
¶
Work by socionics theorists of a particular type or quadra may be
subject to point-of-view biases inherent to their own type or
quadra
. For example, because
Augusta
and
other prominent
Socionists
are from the
Alpha
quadra, their work has sometimes been suspected of
reflecting an Alpha bias. Likewise,
Vera Stratievskaya
’s type descriptions are in turn
sometimes suspected of reflecting a
Gamma
bias since her own
type is
ESI
.
Alpha-centrism
¶
An example of possible Alpha bias is that descriptions of
and
are often described in what seem to some people to be
broader, more encompassing terms than the
IM elements
of
Gamma
, being the opposing quadra. For example
is sometimes described as related to the use of logic and
understanding, as well as organization, whereas
is often
described enigmatically as related to “business logic” or random,
disconnected facts.
bias
¶
Similarly,
is often described as relating to ideas,
insight, and intellectual interest in general, whereas
is
often described more enigmatically as related to “time.” It is very
likely
Augusta
increased the territory of
in comparison to other
IM elements
to reflect the most
outstanding qualities of herself and other
ILEs
around her.
For example, here are a few lines about leading
from her
work
The Socion, or Socionics Basics
:
“When this element is in the leading position, the individual has
pronounced cognitive interests. He is constantly studying underlying
phenomena, which he is able to communicate to others quite
successfully by making complicated things simple. Likes to explain to
others his understanding of things. In favorable conditions becomes a
scientist or writer”
1 <http://www.socionics.us/works/socion2.shtml>
The rest of the description is probably objective, but this section
above would apply to many people of other types with pronounced
intellectual interests. Over time this bias seems to have weakened in
Russian socionics, and statements such as Augusta’s are now rare among
publishing socionists. However, in forums and informal discussions they
are sometimes brought up by amateurs who have picked up the bias from
socionics literature.
ILE bias
¶
The
ILE
bias comes from
Augusta
herself and is
closely related to the one above. According to Augusta’s original
conception of type roles,
ILEs
were seen as being a type that
sees the hidden roots of phenomena (supposedly
) and
arranges them into a system or theory (
). For many years
Augusta
and her associates assumed that scientists and
thinkers who generated new theories were
ILEs
(people like
Einstein, Bohr,
Newton, and Darwin). Later,
she and others seemed to recognize this mistake, but the ILE bias has
still not been completely undone. Just as “health” does not equate
exactly to
, “theory” does not equate exactly to
, and people of different types may tend to generate
theories of a slightly different nature.
Intuitive bias
¶
In popular socionics, intellectual inquisitiveness and a focus on “the
big picture” is often associated with
intuition
, while
sensing
is associated with a “focus on details” or a
preoccupation with “the here and now.” While such a division may appear
to be true for many or most people, intellectual sensers may not
identify with the image presented by some descriptions of
sensing
. Such popular descriptions add attributes shared
by most or all highly
intelligent
people to the
“intuitive” category, leading to possible systematic
typing
errors.
Misinterpreting the behavior of other types
¶
This category is similar to type- or quadra-related bias. However, here,
the issue is that in describing a given type, one may notice behaviors
that appear foreign. Hence, one’s description of a given type may
reflect how odd or mysterious that type seems to oneself.
Examples
One possible example is the common assertion that ILIs are
predisposed against new ideas because of their being new. A number of
factors may create this impression from the perspective of other types,
such as that ILIs may:
View criticism as being an important form of contribution, which may
have the effect of making it seem that they don’t like the idea
they’re criticizing
Tend not to display enthusiasm to the degree of other types (because
of
subdued
Fe
)
Not want their primary role to be in the area of practical
implementation, including implementation of other people’s ideas
Take too little initiative in promoting their own ideas
Be perfectionistic about their own ideas and therefore resentful when
people with less honed ideas get more attention for them
A combination of these factors may cause ILIs to seem predisposed
against new ideas when that may not necessarily be the case.
National and cultural biases
¶
Cultural differences in overall demeanor, norms, and the ways people
express themselves may influence type descriptions.
Russian vs. Western views
Competing typologies, such as the
MBTI
theory, which
developed in the U.S. are sometimes described by Russian Socionists as
too optimistic, showing too little of the dark side of the various
types. In contrast, people from the West may be surprised by the
degree to which Socionics types are described as melancholic. This
difference may reflect differences in the degree to which people in
different cultures tend to express melancholy, morose, pensive
characteristics in public–or, on the contrary, the degree to which
they are conditioned by their culture to express bright, optimistic
qualities. In addition, socionics types’s “weaknesses” as perceived by
other types, usually reflecting the super-ego functions, are a central
part of the socionics conception of types, while
MBTI
descriptions tend to focus only on each type’s “strengths”, an
approach that Russian socionists tend to see as too “politically
correct” and avoiding of a frank discussion of the types.
Passing on descriptive elements without fully knowing their source
¶
Many type descriptions contain similar phrases about very specific
behaviors that have no connection to the position of
functions
in
Model A
. A famous example is
a phrase from
Weisband’s
early descriptions that
LIEs
are “inclined towards alpinism.” If these don’t reference
specific studies supporting them, then it becomes very difficult to
ascertain the validity of such statements. Potentially, an observation
made on a small number of people may get copied from description to
description and hence become “standard” in type descriptions (or
descriptions of other groupings), hence perpetuating a somewhat biased
understanding. Collective discussion and criticism lessens the frequency
of these “random” tidbits.
Associating specific interests and topic areas with types
¶
A kind of bias related to the other categories comes from describing
types, quadras, and IM elements in terms of specific interests and topic
areas. For example, a person might associate interest in the arts with
being an ethical type, interest in pure sciences with being an Alpha NT,
and interest in applied sciences with being a Gamma NT. While some
people regard these socionic “stereotypes” as completely valid, others
point out that they’re also inaccurate for a number of people.
One problem with this kind of type-interest linkage is that it fails to
take into account the roles other IM elements may play within in a
particular interest. For example, it is commonly suggested that an
interest in health is related to
. However, when one
thinks of the breadth of activities that may be related to health, it
becomes apparent that many different functions might be involved:
Gathering and analyzing the latest research on nutrition
Predicting global trends related to world health
Coming up with innovative solutions to health problems
Developing formulas for maintaining good health
Fostering relationships for good psychological health
Using spiritual or emotional means to influence physiological health
By considering the breadth of what’s involved in “health,” it becomes
clear that more IM elements than
may be involved.
Describing socionic categories using language that is foreign to that category
¶
The authors of
The Semantics of the Information Aspects
found that many
existing descriptions of
information aspects
used language that did not resonate with the aspects themselves. For
example, many descriptions of
contain the word
“mysticism,” which did not resonate with individuals with
as a strong function. “Mysticism” was an external interpretation of the
interests and behaviors of types with strong
, but was not
how these types themselves perceived things.
Other examples may be when sensers are described as being “focused only
on the here and now,” or intuiters as being “impractical.” The first
sounds like something an intuitive type would say about sensers, while
the second sounds like what a sensing type might think about many
intuiters.
It could be argued that describing Socionics categories from the
perspective of how those of an opposing category may describe them is
legitimate, valuable information. The bias comes if this isn’t done
evenly for every category (i.e., if some categories are described from
an internal viewpoint, and others from a more external viewpoint).
Research on how people of different categories describe themselves and
are described by people of other categories, and clearly annotated
information based on such research, may help in overcoming such bias.
Over-emphasis on duality and intra-quadra relationships
¶
Because Socionics was developed largely to understand behavior in
long-term personal relationships, the benefits of certain relationships
in other settings may be overlooked. For example, the impression is
created that relations between
opposing quadras
are adversarial; however, in many settings these relations may be more
agreeable than predicted (especially
Contrary
and
Super-Ego relations
). In an atmosphere that
emphasizes purely intellectual discussion and doesn’t require emotional
or practical support,
Alpha
and
Gamma
NT types
may find a certain complementarity.
Duality
is emphasized in Socionics because it involves
complementarity at all levels. However, other relationships have their
own merits.
External Links
¶
Limitations of
Socionics
,
Mixed
Effects of
Socionics
by
Rick DeLong