Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Type distribution
¶
Different socionists have different views on the distribution of
socionic types in the population, whether in Ukraine,
Russia, Europe, or the United
States. Only a limited number of statistical studies
have been performed, and the results of type tests are universally
recognized among socionists to be unreliable judges of type
distribution, for reasons of selection bias and the general
defects of tests
. In contrast, type distribution statistics in
western typologies such as
MBTI
are amassed specifically from
test results.
The different views include, but are not limited to, the following.
Roughly even type distribution
¶
While there are no poll numbers to cite, probably about 30-40% of
socionists believe that types are roughly evenly distributed. Personal
experience, typing statistics, and logical arguments are cited to
support this view.
Reasoning and response
¶
Uneven type distribution
¶
There is a wide range of opinions on which
traits
are more
common. Generally, socionists seem to agree that
rational
and
irrational
types are equally common, and most
socionists consider the number of
extratims
and
introtims
to be roughly equal, but there is disagreement
about whether there are more intuitive or sensing types, and logical and
ethical types. Personal experience, typing statistics, and,
occasionally, logical arguments are cited to support these views, but
there is little consensus on the prevailing traits.
Reasoning and response
¶
Uneven distribution by dichotomies, but even quadra distribution
¶
Reasoning and response
¶
External links
¶
Socionic Type Distribution Statistics
article in favor of even type distribution with statistical sets provided