# Sakinorva Rheti test



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

The IN are clear. F/T and P/J are close, it seems, so it could go either way.
4w3 is just like 4w5 a possibility
Tritype 146 is correct, i just don't know the order yet. It's very confusing... I know i have 4w3, 6w5 and 1w9 but i just don't know in what order to place them.


----------



## LonelySpaceEmperor (Jan 4, 2018)

Seems consistent with previous results.


----------



## NipNip (Apr 16, 2015)

TricoFeathers said:


> View attachment 818883


Phew, I am not the only one with "comparative e" value minus.


----------



## TricoFeathers (Jan 13, 2019)

NipNip said:


> Phew, I am not the only one with "comparative e" value minus.


I wasn't sure what that meant, do you?


----------



## NipNip (Apr 16, 2015)

TricoFeathers said:


> I wasn't sure what that meant, do you?


Unclear to me. Both the scale (seems very uneven, from something like -100 to +300, why?) and the reasoning behind "comparative" (what does it mean; how is it calculated?).

But the minus probably means significantly below average.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

I had something like -57 on extraversion in comparative, if it helps


----------



## LonelySpaceEmperor (Jan 4, 2018)

TricoFeathers said:


> I wasn't sure what that meant, do you?


I think "Raw" means the MBTI type calculated directly from your answers, while "Comparative" factors in your enneagram scores.


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

Can someone tell me what any of this means plz?


----------



## justhannahsis (Jan 3, 2017)

I got 4w5, tritype: 461 (seems really accurate honestly) and INFP as mbti type. They got that wrong though cause I am an ISFP it's just that my "intuition" and "sensing" parts are very balanced, just slightly more sensing. But all in all, pretty accurate.


----------



## Blue Wolf (Feb 8, 2019)

I didn't get my type, but I'm not surprised, because I had a difficult time answering between the two options many times. I either related to neither or related to both. Also, shouldn't I have scored INTP, because my P was higher than J according to the test? The Enneagram results aren't too bad, but I'm not a 369. I would look for my tritype and wings in those I scored highest in. I figure myself for a balanced wing 5.


----------



## Brains (Jul 22, 2015)

If this is mostly the RHETI, we can throw it to the trash: RHETI is psychometric garbage, and what it types people as differs significantly from eg. how the Enneagram Institute staff type people in a live setting. One of the biggest pieces of nonsense is that the people typed at 3 by the RHETI _tend to be more introverted than average_. Given that Extraversion is literally a measure of reward orientedness and positive emotionality and Threes are described as being very high on that, the test just doesn't make sense.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Brains said:


> If this is mostly the RHETI, we can throw it to the trash: RHETI is psychometric garbage, and what it types people as differs significantly from eg. how the Enneagram Institute staff type people in a live setting. One of the biggest pieces of nonsense is that the people typed at 3 by the RHETI _tend to be more introverted than average_. Given that Extraversion is literally a measure of reward orientedness and positive emotionality and Threes are described as being very high on that, the test just doesn't make sense.


What? Extroversion isn't about positive emotionality...
Extroversion and introversion are about energy, basically. It's not about positive or negative emotionality or even reward orientation, in all actuality


----------



## Brains (Jul 22, 2015)

Vaka said:


> What? Extroversion isn't about positive emotionality...
> Extroversion and introversion are about energy, basically. It's not about positive or negative emotionality or even reward orientation, in all actuality


If you simply read Jung, maybe. But what psychologists have found within the last few decades is that if Extraversion has a foundation, it is exactly reward orientation and positive emotionality.

To get at it one way, even Jung characterized extraverts as being very much oriented towards the outside world, and the same applies to basically every model of personality ever invented - the four temperaments, Enneagram's Assertive Triad, Jungian Extraverts, list goes on. But most of these models' explanations for extraverts' behavior amount to speculation, and sometimes amount to simply torturing a concept to fit the overall model of the system. They don't really answer _why_, which is one question that psychologists sought to answer.

The first clue comes simply from how they construct the traits: The Five-Factor model didn't originate from any presumption of how human personality is constructed, psychologists simply asked people a ton of things and used statistical programs to see what things occur together. If the things that are asked about have no relation to each other, in a big enough sample they won't end up correlated. Things that have a commonality with each other on the other hand, do. One of the clusters they found was unsurprisingly Extraversion. The trait reflected social behaviors as expected, and indicated that extraverts were ambitious, enjoyed gaining status and attention and in general were perceived as highly active, energetic people who had energy for pursuing a variety of goals. And last but most definitely not least, positive emotionality found its way under Extraversion.

"What are the positive emotions? They are all activated in response to the pursuit or capture of some resource that is valued. Desire is awakened in us to get us to go and look or work for the thing we want. Excitement builds towards the anticipated capture of that resource. Joy follows its capture. These are all states to do with getting things, or moving towards getting them." - Prof. Daniel Nettle, "Personality: What makes you the way you are"

Fundamentally, for any living creature to take action, there has to first be some evaluationary process that says it's worth it to do. You can liken the decision process to a hedonic calculation with gains and costs. Extraversion, in the modern, non-Jungian understanding, is the degree to which we get gains in pleasure or satisfaction from rewarding things we've acquired and in how strongly we respond to cues for getting that satisfaction that are presented to us. That is, it's how much we like things and want things. 

From this, it's easy to see that all else being equal the costs of doing things are roughly the same for two people, but the person high in Extraversion would end up deciding many more things are profitable, while the person low on Extraversion would have a narrower range of concerns - there'd simply be less things that'd get him enough to outweigh the costs. Given this, to one person the world seems full of worthwhile things to do, to strive to acquire, and so on, while for the other the world is basically a drag and he can't see why others run around like headless chickens chasing whatever thing that seems unsatisfying to him.

The above should make sense of why Extraversion is the trait most linked to positive emotionality, since desire and enjoyment are what drive us to go after rewards. This holds up just by looking at what people everyone agrees are extraverted are like, and is upheld by studies that show that high extraversion scorers eg. report being happier on average, and enjoy seeing pictures of puppies more and stay happier longer than less extraverted participants.

There are several interesting things to be noted from this:

One, Jung was wrong. The opposite of Extraversion's outward-orientedness is not a deep inward-orientedness (that is a separate personality trait), but rather simply a low degree of outward orientation. An introvert who's low in the drive to contemplate can simply end up collecting Turtles comics or something of the sort. Extraversion-Introversion makes nice sense when you're playing around with concepts, but ultimately Extraversion-Detachment is a better name for the axis.

Two, extraverts are by no means necessarily shallow and unintellectual - if anything, it's the opposite, as Extraversion has a positive correlation with both aspects of Openness/Intellect, the personality trait that's linked to aesthetic sensitivity, a desire to experience strong emotions, a vivid imagination, creativity, tendency to psychosis, an intellectual personal style including the drive to invest effort into analyzing things in depth, and to some extent raw intellectual ability itself. (Fives and Fours are characterized by both low Extraversion and high Openness/Intellect)

Three, social anxiety is not a form of introversion - an emotionally stable introvert simply isn't interested in social interaction because it is unprofitable. Anxiety is an active form of negative emotion, not the lack of positive emotion that characterizes low Extraversion.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

Brains said:


> If this is mostly the RHETI, we can throw it to the trash: RHETI is psychometric garbage, and what it types people as differs significantly from eg. how the Enneagram Institute staff type people in a live setting. One of the biggest pieces of nonsense is that the people typed at 3 by the RHETI _tend to be more introverted than average_. Given that Extraversion is literally a measure of reward orientedness and positive emotionality and Threes are described as being very high on that, the test just doesn't make sense.


I noticed the 3 questions seemed strange too on the RHETI. It was basically like how TJ you were, not what you described which is what I see usually associated with 3.

That being said, I still think it's the best test out there. And it gave me a tie of 4 and 5 which seems about right too.


----------



## TricoFeathers (Jan 13, 2019)

Brains said:


> If this is mostly the RHETI, we can throw it to the trash: RHETI is psychometric garbage, and what it types people as differs significantly from eg. how the Enneagram Institute staff type people in a live setting. One of the biggest pieces of nonsense is that the people typed at 3 by the RHETI _tend to be more introverted than average_. Given that Extraversion is literally a measure of reward orientedness and positive emotionality and Threes are described as being very high on that, the test just doesn't make sense.


What tests do you recommend? Most responders to this one seem pleased or comfortable with their results as fairly accurate. No test is perfect but this one is holding up well enough as online tests go.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

Ocean Helm said:


> I noticed the 3 questions seemed strange too on the RHETI. It was basically like how TJ you were, not what you described which is what I see usually associated with 3.
> 
> That being said, I still think it's the best test out there. And it gave me a tie of 4 and 5 which seems about right too.


Agreed, as a TJ i get 3 in almost every tritype test, while in reality i have almost none of 3ness in me, definitely 4 in image triad


----------



## VinnieBob (Mar 24, 2014)




----------



## Brains (Jul 22, 2015)

TricoFeathers said:


> What tests do you recommend? Most responders to this one seem pleased or comfortable with their results as fairly accurate. No test is perfect but this one is holding up well enough as online tests go.


Responders being pleased with their typings is more or less irrelevant - a huge number of typology enthusiasts are mistyped and/or just not very self-aware. A huge number just use typology as a vehicle to socialize or their typing as a source of identity, ie. "I'm Type 3, therefore I'm like this this this and this", when it should be the opposite "meh, I'm like this, this and this, so I guess Type 3 ends up being the most descriptive fit".

A true gauge of an Enneagram test's accuracy is whether it types people that fit the Three description as Threes, and so on. In the sample I often cite, for example, the Three population was distinctly above average on Extraversion, while a group of people typed as Threes by the RHETI were below average, which doesn't fit with the Enneagram Institute's description of what kinds of people we should call Threes at all.

As far as Enneagram tests go, I prefer the SEDIG, the short simple test in Wisdom of the Enneagram and the "classical" one on Ecletic Energies that just gives you a simple type and wing result, and that's it. That said, understanding the Five-Factor model well, going through the Enneagram literature through that lens and gauging from that gives the best, cleanest result if you're willing to put in the work. Studying the FFM in depth tends to destroy the Enneagram, though.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

@Brains I found the Eclectic Energies test to have a much more idiosyncratic view of the types than the RHETI. Even if they didn't mess 3 up, I remember their 4 seeming way off. But maybe it's just that I'm more used to this mainstream Riso-Hudson version of Enneagram which is best reflected in their own test (even if flawed). I don't think there is a technically "correct" way to do Enneagram though, so within each test is an implied interpretation.

What is this "sample you often cite" anyway? You've got me intrigued on this.


----------



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

vinniebob said:


> View attachment 819527


This isn't comfortable :sad:


----------

