# Jumping to conclusions & cognitive functions?



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

Would it be indicative of a dominant judging type to jump to conclusions quickly?

Let's say I'm discussing something with a friend of mine, and they reacted negatively. Mentally, I'll quickly try to think of all the possible reasons why they reacted that way, and settle on the one that makes most sense with regards to circumstances, my knowledge of their personality and pet peeves, etc.. Once I decide on that, I get kind of stubborn. _They were upset because X_. Makes sense. Then later on, after discussing it with them and finding out more, I'm like.. oh.. okay. Maybe they weren't upset because of X.

It's been pointed out that Ne-doms for example would take much longer before settling on a conclusion. I've also seen dominant perceiving being correlated with indecisiveness, and a reluctance to reach conclusions. Would that be correct?


----------



## Hanaseru (May 29, 2013)

I don't know if it would be indicative, but I know that I do it for trivial matters. Otherwise, I take like 7 trillion hours thinking things over.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

This has been something I've thought about for a while, and probably some months ago I might've been a bit more tempted to say "yes." 

Currently, my take is this -- I think a rational/judging type would find it necessary to revolve his/her cognition around rational processes, so e.g. I know a friend who is Fi-dom almost certainly, and you'll see her making _lots_ of feeling judgments from the get-go and without doing this, maybe it's hard to even start to process the situation (i.e. rather than doing "pure observation mode") , but maybe they're not _final_, more like, all of the judgments will be weighed against each other.... in time...but they are still made as and when the individual feels like it, as part of the process of understanding.

I think whether or not someone would wish to close off a judgment process unto a final conclusion somewhat swiftly might just be more of a J-ish vs P-ish thing in the non-cognitive-functions sense, and while some theorize those measures relate to the functions line-up, how this is so actually is debatable it seems even to those who seriously consider it.

So I think the "Ne-doms may wait a long time" might be a bit more about P vs. J than about perceiving vs. rational.

As a simple example --- N-doms might exhibit this tendency to go by their hunches, without exercising much judgment, i.e. they might go with the first judgment elicited by their intuition, and to be honest, _why not_ -- they don't necessarily gain the same satisfaction from the rationalization process as they do from perceiving, say, possibilities, or whatever the case may be (one might say, well, wouldn't they keep perceiving possibilities until the ideal judgment is reached, BUT remember, this is TYING the perceiving function into a judging operation --- that might not be what N-doms want to use their N for in the first place, i.e. to offer the ideal possibility for the perfect conclusion, and may want to use it in a more "purely irrational" way, so may hurry their decisions...). Whereas perhaps the judging dominant might judge and judge and judge until tomorrow comes. I mean, it all depends of course --- judging doms can and are often rash on this too, I'm just presenting the other side. For instance, maybe they're all too confident that they will/can get what they need out of the judgment they make (since they're so invested in judgment, in full) that they won't hesitate much and go with their first judgment. 

Now to just be careful, even J orientation isn't about jumping to conclusions prior to sufficient data, it's more like they may wish to predefine a goal that _is_ achievable, and really nail it, rather than meander more freely in terms of defining what it is they want to classify, do, etc.


Something I'll suggest might be at the heart of this: some people have a hard time waiting long enough to avoid jumping to a conclusion unless there's a REAL HUGE reason telling them they have something to lose, i.e. they're of the orientation "well it makes sense...given what I know, so why not conclude it". As in, they may be (more subconsciously) aware they can make more mistakes this way --- but maybe for whatever reason, this doesn't necessarily totally bother them, and/or maybe it does but it's not high in priority to avoid enough that they'll invest the psychological energy to avoid.


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

Not necessarily. Jumping to conclusions is a cognitive distortion that I have personally witnessed in both judging and perceiving types. Anybody can have really shitty thinking habits. 

I'm going to post a list of cognitive distortions while I've got a chance. If you look for these things in your thinking and combat them or at least call yourself out on it and tell yourself to you need to cut that shit outt, life really will be so much easier. Train your brain, peeps <3 

Shit, I might just post this list and ask people of all types to tell me if they saw themselves somewhere on this list! I know I did the first time I saw it. I was like... fuuuuuuuck, lol. I was pretty embarrassed. 

15 Common Cognitive Distortions | Psych Central


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

> It's been pointed out that Ne-doms for example would take much longer before settling on a conclusion.


Sometimes, but I wouldn't associate that with the type. It is certainly part of the stereotype, but not essential to someone preferring Ne over other Perceiving functions. 

The stereotype is that Ne doms aren't just indecisive - it's that they change their mind frequently and struggle to settle into one decision and stick with it. This could be driven by actual processing (functions) or motivation (enneagram) - because there isn't much to account for the overlap between these systems, it basically comes down to exing that trait out as a pointer to Ne dominance. 



> I've also seen dominant perceiving being correlated with indecisiveness, and a reluctance to reach conclusions. Would that be correct?


This is more subtle. 

Dominant Perceiving means the type's first motus is to in some way bring in information. They spend more time managing the information they bring in than they do filtering, assessing, or deciding - regardless of how "decisive" their behavior looks or sounds. The same would be true for dominant Judgers who appear indecisive, but in fact are that way because they are constantly assessing over and over. 

In other words, "decisiveness" is more of a personality trait than it is a trait caused by a specific habit of informational processing that could be explained by the functions. The difference is more that a dominant Perceiver would speak from the motive of what they have taken in, or want you to take in, while a dominant Judger will speak from the motive of what they have assessed, or want someone else to have also assessed.


----------



## jonagelle (Oct 8, 2013)

It is okay that from judgment you proceed to conclusion but do not announce it when you are not sure of it. You carefully observe on how things are done. Get the details and figure out the issues in a clever way. We cannot left out conclusion on a judgment, it has been innate to a person. But the handling is what it matters. You must be careful to it. Do not reveal if not fully understand. Based it from factual and not by expectation or belief. A judgment will result to a lot of conclusion, some negative some positive so it needs to be accurate. Some are false some are correct. Use a wise judgment so you will result to a wise conclusion. Use a righteous judgment so it will also result to a righteous and good conclusion.

Nathanael King is a Clinical Hypnotherapist, NLP practitioner and weight loss & nutritional therapist. He also helps people suffering from panic attacks or social anxiety. He has written a book on how to build confidence instantly using NLP techniques. Please click <a target="_new" href="http://dailyimproveself.com/instantconfidencefree/">here</a> to download now. You can also sign up for weekly newsletter at <a target="_new" href="http://www.SelfProgress.co.uk">http://www.SelfProgress.co.uk</a> for your growth.


----------



## I Kant (Jan 19, 2013)

Almost all the types I have encountered have jumped to conclusions.

If they jump to the right ones it isn't so bad, unlike if they become too entrenched in the wrong ones.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

kaleidoscope said:


> It's been pointed out that Ne-doms for example would take much longer before settling on a conclusion. I've also seen dominant perceiving being correlated with indecisiveness, and a reluctance to reach conclusions. Would that be correct?


well this is certainly true of me with auxiliary Ne, I always take forever to decide things, it's a grueling process every time to thoroughly consider all the options, it's like I take all decisions so seriously like the fate of the world depends on them or something, hehe, I just don't decide quickly, and I always hate to feel locked into a decision in case new information comes up or my mood changes or whatever, much of the time I like to hold several possible conclusions in reserve rather than going with any one of them, I don't really feel that driven to make definite conclusions, I prefer tentative ones.

In contrast, something I've noticed with my ISTJ mother is that I'll start to say something and before it's even halfway out of my mouth she'll cut in and say something like "oh so you decided ___" and I have to stop her and tell her to wait and hear me out. She'll do this most often when I'm talking through my thought process about something mentioning the pros and cons of various options, she'll just seize on the first point that comes out of my mouth when I still have several more to make before summing up any conclusion I might have (though probably I haven't made a decision at all yet). 

For example:
mom: "do you want to pick up lunch or just go home?"
me: "well there is that wendy's across the street..."
mom: "okay so you want wendy's."
me: "...but they looked pretty busy so I was just going to say that it might not be any faster than eating at home."
mom: "so you want to go home."
me: "no, I didn't say I _want_ either. I don't really care, I'm just pointing it out for _you_ to consider."

She'll also sometimes do this when I'm just making some kind of random observation about something and don't have any actual opinion about it, or there is no decision to be made, it's like she'll try and force it to be a point which indicates some conclusion that just isn't there and is totally irrelevant to whatever it was I was thinking. 

For example:
me: "wow the sun is really making that cornfield look golden, that's beautiful."
mom: "Darn, if I had known.... I should have gotten you the yellow roses instead of the purple bouquet for your birthday."
me: 0_o ".....no. I'm just saying it's pretty mom, I didn't say yellow is my new favorite color."

It's really kind of funny to see her scrambling around from one conclusion to another based on random bits of information, she's just so eager to draw conclusions from things. 

In the two examples above my mom's conclusions might occur to me as possibilities if I was in her shoes, but I'd just sort of make a mental sticky-note for review later after staying alert for more information that might confirm it, or if I said anything it would probably be in the form of a question asking for verification.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)




----------

