Visual reading

[Coolydudey]

Now officially employed by both Pod'Lair and Auburn (as part of CognitiveType), visual reading of cognitive functions appears to be gaining both respect and momentum.

Very often, whenever the subject is brought up, somebody goes off on a (valid) tangent regarding how accurate the stuff is. So, how accurate is it? Personally, I have seen it work in practice, but I don't rely on it as a sole indicator of type (which is true of anything). It's a narrowing-down/starting point that has actually allowed me to type people I had trouble with before, and then realise the typing made sense anyway (after more careful consideration). Furthermore, it at least seems theoretically sound in that the way a person's mind functions is translated both sub-consciously and consciously into the body. My two cents, anyway.

So, without further ado, I summon the tamers of the art, @Auburn, @Lyra. Let the discussions begin! This can be the official visual reading reliability and validity discussion thread.

 

[Chad]

Personally I wish to keep my mind open to the prospect but I still see factors that could make this practice are inaccurate.

I don't know this for sure but many have suggested that Pod'Lair is overly fond of INFJ's. This is only something I have heard form others on this site and I have no way to verify if it is true however, as a possible point of arguement I would say that any test that favors one particular type is most likely flawed in some way.

This is not to say that self typing and MBTI are not flawed either. I am just playing devils advocate here and I honestly would like to learn more about this practice and see some actual test verifying it validity, or as close to validity you can get with something as theoretical as personality typing.

 

[Auburn]

This can be the official visual reading reliability and validity discussion thread.

Okay. (: I'll start with some material. The data hasn't yet been consolidated into one place, but here is a synopsis of available data from cognitivetype for those new to this.

Overview:
- What is CognitiveType?
- Visual Reading: On Judgment
- Visual Reading: On Perception
- Visual Reading: On Introversion/Extroversion
- Visual Reading: On Intro. Judgment
- Visual Reading: On Extro. Judgment
- Visual Reading: On Extro. Perception
- Visual Reading: On Intro. Perception
- Visual Reading: On Te & Fi
- Visual Reading: On Fe & Ti
- Visual Reading: On Ni & Se
- Visual Reading: On Si & Ne

Articles:
- The "Why" to Ni/Se and Si/Ne Eyes
- Summary of Eyes Cues
- Summary of Face Cues
- Hierarchy of Functions
- CognitiveType People Listing
- Summary of Experimental Thesis (accuracy of CT)
- Thoughts on Genetics of CognitiveType
- Thoughts on Brain Activity & Type
- Similarities/Differences Between CT & MBTI/Soc

Q&A Videos:
- On CognitiveType's Compatibility with Enneagram/Socionics
- On Imitating Processes & Muscle Control
- On Ti & Fi Difference in Hands
- On Ji>Pe Body Language

Detailed Video Series:
Larin Series: Premiar Film
Larin Series: NiTe Video Breakdown
Larin Series: TiNe Video Breakdown
Larin Series: NiFe Video Breakdown
Larin Series: SeFi Video Breakdown
Larin Series: TeNi Video Breakdown
Larin Series: SiTe Video Breakdown

​

 

[Montresor]

subscribed

 

[Coolydudey]

An interesting point to mention is that criminal interviewers use bodily gesture and posture to help tell if somebody is being dishonest, is telling the truth etc. They wouldn't be doing this without supporting evidence, so frames of mind do manifest themselves in the body. Why should this not extend to type?

 

[Ink]

At this point the only thing Visual Reading accomplishes is telling you what facial expressions you use, nothing deeper than that. IMO

 

[Obsidian]

^^ The ISTJ in him demands more concrete proof

 

[Ink]

More like instead of telling you you are a type because you do this and this facial expression, tell you what your actual thought process is. Auburn is doing moderately accurate speedreading with his methods nothing else.

 

[Coolydudey]

More like instead of telling you you are a type because you do this and this facial expression, tell you what your actual thought process is. Auburn is doing moderately accurate speedreading with his methods nothing else.

That's a useful skill isn't it? A starting point? And since you admit it to be moderately accurate speed reading, you're admitting it has some validity, i.e. telling you more than just what facial expressions you use.

 

[Ink]

That's a useful skill isn't it? A starting point? And since you admit it to be moderately accurate speed reading, you're admitting it has some validity, i.e. telling you more than just what facial expressions you use.

It's not accurate enough

 

[Coolydudey]

It's not accurate enough

Perhaps not to tell you your type, but probably to help narrow it down if confused. It's worked well enough for me though.

 

[Ink]

Perhaps not to tell you your type, but probably to help narrow it down if confused. It's worked well enough for me though.

How did it work for you?

 

[Montresor]

Just because the method hasn't been perfected yet doesn't mean it won't be. It is difficult to apply and "speed-reading" is probably the biggest factor lending toward erroneous typing.

 

[Ink]

The method will never be perfect since humans aren't simple enough like that.

 

[Chad]

An interesting point to mention is that criminal interviewers use bodily gesture and posture to help tell if somebody is being dishonest, is telling the truth etc. They wouldn't be doing this without supporting evidence, so frames of mind do manifest themselves in the body. Why should this not extend to type?

Were talking apples and oranges. One is saying they I can read someone whole personality just but watching them. The other is saying that when some one is nerves about something like lying to the police they will give off obvious tells that they are doing this.

To be honest the fact that situational events can effect people gestures is just one more strike against visual reading. People act and talk completely differently in different situation. However, this is not a personality change just that our emotions often come out in are posture and gestures.

P.S. I learned in my criminal behavior studies class that reading is someone is lying is less accurate then a polygraph test. However, both can be fooled if the person know what they are doing. He also told us that if we wish to be professional criminals we should learn how to pass a polygraph test volunteer for a polygraph test every you question about a crime. Police officers are notorious for believing polygraph tests.

 

[Montresor]

The method will never be perfect since humans aren't simple enough like that.

The methodology is strong and sound; the practitioner is the one that could never be perfect. This is why I constantly argue in favour of a neurophysiological CT theory.

To me, it just seems more believable if there is brain imaging data* that supports the theory. Then typing could be executed flawlessly by a computer/analyst.

Some data exists and has been presented but it basically shows that cognitive functions exist as individual units and that they might be correlated to EEG patterns.

 

[hasen]

I've been interested in Visual Reading ever since DaveSuperPowers (on youtube) mentioned how N and S eyes are different.

All the theories of visual reading sound nice and consistent, but I've yet to see a system of visual reading that actually matches reality.

For instance, the VR methods of CognitiveType (Auburn) yielded INFP (FiNe) for Linus Torvalds. ISFJ for me (I think I'm INTP), ESFJ for pneumoceptor (she types herself as INFJ), ESTJ for Richard Dawkins, ENTJ for Richard Feynman (widely believed to be ENTP).

This to me seems like a strong evidence that no method of Visual Reading can match reality.

 

[Magus]

Thanks Auburn for posting all those links. It seems we all now have plenty to study in our spare time this week.