Oh yes, another lil' personality quiz -- details enclosed!

Post Reply New Topic

I meant to say AE instead of NE

I think it would be rare to find someone who fit completely into one style and couldn't identify with at least one thing in another. I can't identify with NMP at all and one tiny part of the NDE style applies to me. I identify with NDA a little more but still not enough to say "That's me!" I can see myself in the AE style though. I would say that I am a mixture of AE and NAE (my quiz result).

Scoots is spot on; it's just attempting to move you up and down the graph of the various contradictions, and putting so many together at once is just a short cut (the full test takes hours...). Those who haven't tried it yet should try to go in with a relaxed attitude; don't get fixated on exact values, it's not meant to be a serious test, just an overview!

It's interesting that on the other sites that everyone (who published) got the A component (which used to be for "Autisitic" but is now the more PC, but less representative, "Artist") but we have many here without the A factor. Does the corellation still hold, i.e., are those non A results those of non Aspie members?

Bear in mind that this quick test was loosely based on a measure of your working potential, and has nothing to do with AS as such (though I'm hoping it can be developed in that direction, and it's looking good so far) but any feedback, negative or otherwise will be most welcome!

I'm still working my way through a lot of background info, and whenever I come with something of note, I'll pass it on to Torley for publishing here. This is just a fleeting visit for me (I've got too much on, basically) but if any of you have particular concerns, or any significant input you wish to contribute, I'm sure Torley will be happy to act as conduit.

[Wel done Torley! This is going really well. ]

Welcome to WrongPlanet, gwynfryn

Yes... if there are other specifics... let me know... I'm curious how this will develop.

That's me very accurate

Rogue, the N component is a measure of how much control one has (over their natural inclinations) so NAE is really just a "better" adjusted AE.

I was a bit put out when I got two diagnosed "Aspies" with no A component but it turns out Cocknie Rebel wrote the wrong result down (it was a wind up right? ) so there's just Deborah now who might want to check her diagnosis (and from my reading of the various categories, I can easily believe the MPE combination could give an Aspie like personality; Motivated/Prudent/Engineer type) but bear in mind this is only a "Mickey Mouse" version of a much more invloved full test, which in any case was not designed as a tool for diagnosing Aspies!

As for undiagnosed, we have Cindy with no A, so it would be interesting to know why you believe you're an Aspie (same disclaimer as above; you may well be correct, but a Normalised/Engineer could also just mean a non Aspie "nerd"? If anyone's read Scott Adams' "The Dilbert Principle", you'll likely have noticed his discription of "Scientists, Engineers, Programmers, and other Odd People" is a near perfect take on the outward appearence of Aspies; the only missing aspect is our inclination to disregard body language!).

If you've visited the other links Torley provided, you'll know I'm trying to arouse interest (among certain professionals in the field) in developing the full test further, with the focus on the diagnosis and categorising of Aspies (and I think most will agree the results so far can fairly be described as promising?) so if you Ladies would care to provided further feed-back (by PM if you prefer) that could prove invaluable; it's always the borderline cases which determine the value of any test.

Still working on what the varous letters mean but you can expect more info very soon, so please keep the results coming in.

I did this test 4 times and I got:
1. AE
2. NAE
3. DAE
4. "You have an even-tempered style with no overly dominant components that we can report on at length. To discover more about your dominant style in a particular circumstance (e.g. work, or play), please try again with just that circumstance in mind."

Of which I partially agree with AE and NAE, much less with DAE and not at all with #4 (obviously). More than once I was selecting answers at random, because both choices described me equally well. If the same ambiguous set was shown again, I was selecting different answer than the first time.

Since description of DAE was not yet posted on this thread, I include it below for the reference.

'DAE' style

Individuals with these characteristics are project minded, task focused and very orderly in their approach to work. They are also characterised by carefulness and caution, which adds to the individual's stubbornness and perfectionist approach. Not only are they focused on details, but they also bring a need to think ahead and consider pitfalls, which can turn their perfectionism into fussiness or pedantic behaviour. Clarity, direction and clear expectations are all very important to them. They need to know what they are required to achieve and work best in an area where there are systems, processes and procedures to follow.

They like to have boundaries to operate within and to feel comfortable that they will not tread on toes or encroach on someone else's work area. Certainly, stress will occur if they cannot deal with their work in a logical and orderly sequence, particularly if, as a result, error occurs. In such situations, the stress will manifest in irritability and the negative aspects of their temperament bring a more critical approach and they will be outspokenly pessimistic. What is also seen when they become stressed is some oscillation between quiet, focused behaviour and outspoken, direct and even blunt behaviour. Anxiety will also occur if they are put on the spot in terms of having to react very quickly to changing demands. They like plenty of warning and background information.

Their work approach is extremely conscientious. They can be relied upon to produce the work that has been asked of them on time and to a high standard. They will try and keep on top of their work flow, will be very organised and methodical and will have a place for everything. You will not see a slapdash approach resulting from this sort of individual and they will not take too kindly to anybody else who is. As a general rule, their preference is to take one step at a time, deal with one task, complete it and then begin another. Having to juggle multiple demands is likely to create confusion, which can result in a flustered or anxious approach to their work and an increasing need to organise and keep everything in its place.

With people, they will tend to be more matter of fact, businesslike, direct and formal than demonstrative or bubbly. They are certainly more reserved than outgoing or sociable and having to be in the limelight or constantly talking to people during the day will make them feel like they are being distracted from their tasks rather than productive. At the same time, whilst their general demeanour will be of someone who is sensible and "no nonsense", they do have an underlying warmth and consideration for people, which can emerge from time to time. It is more likely to be fleeting in a work situation but may be more evident outside of this or with people they know particularly well. They respond well to people who are professional, conscientious and very thorough.

A few breakdowns;

"The Extroverted Components
The H, M, and D components can be viewed as largely extroverted in kind; each seeks and needs contact with people in order to maximise personal satisfaction.

M & D
The M and D components are closely related and can be considered together. These components centre around feelings, emotions, and associated manifestations, and are closely related to the individual's contact with their environment. Environmental conditions have considerable effect upon their manifestation. When events are pleasing, the feeling tone is heightened and the emotional tone is likely to be cheerful; but when events are unpleasant, the feeling tone is depressed and the emotional tone is likely to be gloomy.
Because of this special sensitivity to feelings, the individual is strongly influenced by environmental impressions. This results in involuntary shifting of their attention in accordance with the pleasure or displeasure felt toward the matter under immediate consideration. Consequently, there is often some impairment of the powers of concentration. Because of the satisfaction found in some sensory reactions and the annoyance found in others, these individuals have strong impulses toward pursuit and avoidance. These may result in aimless activity, expressed as restlessness or as ambivalence.
The M phase sometimes alternates with the D phase. Sometimes mixtures of the two phases occur at the same time. A depressed mood often alternates with a positive mood. When this occurs, the tendency to be more active during the M phase is likely to result in greater effectiveness while it endures. However, the well integrated person does not have such pronounced alternations of mood as to interfere seriously with their efficiency, even when they interfere with their comfort.
To summarise, the M and D components are chiefly made up of traits associated with feelings or emotions, with attention, and with drive toward activity.
M
The tendencies associated in the M component are those that arise from pleasant feeling tone or the pursuit of pleasant feeling tone.
The typical N–M is cheerful, active, and alert; the typical under-controlled M is elated, restless, and distractible. The differences evidenced are changes of quality in the behaviour pattern due to differences in regulation and control.
Many associated tendencies are also found in M temperaments, such as sociability, enthusiasm, jocularity, responsiveness to others, hopefulness, versatility, insomnia, impatience and quick temper.
N–M temperament is the most frequent behaviour pattern found in the general population; but there are infinite variations within this group. The differences to be observed are due to the relative strength of N and M, and to the relative strength or weakness of other components.
N–Ms are found among successful salespeople, actors, publicity people, and in many other public contact occupations. It must not be concluded from this, however, that the mere possession of such temperament spells fitness for these jobs, nor that other temperamental patterns disqualify them. The individual must also have the necessary:
interests
abilities
training
experience
Furthermore, these must all be well integrated. It is only when all of these prerequisites are met that the person is able to perform well in these occupations.
D
The tendencies associated in the D component are those that arise from unpleasant feeling tone. They usually centre around sadness or worry, lack of push or drive, and inability to concentrate.
The individual in whom the D component is dominant is likely to appear quiet, gloomy, inactive, and somewhat unresponsive or pessimistic. Care must be exercised not to confuse this condition with one found in A individuals in which the outward manifestations seem almost identical, but occur on the basis of shut-in personality rather than worry.
D individuals, even in the presence of a rather strong N component, are sometimes under-performers. Often this may be explained by an examination of the accompanying N tendencies when those having to do with self-reliance are lacking. In such a case, presence of feelings of inferiority may be established. Since these feelings have considerable inhibiting effect on drive, the individual may appear lazy. In some instances their productiveness is seriously impaired.
Many associated tendencies occur in D temperaments. Among these is pessimism, despondency, discouragement, dearth of ideas, tearfulness, inability to concentrate, anxiety, indecisiveness, and timidity.

For more on H & P, see here:

http://www.musicmademe.com/asp/viewtopi ... highlight=

and for A & E:

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/phpBB2/ ... f92d723446

I got the MAP style NT emulated and NDE unemulated.

Personally I think this test and tests like them are a load of rubbish. None of those descriptions are me.

Alright, I did the test again, and got the same result.

'APE' style


There is a great deal of pride tied up in this temperament style. There is also considerable drive and focus on high quality outcomes. They need to have ownership of particular projects or goals and to be able to pursue them independently, gaining credibility from achieving. This person can be hard to dissuade and, at times, can become so tenacious as to be called stubborn. They are able to aggressively protect their position but can also withdraw from a conflict situation while still maintaining their viewpoint. They are hypersensitive to criticism and, when upset, can retreat into the highly imaginative and creative aspects of their work.


Avoidance of criticism, protection of their ego and pride in high quality outcomes will typify the motives of this person. Working independently and tenaciously holding onto their direction in order to achieve a strong product, enhance their reputation with the organisation and gain full ownership of what they believe in are also important components. Avoidance of anyone finding fault in what they do is a particularly important criterion. Similarly, when confronted with blockages to the achievement of their goals, they can become particularly frustrated and move from becoming openly critical and blunt to then retreating and stubbornly refusing to deal with those who are antagonistic towards their plight.


The need to initiate contact with others and create positive relationships is not apparent in this temperament style. They can be polite if they are not under stress but can become overly aggressive and blunt if they perceive that they are being judged negatively. The need for recognition is one of the main reasons why people would be tolerated or even, on occasions, sought out. Otherwise, they can be considered, in a positive sense, preoccupied, and in a less than positive sense, rather aloof and even arrogant. They are creative specialists rather than broad line managers in orientation.


An independent work environment is far preferred over a group situation. This is a person who thrives in a situation where they can have complete control over a clearly defined project which has been predetermined in terms of what the outcome looks like and what the process would be prior to launching. Then the opportunity to pursue it without interruption or change to direction would be relished. Reward comes from the achievement of a high quality outcome and the recognition that results from a job well done.

Well, I don't think I'm quite as ego based as the result suggests, but I certainly am stubborn when I think I'm right. I've never looked for rewards or credit but don't like to be dismissed as not having done my share. I like projects where I'm not sure of the result - I like to have little design adventures and to experiment, and I never like to accept a solution that someone else provides me. But there's that 'A' again!

That would explain why I saw myself in both descriptions then I had assumed there was a link between the two but wasn't sure about the N. Thanks for clearing it up

I'm a NAE like Rogue.
It describes me well

This test looks like the Jung-Meyer-Briggs Test Indicator

I took it today. My result is INTJ (Introversion, iNtuition, Thinking, Judging)

I took another MBTI several months ago and got INTP (perceptive). So it's quite accurate I think.

Did anybody ever take the MBTI?

I got AE, and it described my work style to a 't', could not have been more accurate.

The test was infuriating thoguh and I very nearly ended it before finishing because it seemed totally pointless and redundant!

My MBTI type is INTP.

Well a trimmed down five minute test is hardly going to work for everyone, but many find it surprisingly accurate;



But it worked, right?

anbuend did an analysis of the various possibilities and determined it was impossible to get A and H in combination, and feed back from the company is that in fact, though not impossible, there is extreme conflict between these characteristics, and the combination is extremely rare!

This lead to the folowing train of thought: As the H component is the one that is most likely to ensure that a person will acheive "success" as it is generally described by the capitalist mouthpieces, it appears likely that the "establishment" of any particular institution will be over-represented with people of strong H component. If this is essentially the opposite of the A component, would this lead to conflicts in real life based on nothing more than natural antipathy? In other words, could it be that Aspies have a hard time at work, not because we lack "social skills" per se, but rather that the H dominated management simply has a natural dislike for we who seem to be their opposites in so many ways?

When reflecting on my own experiences it does seem to me that the managers who reported "complaints" about me, allegedly from my colleagues, did seem out of step with what I observed of my colleagues directly! In fact, I generally got on very well with my fellow workers (with the exception of those who where management wannabees) and it seemed to me at the time that the "complaints" were in any case exaggerated out of all proportion to their possible impact on performance, and, as often as not seemed entirely spurious. It seems to me now that this is in fact the case; that the managers in question had taken a dislike to me, and then gone looking for justifications i.e., those "complaints" were in all probability just chance remarks which were never meant to be more than observations, but were latched onto to "make a case".

If this notion has substance then we are clearly being actively prejudiced against! All this stuff about prioritising "interpersonal skills" (which are, frankly, of f***-all use in an engineering capacity, say) and "networking" etc., is all a smoke screen, designed deliberately to eliminate characters which management types find irritating, and has nothing whatsoever to do with improving workplace harmony and all that garbage (and it should be clear that eliminating natural inventors like myself can not be in the interest of generating profit?).

Similarly, all this talk of "team playing" is also designed to acheive the same (though eliminating people who can work competently alone has the direct effect of allowing the mangement ot keep all available bonus payments for themselves) as history shows consistently that the best designs have always come from talented individuals (who nowadays have been renderred practically superfluous by modern trends; the media is full of "reasons" why team working is "necessary", without bothering to note that any such collaborative work, in the absence of telepathy, has got to be limited by the exchange of language).

Society condemns any such attempt to deny employment because of race or creed etc., so how much firmer should censure be applied to managers who are determinedly denying employment "because these people are naturaly irritating"?

It seems to me that there is a very strong possibility that we are very deliberately being shafted by the establishment (who are equally determined, if my recent experience is anything to go by, to deny us any benefit payments as we "obviously" don't try to find work!).

Has anyone else had experiences that support this model?

Yes, yes I have. Please read http://www.wrongplanet.net/modules.php? ... ight=#6036

My job stocking shelves was in a team setting, but there were no guidlines set down regarding work procedures, we were all on our own, and quite frequently, I was in conflict with managment because I had some rather un-orthadox, yet efficent methods of doing certain things.

Before I stocked shelves, I spent a summer and fall working in a meat packing plant. It too was a team setting. I would get stuck on a machine with three other people, usually women, it was myself and three other guys in the whole department. For the most I got along well with everyone. Like with my stocking job, I got off to a rough start as I tried to feel my way through the social rules of the place. At first, no one really liked me, but my quiet demeaner helped me out quite a bit, and people came around to me eventually. It was only a summer job, and I got laid off on Friday November 14, 1998. They were looking to hire four people full time for over the winter, and I put my name in the hat.

Two weeks later, I got a call from one person who had gotten hired full time and told me I didn't get hired. I asked who was hired. The four people they hired were the ones that got along the best with the managers. One of the people they hired full time was a gal who had gotten caught stealing stuff from the company! This same also gal got into a fight with her boyfriend in the parking lot and the copps had to be called. This same gal would come to work wearing her weight in make-up and jewelry, a definite plus for working around food. But she could charm the managers like no one else could.