MBTI Text Analyzer

ClevelandINTP

ClevelandINTP

Well-known member
MBTI
INTP
Enneagram
5w4 / 8w7

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.49.01 AM.webp
    Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.49.01 AM.webp
    14.7 KB · Views: 14
  • Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.53.18 AM.webp
    Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.53.18 AM.webp
    13.6 KB · Views: 14
  • Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.55.12 AM.webp
    Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.55.12 AM.webp
    9.6 KB · Views: 14
  • Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.56.12 AM.webp
    Screen Shot 2019-10-14 at 12.56.12 AM.webp
    5.9 KB · Views: 15
BritNi said:
Fun!

This thing is bias against INFJs though.
Apparently it's just like the rest of the world which doesn't understand them.

Lol.
Click to expand...

How so?

I think it depends on the context of the work you're feeding it. For example, I used some of my finished projects which are very direct, forceful, analytical, insightful and future-oriented. Most likely were heavily influenced by corporate preferences. Perhaps, that is associated with the language of the INTJ

Yet, when I feed it my brief insights from a twitter-esc feed, I am typed ENTP. Apparently, ENTP is the language of quick, insightful, witty, punchy, scattered and analytical

I think your observation is interesting
 
I have fed the classifier several different texts over various contexts, and it burbs out everything from INTJ to INTP to ENTP to ENFP to INFP to ESFJ to ENFJ. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
We do use all of the cognitive functions, though. Seems like it classifies your writing style as more 'NT'

Frankly, all of my "polished" work is classified as INTJ. These are long texts, too, so more data, central limit theorem, etc.

Doesn't mean I'm INTJ, but because it's more complete and thought through, I'm sure my writing is super-concise, action-oriented and focused on future direction
 
Last edited:
ClevelandINTP said:
How so?

I think it depends on the context of the work you're feeding it. For example, I used some of my finished projects which are very direct, forceful, analytical, insightful and future-oriented. Most likely were heavily influenced by corporate preferences. Perhaps, that is associated with the language of the INTJ

Yet, when I feed it my brief insights from a twitter-esc feed, I am typed ENTP. Apparently, ENTP is the language of quick, insightful, witty, punchy, scattered and analytical

I think your observation is interesting
Click to expand...

Lol. I'm sure if you write about conspiracy theories and aliens and fortune telling, it would type you as INFJ.

Lol.
 
It's not an underestimation rather than some skepticism.

Before I would ever take something like this as more than *fun*, I would really like to know the credentials of those who are creating the algorithms, ya know?

Valid and accurate are two different things, yes. Thanks for pointing that out. Perhaps there is some accuracy within this tool, at times. But I highly doubt it's valid.

Just my opinion and all.
 
BritNi said:
It's not an underestimation rather than some skepticism.

Before I would ever take something like this as more than *fun*, I would really like to know the credentials of those who are creating the algorithms, ya know?

Valid and accurate are two different things, yes. Thanks for pointing that out. Perhaps there is some accuracy within this tool, at times. But I highly doubt it's valid.

Just my opinion and all.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I think our definitions of valid and accurate are swapped. I think accuracy requires validity whereas validity doesn't always mean accuracy
 
BritNi said:
Fun!

This thing is bias against INFJs though.
Apparently it's just like the rest of the world which doesn't understand them.

Lol.
Click to expand...
I fed it your post and this was the result:

INFJ
25%
ISFP
13%
INFP
12%
ESTJ
11%
ENTJ
8%
ENFP
7%
INTP
6%
INTJ
4%
ENTP
4%
ESFJ
3%
ISFJ
2%
ESFP
2%
ISTP
2%
ESTP
1%
ENFJ
1%
ISTJ
0%
Click to expand...
lol!

But I agree with you that this is all a bit silly.
 
BritNi said:
It's not an underestimation rather than some skepticism.

Before I would ever take something like this as more than *fun*, I would really like to know the credentials of those who are creating the algorithms, ya know?

Valid and accurate are two different things, yes. Thanks for pointing that out. Perhaps there is some accuracy within this tool, at times. But I highly doubt it's valid.

Just my opinion and all.
Click to expand...

Here are the culprits: https://www.uclassify.com/about
 
acd said:
I fed it your post and this was the result:


lol!

But I agree with you that this is all a bit silly.
Click to expand...

I mean, it's scooping up a lot of "IF" and more "Fi" followed by dominant "Te" users

Which is basically an INFP. Perhaps their algorithm could use some slight tweaking but it seems like it's getting the essence...

A better question to ask is: is this classifier better at picking up type than just random selection and or is it better than a human could do
 
acd said:
I fed it your post and this was the result:


lol!

But I agree with you that this is all a bit silly.
Click to expand...

Lol. That's funny.

I wonder if it just fed INFJ because it included "INFJ". Hmm... Lemme check.


Lol.

I removed "against INFJs" and it fed me this:
Screenshot_20191014-133102_Chrome.webp

Which I find humor in because it kind of supports my hypothesis. :P
 
An interesting and fun experiment. Thanks for posting this @ClevelandINTP.

I tried different chapters of my novels and got INTJ most often.
I tried different clips of dialogue and earned the correct type for the character each time. Interesting. I wonder if this is a good tool for checking authenticity when trying to write "typed" dialogues.
Note: I typed the characters after writing, not before.
 
Asa said:
An interesting and fun experiment. Thanks for posting this @ClevelandINTP.

I tried different chapters of my novels and got INTJ most often.
I tried different clips of dialogue and earned the correct type for the character each time. Interesting. I wonder if this is a good tool for checking authenticity when trying to write "typed" dialogues.
Note: I typed the characters after writing, not before.
Click to expand...

Neat! Yeah, I don't think it's perfect, but it's has some accuracy within it. It's certainly providing me a nice mid-day mind-fuck

Imagine we're in a simulation and everything we've ever read has been created to give the illusion of what a certain type might have wrote and or thought
 
ClevelandINTP said:
I mean, it's scooping up a lot of "IF" and more "Fi" followed by dominant "Te" users

Which is basically an INFP. Perhaps their algorithm could use some slight tweaking but it seems like it's getting the essence...

A better question to ask is: is this classifier better at picking up type than just random selection and or is it better than a human could do
Click to expand...

Oh, nevermind. I see what you did
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top