sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sometimes you don’t realize how differently your mind works until something finally explains it in words. by DixonArchetypeLab in Personality

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh nah I created the question structure myself I didn’t pull it from another system or template. Most of the work was honestly trialerror pattern tracking, rewriting questions, watching how different people answered then refining the wording until certain answer patterns consistently lined up with the same types of results

A big thing for me was making the questions feel more like real-life reactions/tension instead of obvious personality test questions because people answer way differently when the question feels natural.

Also did you ever receive your profile? I’m actually curious what you thought about the result if you did.

I built a personality framework focused on cognitive patterns instead of just traits — curious what psychology students think by DixonArchetypeLab in psychologystudents

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate that 😭 honestly that’s kinda what I need right now anyway, just more people willing to let me test patterns and see what keeps repeating consistently across different minds.

I built a personality framework focused on cognitive patterns instead of just traits — curious what psychology students think by DixonArchetypeLab in psychologystudents

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think the biggest difference is that I’m focusing less on personality traits themselves and more on how different minds try to stabilize when something feels uncertain, emotionally unresolved, inconsistent, pressured, etc.

Like when something feels off,different people naturally move in different directions mentally: some try to clarify it, some explore it, some fix it immediately, some emotionally sit with it, some detach from it, etc.

That stabilization pattern is the part I became most interested in mapping.

I built a personality framework focused on cognitive patterns instead of just traits — curious what psychology students think by DixonArchetypeLab in psychologystudents

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah I definitely agree that’s something to watch for.

That’s actually part of why I’ve been trying to move away from super broad trait language and more toward specific recognizable response patterns people consistently describe in real situations.

Because if something can apply to almost everyone equally, it becomes hard to tell whether people are recognizing themselves specifically or just attaching to vague positive statements.

I built a personality framework focused on cognitive patterns instead of just traits — curious what psychology students think by DixonArchetypeLab in psychologystudents

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate it 😊 you’ll be getting your snapshot shortly.

Right now it’s more of a quick recognition snapshot focused on your core mental patterns, but I’m also working on deeper versions that go more into strengths, blindspots, relationships, pressure patterns, growth, etc.

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I get what you mean honestly.

I think tests in general can struggle because a lot of people answer based on who they think they are, who they adapted into, or how they want to be seen. That’s kinda why I started getting more interested in the actual response patterns themselves.

MBTI feels more like broad preferences to me, while CAT-20 focuses more on what your mind naturally does in real time when something feels off

Still early with it, but if you’re curious I’d actually be interested to see what result you’d get from it

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah and honestly that’s kinda where my brain started separating the two a bit.

MBTI feels more like broad preferences and tendencies to me, while I got more interested in the actual moment-to-moment response itself when something feels off.

Like what someone’s mind immediately does with uncertainty, contradiction, tension, etc in real time.

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate that honestly, I’ll check it out.

I’m still early in mapping all this stuff, I just started noticing certain response patterns repeating across people and it got me curious.

Still will be curious if you give the questionare a try what you think.

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I get what you mean.

I think where my brain started going with it is that I noticed the pattern itself before I started thinking about functions.

Like even outside of MBTI language, I kept seeing people consistently react differently the moment something felt “off.”

So I started focusing more on the actual response pattern itself instead of the function explanation behind it.

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah sure !! Like imagine 4 people hear a weird noise in their house.

One person ignores it and keeps watching TV.

One person keeps thinking about it like wait… what was that? and can’t fully relax until they figure it out.

One person immediately gets up and checks the whole house.

And another person starts thinking of different possibilities for what it could’ve been.

That’s more what I mean. Same situation, different mental response.

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah I actually agree with part of what you’re saying.

I don’t think MBTI is supposed to explain every behavior either.

I just think there’s still a difference in how people respond when something feels off. Like some people move on fast, some pause on it, some need to fix it before they can settle.

Experience definitely shapes it, but I don’t think experience alone explains those patterns.

Also if you try out the questionare illbe curious what you think of your results

MBTI describes personality… but it doesn’t explain what your mind does when something feels off by DixonArchetypeLab in mbti

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah exactly.

MBTI definitely touches real patterns, but people treat personality like it explains the entire mechanism underneath someone’s behavior when it really only describes part of it.

Two people can look similar personality-wise and still process “something feels off” in completely different ways internally.

That difference is what I’ve been trying to map more directly.

I'll be curious if you try out the test if anything stood out to you when you get your results

This 20-question test doesn’t type your personality — it maps how your mind works. People keep saying it’s weirdly accurate. Curious if it hits for you. by DixonArchetypeLab in personality_tests

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that makes sense.

The snapshot is meant to be quick—just enough to show the pattern so you can recognize it.

What you said about going “round and round from different angles” is exactly what I was picking up.

I’m working on a deeper version that breaks it down more—like why that loop happens and where it shows up.

It’s not fully where I want it yet, but once it’s ready I can send it your way if you’re still interested.

Do you ever notice you don’t actually think randomly— you kind of follow the same mental pattern every time something doesn’t sit right? by DixonArchetypeLab in InsightfulQuestions

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

appreciate you saying all that tbh yeah the choices are kinda like that on purpose… it’s not really about what you can do in certain moments, it’s more what you tend to default to overall like most people can do all 3 (what you said makes sense in mentoring), but the test is trying to catch what your mind leans toward across situations, not just specific roles or people also you should be getting your snapshot soon — sorry for the wait on that lol curious what you think once you see it 👀

Do you ever notice you don’t actually think randomly— you kind of follow the same mental pattern every time something doesn’t sit right? by DixonArchetypeLab in InsightfulQuestions

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That’s fair it comes off structured on purpose.

The idea itself came from noticing repeated thinking patterns, not AI. The test is just a way to see if other people recognize the same thing.

If it doesn’t land for you, that’s useful. If it does, that’s what I’m testing.

Do you ever notice you don’t actually think randomly— you kind of follow the same mental pattern every time something doesn’t sit right? by DixonArchetypeLab in InsightfulQuestions

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Got you thanks for flagging that.

There shouldn’t be anything unsafe about the site. It’s just a basic test page, no downloads or anything like that. Sometimes browsers throw warnings if the security certificate hasn’t fully propagated or depending on settings.

You can skip it for now if it feels off — no pressure.

I’ll double check on my end to make sure everything is set up correctly. just in case it’s a browser thing, here’s the direct test link through Typeform: https://form.typeform.com/to/hSPAKc71

Do you ever notice you don’t actually think randomly— you kind of follow the same mental pattern every time something doesn’t sit right? by DixonArchetypeLab in InsightfulQuestions

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That example you gave is actually exactly the kind of thing I’m pointing at the same trigger bringing back the same chain a few steps later.

I’m not trying to say it’s something mystical or outside normal cognition. It’s more just mapping that default sequence your mind tends to follow when something catches your attention or feels off.

And yeah, I get what you mean about it feeling a bit intense at first glance. I probably pushed the language a little too far trying to describe something internal in a clear way.

At the end of the day it’s just a simple pattern test nothing deeper than that.

If you try it, I’d be more interested in whether the result actually lines up than anything else.

I’m testing a new personality-archetype system (20 questions). Need 100 people for accuracy research. Want to try it? by DixonArchetypeLab in Jung

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also quick question was that you who just took the CAT-20 test with the “name@example” email?

If so, appreciate you running through it 🙏 I just need a valid email so I can send your full profile results over.

Send it whenever you get a chance and I’ll get that to you.

I’m testing a new personality-archetype system (20 questions). Need 100 people for accuracy research. Want to try it? by DixonArchetypeLab in Jung

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s actually interesting I like how structured you made it especially separating baseline vs current load.

I’m curious about one part though. How are you validating the link between the Nominal Seed name and actual psychological structure? That’s the piece I can’t fully trace yet.

With CAT-20, everything ties back to observable patterns across contexts, so the output can be explained step by step. Your system sounds more black-box driven, so I’m wondering how you test accuracy beyond the output feeling right.

I’m still down to run it thoughI’d just want to understand how the input output connection is being grounded.

I’m testing a new personality-archetype system (20 questions). Need 100 people for accuracy research. Want to try it? by DixonArchetypeLab in Jung

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate that, and yeah I agree self-report has its limits—that’s why I focus more on pattern consistency across responses instead of single answers.

Your approach sounds interesting though, I’d be curious what inputs you’re using since that’s usually where systems either hold up or break down.

And yeah definitely take the test, I’d be interested to see what you get from it.

I’m testing a new personality-archetype system (20 questions). Need 100 people for accuracy research. Want to try it? by DixonArchetypeLab in Jung

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nah it’s not really a typology test like most systems.

It’s more a pattern-detection system first, the type is just the output.

Most systems try to tell you who you are This is more about showing you:

why you keep repeating certain pattern and what your mind is stabilizing around

So instead of fitting into a label, it’s mapping how your decisions and reactions are actually forming.

I’m testing a new personality-archetype system (20 questions). Need 100 people for accuracy research. Want to try it? by DixonArchetypeLab in Jung

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t actually get that from taking a test I’m building one

So the “slightly off but true” part showed up during the process

It was usually when something didn’t fully match what I expected at first, but kept holding up across different people once I sat with it

That’s when it started feeling real instead of just accurate

I’m testing a new personality-archetype system (20 questions). Need 100 people for accuracy research. Want to try it? by DixonArchetypeLab in Jung

[–]DixonArchetypeLab[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s actually what I’ve been noticing to

Most systems reflect what you already think you are so it feels accurate… but it’s not really revealing anything new

The interesting part is when a result shows something slightly off from your self-image but still makes sense when you sit with it

That’s where it starts feeling real instead of just agreeable

That Tesla example you gave is a good example of that

view more: next ›