SHS Subtypes Reference 2022

The DCNH subtype system of Humanitarian Socionics versus MBTI, Big Five, DISC Typologies

1. Background. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

The DCNH system appeared in the late 90s, when I realized that the socionic type is too broad a category to explain human behavior by a limited set of certain fixed qualities. Since I was not worried about informational metabolism, but about the real actions of people in specific situations, I quickly discovered that the type is variable in a very wide range. Among representatives of the same type, the differences are so great that an independent external observer does not agree to attribute them to the same mental makeup.

Conducting trainings and experiments on socionics, I noticed that during the formation of the group there is an inevitable distribution of internal roles and what role you end up with will depend not so much on the type, but on which functions you have been stronger than other members. In particular, in order to become a sustainable organizational leader, you need to strengthen the functions in your functional profile of business logic and / or power sensorics. In this case, you do not need to have the type SLE (Marshal) or FEL (Administrator).

Such an enhancement of the complex of functions led to the fact that a representative of any type had new dichotomous features that did not coincide (or, more precisely, only partially coincided) in their meaning with the well-known Reinin signs.

The first new dichotomy, which I discovered, was about the behavior of a person in a situation of solving problems that require an effort for a long time. Some behaved in these conditions as sprinters, that is, they did a jerk, and if the task was not solved, they would refuse it. Others behaved like stayers, that is, they showed endurance in bringing things started to the end. I called this polarity "initial - terminal". The number of types in view of the two newly appeared options increased to 32.

Then the behavior in a stressful situation was added, which found expression in the dichotomy “contact - distant”. Contact types in situations of sudden danger approached rapprochement with the enemy or obstacle, distant types tried to step back or ignore the problem, preferring not to spoil their nerves. The typology began to count 64 variants of the psyche.

If we accept only new dichotomies as basic ones, then we will get a complete four-way model. This is how a system of four functional types appeared - dominant (D), creative (C), normalizing (N) and harmonizing (H). I emphasize: functional, as they arise in the process of functioning in a specific communicative environment and have no relation to the innate and unchanging structure that a standard socionic type has.

Later, I discovered that there are dozens of similar, although less developed from the point of view of socionic, typologies. With the most famous of them, I will make a comparison in this report. My goal is to show you the advantages of the DCNH system for use in modern socionics, which can take into account intratype differences.

2. CPI: California questionnaire. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

The first similar DCNH system is a typology that emerged as part of the California CPI (California Psychological Inventory). The California Psychological Personality Questionnaire was created by the American psychologist Harrison J. Gough in 1951. His latest version of CPI-462 (Gough, 1987) contains the so-called vector scales, which include, firstly, the “involvement” factor (directed towards people or from people) and, secondly, the “standard acceptance” factor (compliance with norms - violation of the norm). These factors are very reminiscent of our dichotomies of contact (the poles of contact and distance) and order (the pole of initiality and terminal).

By combination of these factors, four psychological types are distinguished. This is how they are characterized in CPI. Alpha - are active individuals, focused on interpersonal interaction, productive and focused on achieving life goals. This type of people clearly corresponds to dominant personalities in Humanitarian socionics. Beta are internally oriented personalities who adhere to externally defined norms and values. It is obvious that they correspond to the normalizing type in Humanitarian socionics. Gamma - individuals who are focused on external interaction, but are able to disobey the dictates of the norms and make independent decisions. In general, they resemble the creative type in Humanitarian Socionics. Delta - internally oriented individuals with good imagination, prone to reflection and prefer to make their own decisions.

Typology based on CPI is firmly rooted in Western practice and is widely used in working with staff. It is believed that she predicts well how well the employees of the company will be able to master these or other professional skills. I draw your attention to the fact that American MBTI-organizations actively use the CPI methodology in addition to the 16 standard Jung types. In fact, it serves them to describe the difference of people within a type, therefore it plays the same role as assigned to subtypes in Humanitarian socionics. Thus, active practice led American specialists to the threshold of typology 64, which has long been established in Humanitarian Socionics.

3. Typology DISC. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

The second similar DCNH system is called DISC. Its representatives claim that they are not studying personality types, but behavioral styles, which helps them to abandon excessive claims to theoretical depth. The typology was created by the American scientist William Marston (Emotions of Ordinary People, 1928). According to DISC, there are a total of four behaviors. They are determined by two dichotomies: first, how a person perceives the environment in which he acts (as favorable or unfavorable) and secondly, how a person reacts to this environment (actively or passively).

Combining the poles of these dichotomies, we get four styles. Style D (dominance) - active behavior in a hostile environment. Such people can be characterized as competing, aggressive, decisive and result oriented. They like to take responsibility, control the situation and keep power in their hands. However, they can be persistent, domineering and even rude. This style clearly corresponds to the dominant functional type in Humanitarian socionics.

Style I (influence) - active behavior in a friendly environment. This style is inherent in people talkative, sociable, optimistic, cheerful, unpredictable and full of enthusiasm. When interacting with other people, they strive to be positive and benevolent. However, they promise more than they can fulfill. This style is similar to the creative functional type in Humanitarian Socionics. The only difference is that it overestimated the function of emotions in relation to intuition.

Style S (steadiness) - passive (reactive) behavior in a friendly environment. The man of S-behavior is calm, patient, modest and unhurried, always ready to help, loyal, good team member, attentive listener, flexible and reliable in relationships. It corresponds to the harmonizing functional style in Humanitarian socionics, only with great emphasis on the ethics of relations.

Style С (compliance) - passive (reactive) behavior in a hostile environment. The characteristic of this style: accurate, consistent, cautious, prone to order, analytical. Concentrates on the task, does the job very well. At the same time, it is unnecessarily focused on details, in communication it is cold, picky and slow. Fully responds to the normalizing functional type in Humanitarian socionics with an emphasis on structural logic.

Here is an example of a question from one of the DISK tests. If you decided to jump with a parachute, then for what reason:

A) I met very interesting people (people) who are engaged in parachuting. They persuaded me to join. - The answer is harmonizing.

B) I need to go through this to achieve an important goal for me. - The answer is dominant.

B) I generally like risk, adrenaline. I want to know what I can do. - The answer is creative.

D) I am considered meek. I am always in the shadows, silent. I want to prove to myself and others that I am not a coward and not a rag. - Answer normalizer.

4. Typology of Adizes PAEI. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

Being engaged in research and experimentation for forty years, business consulting specialist Yitzhak Adizes came to the conclusion that any management must perform four functions. If all four functions are performed properly, the organization will be efficient and effective in the near and long term. Using a figurative language, he compared the functions with the “vitamins” necessary for any healthy organism.

What are these features? Do they look like our functional types? To begin with, let's define each of the “vitamins” through two dichotomies that Adizes operates with. The first dichotomy: "effectiveness - efficiency." The second dichotomy: “short term - long term”.

Vitamin P, according to Adizes, is necessary for the effectiveness of the organization in the short term. This type is called Producer. Producing is the production of the main result of the company, which consists in meeting the needs of the clients for which it exists. Why do people turn to your company? What do they need you for? What services do they need? You can evaluate this feature in a company by the number of people who return to purchase its products or services.

Vitamin A is necessary for the company's effectiveness in the short term. The administrative, or administrative function is needed to maintain order in 10 organizational processes: a company must do the right things in the right order. If the cost of customer satisfaction is lower than the price that the customer is willing to pay for the product or service (P> A), the organization is profitable in the short term.

Vitamin E ensures the effectiveness of the organization in the long term. For long-term results, says Adizes, you need a visionary. It determines the course to be followed by the organization. Such a person is ready for proactive actions in the conditions of constant changes, which makes the company innovative and advanced. This is a functional type of Entrepreneur - an entrepreneur who is creative and ready to take risks. If this function is performed successfully, the products or services of the organization will be in demand by future customers.

And finally, vitamin I ensures the effectiveness of the organization in the long term. This function provides Integrating - integration, that is, it creates a communicative atmosphere and value system in which people act together and will not allow anyone to become so indispensable that his departure will question the viability of the entire company.

If one of these roles is not performed or is performed poorly, the organization is ineffective and ineffective both at the current moment and in the future. In particular, if the P-function is not satisfactorily performed, the sales volumes decrease and many customers remain unsatisfied. If the A-function is poorly performed, the organization bears unjustified losses. The organization does not cope with the E-function - and new products are delivered to the market late and are not in demand. If the I-function is not implemented, the company starts having serious problems when the leader leaves it.

In conclusion of this part of the report I will add that according to Wikipedia, the Adizes method is applied to 12 around the world in companies with sales from $ 2 million to $ 2 billion, including Coca-Cola, Bank of America, Volvo, "Visa Group" and many others. But the four types used by Adizes are almost identical in meaning and the behavior attributed to them with our functional types. The P-type is nothing but our D type, the A-type corresponds to our N, the E-type is not much different from our C, and the I-type in Adizes is an analogue of our N. The letters are different, but the meaning is the same.

5. Hormonal typology Helen Fisher. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

As a result of 30 years of research, the American anthropologist Helen Fisher concluded that a person’s psychological makeup, up to his preferences in choosing a partner, is determined at the biochemical level, namely, through the hormones that dominate his body. Here we are confronted with the materialistic approach to close relations, in particular to love, which, even in everyday communication, people of logical mentality are often called chemistry. Helen Fisher herself, in my opinion, is a logical sociotype.

In any case, H. Fisher believes that love attraction arises under the influence of four hormones - dopamine (dopamine), serotonin, estrogen and testosterone.

Dopamine is a neurotransmitter that motivates a person to apply maximum effort to achieve difficult goals, to quickly satisfy desires. It causes strong positive emotions when getting the desired result. Lack of enthusiasm and lack of self-confidence are connected just with the lack of dopamine.

Serotonin brings a stable good mood, helps to feel their own value and stability in life. Its deficiency leads to alcoholism, depression and suicidal behavior. Many antidepressants contribute to the production of serotonin.

The two remaining hormones have a pronounced sexual effect on a person’s character. The hormone estrogen is responsible for soft feelings of tenderness and kindness and corresponding appeasable behavior, and testosterone is responsible for passion and sexual desire, as well as for the tendency to compete for sexual partner.

The four psychohormonal types of Helen Fisher are characterized as follows: 1. The person with the predominant action of the hormone dopamine is called Explorer, that is, the Researcher. In personal relationships, he will seek new experiences. He feels passionate, but short-lived love. Such a feeling does not last long: it flashes during the period of courtship, and then quickly fades. The fact is that dopamine is pushing people to search for new acquaintances and fresh feelings. You can keep a Researcher next to you only by something extraordinary, constantly changing for his sake.

For those familiar with Humanitarian socionics, it is not difficult to determine that the psychohormonal type Researcher corresponds to the Creative Functional Type in the DCNH system, in the profile of which functions I, E and F are reinforced.

2. A type that is strongly affected by serotonin is called a Builder, that is, a Builder. Such people are the opposite of Researchers. H. Fisher argues that the Builders are trying to build strong relationships, and their love is strong and deep. Serotonin people are the most reliable partners who value family and traditions. Serotonin forms a calm and stable personality type, which is distinguished by constancy. In all spheres of life they have their own order. As Fisher notes, the only minus of relations with such people can be boredom.

The characteristic of the Builder easily recognizes our normalizing functional type, which is characterized by the greatest conservatism. Its psychological formula includes enhanced functions of L, R and S.

3. Persons with a high level of testosterone received the name Director from Fisher. As a rule, they are decisive and self-righteous people who are selfish in a relationship, and sometimes even despotic. The director seeks to start a family, but the relationship in her should develop only as they see fit, that is, with his leadership. Fisher believes that this can be both a plus and a minus, because depending on other features of the personality, such people turn out to be either good “heads of the family” or tyrants.

The Director corresponds to the dominant type in Humanitarian Socionics, its psychological formula includes a solid combination of enhanced functions F, P and E.

4. And finally, the fourth, estrogen type - Negotiator (Negotiator or Mediator). The hormone estrogen gives it those traits that are considered to be female. Negotiator is quite soft and flexible, prone to compromise. The life of such people is rich in feelings and anxieties due to close attention to relationships. Such people are usually engaged in creative professions, they are very sensitive and vulnerable, they need patronage. These include everyone who loves spiritual communication more than carnal pleasures.

In this brief description, our harmonizing functional type clearly appears, in the psychological formula of which includes enhanced functions T, R and S.

A few words about the applicability and prevalence of Helen Fisher typology. In 2005, she was invited by the Match.com 17 website to develop a new dating site, Chemistry.com, based on her test and compatibility prediction model between the four psycho-hormonal types. According to 2013, more than 8 million people passed her test.

6. Structural and functional typologies. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

In the literature on personality psychology, it is considered that the typology is a system with a rigid fixation. That is why the developers of the DISC system, for example, emphasize that it is not a typology. But I have not yet met the assumption that hard and soft approaches can be combined. Such a combination underlies the Humanitarian Socionics in the form of the concept of a solid core and a soft shell. Or, if we consider the concept in a system-wide way, then it removes the “structure-function” dilemma, known in psychology, by breeding the preponderance of a particular pole along different layers of the psyche. Typically, clear and complete structures are classified as typologies.

Functional models, because of their greater mobility and variability in time, try not to be called typologies. Thus, it is a question of a research position that will surely come up in front of a scientist who is interested in the psyche. Recently, the focus of socionics has shifted from rigid structures to the study of variable functional manifestations of the type. Although not all socionics are aware of and recognize.

This shift occurred in two ways. I went the first way. What did I do? - I freed the function from the determinism of the structure, expanding the framework of conservative socionics. This is the path of functional socionics, which catches the variability of type, the dependence of its manifestations on time and environment.

Other socionics (most of them) remained in a rigid structure and began to supplement the dynamic part of the psyche with extraneous models. In other words, they chose the path of “plugging holes” in the bottom of a ship of orthodox socionics that did not stand the test of a storm. Drawing on all the new psychological models for building them into the body of the old socionics, they are unaware that they are preparing for them the fate of the “Theseus ship”. As in the famous ancient paradox, replacing the decrepit parts of the ship each time with new parts, they will see a construction in front of them, which will still be called socionics, but in which all working mechanisms will be foreign.

Which of these solutions is better? - Time will tell. The main thing is that socionics should not dissolve among other typologies.

Of course, I touched in my report only a small fraction of fourfold typologies that existed before and now appear under all new names. Many of them are beautifully decorated and attractively presented, but very poorly developed, from the point of view of socionic methodology. There is a positive point in this: by now, an active demand has emerged for a practical personality model adapted to working with people in a dynamic network society. Although for a deeper insight into the psyche, of course, one single simple typology is indispensable.

Summarize some results. It is easy to see that, despite the individual differences in the interpretation of features of certain types, the models considered in my report as a whole are the embodiment of the same invariant psychological system. I think that the next logical step in the personality typology should be to test the hypothesis of invariant functional types by means of neuropsychological studies on modern equipment. I emphasize once again that we are talking about the types of a more specific level arising due to the stable interaction of various groups of functions, regardless of the 16-type structure of the psyche.

7. Big Five - Big Five. DCNH subtypes system of Humanitarian Socionics in comparison with other four-fold typologies

There is another typological system on which I want to dwell especially. Rather, it is better to attribute it to those theories of the psyche that regard the personality as a certain set of universal features of different expressions. It presents not types, but continuous scales - conditional analogs of socionic dichotomies. In addition, there are five, not four, as in the usual socionics.

The typological approach has many opponents not only here, but also in Western psychology. In the West, it is customary to criticize the MBTI for the fact that it works with subjective preferences and does not have the predictive power of a person’s success in a particular area of ​​activity.

The MBTI test is contrasted with a five-factor Big five model. Perhaps the criticism stems from the fact that the Big Five was derived from extensive empirical material using a mathematical procedure of factor analysis, and Jung and MBTI typologies are more likely a deductive theory that its creators project onto mental reality.

What is the Big Five? The primary test that implemented this concept was NEO-PI, the Personal Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness, which was constructed by American psychologists Costa and McCray in 1983-1985. The structure of the personality is presented in it as a set of school marks for the five factors, the first letters in the name of which add up to the abbreviation OCEAN: 1. Openness - openness (new experience), 2. Сonscientiousness - good faith, 3. Extroversion - extraversion, 4. Agreeablness - friendliness and 5. Neuroticism - neuroticism.

The full version of NEO-PI-R (1992) contains 240 questions (5 factors x 6 aspects in a factor x 8 questions). Time is 45-60 minutes. The compact version of the test NEOFFI (2004) contains only 60 questions, the time of passing 10-15 minutes. Also there are versions for 75 questions. One of the most recent Big Five testing tools is the BFI (Big Five Inventory, Berkeley Personality Lab, 2007-09). This test can be passed online. These methods are protected by copyright, but are free for research purposes.

The correspondence of the four first scales to the Jung poles of dichotomies suggests itself. Openness to new experience resembles socionic intuition. Conscientiousness is analogous to rationality. Extroversion has the same name. Friendliness corresponds to socionic ethics. Just do not think that the tests of the Big Five will allow to determine the type. These are just approximate analogues, but not full correspondences to socionic features. Although it is clear that ethics is related to friendliness, not every friendly person will be an ethic.

These scales, from the point of view of socionics, are complex, that is, they are already in some way, and in some ways they present signs of Jung more broadly or include some signs of Reinin in their scope. But in this case I am much more interested in the fifth scale - neuroticism. What does it correspond to?

In orthodox socionics there is no such separate independent scale. But in humanitarian socionics there has long been a scale of initiality - terminality, which I introduced back in the 90s to describe subtype differences. The initial subtypes are, indeed, more nervous and randomized in comparison with the terminal ones. This measurement has long been used by me in practice. I have repeatedly pointed out that subtype differences strongly affect real intertype relationships, making them in one case more compatible, and in the other - more conflicting.

While some socionics developed information metabolism, the fifth dichotomy began to be actively used by modern MBTI schools. In particular, NERIS Analytics Limited. In this organization, the scale of initiality - terminality is called “identity”. The poles of this dichotomy are called Assertive vs. Turbulent. You easily recognize the terminal in assertive ones, and the initial variants of the type in turbulent ones. So the conclusions for us, socionics are alarming.

As long as my theory of subtypes was stubbornly denied as unrelated to socionics, or at best silenced, Western typologists independently rediscovered my subtype dichotomies. And, unfortunately, it is likely that Typology 64 will come to us some day as another western development, although I have been trying to bring this discovery to the socionic public since the 90s of the last century. Not to mention the fact that two years ago 4 brochures were issued for the participants of the School of Humanitarian Socionics, one for the description of the subtypes of each quadra.

I spoke with the presentation of new descriptions at the 30th IIA Conference in 2014. However, these extremely important data for the advancement of our science forward development did not evoke any interest. Instead of developing socionics in the spirit of a holistic theory, a heterogeneous and ugly mix of 16 types and theories alien to the spirit of socionics, like the Afanasyev's psychosophy, is being created and spread.

Report of Viktor Gulenko at the 32nd Conference IIA, September 17, 2016