Many of you enjoyed taking the EQSQ Tests (empathy versus systemizing) mentioned in a previous post. Tim Worstall, who runs the EQSQ site, picked up on my confusion about interpreting my 51 EQ score and my 97 SQ score and offered a very helpful clarification.
If I understand Tim correctly, the difference between my scores and the direction of the difference are the most important aspects. So obviously, I skew towards systemizing, even though my EQ is relatively high. That makes sense. Still, it would be nice to break the results into the four quadrants: low EQ/low SQ, low EQ/high SQ (“traditional” male), high EQ/low SQ (“traditional” female), and high EQ/high SQ (Mr F., Karen, and me). My guess is that you might even find some connections between these four “types” and other, more traditional personality tests like the Myers-Briggs for $59.95 or the free Keirsey Temperament Sorter.
In Kate Gregory’s chart, reprinted in my own post linked above, there seem to be a large number of people who are low on SQ. Tim, do you have any frequency data to share with us?
Thanks again, Tim, for helping us out!
1 Comment
Laura’s Psychology Blog » For geeks on your Christmas list…. · December 12, 2007 at 12:02 pm
[…] Given my outcome on the EQSQ scale, not to mention my addiction to Zelda on the Wii, I think I qualify as a bona fide geekette. Shopping for the geeks you love can be challenging, as of course, we buy every electronic gizmo at top price the minute it comes on the market. […]
Comments are closed.