It is interesting enough, but the report kind of feels very AI generated and generic. Most of the questions present the choices in a good vs bad way, i.e it sounds bad saying I disagree and sounds good when I say I agree. Other test usually have postive versions of both ends of the spectrum which is missing here. I also agree that there needs to be some validation of why these dimensions, how the correlated internally etc.
Hi Atiscant, thanks for the feedback. I rewrote the questions to avoid the good vs bad formulation, reduced the questions from 6 to 4, and I also simplified the dimensions from 12 to 8, so the result should be a tighter, better test. I need to wait until I get some data to validate, you were one of the first users, it will take some more time before I can do that. "the report kind of feels very AI generated and generic" - point taken, I will tweak the prompt to make a better use of the user's free text input in order to make it more personal - I mean thats the whole point of having an AI to help with the report. In your opinion, how many naturally recurring personality archetypes in the human population? With MBTI and 4 traits, its only 16, imho thats too few.
Hi, Jaen, thanks for the feedback. Whether they are independent or high entropy, its too soon to say, its a new framework I conceived and I am not a psychometrist, I would need to get to 500 or 1000 to see the recurrence of archetype clusters. I see your point however, some of the concepts may overlap, I am going to bring it down to 8 trait pairs / dimensions. Hogan has 7 dimensions seems. In your experience, how many archetypes exist in the human population? with 4 trait pairs, thats only 16, with 12, thats above 3000. Must be somewhere in between.
You are right, Yodon. Validation needs a minimum of 500 or 1000 uses, no? And I don't have that yet. To get there I first need to get to a product that people find relevant, so any feedback is good feedback at this early stage. Based on what I got here, I am going to reduce the trait pairs from 12 to 8, and re-write the questions, and put less questions to make it quicker to complete, and tweak the report format. I'll publish a V2 in a few days. Thanks for the feedback.
It is interesting enough, but the report kind of feels very AI generated and generic. Most of the questions present the choices in a good vs bad way, i.e it sounds bad saying I disagree and sounds good when I say I agree. Other test usually have postive versions of both ends of the spectrum which is missing here. I also agree that there needs to be some validation of why these dimensions, how the correlated internally etc.
Hi Atiscant, thanks for the feedback. I rewrote the questions to avoid the good vs bad formulation, reduced the questions from 6 to 4, and I also simplified the dimensions from 12 to 8, so the result should be a tighter, better test. I need to wait until I get some data to validate, you were one of the first users, it will take some more time before I can do that. "the report kind of feels very AI generated and generic" - point taken, I will tweak the prompt to make a better use of the user's free text input in order to make it more personal - I mean thats the whole point of having an AI to help with the report. In your opinion, how many naturally recurring personality archetypes in the human population? With MBTI and 4 traits, its only 16, imho thats too few.
The dimensions seems very "profession"-oriented (as a contrast to other personality inventories that can also be used in professional psychology).
Questions:
1. Where did the 12 dimensions come from?
2. Are they ~independent (ie. don't have huge correlations making them redundant)?
3. Are they high-entropy? (ie. they split the population into roughly equal-sized groups and have predictive value)
Hi, Jaen, thanks for the feedback. Whether they are independent or high entropy, its too soon to say, its a new framework I conceived and I am not a psychometrist, I would need to get to 500 or 1000 to see the recurrence of archetype clusters. I see your point however, some of the concepts may overlap, I am going to bring it down to 8 trait pairs / dimensions. Hogan has 7 dimensions seems. In your experience, how many archetypes exist in the human population? with 4 trait pairs, thats only 16, with 12, thats above 3000. Must be somewhere in between.
>the next step is to combine Archetype 360 with a variation of Holland Codes / RIASEC (vocational interest areas)
Shouldn't the next step be actual validation (which looks nothing like asking people what they think about the reports)?
Without validation, it's just a nice-sounding horoscope.
You are right, Yodon. Validation needs a minimum of 500 or 1000 uses, no? And I don't have that yet. To get there I first need to get to a product that people find relevant, so any feedback is good feedback at this early stage. Based on what I got here, I am going to reduce the trait pairs from 12 to 8, and re-write the questions, and put less questions to make it quicker to complete, and tweak the report format. I'll publish a V2 in a few days. Thanks for the feedback.
> it's just a nice-sounding horoscope
Like meyers briggs, then
3x deeper than MBTI...
... that sounds horrible