In Socionics, there is the so-called “Inert/Contact” subtype system. According to it, people can either be the “Inert” (first function) subtype, or the “Contact” (second function) subtype – or neither (“no subtype”).
Watch this for an in-depth explanation of Jungian subtypes.
Your subtype determines which alternative Jungian type you will emulate and/or resemble – your “Pseudo-Type“.
What that means in more practical terms, is that certain people lean towards using their first or second function more than other people of their type. Or in other words, those people have a certain tendency to focus on one function in their Ego more, and through that “strengthen” or “boost” other functions, than is the case with the most basic version (aka “no subtype” version) of the type.
That results in the person commonly appearing to be like another type – their Pseudo-Type – on a surface level. Most people will tend to mistype the individual as their Pseudo-Type (initially), for most people do not actually delve deeply enough into the psyche of the person to realize that they are only seeing and typing the Pseudo-Type, not the “real” type. This typing mistake occurs the most often when people attempt to type celebrities or strangers.
Unfortunately, even people who study Socionics commonly mistype themselves (or others) as their Pseudo-Type, for several reasons. For example, it might fit their “Alter Ego” or Enneagram type’s persona better. (Of course they are unaware of the fact that this influences their perception on their type.)
When it comes to typing someone’s Subtype correctly, having a look at their two possible Pseudo-Types could give a hint at which subtype they are more likely. For example, an LIE who could seem like an ESTj at times is more likely going to be the Te subtype, whereas an LIE who could be mistyped as ENFj and/or an introvert by some people is more likely the Ni subtype. And if the LIE could be mistyped as either at different times by different people, or seems to not have a strong tendency for either Pseudo-Type, they are probably “no” subtype.
People with “no” subtype generally have no set “Pseudo-Type”, or what type they appear to be to others is much more fluid. Often times, they appear to be just like what their type is “supposed” to be like, or they engage in their HA / Mobilising to the point they might get mistyped as having this as their Lead function by people who cannot type too well.
Someone’s Pseudo-Type can have an effect on first impressions and superficial interactions. In that sense, the interaction of Pseudo-Types can create Pseudo-Intertype relations. The specific Pseudo-ITR can involve both peoples’ Pseudo-Types, or just one person’s Pseudo-Type and the “real” Sociotype of the other. Those Pseudo-ITRs primarily occur in the early stages of the interaction and/or are to be observed by outsiders.
In that manner, compatible Jungian Types may appear to be less compatible in an interaction to outsiders because of their less compatible Pseudo-Types (“How can they be a couple, they are so different!”). Whereas incompatible Jungian types may appear to be more compatible in an interaction to outsiders because of their more compatible Pseudo-Types.
It should be noted that the “real” Types and their true ITR compatibility will always matter more, ultimately, especially when the people attempt to get more close emotionally and psychologically. However, when the people keep their relationship primarily on a surface level, the Pseudo-ITR may actually stay in the forefront.
I have had a closer look at the clumsily translated Inert/Contact subtype article by Meged and Ovcharov, and realized that the table at the end seems to be partly flawed. I am providing what I deem to be a more accurate overview of the Pseudo-Types.
For those of you who come from MBTI, here’s a quick conversion overview:
LII (INTP), ILE (ENTP), ESE (ESFJ), SEI (ISFJ), IEI (INFJ), EIE (ENFJ), SLE (ESTP), LSI (ISTP), ILI (INTJ), LIE (ENTJ), SEE (ESFP), ESI (ISFP), EII (INFP), IEE (ENFP), LSE (ESTJ), SLI (ISTJ)
In bold are the IEs that are particularly “boosted”, “shielded”, etc.
My subtype is too strong to get a result. Yes, I am 3 Creative.
Specifically, I end up as SLE-3Ti. What’s the Pseudo-Type for that?
What makes you not choose LSI? With a subtype like this, it is essentially only a minuscule difference to LSI.
The problem with many LSI descriptions is the fact that they are somewhat inaccurate, or just unpleasant. So, I understand why someone would rather self-type as SLE-3Ti than LSI. A similar problem exists with the ESI descriptions. Stay tuned for an LSI description by me. And read up on Ti lead, Si Demonstrative, and Ni HA, etc.
To answer your question, the pseudo-type of SLE-3Ti would technically be either like an LII or ILI.
LSI-2Se or so is PoLR Ne. In the SLE-3Ti, Ne is almost as strong as Se.
So you relate better to Fi PoLR? How so.
I’m still Jerdle, just WordPress logged me in.
I’m close to the “insensitive jerk” stereotype.
I think I tested as more Ti than I am. 2Ti is more reasonable.
I’m really not focused on affection and sensitivity.
I’m comfortable with extremely offensive jokes (rape, murder, etc.)
Basically, in the best way possible, I’m a prick.
Very interesting article, I really like this website! I’m still choosing between LII-Ti and ILI-Te, types with same functional strength. I feel that my Ti is very strong (LII) but I’m unsure about belonging to the Alpha Quadra…
Hi Alex, nice to see you enjoying the site.
I’d suggest you check out descriptions of Introverted Sensing, Extroverted Intuition, and Extroverted Feeling and how they are placed in LII. But mainly, figure out whether you can relate to those information elements more than the other ones. If you do, you are automatically from the Alpha Quadra.
Don’t let yourself be swayed by certain stereotypes people have made up about the Quadras. It just boils down to which IEs you value, nothing more and nothing less. I have seen people mistype themselves just because they thought the stereotypes of a certain Quadra applied better to them. That’s not really how it works.
Thank you for your comment! I can relate to Extraverted Intuition as a creative function, but less about Introverted Sensing as my Hidden Agenda. I actually don’t know if Extraverted Feeling is my Dual-Seeking function. I don’t seek emotions and I’m quite cold with others. But if I’m with a close friend I become really open, almost hyperactive, talking about anything that comes to mind. It’s like a metamorphosis. I seem to have stronger (but not necessarily valued) Extraverted Thinking and Extraverted Sensing than the average LII. Could this lead me to mistype myself as ILI-Te? Or might I just be the inert subtype of the LII? I’ve been researching for days but I haven’t found an answer yet.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This does sound like you could be an LII-Ti. 🙂 When you are the inert subtype, you are very unaware of your dual-seeking function. I wrote about this here: https://typevolution.wordpress.com/2016/08/28/the-effect-of-subtype-on-functional-strengths-weaknesses/
This is quite an interesting topic , I appreciate your work and your effort .
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will assume that you’re are IEI-1Ni subtype , am I right ?😇
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I am IEI-Ni, though I have considered being 2Ni before. ^-^’
What I was wondering, what I have observed and what I often checked is: given the categories of accepting and producing for the different functions (like in the usual theory the base function is accepting and the creative function is producing) is there a correlation between instinctual flow/controflow and assignment of accepting or producing to the base function (and then correspondingly to the creative function). So my guess is: sx/so would have producing base function, whereas sx/sp would have accepting base function. What do you think about this “theory”?
Hm, I don’t think that you can merge the theories like that, for at the end of the day they describe different things. Enneagram is about motivation and Socionics is about Information Metabolism. While there are definitely overlaps, as in not every Sociotype can be every Enneagram type and vice versa, it is tricky or perhaps even false to merge the function theory with the Enneagram.
Having said that, I think I get your idea on some level, and it might explain the general “vibe” of the stackings, as in Contraflow is *like* the Producing function, and Synflow is *like* the Accepting function, but that’s as far as I would go.
I have illustrated the “Producing” nature of Contraflow, and the “Accepting” nature of Synflow more in detail in this article.
Miss Mylia Heisenberg , may I ask what is the psuedo type of The ILI – 3Te ?
LIE. 😛 I don’t think 3-subtype people exist IRL (only in fiction). So anyone who thinks he is ILI-3Te is probably just LIE (or some other type).
P.S: What’s up with the “Heisenberg” btw?
I guess you are right about 3Te..
About Heisenberg: He is a brilliant mind from Germany, also one of my favorite physicists!
And thank you for replying 😇😊.
i’m skeptical of whether it’s this simple. i think someone can come off across as any sociotype depending on many factors: environmental familiarity, social anxiety, social introversion/extroversion (yes it’s possible to be a social introvert and a socionics extrotim), and past personal experiences to name a few. even then, the factors most influential to the individual’s behavior in social or public settings give slight indications of their true type.
i’m probably an IEE-Ne, but i don’t give off the impression of being an extrotim at all since i’ve recently been very withdrawn in public due to several anxiety issues. my most likely “pseudo-type” is ILI-Ni, which frustrates me a bit since this doesn’t even come close to reflecting my true nature, and it feels very constraining to have such personal barriers on what could easily be freedom. i think that just because a type is an extrotim (and therefore has a base IME oriented towards external objects and fields), doesn’t mean that their pseudo-type aka public presentation of themselves will also be an extrotim, even if it’s an inert subtype. i think any type is possible; it’s an outer covering that doesn’t have to work compatibly with the true type. not all books have covers that match their content, and that’s why judging books by their covers is not always a reliable method. however, i do believe that people’s pseudo-types can also have intertype relations between true types as well as other pseudo-types, albeit on a more superficial level. good article overall.
Hey, I do agree with you that there is a difference between social extroversion and Jungian extroversion, the latter is primarily about energy levels. Exxx-xe people are usually the most high-strung energetically. IEE-Ne would have a lot of energy, and ILI-Ni would have quite low energy. How are your energy levels?
If EII-Ne and LII-Ne are “Pseudotypes”, how are you able to tell them apart? The fact that Role-Base duality also does not allow both Fi and Ti to be active at the same time. So, it’s only according to the situation, the individual would use Fi or use Ti and we would have no way to tell which is Base and which is Role.
HA is the only possible way I believe, and that too is same for both types.
EII-Ne will be more focused on using Te, LII-Ne will be more focused on using Fe. That usually tells them apart ime. And eventually, they’ll also show their Fi or Ti. https://typevolution.com/2016/08/28/the-effect-of-subtype-on-functional-strengths-weaknesses/
Hello there! I’ve been researching MBTI for awhile now and I had originally typed myself as an INTJ about a year ago, but now I am unsure whether that is my true best-fit type or not. I do believe I have Fi in my stack and I’m pretty confident I am an intuitive as well, though I am not exactly sure what type of intuition I have. The MBTI types I am currently considering for myself are:
I think I have some emotional suppression and social anxiety going on that is also skewing some of my results. To a lesser extent I would also consider being INTP or ENTP.
Since I have essentially come to a stalemate in my quest for my true type in MBTI, I decided to take a deep dive into socionics. Perhaps, I thought, the concept of a pseudo-type may be able to explain some of the confusion I’ve been struggling with surrounding my type. However, the pseudo-types you’ve listed here don’t exactly reflect my situation. What would be the pseudo-types of the socionics equivalents of an INTJ, INFP, or ENFP?
I will also mention that yesterday I took both tests on the Sociotype website. On the original test I was typed as an ILI, but I forgot the subtype. The extended version, supposedly more accurate, typed me as an IEE-3Ne. Does this mean I am an unhealthy ENFP? Or that INTJ is my pseudo-type? Vice versa?
So sorry for such a long comment. I feel like this is such a burden I’m dumping on your website. Perhaps just writing this I came off as a certain type already to you. Any help or reply would honestly be so appreciated. Thank you!!
I see. I have to say, whenever someone gets a “-3” subtype result, it’s pretty clear that they are most likely mistyped. The -3 subtype is too unrealistic to exist irl. It would warp the ITRs too much.
Have a look at these overviews:
You may also want to read this: https://typevolution.com/2020/11/30/mbti-big5-myths-stereotypes/
If you are still uncertain about your type afterwards, you can book a Get•Typed session with me: https://typevolution.com/services/
Hi. I am an ENTJ -Ni and my ex was an ISTP-Se. Could be possible that we are attracted because she thinks that I am an ENFJ -Ni and I think that her was ISFP -Se? Because in the beggining one think that the other was perfect, the dual of the other. But after the time I saw her like an ISTP and she saw me like an ENTJ and one feel iluded by the other and the relationship finished.