Test

Yeah, and it still means nothing. Pick any of those other traits and they still won't make much sense.

I fucking study the Russians you pidor. It still has almost nothing to do with literature, except for being a uselessly vague paraphrase of Bakhtin's chronotope theory. "The urban" barely existed for millenia, and today it is dominant, completely swallowing the rural. So what sort of a choice do you have here?

this is really accurate, the only discrepancy is that i much prefer darker literature i just don't believe that life is meaningless and bleak, the brooding, nihilistic sociopaths of literature are the satire i am looking for, they come off as pitiful wretches who can't see the wood for the trees, otherwise this is a nice template of my preferences, if anybody has some recs for a person with my taste let me know

Attached: results.jpg (552x598, 81K)

>preferring Urban literature
Reeeeeee get off my board

Attached: Screenshot_20190509-214717.jpg (1304x2254, 721K)

>this questionnaire pinned down my tastes perfectly!

what's it like being the perfect goy for algorithm advertisting and social media?

>i like minimal prose
>strongly agree
>outputs that you like minimal prose
this is.....
really accurate!

i guess i'm pleased with myself that my answers were consistent and that the results met my expectations, i must know myself pretty well, what is instagram anyway? like a facebook for chefs?

Ridiculous test
Retard

t. INTJ-A (The Chad of INTs)

>It still has almost nothing to do with literature,
It seems like you learned nothing from Tolstoy. Thanks for revealing yourself.

INTJ MOTHERFUCKERRRRR

That is mine. I think It is good.

Attached: Screenshot_20190510-012312.png (720x1440, 204K)

>ask a series of question to categorise you as A or not A along several binary spectra
>thereby classify your politics, mindset, aesthetics, and everything else

These are the same kind of swindling tautologies as star-signs.

mine is the best

Attached: lit.png (475x655, 60K)

Was a bit odd I guess. I don't read fantasy but I understand why it exists and accept it as literature, so a lot of my answers were a bit nuetral.

Attached: Screenshot_20190510-015601_Firefox.jpg (914x1715, 496K)

>perfect 50/50 split on fantasy/reality

Attached: asjhdkjaljafkjahfjhaf.png (535x619, 60K)

A little bit of everything I guess

Attached: Screenshot_20190510-032033.png (1440x2560, 515K)

Recommend me a book based on my results

brother

Attached: lit.png (520x716, 63K)

i dont actually read, but im starting to after getting a hankering for it like a week ago

Bored and was interested in seeing the average so far. So here's the average results based on everyone's post in this topic so far.

Minimalism (58.9%) vs Maximalism (41.1%)
Fantasy (41.7%) vs Reality (58.3%)
Dark (54.2%) vs Celebratory (45.8%)
Urban (58.7%) vs Rural (41.3%)
Moralistic (47.8%) vs Satirical (52.2%)
Abstract (58.3%) vs Concrete (41.7%)
Philosophical (72.2%) vs Cozy (27.8%)

So basically the most Yea Forums person would prefer minimalism, reality, dark, urban, satirical, abstract, and philosophical?

Attached: Screenshot 2019-05-10 at 09.20.47.png (874x1200, 242K)

Most people who take the test gets a wrong result anyway.

I get INTJ too like everyone else, and I know I'm not one.

>"Do you like to think about stuff or are you a fucking retard"?
>"Gee, I'm an Intuitive, man!"

This sounds interesting
>#thankyoupewdiepie
Nevermind.

Attached: h.png (503x676, 50K)

Ok guys, rate mine.

I usually read when I feel the comfiest, and I like concise and direct stories, don't like to think about the book that much after I've finished it. Could use some recs.

Attached: Capture.png (699x838, 93K)

Attached: 20190510_115059.jpg (985x1800, 436K)

What so the bat and the clock represent?

>What kind of reading does Yea Forums prefer?
I prefer to know the algorithm used to "calculate" "preferences", so I'm currently reading the source code for that test.

I only really read philosophy textbooks and Phillip k dick

Attached: CF870511-4F3F-475E-B373-0A237DF2F3DF.png (750x1334, 186K)

Actual psychologists shit on MBTI. Imagine believing in a test made by housewives who had read too much Jung.

How the fuck is philosophical the opposite of "cozy"?

what does the -a stand for?

i mainly read pseudo-historical fiction and philosophy.

Attached: litresults.png (728x857, 114K)

do NOT advertise trying to confine me to a narrow scope of interest with some pseudo worthless test you jerkfuck. i am malleable and my interests and affinities wax and wane. I am going to put you into the trash so you can get your butt fucked by oscar the grouch you little fucker.

this one is better
dichotomytests.com/test.html?id=4

Attached: meemo.jpg (441x569, 63K)

Similar results here brother,
If anyone could direct me to some prime literature with this duality, I'd appreciate it.

Attached: Pm-Ex.jpg (1508x1878, 350K)

Any book recommendations based on this?

Attached: BCC6D898-396A-41D2-BCE3-E5BCD3274387.jpg (750x1217, 381K)

I'm pisces how about you guys

I'm capricorn.

This is the only response this dumb test deserves cos most of the questions are highly conditional/contextual

Attached: Untitled.png (620x924, 63K)

I think they are genre recommendations. The bat is gothic literature (which is spot on for me) and the clock is magic realism or whatever it's called (can't fuck with that).

>Satire and Moralism are a dichotomy
>Philosophy is the opposite of cozy
Yeah I'm posting this frog

Attached: 1488346684974.jpg (306x306, 20K)

Attached: 1515040307378.jpg (1000x773, 587K)

lmao

Attached: adkfjhdasfh.png (519x601, 59K)

Now comes the part where you all tell me how bad my tastes are, tell me to go back to ___ site/board, et al.

Attached: Screenshot (118).png (575x781, 102K)

The only part I can't understand is your urban fixation.

I really don't give a shit. Stick a story anywhere you like as long as it's good.

Yeah, I just think people get lost in cities and unironically people are less interesting in cities as far as my experience has lead me, people tend to live quite differently in remote locations.

Ironically, stories about boring, unsophisticated individuals tend to make for the most interesting stories.

These questions must have been written by an idiot. This whole thing is full of false dichotomies, like moralism vs satire. All satire that has anything to say is deeply moralistic. You're clowning on people because you think they're bad.

Literally none of these are exclusive

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-10 at 8.15.56 PM.png (954x1186, 233K)

half of these questions are redundant, how many times do I need to be asked about literature about village life

Attached: lit.png (660x853, 97K)

Apparently not enough

actually based

What the fuck is this

>Someone is extremely polarized in the same way.
What books u read'n qt?

Attached: Screenshot (99).png (731x893, 126K)

Continuing from and (1/4)

I've been reading through the source code and doing some analysis on and off. I made some interesting observations.

I'm going to skip over the problems with MBTI type tests in general and why it is about as scientific as horoscopes since many anons have already pointed most of them out.

Where I will start is how terrible the code on the website is. The developer clearly doesn't understand much about how to JavaScript. Here are some things I noticed without pouring over every line:
>inline HTML in JS strings
>global named function declarations
>high/exclusive usage of imperative control flow structures and patterns
>non-descriptive variable names
>unnecessary strong coupling
>include jQuery, only use it twice, still use direct DOM manipulation/lookups dozens of times
>not using code blocks for one line if/else statements

These are just some on the low level. To some extent these transgressions can be excused because people rarely bother actually learning JavaScript since it is so easy to just cobble something together that works. However, that does not excuse the application logic, which I'll cover next.

I'm sure many of you anons had fun with that little test regardless of the pseudo-scientific nature of it, posting your results and arguing about how accurately it fails to reflects your preferences or reality. I sure had fun reading your comments after learning how it works behind the scenes. First let's start with the basic algorithm used:

1) There are 7 dichotomies, each representing two "opposing" character traits(or views).
2) There are 70 questions, each one's answer only affecting one of the dichotomies at a time.
3) There are 5 answers per question, each contributing -10, -5, 0, 5 or 10 points to each dichotomy. Both "Strongly Agree" or "Strongly Disagree" can contribute either -10 or 10, and likewise with "Agree" and "Disagree" contributing either -5 or 5, it all depends on how the question is framed.
4) Positive values increase the left-hand side's percentage of the dichotomy on the results page, and negative values increase the right-hand side.

So, some examples:
>4. Literature allows us to live out our dreams.
Answering "Strongly Agree" will add 10 points to the Ontological dichotomy, which increases the Fantasy trait's percentage, which lies on the left-hand side. Answering "Strongly Disagree" will add -10 points to the dichotomy, shifting the percentage towards the right, or the Reality trait.
>12. I prefer stories that are set in the real world as opposed to an imaginary one.
Unlike the above example, "Strongly Agree" will add -10 points to the Ontological dichotomy, towards Reality's percentage, and likewise 10 for "Strongly Disagree", towards Fantasy's percentage.

Pic unrelated.

Attached: sweet_potato.jpg (958x957, 74K)

(2/4)

Agree and Disagree works exactly the same, just less points. Neutral/Don't know always adds 0 points. Everyone following along? Good.

Now, one would think that since there are 7 dichotomies and 70 questions that each dichotomy has 10 questions. Some might venture even further and make an educated guess that for each of the 10 questions per dichotomy, 5 are framed in favor of the left-hand trait, and the other 5 framed in favor of the right-hand trait.

This does end up being the case for the Tone, Setting and Accessibility dichotomies. That is where the regularity ends, however. The Ontological dichotomy has 6 questions in favor of the Fantasy trait instead of 5, for a total of 11. Following from this, the Ethical dichotomy only has 4 questions in favor of the Satirical trait, for a total of 9.

So far the questions for the above dichotomies follows the internal logic of the application well enough. Of course that is while ignoring how ineffectively they represent human nature and preferences to begin with. The next two dichotomies, however, don't quite line up as consistently.

The Perspective dichotomy has 4 questions in favor of the Philosophy trait, with 6 in favor of the Cozy trait. Question 67, "It's not worth reading stories unless they raise profound existential questions." should score in favor of the Philosophy trait, but in actually scores towards Cozy. This is just a wrong sign value in the data tables, and fixing it would make the Perspective dichotomy fall in line with 5 questions per trait pattern.

So, only the Form dichotomy is left, and I left it for last for a good reason. Oh boy is this one a mess. It has 10 questions like the rest, but every one of them scores in favor of Minimalism. This wouldn't be so bad if they were all phrased in favor of Minimalism, but only three of the ten makes sense in that regard, the rest require some direct explanation:
>5. I prefer stories that take on the world.
This one is clearly in the wrong dichotomy, it sounds like it can fall under both the Ethical or Philosophical dichotomies, this flexibility in itself just goes to show how open-ended, and hence meaningless, these questions are to begin with.
>19. I prefer it when the story takes centre stage as opposed to the author's style.
This one also sounds like it can fit in more than one dichotomies without raising any eyebrows any higher than they already are.
>36. Individual lives are always more fascinating to examine than the grander picture.
Probably meant for Maximalism, but could fit under Accessibility or Perspective.
>13. Literature with grandiose and dazzling prose is best.
>46. I prefer stories with a wide and cinematic scope.
>52. Literature allows one to escape from the meaninglessness of individual life and explore humanity in a greater picture.
>58. I prefer authors with a refined and lavish style as opposed to a direct one.
These should score towards Maximalism, whatever that is, not Minimalism.

Pic unrelated.

Attached: lucky_charm.jpg (206x206, 9K)

(3/4)

So not only is the concept of this website based on pseudoscience, it's also implemented sloppily and in places just plain wrong and broken. Now one could just say it's some dumb site some dumb user posted because it looks like harmless fun, right? End of story? Only if you stop reading.

Since I used the github repository(link top right on the site) to have a good look at the source code, I also saw when the last commit was made. Three hours before this thread was created. Probably just a coincidence of some kind, right? I looked a bit further back in the commit history and saw another big commit made on the 31st of January. After doing a search I found a thread on Yea Forums created shortly after that commit, one that also linked to dichotomytests.com. Not quite so coincidental now. OP is the developer of this website.

Some might still argue, what's the harm? Well, I also saw in the the commit history some notes about the removal and addition of advertisements to the website. I didn't notice at first since I have adblockers, so I decided to disable mine to see what kind of advertising our dear OP decided to grace us with. Pic related.

I have a bit of a pet peeve against advertising and marketing in general, especially on the internet, and especially this kind. The kind of advertising employed on dichotemytests.com is the kind that should be criminalized with the death penalty. It uses cheap tricks to circumvent and exploit legacy shortcomings in browsers to create a new window or tab, which then downloads files to the browser's cache without prompting, wasting bandwidth for those on metered connections, like myself, and then throws more annoyance at you. The creator/owner of that website is getting paid for this at our expense.

It seems pretty obvious that the developer behind this piece of shit of a website is also the one that created this thread. And this developer thinks that if he throws some Yea Forums terms around and knows some maymays that he can earn some free advertising revenue from this half-assed shit excuse for content.

No mercy from this autististic user, no sir. This little shit needs to be taught a lesson, and an example needs to be made.

Attached: badvertisement.jpg (1366x768, 85K)

(4/4)
Unfortunately, there is nothing that can be done.

It's not like one can look at the owner of the github repository's profile and maybe find a name. Who would be stupid enough to link something they posted on Yea Forums that can be traced back to their IRL identity, am I right? Certainly not this person, who has clearly shown immense intellectual prowess by creating this finely crafted and expertly coded website. Not even second year Computer Science students can achieve such a feat.

And it's not like one can look to find details about this person from their profile page, like whether said person is attending any tertiary education institutions and for how long or what the year of birth for this person might be. It certainly is impossible to search for this name on Facebook and find a matching profile. And once this profile isn't found, which it won't, there won't be any photos of this person anyway. Or links to who they are in a relationship with. Such a hypothetically cute couple they would make, but we'll never know.

Even if all this were possible, I would Strongly Disagree with such a course of action.

Pic unrelated.

Attached: mark_and_iseult.jpg (480x480, 41K)

What are those icons at the very bottom? I did the test twice now and the icons never appeared for me.

These questions are so situational it makes the test meaningless. For so many of the questions about style I answered neutral because if executed correctly, every one of the styles in question are equally valuable.

What is selection bias

abstract gang rise up

based lord of abstract

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-09 at 11.17.41 PM.png (520x647, 107K)

Attached: Screenshot_20190510-230038.png (1440x2560, 321K)

Just took it, answered honestly, and sure enough: INTP-T. It seems accurate but I'm sure it's about as accurate as a horoscope. Broad flattering descriptions that make you say, "wow, this is LITERALLY me"

Need a charger vro?

Attached: Screenshot_20190510-231021.png (1080x1920, 317K)

can i get some recs based on this

Attached: 2019-05-11 00_41_10-Window.png (477x653, 58K)

the flower at the bottom apparently means romanticism, which is accurate enough for me.

that pretty wild, tBh

So, with all of that said, would any of you guys be interested in making a less pseud version of a Yea Forums test that actually works?

While these tests are what they are, I still think we can actually make something that is more accurate and reliable. I can do the tech wizardry since this level of functionality is actually rather trivial to implement. Also I can do it without resorting to advertfagging. Fuck adverts, seriously. We can also explore different algorithms or theoretical frameworks for constructing the test or tests, especially if anons with deeper understandings of psychology and literature feel they have some insight or quality control to contribute. I can even create something like a general framework that can be used by other boards to make tests for their own boards.

For example, a question doesn't have to only affect one "dichotomy", it could have weighted contributions to multiple ones. We also don't have to limit ourselves to one dimensional dichotomies like that. I'm not going to say anything is possible, but I feel like compared to the DichotomyTests in this thread, we can be a lot more imaginative and creative with something like this. Also we don't have to pretend we are doing hard science and take it too seriously.

At least this way when you all want to talk about and compare results, a significant portion of the result won't be outright meaningless from how broken and buggy the implementation is. Recs based on these results will actually mean something and won't be such a colossal waste of user's time like in this thread.

So anyone interested in something like this? If there is interest I'll make a thread in the near future about it and we can take it from there.

Attached: nike.png (500x329, 104K)

INTJ-T
Many of these were hard to answer because I get into different moods and look for different things then. The favorite genres thing was pretty accurate though, I like his fantasy, romanticism, and magical realism, no matter how much Yea Forums memes on it.

Attached: Screenshot_20190511-104542~2.png (716x1131, 190K)

t. freudian cuck

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers–Briggs_Type_Indicator#Criticism

Anyone?

Attached: memetest.png (494x646, 57K)

Why does it keep asking the same questions over and over? It could've been 20 questions instead of 70.

Attached: LitScales.png (570x861, 108K)

autism

how the fuck is satirical the opposite of moralistic

Is that you Concon?