How male or female is your brain?

[tragula]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,12983,937443,00.html

Leave it to me to find this test! I can't say that it is the most cleverly constructed test I've ever taken... but there it is!

There is a link when you are done taking the test that takes you to a spot to map your brain.

EQ35
SQ50

[Hyperion]

EQ17
SQ65

Hmmm ... a female friend (a teacher, probably INFJ) who is probably intrigued by my (sometimes outrageous ) opinions/analysis summed me up as:

You are not overly concerned and yet not too unattached either. You are the type who will analyze instead of using too many emotions to solve problems.

I sure thought that my EQ would be higher than an autist! I did love to cut up worms and mangle insects (and even animals) as a child so maybe that brought down my EQ score. :D

[Boneca]

EQ15
SQ33

Either I'm severely underestimating my social skills, or that test is biased against me. It said autistic people score about EQ20!

[indie]

EQ = 42
SQ = 44

[greenintp]

E34
S60

[misutii]

EQ - 23
SQ -24

[Shai Gar]

is that emotional quota and spiritual quota?

and show us your tits.

[MasterMerk]

EQ = 56
SQ = 33

[Bluehaze]

For the record:

EQ = Empathising Quotient (Female)
SQ = Systemising Quotient (Male)

Continuing:

EQ = 34
SQ = 48

As others have shown, there seems to be an abundance of low EQ scores. The main reason is most likely that the test is confused in assuming that just because a person acts a certain way, means that the person did it because they thought it was the best response.

For example, if one decides to be blunt about a point, that doesn't neccessarily mean one does not know that a more thoughtful response will be better--but that one just doesn't care (or by some other reason) enough to do otherwise.

[MasterMerk]

Yes. I tend to know when someone is feeling iffy about something, but I like to think I know better than to neccesarily do anything about it.

[tragula]

The two above posters have it exactly right. It's possible to be totally conscious of how another person will react emotionally and choose to disregard their feelings because doing "the right thing" demands it!

This is the big divide between feelers and thinkers though, and it is not possible to reconcile them. It is reminiscent of the debate about people who make decisions based on "values" and people who make decisions based on "principles". The classic example being whether you would turn in your own sibling if they committed murder.... Values say "don't do it" and principles say "you HAVE to." One is Subjective and the other is Objective!

Making purely subjective decisions must have really benefited the human race at some point, because a lot of people do it!

[Clara]

... :blink: Huh? I thought the male/female brain categorization ( there have been studies, mapping how we use our brains - indicating that it's similar to the joke about "how men/women shop for a specific item" )

And, by the way, my best guess would be that many people here "can do both." For instance, men who can follow a long complicated series of tangents :whistle: and women who can immediately grasp the concept, and restate it in a simple and direct way. :)


This is the big divide between feelers and thinkers though, and it is not possible to reconcile them. It is reminiscent of the debate about people who make decisions based on "values" and people who make decisions based on "principles".
I disagree - I think it's always important to take both (all) into account...

[Claverhouse]

EQ = 16
SQ = 33

Which gives a fairly untrue impression. Some of the questions were too diffuse for my liking.

And apart from distrusting anything that comes from the Guardian, 'Beware of Liberals bearing gifts', I'd like to be reassured that Mr. Simon Baron-Cohen has absolutely no connection with Borat...



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[BritainOphira]

EQ = 40
SQ = 50

[melancholeric]

EQ 29
SQ 34

EQ score seems suspiciously high to me...

[Aryan]

EQ = 29
SQ = 41

[Helios]

Geez I am really off balance, I am EQ26 and SQ56

[Helios]

EQ17
SQ65

Hmmm ... a female friend (a teacher, probably INFJ) who is probably intrigued by my (sometimes outrageous ) opinions/analysis summed me up as:

You are not overly concerned and yet not too unattached either. You are the type who will analyze instead of using too many emotions to solve problems.

I sure thought that my EQ would be higher than an autist! I did love to cut up worms and mangle insects (and even animals) as a child so maybe that brought down my EQ score. :D


Yeah I see you're the only person more S than myself, but I did pass on the cutting up bit

[mgb]

EQ = 31.

I'll take the other test later.

[Little Miss Krahka]

EQ = 10
SQ = 51
Sooooo what'd I win?

[cjs55]

I didn't like these tests.

EQ = 29
SQ = 35

I'm apparently unimpressive.

[euterpenc]

EQ-25
SQ-36

SQ seems too low

[raincrow007]

EQ-34
SQ-15

Questions sucked.

[AnandaQ]

EQ = 24
SQ = 36

I was actually surprised at the 'low' EQ score; when I saw that it was testing empathy, I thought "oh, empathy... I'm all good with the empathy." It's sympathy, and even more specifically, verbally expressing sympathy, is what I suck at. I always feel like the other person is going to not only see through my feeble attempts at being comforting, but think I'm mocking their pain. Ugh. :p

Anyway, according to that test, I suck at empathy too! Three cheers for the Ice Princess! happppy

Ananda
__________
Currently listening to:
Shivaree - "Lunch"
"The latest color on your lips and there's a satchel at your hips
And it's all full of broken Barbie dolls and disassembled dreams
If you don't want for them to hate you 'cause you're beautiful
How can you want them all to love you for the same thing?"

[PonderBee]

EQ=43
SQ=36

[avidApathy]

EQ=33
SQ=48

Are INTP's half autistic or what?

[Heather Harrison]

EQ=34
SQ=41

This isn't the best test, but it is an interesting data point. I am a little surprised at how high my EQ score was. I was diagnosed with autism when I was a child (I believe the diagnosis was correct, but I am a high-functioning type). In recent years, knowing that I was lacking in empathy, I have consciously tried to do better in that regard, and nowadays it is beginning to come naturally.

One problem with the test is that it allowed "somewhat" responses; it can be good, but it is in my nature to choose these options when they are available because I always assume some uncertainty on my part; either of these could have been underestimated as a result.

Heather Harrison

[Architectonic]

Does anyone really dislike the structure of the test? I mean to score highly you have to choose the more extreme responses rather than the more honest and realistic "slightly". That is to say anyone who scores above 45 is likely to be seriously deluding themselves.

For example, the difference between my "honest" EQ score (30) and my more extremely answered score (66) is rather large...

Do my Delusional™ scores are:

EQ: 66
SQ: 65

:P

[April]

EQ - 61
SQ - 31

[Albino Sartan]

EQ--51
SQ--24

Henh. Weird.

[INTrPosr]

EQ 42

SQ 32

Okay, I will bite..... What does it mean if your EQ is higher than your SQ? Are those whom had a higher EQ, NFs?

[ApeTheDog]

EQ = 25. I wonder if I would have scored higher if I'd picked the 'strongly' option more often. I almost always had to slightly agree or disagree because they use 'always' and 'never' often in their questions - and nothing I do is ever rigid like that.
SQ = 32. Yes, sometimes I do wonder how the mountain is formed, but not every single time. Yes, sometimes I wonder how the building is made, but I can't say I do so every time I see one. I had to be honest here and say no to many questions because of the way they were asked again.

[Albino Sartan]

I would be inclined to say that NFs have a greater NATURAL capacity for EQ, but I don't think all NFs have high EQ or that all NTs have low EQ. Some NFs can get so caught up in their own emotions that they don't figure others' emotions into the equation very often.

[sbw]

I sure thought that my EQ would be higher than an autist! I did love to cut up worms and mangle insects (and even animals) as a child so maybe that brought down my EQ score. :D

wow, I'm sub-autist as well! (EQ19) Ah well, fuck 'em.

Scott

[Nighthawk]

EQ - 19
SQ - 52

Apparently having a very high ability for analyzing and exploring a system tends towards "mental issues" like Asperger's Syndrome and autism. However, it is perfectly cool to have a lower than average ability for analyzing and exploring a system. Sounds like societal bias against engineers to me.

[jyakulis]

Apparently I'm autistic as well.

[Albino Sartan]

Ah, autism. I was diagnosed as autistic...Silly social workers. ;P

[Geek Engineer]

Ouch..
EQ 14
SQ 44

I have AS I should have known..haha... I might have been to hard on myself on the EQ test. But it wouldn't suprize me either I pretty much suck as social side of things... I know in grade school they wanted to test me for "developmental" issues etc, but my dad wouldn't let them do it since he didn't think there was anything wrong with me. Maybe he was wrong.. :shock:

[CrackerJack]

EQ24 <- Jeez and I was gonna be a care worker!
SQ37 <- I really thought I would do better than that.

[Birdsnest]

Thought I'd score higher, 28 on the EQ test. Didn't take the other one yet.

[Miss Anthropic]

EQ31
SQ36

[Miss Anthropic]

EQ = 10
SQ = 51
Sooooo what'd I win?
The coveted Asperger award!

[xenose]

EQ - 28
SQ - 23

[moni]

EQ - 34
SQ - 18

[Sackanaka]

EQ - 38
SQ - 29

[Ka.avik]

eq 18 (yay! nearly as high as the autists :-P )
sq 20 (yay! I can nearly explore a system!)

Methinks this is a primarily useless quiz.

[Chicken]

Well, holy crap.. I'm sure no one will be surprised by this one :P
Then again, I am pretty damn surprised I scored so low on EQ. I think the sexist implication in the questioning is pretty pitiful. There were a few things that specifically caught my eye that were blatantly sexist. Who ever designed that test was a tosser. Obviously the test is flawed. I have EQ. Damn fawhokwhogads!

EQ - 5
SQ - 44

[cathmc]

EQ = 49 (average ability for understanding how others feel and responding appropriately)
Yeah I think I'm above average at understanding how others feel but who's to say whether my responses are 'appropriate'
SQ = 26 (average ability for analyzing and exploring a system)
I think the test was skewed to certain systems like cars and technology which I'm not personally interested in. If there were more Qs like 'when I learn a language I like to understand the grammar' (to which I said definitely agree) I would have scored higher. I think I'm actually quite analytical. I just don't care about cars.

[Watermark]

EQ = 30 (lower than average) not good. lol
SQ = 43 (above average for exploring and analysing a system. Most people with AS or high functioning autism in 40-50 range - interesting factoid.)

[jimkopelli]

EQ : 24
SQ : 51

[Chrysalii]

EQ: 14
SQ: 44
I have never been on an airplane....how do I answer this question

[Dempsey]

EQ = 20.
"Most people with Aspergers Syndrome or high-functioning autism score about 20".

[KBELL]

EQ = 47
SQ = 36

????????????

[Asmodiel]

EQ=14
SQ=44

I was surprised to see a score that low on EQ...but then again, I really am totally oblivious in that department :/.

It's an odd test...

[Johan]

This test was indeed farily inaccurate if one is far from the stereotypes of these types, yet a part of them. The most skewed was the SQ measurment which was almost entirely based on interest in technology, i.e. an expression of the interest in systems and not the interest itself.

I personally got a very low score on the EQ (then again, I do express asperger tendencies) but it should have been higher. Someone mentioned that it didn't make the distniction between picking up certain cues and acting on them which sounds valid. According to the test I am also under the average when it comes to systems. In the cases of organising something, I am very well above the average. I simply don't care to do it if I don't have to.

The system quotitient also suffered as it didn't account for theoretical systems. I am interested in abstract theories and games, yet this was not accounted for in this test (and as it is aimed at the majority of the population, why should it?) . I am somewhat interested in technical details but not consistently unlike my brother who was euphoric when he got the chance to take apart our broken dishwasher ;)

[Shadow]

As far as the test being skewed, it seems to be geared torwards the stereotypical Aspie, not necessarily the high-systemizing, non-aspie. I believe the intended purpose (if not explicitly stated) is to measure aspiness in a more generalized manner.

SQ - 65
EQ - 11

[Wilde Mutton]

EQ: 41
SQ: 47

[Fingers]

EQ = 30
SQ = 28

bleh.. test sucks.

[MySavior]

EQ 20
SQ 24

WTF??

[Partial Observer]

EQ 30 I have been 'accused' of having Aspergers in the past...
SQ 32 Piss poor test.

[pillow]

EQ: 26
SQ: 46

Omg, both tests say I have a weird syndrom.
Doctor, tell me please, will I live? :P
--------------------------------
Asperger Syndrom= a developmental disorder characterized by impaired social and occupational skills, by normal language and cognitive development, and by restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities often with above average performance in a narrow field against a general background of deficient functioning called also Asperger's disorder.

Autism

1. n : (psychiatry) an abnormal absorption with the self; marked by communication disorders and short attention span and inability to treat others as people

2. a developmental disorder that appears by age three and that is variable in expression but is recognized and diagnosed by impairment of the ability to form normal social relationships, by impairment of the ability to communicate with others, and by stereotyped behavior patterns especially as exhibited by a preoccupation with repetitive activities of restricted focus rather than with flexible and imaginative ones
--------------
I might be introverted and like to be alone or think or dream but that doesnt mean that I cant function in the world when I must do that. Not that nuts yet :P:P:P The test is obviously not reliable.

[last_caress]

EQ: 34
SQ: 30

[vascily]

SQ:61
EQ:43

[vacant space]

EQ: 39 / SQ: 43

[saanengirl]

EQ:38
SQ:51

On the EQ test, I answered most of the questions with "slightly" on the SQ test I had more extreme answers. Answering questions with "slightly" apparently is key to low scores...

[Snowflake]

EQ=18
SQ=51

I have to agree with the comments regarding the test. The questions seemed too subjective.

[Bugeater]

EQ=18
SQ=67

[aether]

EQ 19
SQ 47

Any good careers for aspies?

[Hexchild]

EQ 17
SQ 35

For no practical reason it bugs me somewhat that so many people, including the authors of this test, spell Aspberger's Syndrome incorrectly.

[academiannut]

EQ = 10
SQ = 31

So I'm worse than the Aspies on EQ, but average on SQ. Hmm, what to make of that.

It worries me that my EQ is so low even compared to the people on this board. I AM a freak.

Surely I have empathy. So I don't get drawn into other people's emotions too heavily. Isn't it better for someone to remain objective?

Argh.

[elle]

EQ:59
SQ:59--- or wait was that 69????
talk about balanced!!!

[holarchon]

EQ 37
SQ 67

Usually I don't see Mountains - but when I really look at one I do think about how it was formed. Trees, less so. Of course there are more of them around here :)

We are abusing this quiz... if that is possible.

[Chihbu]

EQ = 40

SQ = 30

[Pan]

EQ 17
SQ 47

What can you say about a test by someone who claims:


The extreme male brain (bottom right of the graph) may be a manifestation of autism.
As INTPs seem to score in precisely that area of the graph (low EQ, high SQ), does it mean we're autistic? ...... or just extremely virile, manly men? :blink:

[Dunearhp]

EQ 42
SQ 59

I was looking at the landscape the other day and wondered if Larry Niven's Ringworld would have much of a problem with soil erosion. With the absence of plate tectonics there would be nothing to replenish the soil at high altitudes. It would become a world of silt with scrith mountains poking up here and there. Relevant? Who cares.

[Maniac]

This test is crap, although I'm glad I'm more male than female. I thought I would score much higher on the EQ.

EQ = 16
SQ = 34

Then again, I'm sure some questions were biased. Probably more realistically:

EQ = 20
SQ = 36

[meshou]

EQ = 40
SQ= 37

[cosmic06]

EQ 42
SQ 54

Quite surprising that they say my SQ is very atypical for women, since I am a female. Maybe I am overestimating myself on this quiz. Who knows. Interesting.

[Melange]

EQ19- this test is very biased, not impressed
SQ40- seems a little high, thought it would be mid 30's

[Madrigal]

I thought the system questions were way to science/technology based. I got a 17, and yet I'm fascinated by history, social systems and artistic ones. Test sucks.

[Neppy]

Click here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,12983,937443,00.html) to find the (two) tests. One tests your Empathy Quotient, the other, your Systemising Quotient. This is basically the sequal to the Asperger's Syndrome test (yes, as you can see, I am fond of tests, being a curious individual).

Once you've taken both tests, you can click on the "Your brain type" link and see where you are on the grid. A bit of background information: Those with "extreme S type brains" are likely to have AS/Autism.

I don't know if I want to share my scores. Maybe later. But that said, let the fun begin (and it is just for fun at the end of the day, though you can take the scores seriously if you want to).

It has been brought to my attention that this was already posted in January, but hey. New members or those wanting to take it again... and for some reason I can't delete this anyway.

[melancholeric]

http://intpcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2309

[Neppy]

Oh you're not serious. X.x

Well that was posted in January. Maybe newer members can take the quiz.

[Hypnos]

I scored 5 on the empathy thing. I think this means that I can't even feed myself.

[Neppy]

Hah!

The test is a bit... ehm, skewed. Kind of inaccurate. But most online tests are.

[Hypnos]

I scored middling on most things, but the last ~20 questions on tact and social grace did me in.

Bitch.

[Neppy]

I hope you're being ironic. ;-;

And I thought my score was low. ;) I got below 20 on the EQ. 46 on the SQ. I doubt it's that accurate in my case. :whistle: I'd definitely be an S type but not that severe.

[CosmicDust]

I took that test in the book. I think I first scored 20-something empathizing and 27 systemizing, but after changing some answers where I was ambivalent about the degree I related or didn't relate, I got about 30 in both.

[Hypnos]

I hope you're being ironic. ;-;
I don't get it.

Anyway, seeing as that I can get along more or less without assistance, and manage to not have everyone run away screaming, I'm probably more psychopath than Aspie.

I must go feed my ATM machine a stray cat.

BTW, i scored quite high on systematizing, 53.

[mgb]

SQ = 36

EQ = 42

[MacGuffin]

Whee! [merges threads]

[Neppy]

Good, someone got rid of my topic... I couldn't delete it myself.

According to the results I've got an "extreme male brain", or S brain. :ph34r: E: 17 and S: 46... kind of disproportionate. I am good at deciphering the emotions people are feeling, but it's not a natural process. I have to really pay attention..

[wildcat]

EQ 29
SQ 34

EQ score seems suspiciously high to me...
... maybe it is because of the free vodka..

[mgb]

Whee! [merges threads]

I don't like that at all.

[MacGuffin]

I don't like that at all.Wait till I merge you and swift!

[mgb]

Wait till I merge you and swift!

ewww.

But seriously, I find threads to be more of a train of thought during a particular period in time.

A new thread that is the same as an old idea, is actually something completely different from whatever the old idea was because it's new people posting, or at least the same old people with some new ideas, so merging them kind of distorts the impression of time.

[MacGuffin]

A new thread that is the same as an old idea, is actually something completely different from whatever the old idea was because it's new people posting, or at least the same old people with some new ideas, so merging them kind of distorts the impression of time.True, I've thought about this before. I merged this one cause it is the same test. I figure people can go back and see how others tested.

If it is similar ideas and not a repeat to a link, I'd probaby just leave it alone. Probably.

[Rajah]

EQ - 28
SQ - 31

I don't understand what this really means though... or if it means anything at all!

[wildcat]

EQ17
SQ65

Hmmm ... a female friend (a teacher, probably INFJ) who is probably intrigued by my (sometimes outrageous ) opinions/analysis summed me up as:

You are not overly concerned and yet not too unattached either. You are the type who will analyze instead of using too many emotions to solve problems.

I sure thought that my EQ would be higher than an autist! I did love to cut up worms and mangle insects (and even animals) as a child so maybe that brought down my EQ score. :D
.. amateurish.. and wrong. The test confuses Field Independence and the P scale of Eysenck. Signs of autism and psychopathy, repectively. They do not match.

[DeadDove]

EQ = 40
SQ = 24

[BSizemore]

EQ 21
SQ 51
INTP
...???
What do you think guys?
Does this mean I'm an Aspie?

[Lee]

What do you think guys?
Does this mean I'm an Aspie?No.

[EmmaPeel]

EQ = 21
HQ = 32

[Park]

EQ 57
SQ 52