INTP
Barely I, strong on everything else.
This surprised me, since I'm not a big fiction reader:
Your Lit-IQ is 180/210
Barely I, strong on everything else.
This surprised me, since I'm not a big fiction reader:
Your Lit-IQ is 180/210
Fun Tests: from psychology to color
- Thread starter Town Heretic
- Start date
I beg to differ, all of the anti-Trump propaganda you consume is fiction.
So quit feeding it to him :chuckle:
Newest edition:
Emotional Intelligence Test Out of Berkeley. I'll be adding it to the list in the OP shortly.
[h=5]Your Score: 18/20[/h][FONT="]Impressive. You've got a strong ability to read other people and understand what they're feeling. It's a great skill to have in a friend (and a poker player). Your score puts you in the upper echelons of emotional intelligence, yet research suggests that people can improve their emotion recognition skills with practice. So keep an eye out for our forthcoming empathy training tool, designed to boost your score even higher.
I thought one was surprise that was interest. The other was a shame/embarrassment distinction. [/FONT]
Emotional Intelligence Test Out of Berkeley. I'll be adding it to the list in the OP shortly.
[h=5]Your Score: 18/20[/h][FONT="]Impressive. You've got a strong ability to read other people and understand what they're feeling. It's a great skill to have in a friend (and a poker player). Your score puts you in the upper echelons of emotional intelligence, yet research suggests that people can improve their emotion recognition skills with practice. So keep an eye out for our forthcoming empathy training tool, designed to boost your score even higher.
I thought one was surprise that was interest. The other was a shame/embarrassment distinction. [/FONT]
My emotional intelligence test came out 13/20, supposedly average at correctly decoding facial expressions.
Which is probably remarkably good for an INTP; we tend to be rather unreceptive to emotional discourse.
Which is probably remarkably good for an INTP; we tend to be rather unreceptive to emotional discourse.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
The video of the first-time reactions of people seeing colors through the Enchroma glasses that they hadn't been able to see before was so touching.
I took all the bias tests. I had surprising biases, and where I expected to be biased, I wasn't at all. But those are good tests, if you think about them. They're just measuring and comparing how long it takes you to click the correct button, with your fingers, which are directly connected to your brain, which is trying to press the right button. So if it picks up something, that's worth knowing.
Emotional intelligence is more than reading facial expressions and body language though, this test is only focusing on one facet of it.
A naive and facile view of the game that makes many poker players a lot of money, year after year. Reading tells is not a big part of playing poker at a high level, at big limits and high stakes. It's not that it's nothing, but as far as tools in the toolbox go, this tool is like a small hammer. Bigger hammers and other specialty tools are going to come in handier, but having the tiny little hammer is useful sometimes, although, you can just tap the bigger hammer with a nail set if you need to.Newest edition:
Emotional Intelligence Test Out of Berkeley. I'll be adding it to the list in the OP shortly.
Your Score: 18/20
Impressive. You've got a strong ability to read other people and understand what they're feeling. It's a great skill to have in a friend (and a poker player).
14/20
Emotional intelligence is more than reading facial expressions and body language though, this test is only focusing on one facet of it.
I wonder what it would do for me...well, I'll just have to wait and see.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I wonder what it would do for me...well, I'll just have to wait and see.
Are you getting the Enchroma glasses?! OMG, I'd love to hear about your experience.
Not until I get a disposable income, but eventually. I suspect it will be worth the wait.Are you getting the Enchroma glasses?! OMG, I'd love to hear about your experience.
This is not a test:
http://us.cnn.com/2017/09/13/opinions/why-dont-facts-matter-sharot-opinion/index.html
It's an article about how humans have another bias, at least, that's what the writer contends. They are helpful with mentioning other known human biases, and hinting at others, which just leads me to believe that it's an interaction between numerous other independent biases, like confirmation bias, invalid statistical inferences, and group polarization. I'll also throw in the fundamental attribution error, which even the pope has been manifesting openly over the past year.
Fundamentally, the fundamental attribution cognitive error is when we tend to condemn others, and vindicate ourselves, for doing the exact same things.
In order to regularly make a million dollars a year playing poker, you must be good enough at the game that you can play at a very high level, even practically in your sleep, this is the topmost tier of poker players; there is no real distinction between them, and head-to-head or in ring games together, over a long period of time, they'd all beat each other to death and lose everything in the rakes. It's not like other competitions where there are contests to sort out who's the best one. There's a best group, and being in that group is a requirement for regularly making a million dollars a year playing poker.
But on top of this, there is extra-poker strategy, and this involves things like living in Las Vegas or close to some casino, so that you can actually regularly sit in big poker games.
Being the best poker player is about cards and betting, and you can do this blindfolded once you know your cards and the board, and the bets being placed by whom, and when. The differential equation governing the best poker play is common to all top poker players, but part of what makes it a poker differential equation, is that there's always an element of randomness in there, so no two top poker players will play the same hand the same way. When the best players play one another, it really does come down to catching cards, because everything else they do is governed by that same differential equation. Knowing what your opponents' differential equations are only helps if their differential equation is inferior to the one superior differential equation, that governs the play of the world's top elite group of poker players.
Another facet to emotional intelligence is as you might expect, being comfortable and objective about your own emotions.
And another is understanding others' emotions, and being capable in dealing with the fact that as humans, we are emotional animals.
In fact, these two skills are far more important in poker, than being able to read tells.
The second one helps you earn more money when your opponents have lost control of their own emotions. Poker lingo/jargon in such cases are "steaming," "on tilt" or "tilting," or invoking Mike Caro's having crossed "the threshold of misery," beyond which, all further losses feel the same as money already lost. These players tend to bluff more, and call down hands they should have mucked, among other predictable behaviors. Taking advantage of such an opponent is very profitable.
And the first one is the most important one. It's being disciplined enough to play well, even after having lost a lot of money. Everybody has a bad run sometimes, everybody has a string of bad luck, everybody endures prolonged and protracted losses. The key, if you want to earn a million dollars every year playing poker, is to play well even when you yourself are on tilt. Again invoking Caro, money not lost, is of the same value as money won, even though when you're on a bad run, it doesn't feel that way.