Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Scientific Personality Assessment

  1. #1 Scientific Personality Assessment 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2
    Has anyone taken this?

    ---------excerpt-------

    The Human Side of Science: What is the Archetypal Researcher Personality?

    Are there some personalities that are better suited than others to a scientific career? To provide insight into this issue, The Science Advisory Board created the first-ever psychological profile of life science researchers, the Scientific Personality Assessment (http://scienceboard.net/151.new.html).

    The assessment is meant to help scientists better evaluate their strengths and assets as well as confront the particular challenges they face in their everyday work life. The goal is not to suggest that one personality type is better than another or that having specific character traits will engender more professional success, but rather to encourage people to align their professional aspirations with their own particular blend of expertise and skills. A summary of results based on recent participants has been posted at: www.scienceboard.net


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Just took it. Very interesting. Apparently I am an Explorer

    "Explorers are the visionaries of the scientific community and are full of novel ideas. Willing to venture into uncharted territories, these individuals live life to the fullest, and usually take an idealistic approach to the research process. Explorers are driven by competition and are wholly fascinated with new and exciting ideas and technologies. However, the downside of this is that once the fascination wears away, explorers can quickly lose focus and get bored, yearning for the next exciting challenge.

    These outgoing researchers love to socialize at scientific conferences and enjoy being the center of attention. As a result of their outgoing nature, some may view them as socially aggressive. Though explorers probably would not agree, they are often considered by others to be poor listeners as they usually monopolize conversations. They are confident, opinionated, and are not afraid to say what is on their mind.

    In the laboratory environment, explorers are the motivators of their research team. They excel at networking with fellow scientists and are natural communicators. However, explorers can be disorganized, impulsive and can struggle with follow-through and time management, especially when it comes to repeating failed experiments or meeting grant/publication deadlines. Explorers tend to attribute their successes to their own strengths and may fail to recognize the important contributions of lab members and suppliers
    . "

    . Note that although this study is focused on those in the life sciences, and I work in an egineering discipline, it is still frighteningly accurate.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore Stranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    148
    Thanks for the link. I like these kinds of "tests". It was rather long and there were some questions about myself I never really thought about, but most of the result was accurate. I was an Organizer.

    Organizers are defined by their methodical, traditional and pragmatic approach to scientific research. These highly intellectual individuals are soft-spoken and typically refrain from expressing their feelings, not wanting to overtly influence another's opinion or analysis of experimental results. However, this does not mean that an organizer does not feel strongly about the meaning of the data in question – organizers can be very particular and often judgmental of others, especially when a colleague's assumption contradicts his or her own.

    Organizers thrive on facts and data. Because of the extensive detail they require of any task, organizers prefer to work on only a few research projects at a time. They are extremely cautious decision-makers and have a tendency to analyze problems from multiple angles—but their final analysis is routinely based upon very sound judgment. Although organizers are notoriously dependable, they prefer working independently since their desire for order can become problematic in a team environment where everyone's opinion counts.

    Other scientific personas may find that the organizer to be too demanding. Organizers are perfectionists and are bothered by careless mistakes. They become frustrated and sometimes procrastinate when they must make a decision and sufficient facts are not available, or the quality of the available data does not meet their high standards. Organizers strive for high levels of accuracy and precision in their own work, and expect the same from colleagues and suppliers.
    Watch what thy eyes can't see... and live it.

    (T.B)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    945
    I am an Enthusiast

    The defining quality of enthusiasts is their motivation to interact with and please others. These sensitive and accommodating individuals effortlessly make friends with other researchers in their field, can easily work on collaborative projects and are great listeners. Because they are more apt to stay situated in a comfort zone, the enthusiast is resistant to change, steers clear of risk, and avoids conflict with scientific colleagues.

    Enthusiasts are more amiable than other scientific personas and often strive to reach a group consensus when decisions have to be made. As a result, others may perceive them as being unassertive and conformist. Their easy-going nature and lack of ego encourages them to expect and rely on the support of colleagues and suppliers. Enthusiasts tend to keep their thoughts and feelings to themselves, and in their effort to “get along” they sometimes find themselves involved in projects or decisions in which they have little interest or no personal stake.



    Enthusiasts are extremely hard workers and take pride in their strong work ethic. Their role in a research team is usually supportive and cooperative they are viewed by others as dependable, patient, and loyal—an enthusiast is not one to disappoint his or her colleagues. Because of their eminent likeability and trustworthiness, enthusiasts both excel at negotiating and are effective advocates for their research and lab.

    IS THAT A GOOD THING? OR A BAD THING?
    i answered the questions but i am only a student, but i think it worked well. its true to me to the point of 6, i have ambition , in the snese that i will speak up an dcofront people i don't agree with. what do you lot tink?
    Stumble on through life.
    Feel free to correct any false information, which unknown to me, may be included in my posts. (also - let this be a disclaimer)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman starnamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    63
    Interesting. Quite accurate. I am indeed pretty much a perfectionist though I am learning to be less of it.

    You are an Organizer

    Organizers are defined by their methodical, traditional and pragmatic approach to scientific research. These highly intellectual individuals are soft-spoken and typically refrain from expressing their feelings, not wanting to overtly influence another's opinion or analysis of experimental results. However, this does not mean that an organizer does not feel strongly about the meaning of the data in question – organizers can be very particular and often judgmental of others, especially when a colleague's assumption contradicts his or her own.

    Organizers thrive on facts and data. Because of the extensive detail they require of any task, organizers prefer to work on only a few research projects at a time. They are extremely cautious decision-makers and have a tendency to analyze problems from multiple angles—but their final analysis is routinely based upon very sound judgment. Although organizers are notoriously dependable, they prefer working independently since their desire for order can become problematic in a team environment where everyone's opinion counts.

    Other scientific personas may find that the organizer to be too demanding. Organizers are perfectionists and are bothered by careless mistakes. They become frustrated and sometimes procrastinate when they must make a decision and sufficient facts are not available, or the quality of the available data does not meet their high standards. Organizers strive for high levels of accuracy and precision in their own work, and expect the same from colleagues and suppliers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Junior Cottontop3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    West Texas
    Posts
    252
    I am, based on the:

    "Scientific and Medical Personality Assessment

    A Leader:

    These disciplined scientists are best characterized by their ability to guide and manage other researchers. Leaders can be found at all levels of seniority within a lab but their preference to be in control of projects in which they are involved. Leaders are persistent, assertive, independent, structured individuals who enjoy challenging projects. Because of this, they can also be extremely competitive, especially when it comes to being the first to uncover significant findings. They are self-assured and proud of their many scientific achievements.

    Leaders excel at multi-tasking and prefer fast-paced research environments. They take action immediately, but are sometimes criticized for making decisions too quickly, often relying on their instinct rather than a systematic analysis of the facts. Since they are driven to get the job done, leaders can sometimes lack the diplomacy needed to keep everyone informed and involved when working in a group.

    Concerned with achieving their personal goals and dreams, leaders value fellow lab members and suppliers according to their ability to help them in these endeavors. They work best with "big picture" projects that need to be pushed through with aggressiveness or personal resolve. In a dysfunctional research team, they may be resented or even feared because of this aggressiveness and their perceived lack of concern for others' feelings. A healthy research team, however, will respect a leader and give him or her with authority and responsibility to fulfill their mission. Leaders mandate perfection and are usually easy to get along with—provided that others measure up to the Leader’s high expectations."
    Death Beckons
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    130
    well, I looked over that website, and having a considerable psych background, there was something missing. Every psychological test must have validity and reliability measures, to be sure that it's measuring something real & that it will consistently give similar results each time the test is done on the same individual. For that reason, I am concerned that the V & R standards have not been met. So until those data are present, one cannot know much about the usefulness of this test.

    Perhaps someone here can supply those measures for us. :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    It says that I am both an Enthusiast and an Organizer. Luckily the descripitons of both are given above. I rated the assessment as a 5 out of 7 since some aspects of these two did not match me very well. I have tested out as a Perfectionist in another personality test I took about 15 years ago which has a lot in common with Organizer.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    177
    Our company had everyone take the Myers Briggs personality test (MBTI) about 10 years ago. The results were very interesting, and showed a very strong correlation between personality type and career choice. Has anyone on this forum had this test?

    Nearly all the (non-analytical) chemists were ENTP or INTP
    Analytical chemists and nearly all engineers were ISTJ
    Marketing people were ESFP and ESFJ
    Business people were ESTJ's mostly

    I was ENTP I am a research Fellow (chemist), and Director of R&D at my company
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    130
    You bring up good points about the Myers-Briggs test. It's one which is both valid and reliable & based upon Jung's theory of personality. But what it means, many cases, no one knows. I recall it being administered to my med school class some 30 years ago and frankly, we were all over the types. The test found no one type of personality which was favored by the students. As 95% of us graduated, that pretty much indicated what was going on in medicine.

    Every once in a while one reads that certain types are this or that. One must be very careful that such conclusions are carefully arrived at and confirmed by otehr studies.

    Interesting that while in school I took the BMPT. And 20 yrs. later took it again. I had changed from an INTP to an INTJ, which as I recall taking the first test, I was close to being INTJ, anway, so the change was small. This is a sign of reliability of the test.

    so far, the test being recommended from this thread has not been shown to be valid or reliable. This concerns me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •