[alicebot-general] Personality models (was: Big Five personalitytraits)

[Chris Lofting]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: alicebot-general-bounces at list.alicebot.org [mailto:alicebot-general-
> bounces at list.alicebot.org] On Behalf Of Helio Perroni Filho
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 May 2006 2:06 AM
> To: Alicebot and AIML General Discussion
> Subject: RE: [alicebot-general] Personality models (was: Big Five
> personalitytraits)
> 
> --- Chris Lofting <chrislofting at ozemail.com.au>
> escreveu:
> 
> > These just work off two dichotomies and as such are
> > weak. MBTI works off four dichotomies, big-5 off 5.
> 
> Hello Chris,
> 
> Indeed the MTBI model looks very powerful, but how
> practical is it for bot design? I've been skipping
> through some of the references you provided; right now
> I am under the impression that MTBI covers a wide
> variety of human phenomenon, but also that it is a
> rather advanced topic for the non-initiated. Other
> models may not be so complete, but they are good
> enough for modeling the behaviour of fictional
> characters, besides being more within my somewhat
> limited grasp. ^_^'
> 

The complications of the MBTI are in the number of labels and questions
used. It can in fact be simplified due to analysis of how our brains deal
with information - we can determine the current 'type' based on three to
four questions and then extrapolate to a realm of fine details all due to
the 'hard coding' of the type (given an acorn we can 'grow' the tree).

The many questions of the MBTI are designed to bring out your responses to
four dichotomies but in a manner that 'hides' that intent - they want you to
answer without clearly recognising the types.

Due to the 1/f nature of the categories so there are qualitative
isomorphisms present when mapping the MBTI to, say, the I Ching. This is
due, from a brain function perspective, to the SAME general dynamics
operating in each context.

Thus when my brain, working general to particular, oscillates across the
hemispheres to give WHAT-WHERE-WHAT, that one behaviour will elicit the same
generic quality of meaning where it is the labels of the context that make
it 'different'. Thus the generic qualities of WHAT-WHERE-WHAT are localised
in the MBTI to representing the persona of XNTJ and localised in the I Ching
to represent the trigram of Fire, as it is localised in the categories of
emotion to represent acceptance. 

The common 'theme' in all of these is enclosure and expanding that
enclosure; there is a boundary present (emotionally it is a focus of being
in 'our' gang etc) The emotion of acceptance 'seeds' the dynamics of the
XNTJ persona with their focus on map-making, scientist, theoretician,
strategists etc. there is a definite 'cut' or 'boundary' that is pushed
outwards. In that push so the unknown becomes known - accepted.

>From a generic bot questioning approach, you can use three Y/N questions to
elicit the emotional nature of a context or of a person or anything else as
long as the questions are general enough but also ordered
general-to-particular and so layering the dichotomies.

>From a mathematics perspective, each dichotomy is of a positive/negative
form and so equivalent to the X, Y, and Z axis reduced to a their minimal
form (our mathematics is quantitative but bounded by the qualitative -
positive/negative. This is often 'missed' in that we consider the number
line as 'infinite' on either side of the origin. In fact it is bounded by
the qualities of positive/negative and we use self-referencing to make finer
'cuts' of the line WITHIN that bounding)

Thus the three questions can generate a meaning space of a cube (2^3) (two
question can give you a tetrahedron meaning space etc - 2^2) where further
questions asked WITHIN the contexts of the others reflect self-referencing,
we make finer distinctions, finer cuts, WITHIN each dimension.

The IDM focus is on identifying eight basic qualities derived from
differentiating/integrating, aka WHAT/WHERE, that are then relabelled for
each context. These eight qualities are derived from qualification of four
more basic qualities - a sense of wholeness, a sense of partness, a sense of
static relationships, a sense of dynamic relationships. 

These are qualified by any dichotomy synonymous with
differentiating/integrating. E.g. expand/contract. These qualities are the
common ground for all dichotomies where local context relabel them. It is
this common ground that makes it so easy to use one specialisation as a
source of analogy/metaphor for another. (Composite forms are then created by
applying the eight to each (and so 8 becomes 64, 64 becomes 4096 etc))

The isomorphism means we can use the well-developed categories of the I
Ching to extend the categories of the MBTI etc. (we are not interested in
the divination aspects of the IC, just the qualities derived from
self-referencing yin/yang)

>From a 'bot' perspective the properties and methods of self-referencing of
differentiate/integrate elicit patterns in need of a label and the labels
are stored in a database. Thus one can get a bot to process information by
making contrasts etc which is a method used in Personal Construct Psychology
PCP, also known as PCT - T = theory.

The originator of PCP wrote:

"Our psychological geometry is a geometry of dichotomies rather than the
geometry of areas envisioned by the classical logic of concepts, or the
geometry of lines envisioned by classical mathematical geometries. Each of
our dichotomies has both a differentiating and an integrating function. That
is to say it is the generalized form of the differentiating and integrating
act by which man intervenes in his world. By such an act he interposes a
difference between incidents -- incidents that would otherwise be
imperceptible to him because they are infinitely homogeneous. But also, by
such an intervening act, he ascribes integrity to incidents that are
otherwise imperceptible because they are infinitesimally fragmented. In this
kind of geometrically structured world there are no distances. Each axis of
reference represents not a line or continuum, as in analytic geometry, but
one, and only one, distinction. However, there are angles. These are
represented by contingencies or overlapping frequencies of incidents.
Moreover, these angles of relationship between personal constructs change
with the context of incidents to which the constructs are applied. Thus our
psychological space is a space without distance, and, as in the case of
non-Euclidian geometries, the relationships between directions change with
the context." (Kelly, 1969)

Chris.