<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Bradley Robb &#187; Myers-Briggs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/tag/myers-briggs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bradleyrobb.net</link>
	<description>I&#039;m Here Purely To Amuse Myself</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:06:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>The Written Voice</title>
		<link>http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/2009/01/the-written-voice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/2009/01/the-written-voice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:11:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>bradley</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Myers-Briggs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/?p=460</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The other day, Tom Chandler over at the Copywriter Underground posted a link to a beta project called the Typealyzer. What this bizarre sounding website does is attempt to diagnose the voice of a blog through the Jung / Myers-Briggs &#8230; <a href="http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/2009/01/the-written-voice/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other day, Tom Chandler over at <a href="http://copywriterunderground.com" target="_blank">the Copywriter Underground</a> posted a link to a beta project called the <a href="http://www.typealyzer.com" target="_blank">Typealyzer</a>. What this bizarre sounding website does is attempt to diagnose the voice of a blog through the Jung / Myers-Briggs personality test. I say attempt, as Typealyzer isn&#8217;t exposing their methods and the results are incredibly fast – which seems to suggest that the program is simply scanning for repetition of certain keywords, which reduces the actually usefulness of the program to “neat.”</p>
<div id="attachment_461" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 260px"><img class="size-full wp-image-461" title="voicemirror" src="http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/voicemirror.jpg" alt="Your actual voice my differ" width="250" height="226" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Your actual voice my differ</p></div>
<p>What got me to thinking, however, was the results I got from Typealyzer was not the same as the one I typically get from an Myers-Briggs test. So, I through my old personal blog at the Typealyzer and got not the expected results, but rather a repetition of the first results. Paper personality tests always had me pegged as an <a href="http://typelogic.com/infj.html" target="_blank">INFJ</a> whereas this test, using a broad sample of my writing on a multitude of topics and a over a broad time, declared my written voice an <a href="http://typelogic.com/istp.html" target="_blank">ISTP</a>.  The differences here are rather substantial, but what caught my attention wasn&#8217;t the difference but the fact that there was a difference.</p>
<p>Yes, I am taking this test at face value, and yes, it&#8217;s safe to assume that is a mistake. But the question being begged is still valuable. When a writer is asked to find their voice, how often do we stop and consider how close that voice is to our actual personality? Furthermore, is that potential divorce a good thing?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s certainly a question I&#8217;ll have to get to at a later time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.bradleyrobb.net/on/2009/01/the-written-voice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

