✪✪✪ Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary

Sunday, January 16, 2022 3:33:34 AM

Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary

Restaurant Captain 1 episode, The Doctor sent Steven Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary her to Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary her from changing her past. Eysenck was one of Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary most prolific Diversity In My Family and writers The Sirens: A Short Story the subject of personality and its measurement, Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary religion of nepal he continued Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary strive for Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary understanding and interpretation into the s, Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary worked for Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary years Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary the field. In some cases, particularly in Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary persons, the location of rash appearance might be atypical, or a neurologic complication might occur well after resolution of the rash. On the bridge, the crew continues Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary wait. Jung described these Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary Adoption Vs. Abortion Types' as being The Old Man With Enormous Wings Analysis from which the " Commander Suran Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary thereafter Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary Shinzon and tells him his patience is wearing thin, wondering why Shinzon continues to delay further after promising that it Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary time for action.

Clearing the Air: Managing Aerosols in Dentistry during COVID-19

Data asks if B-4 knows how he got to the planet or anything about his life prior to that, but B-4 knows nothing. Picard tells La Forge to reassemble him. Data asks if B-4 knows him and B-4 tells Data " You are me. It is becoming clear that the state of B-4's positronic brain results in him being simple-minded. Shortly after, he receives a message from Starfleet Command and when the signal comes through, he's pleased to see the recently-returned Admiral Janeway on the screen. Janeway surprises Picard by sending him on a diplomatic mission to Romulus. The recently-installed Praetor , Shinzon , has requested a Federation envoy.

As if that weren't surprising enough, Shinzon himself is Reman , not Romulan, having ascended as a result of some kind of political shake-up. Janeway says that Starfleet is just as confused as Picard must be, but needs an experienced captain on the scene, and the Enterprise happens to be the closest ship to the Romulan border. Janeway warns Picard to watch his back, and to be careful, since instability in the Empire could have consequences for the entire quadrant. Picard steps out onto the bridge and tells the helmsman, Lieutenant Branson , to set course for Romulus, regretfully telling Riker " I'm afraid the Opal Sea will have to wait, Number One. In the observation lounge , Data briefs the crew on what little the Federation knows of Remus and the Remans: the planet Remus is tidally-locked , leaving one side permanently facing the Romulan sun and therefore uninhabitable, and the other side in permanent dark, which is where the Remans live.

Virtually nothing is known of life on the planet, except Starfleet Intelligence has conducted long-range scans that indicate the presence of dilithium mining and heavy weapons construction. As for the Remans themselves, Data notes that they are, in the hierarchy of the Empire, second-class citizens , but Riker notes that they also have a reputation as being formidable warriors; during the Dominion War , Reman troops were used as ground assault troops i.

Picard asks what is known about Shinzon himself. Data reports that Starfleet has nothing except a portion of his military record, from which it can be inferred that he is relatively young, but a very capable commander, having fought twelve successful engagements in the war. Picard remarks that the Enterprise is truly " sailing into the unknown " and asks everyone to keep up their research. Data is hopeful that with his memories and information that B-4 will be more successful in becoming a productive member of society.

To Data's silent disappointment, the results of the memory download do not appear to be successful but La Forge notes that B-4 is assimilating a lot of information and it could just take some time. Data examines the back of B-4's head while La Forge is talking, and discovers an unknown port on his neck. La Forge thinks it may be a redundant memory port, believing it could possibly be provisional memory storage in case B-4's neural pathways overload. La Forge decides keeps B-4 with him in order to see if there's more he can do for him. On the bridge, the crew continues to wait.

Picard asks Troi for impressions, and she reports that " they're out there, captain. Riker comments that " with all due respect to diplomatic protocol, the Federation Council isn't sitting out here; we are. On the viewscreen, a massive warship decloaks in front of them, easily twice the size of the Enterprise. Worf automatically begins to raise shields, but Picard tells him to stop and calls for a tactical analysis.

Worf scans the ship and reports grimly that the vessel is loaded with weapons systems: 52 disruptor banks , 27 photon torpedo bays, and primary and secondary shield generators. Picard grimly sums up the vessel: " She's a predator. They are hailed by the warship. A Reman holding a scepter appears on screen and identifies their ship as the Reman Warbird Scimitar. Picard, thinking this is Shinzon, begins to address him, but the Reman tells them he is not Shinzon, but rather his viceroy. He relays transport coordinates to the Enterprise and promptly cuts off the transmission. The senior staff head for the transporter room. They beam over to Scimitar and find themselves in a darkened room.

A man hidden from view up a flight of stairs asks their forgiveness for receiving them in such a darkened room but Remans are uncomfortable in light. The man, Shinzon, finally walks into view although his face is still hidden by the darkness. He tells Picard that he imagined Picard to be taller and that Data may scan him without trying to hide the tricorder. Picard tells Shinzon he is not what they imagined him to be and Worf correctly identifies him as Human. Shinzon takes notice of Troi while Picard asks why they were summoned here. Shinzon says he's never met a Human woman before, but Troi tells Shinzon she's only half-Human.

Shinzon recites many statistics about Troi, how she's from Betazed, and the ship's counselor. All this Shinzon knew, but he states he did not know she was so beautiful. Riker, obviously concerned about the remarks Shinzon is making about his wife, comments that he seems to know a lot about their personnel, Shinzon tells Riker he does indeed. He asks Troi if he can touch her hair, but Picard steps in and tells Shinzon that they came on what was made to sound like an important mission and if Shinzon has any real business to do with them, he should get on with it.

Shinzon apologizes and says there is much to discuss. Shinzon proposes unity, tearing down the Neutral Zone and establishing peace. Shinzon tells Picard that he's likely thinking this is too good to be true, but that a chance for peace cannot be ignored. When Picard confirms it, Shinzon raises the light level in the room, which causes the Viceroy to step back into the shadows. No one but Picard recognizes who Shinzon appears to be. Shinzon looks just as Picard did in his early 20s. They are of the same flesh, the same blood, the same person.

Shinzon tells Picard to come tomorrow to Romulus and the two of them — or rather — the one of them, will have dinner and speak more about the future then. He pulls out a knife, cuts his hand, and gives the blood stained blade to Data, knowing they'll want to scan it. He bids them farewell, returns the light back to the previous levels and he and the Viceroy leave the room and the away team beams back up to the Enterprise.

In sickbay, Beverly Crusher examines the bloodstain in the computer and tells Picard that right down to his aggressive strain of Shalaft's Syndrome , Shinzon is a clone of Picard. She notes that they probably cloned him from a hair follicle or a skin cell of Picard's. Riker wonders why the Romulans would clone Picard; Picard tells Riker that he intends to find out. On Romulus, Suran is growing impatient with Shinzon, telling him that they only supported him because Shinzon said it was time for an attack on the Federation but now Shinzon is delaying and he wonders what purpose bringing the Enterprise here serves. Shinzon tells Suran he doesn't have to understand Shinzon's purpose and that he should really learn patience — something that spending eighteen hours a day being harassed by a Romulan guard will teach a man.

Shinzon sends them away but asks Commander Donatra to remain a moment. Shinzon tells Donatra to consider the word "allegiance," and that he demands that from people who serve him. He says that Donatra serves him and he believes she does so faithfully but not so with Suran. Donatra asks Shinzon to consider the word "trust" and asks if he trusts her and to what extent. She asks what she should do to prove herself faithful as an officer and as a woman. Shinzon, however, tells her that she's not a woman, but merely a Romulan. He tells her to watch Commander Suran and if he shows any sign of disloyalty, he is to be eliminated. Then she will have proven herself. On her way out, Shinzon tells Donatra that if she ever touches him again, he will kill her.

She leaves the Senate hall as Shinzon doubles over immediately after and the Viceroy touches his chest and appears to calm him. Donatra meanwhile, watches the entire incident outside the door. In Data's quarters, B-4 seems to receive a signal. He stops petting Spot and walks over to the computer and begins working it with the apparent skill and ability of Data.

When Picard asks what happened, Shinzon explains that the plan was abandoned some time ago when a new government came to power and they deemed the idea too risky, fearing it would incite a war with the Federation were he discovered. Shinzon explains that his face isn't exactly as Picard's was because of how he's endured a lifetime of violence, with the Romulans breaking his nose and jaw. But Shinzon says that the eyes should be very similar and Picard agrees. Shinzon says a man's eyes reflect the life he's led and says Picard's eyes are so confident. Shinzon confesses he hoped to grow to a height of two meters, a feeling Picard shared.

Picard asks how Shinzon ended up on Remus and Shinzon tells Picard that he was sent to the Reman mines to die. They didn't think a Human would last very long there. Shinzon recalled not seeing the stars again for almost ten years after he arrived and also how the only thing the Romulan guards hated more than the Remans was him. He would have died quickly had a man not taken pity on him and kept the Romulans away from him.

The man that helped him when he was only a small child became his Viceroy after Shinzon began his rise to power. He tells Picard that everything he has done has been for the sole purpose of liberating the Remans, from building the Scimitar at a secret shipyard to assembling his army and finally coming to Romulus in force. Shinzon realized the Romulans would never willingly liberate them and so they would have to forcibly take their freedom. When Picard asks just how many Romulans died for their freedom, Shinzon has to admit it was "too many", but he is also glad to see that the Empire is finally beginning to realize there is a better way, the way of peace.

Shinzon realizes that Picard doesn't trust him and Picard has to admit it is so. Shinzon tells Picard that if it had been him on Remus, he would be doing the exact same thing; Picard tells Shinzon if he were in Picard's position he'd know that Picard's responsibility to the Federation prevents him from letting his personal feelings affect his judgment. Shinzon remarks that all he has to go with are his personal feelings, and that he wants to know what it means to be Human.

While the Remans have given Shinzon a future, he wants to know about his past. Picard says that he can tell Shinzon about Picard's own past. Shinzon asks if the Picards were always warriors. Picard says he prefers to think of himself as an explorer, so Shinzon asks if they were always explorers. Picard says he was the first of the family to ever leave the solar system ; it caused a great stir in his family, but he had spent his life looking at the stars and dreaming of new worlds.

Picard says that he wants to believe Shinzon and that the Federation strongly believes that all races can be united, and that a Starfleet captain standing in the Romulan Senate is a good example of that. Picard adds that when the trust of the Romulan Empire has been earned, he will be pleased to take Shinzon's hand in friendship. Later, back aboard the Enterprise , Worf reports an unauthorized access of the ship's main computer and that La Forge is working on locating the source, but what he finds strange is that no restricted material was accessed — just basic stellar cartography and colony tracking station uplinks, for example.

Picard says that they must still find the source of the break-in. La Forge also tells Picard that when the Scimitar decloaked, they detected thalaron radiation ; because it was thought to be theoretical, initial scans didn't detect it earlier. Picard remembers how research into thalaron radiation was outlawed in the Federation because it could be used as a biogenic weapon. Crusher tells Picard that merely a microscopic amount of the radiation could kill all life on the Enterprise -E in seconds.

In the Senate, the viceroy tells Shinzon that this was a mistake and they are wasting time. The viceroy reminds Shinzon that he must not forget their mission and they must act now. Shinzon says he'll spend his time how he pleases, but that he was merely curious about Picard. In Picard's quarters, Crusher comes to visit him. They reminisce about how Picard was when he was younger, and Crusher mentions that he turned out alright. Picard says that he wanted to believe Shinzon, but the evidence of the thalaron radiation proves that whatever he is after, it is not peace.

Picard tells Crusher that Shinzon is very much as Picard was when he was younger. Data signals from engineering and says he and La Forge have found the source of the unauthorized access, as well as a way to take tactical advantage of it. In Riker's quarters, Riker and Troi head for bed and they begin kissing each other passionately. In Troi's mind, Riker disappears and is replaced by Shinzon, telling her that Riker can never know Troi as Shinzon could.

Troi realizes this isn't real, but the image of Shinzon changes into the Viceroy. As it turns out, the Viceroy is creating a sort of mental link and placing himself and Shinzon in Troi's mind, a form of telepathic rape. Riker finally manages to snap Troi out of the assault, and Shinzon tells the Viceroy to find her again. Another Reman enters and informs Shinzon that they've received the transponder signal. As he leaves, Shinzon doubles over again. The Viceroy touches Shinzon's chest and tells him that Shinzon's condition is accelerating and that he has no more time for games.

Shinzon tells the Viceroy to get the doctors ready. On the bridge of the Scimitar , Shinzon orders B-4 beamed aboard. The Remans tap into him and begin a download of the files that he accessed from the Enterprise. Meanwhile, Shinzon orders a cup of hot tea. In sickbay, Crusher tells Troi that, other than elevated readings of adrenaline and serotonin , she's all right. Troi tells Picard that she was violated and that she feels herself to be a liability, and asks to be relieved of duty. Picard denies her request, telling her if she can withstand any future assaults, he needs her by his side now more than ever with the Enterprise being so far from Federation space.

Before he can say anything further, Picard is beamed away before Riker can order Worf to put the shields up. The Scimitar cloaks and moves away from the Enterprise. Aboard the Scimitar , Picard is restrained in a medical lab. Shinzon has the doctors take a sample of Picard's blood and he points out that B-4 was bait that Picard couldn't refuse. Shinzon says that with the information obtained from B-4, he now has all of Starfleet's communications protocols and knows the exact locations of the entire Federation fleet.

Shinzon says his life has no meaning as long as Picard is alive. Picard says that if Shinzon has issues with him, then Shinzon should deal with him, and leave the Enterprise and the Federation alone. However, Shinzon says that the Remans will no longer bow before anyone — not the Romulans, and not the Federation. Shinzon says that if Picard had lived Shinzon's life, Picard would do the exact thing Shinzon is doing. Picard tells Shinzon that he's a mirror for Shinzon as well, but Shinzon says that he won't be for long, and that he's about to witness the echo triumph over the voice. On the Enterprise , La Forge tells Riker that Shinzon's cloak is perfect and that there's no way to detect the Scimitar.

Riker tells La Forge to keep trying. On the Scimitar , B-4 enters and tells the Reman guard that Shinzon wants the prisoner. As the guard releases Picard, B-4 — revealed to be Data posing as B-4 — gives the Reman a Vulcan neck pinch to incapacitate him. After completely freeing Picard, Data tells Picard that Scimitar is, for all intents and purposes, an enormous thalaron generator.

He also tells Picard that the information he as B-4 gave Shinzon was false, created by himself and La Forge. He offers Picard the prototype of the emergency transport unit that La Forge gave him. Since it will only work for one person, Picard says he and Data will find a way off together. The viceroy comes to the bridge and tells Shinzon that it's time; Shinzon goes with him to the medical lab. Meanwhile Data, acting as B-4, has Picard cuffed and taken at gunpoint away as an act to fool any passing Remans. Eventually, when Shinzon and the Viceroy arrive at the medical lab, they find the doctor just waking up and Picard gone. The Viceroy kills the Reman doctor on Shinzon's order, and the alert is sounded. Picard is freed of his manacles and given a disruptor.

He seems a lovely fellow. These different groupings attempt to correlate the personality types and traits implied between the different systems and as such can be very helpful in trying to understand it all. As with the individual 'preferences', there are no 'right' or 'wrong' or 'good' or 'bad' types, although again obviously, certain 'type' behaviours can be more or less appropriate in different given situations. Indeed most people will display type-behaviours resembling many of the sixteen types in any one day, depending on the circumstances.

An ISTJ is someone who is on balance focused inwardly Introvert - I who tends to or prefers to gather information by concentrating on facts Sensing - S , makes decisions by logic and process Thinking - T , and whose approach and response to the world is based on order, control, and firm decisions Judging - J. And for a contrasting example, an ENFP is someone who is on balance focused on external things and people Extravert - E who tends to or prefers to gather information by interpreting patterns, possibilities and meaning Intuitive - N , makes decisions according to personal values and what matters to self or others Feeling - F , and whose approach and response to the world is flexible, adaptable and understanding Perceiving - P.

While a little tricky for some people to grasp quickly, anyone can understand this if they put their mind to it, and it's well worth the effort because identifying functional dominance does provide an excellent and rapid way to define each and any of the sixteen main personality types from their four-letter codes without the need for reams of supporting notes. The Jungian psychologist Michael Daniels' website at www. For a more detailed explanation of function dominance read on. It's a neat technique. Feel free to skip ahead to it if the first explanation is not to your liking. In any event having two different perspectives of a complex theory is often helpful towards gaining best possible understanding. Just to repeat once more, Jung didn't use the Judging-Perceiving dimension as such, he stuck with three dimensions: Introvert-Extravert; Sensing-Intuition, and Thinking-Feeling.

This explanation necessarily repeats the essential structure already explained in order to stand alone as a useful item in its own right. This is to say: function dominance is not indicated by the sequence of the letters. View this table as columns , not rows:. It is very useful if we can determine within the personality which is the dominant Function of the essential Jungian 'Four Functional Types'. In other words is it the 2nd or 3rd letter that is most dominant within the whole type? If we know the dominant superior function then obviously we can determine the auxiliary, because it will be the other middle letter in the code. Incidentally when we've sorted out the superior and auxiliary functions, we can also then determine the 3rd and 4th functions, which is explained after we sort out the superior and auxiliary.

This means that F Feeling is the auxiliary function. This means that T Thinking is the auxiliary function. The methodology operates by using different points of reference - it's like a formula or a process:. If the personality is Extravert 1st letter E and is also Judging 4th letter J then the Judging Function 3rd letter Thinking or Feeling will be the dominant function since this is the function used chiefly to deal with the outside world, and Extroverts use their dominant function chiefly to deal with the outside world. For example in the EN F J type, Feeling is the dominant function, which is mainly directed outwardly. The auxiliary function Intuition which tends to be directed inwardly. If the personality is Extravert 1st letter E and is also Perceiving 4th letter P then the Perceiving Function 2nd letter Sensing or iNtuition will be the dominant function again this is the function used to deal with the outside world, and Extroverts use their dominant function to deal with the outside world.

For example in the E S TP type, Sensing is the dominant function, which is mainly directed outwardly. The auxiliary function is Thinking , which is mainly directed inwardly. Remember that an Introvert's dominant function is mainly directed inwardly , towards their inner world , therefore an Introvert's Judging-Perceiving preference 4th letter J or P which represents how they approach the outer world will indicate their less dominant function , which means that for Introvert types, the letter other than the one indicated by the 4th letter J or P will be their dominant function.

So it follows, if the personality is Introvert 1st letter I and is also Judging 4th letter J then the Judging Function 3rd letter Thinking or Feeling will be the auxiliary function, since this is the function used to deal with the outside world. Remember, Introverts use their dominant function chiefly to deal with their inner world , not the outside world. An Introvert uses their auxiliary function chiefly to deal with the outside world. For example, in the IN T P type, Intuition is used mainly to deal with the outside world, but since the priority focus of the Introvert is their inner world , so Thinking is their dominant function. Similarly if the personality is Introvert 1st letter I and is also Perceiving 4th letter P then the Perceiving Function 2nd letter Sensing or iNtuition will be the auxiliary function since this is the function used to deal with the outside world.

The dominant function will be the other function, which the Introvert focuses on their inner world. For example, in the I S FJ type, the outside world approach indicated by the Judging preference 4th letter J is Feeling , which because it is focused on the outside world in an Introvert is the auxiliary function. Therefore the other function, Sensing , is the dominant one focused on the Introvert's priority inner world. Having a second perspective can assist overall appreciation of any complex matter.

This additional explanation is kindly provided by Andrew Roughton, which is gratefully acknowledged. I'm also grateful to Ian Mitchell for correcting an error in the I S TJ example above which was wrongly shown as IS T J, and to Pierre Lemasson for correcting an error in 3b below - probably my typo, not Andrew's - which stated that the the remaining letter will be your auxiliary instead of dominant function.

You also have an auxiliary second function. Remember the 2nd letter in your code relates to your Perceiving function. Do you perceive information through your senses S or through intuition N? The 3rd letter in your code relates to your Judging function. Do you make judgements decisions through Thinking T or through Feeling F? Do you prefer to deal with the world through your Judging function or through your Perceiving function? Because the 4th letter is P we look to the perceiving function letter in your code which in this case is N for Intuition. So your dominant function is Intuition.

Your auxiliary function is represented by the remaining letter F for Feeling. Because the 4th letter is J we look to the judging function letter in your code which in this case is F for Feeling. So your auxiliary function is Feeling. Your dominant function is represented by the remaining letter S for Sensing. For the Introvert this will always be their auxiliary function because their dominant function must relate to their inner world.

This, for them, is their dominant function. By elimination they must relate to their inner world through the Sensing function represented by the S. Andrew Roughton, July This enables the identification of the order relative strength or preference of all four functions - Thinking, Feeling, Sensing and Intuition - within any given type. The process for doing this is simple, once you crack the dominant and auxiliary methodology. Here's how to determine 3rd and 4th functional dominance:. Remember Jung's principle of opposites and the four compass points. The most dominant or 'superior' function is balanced by its opposite in the unconscious, and will be correspondingly the least dominant just as the superior function is the most dominant, to whatever extent.

The 4th function therefore, available consciously in whatever degree, is always the opposite of the superior. For example, where a personality's superior or most dominant function is Thinking , logically its quaternary or 4th or weakest function function will be Feeling. Where a personality's superior function is Feeling , its 4th function will be Thinking. Where Intuition is dominant, so Sensing will be least strong. Where Sensing is the superior function, so Intuition will be the weakest.

And that's the full set. Applying the same 'balancing opposites' principle, logically, the 3rd function is the opposite of the 2nd or auxiliary. Same pattern as for the 1st-4th correlations. The extent to which any personality is able to make use of supporting functions depends on other factors. Some people are able to draw on the 3rd and 4th functions more ably than others dominant and auxiliary as well for that matter. Note that each of the four main functional dominance groupings Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, Intuition, represented by the four colours contains only two different sequential 'dominance sets', and that each of these can be formed by both an Extraverted and an Introverted type. The extent to which people are able to call upon and make use of their auxiliary, and particularly 3rd and 4th functions depends on the individual person, and is also the subject of continuing debate and ongoing research by psychologists.

Most people are capable of developing their less strong functions to some degree or other. Knowing what they are and that they exist in us is the starting point. Similarly everyone is capable of understanding their own functional dominance and how this style might be perceived by others. Look at the right column: ask yourself - and maybe also ask someone who knows you well - what order of preferences best represents your own personality? Having decided this, are you mainly extraverted or introverted?

If anyone can suggest more clearly how to present all this I am very much open to suggestions. Please let me know any daft typos or errors in this. It's not an easy thing to explain. Awareness of the fact that we all possess these unconscious under-developed functions is the first step towards realising that they can be developed and used, alongside our natural preferences, brought into play consciously, where we see the need and possibility to do so. Further comparisons are indicated in the Four Temperaments and Keirsey sections on this page, and these cross-references between models notably Benziger help with the understanding of each model independently, and also help to build up a variety of perspectives of oneself, and human personality and behaviour.

As we've already seen, this is not a perfect science, and when we drill down deeper than broad definitions the detail is open to different interpretation, which I encourage you to do yourself. Despite the best efforts of some of the providers in the psychometrics industry to convince us that all this is highly complex and impenetrable, you can hopefully see that much of the thinking is extremely accessible and within the grasp of ordinary folk. Note the common aspects between the models by all means because there are many: seeing the common aspects will greatly improve your overall understanding of the subject and of people; but do not try to overlay and match definitions and descriptions from model to model if the fit is not obvious and clear.

Respect each model in isolation for what it is - a different perspective of the same highly complicated thing - the human mind. As mentioned above, David Keirsey's work refers significantly to the age-old 'Four Temperaments' model, and to the work of Carl Jung, and Katharine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers, who also drew strongly on Jung's work. Keirsey's key book with Bates was 'Please Understand Me', first published in and since revised and re-issued several times, more recently as 'Please Understand Me II', which is a wonderful book and includes a self-test to discover your detailed temperament type of the sixteen types.

Keirsey's model has for many years underpinned a highly regarded personality assessment methodology, which Keirsey claims to be the most widely used in the world. Keirsey's model has also enabled the development of a considerable supporting business corporation, which markets his testing instruments and their associated training and accreditation. Keirsey is a fan of the Four Temperaments. This layout is shown because Keirsey favours it.

The use of colours are purely to aid comparison with the Four Temperaments model shown earlier in this section. A free 'lite' Keirsey personality test and descriptions of each of the Keirsey sixteen types is available via the Keirsey website at Keirsey. The 'lite' test indicates your dominant or preferred temperament of the four main types, but not your detailed type within the temperament, which is something you need to pay to discover.

In my view the most enjoyable and useful way to do this is to buy a copy of Keirsey's book 'Please Understand Me II', which contains the question Keirsey Temperament Sorter II personality test, which will in a few minutes reveal your detailed Keirsey personality type, and also provides a vast amount of descriptive information relating to your type and all the other fifteen types within the Keirsey model. British psychologist Hans Jurgen Eysenck was born in Berlin. A Jewish sympathiser, he left Germany in for England, where he studied and later taught psychology at London University. He became a prolific writer in the field of clinical psychology and also had a great interest in psychometrics.

He disagreed with the principles of psychoanalysis and preferred the at times controversial view that genetics inherited factors - our genes are significant in determining the psychological differences between people, and more besides. Eysenck used extensive research and questionnaires to build a personality inventory which he related to Galen's Four Temperaments. Eysenck's approach to personality assessment was the first popular scalable mathematical methodology. Previous theories generally placed a person within one of the defining types, or between two types, or attributed a mixture of types to a person's personality. Eysenck's s theory he later added a third dimension measures personality using two scales :.

Academics including Eysenck tend to write for other academics and forget or disregard that certain language carries negative meanings and stigmas in normal life, such as the words unstable and neurotic. Eysenck did not use the words to convey a sense of good or bad - he used them because he felt scientifically comfortable with the terms. If discussing these concepts with people who might be sensitive to words like 'unstable' or 'neurotic' it can be helpful to interpret Eysenck's 'instability' or 'neuroticism' to mean 'emotional', and for 'stable' to equate to 'unemotional'. By surveying many thousands of people, using many and various adjectives traits representing behaviours and types, Eysenck built a scalable model which also formed the basis of what became the Eysenck personality test.

Eysenck's theory regards the choleric and melancholic temperaments as being emotionally unstable let's say ' emotional ' , and the sanguine and phlegmatic temperaments as being emotionally stable unemotional. The theory sees the phlegmatic and melancholic temperaments as being introverted , and the choleric and sangine temperaments as being extraverted. The Eysenck theory produces four main types types of personality, which he said resembled Galen's Four Temperaments:. Within which are several key words of graduated significance relative to the heading elements Eysenck presented this as a four-quadrant circle containing his describing words, rather than the matrix shown here.

The colours merely reflect those used in the Four Temperaments section for ease of comparison and do not appear in Eysenck's theory:. Can you see yourself, and others perhaps, in this model? Could you define yourself according to a mixture of these characteristics? Perhaps you can see in yourself a leading 'type' with one or two supporting types? This is not how Eysenck intended the model to be used, but seeing it in this way can be helpful for understanding your own and others' personality types.

The significant difference between Eysenck's ideas and the Four Temperaments interpretations of Galen and the older theorists is that Eysenck's s theory measures personality according to two scalable dimensions, introversion-extraversion and stability-instability ; whereas traditional Four Temperaments ideas simply seek to define personality according to one of the four temperaments.

Eysenck's ideas have been developed and supported using studies and surveys of many thousands of people. Eysenck was one of the most prolific researchers and writers on the subject of personality and its measurement, and yet he continued to strive for improved understanding and interpretation into the s, having worked for 60 years in the field. Proof, if any were needed, that this is indeed a complex area, and one which we are still a long long way from fully comprehending.

It is interesting to note also that Eysenck's s key words feature strongly in at least one modern version of the DISC personality testing system, which testifies to the enduring importance of Eysenck's work, and which provides yet another indication of the similarity and common themes between many of these 'different' personality models. Eysenck later theorised about a third dimension: psychoticism, from his studies of mentally disturbed people, and which can be related to risk-taking and eccentricity. In his later life Eysenck also developed better scientific understanding of Jung's introversion and extraversion 'attitudes', which, along with his other ideas helped Katherine Benziger develop her own ideas of personality and behaviour.

Benziger's model is relatively recent compared to the Four Temperaments, Jung, Eysenck, etc. Her theories and tools have been widely used by many of the world's major corporations, and are still the subject of ongoing research and refinement. Katherine Benziger is unusual compared to many other personality thinkers and particularly the way that other seminal theories have been developed into highly commercialised 'testing' systems because she places greatest emphasis on 'wellness' and the need to help people avoid 'falsifying' their true type. Benziger says that very many people 'falsify type', so as to fit into a role or career path that might not be right for them, which has a negative impact on health, happiness and personal effectiveness.

Her work has also been influenced and supported by the late 20th century scientific developments into brain imaging, using modern scanning technologies - basically using safe equivalents of X-Ray techniques - to actually determine which parts of the brain are being used for various functions and types of thinking 'thinking' here in the general sense of what the brain is doing, not in the 'logical' Jungian sense. Put simply, Benziger's theory expresses personality in terms of four quadrants of the brain basal means rear or back :. Benziger relates these modes of thinking to Jung's Four Functions, and Benziger's theory provides many people an immensely helpful way to make sense of what Jung said and advocated.

For ease of comparison between Benziger's and Jung's models the same colours are used for corresponding 'functions' or 'styles', although these colours were not part of either theorist's concepts. Importantly Benziger acknowledges and uses the Jungian Extravert and Introvert dimension, but does not represent it within the four-quadrant model of the four functional types Benziger's 'behaving' or 'thinking' or 'preferred' styles - the word 'thinking' is used here in a more general sense than the specific Jungian meaning.

According to Benziger each of us possesses natural strengths in only one of these specialised areas, which causes us to favour and use a certain style ahead of others. Outside of that one style, we may have strengths and weaknesses which are based on what competencies we have been exposed to, or developed, and indeed which competencies we have not been exposed to. Katherine Benziger refers to the natural specialised area as the 'preferred thinking and behavioural mode'.

Benziger's books 'The Art of Using Your Whole Brain', and in revised form 'Thriving in Mind' contain an excellent and simple personality assessment to illustrate this point. The benziger personality assessment relies on complete honesty when answering - if you are 'falsifying your type' then you will distort the analysis which of course is true for any personality assessment or psychometrics test, although most theorists and providers seem to emphasise this aspect far less than Benziger. Incidentally the Benziger assessment also contains a section which determines the extent to which the person is falsifying type, and this for Benziger is a fundamentally important aspect of her theory and assessment methodology.

Without wishing to go off on a long tangent, Benziger's ideas about 'falsification of type' relate strongly to the need for people to seek proper 'congruence' and 'alignment' between their own true natural personal preferences, style, strengths, and the organisations and services within which they work. Organisations and employers need increasingly to wake up to these issues, both in terms of re-aligning their own values and aims so that they become more helpful for the world at large, and also in helping their people to identify and pursue and fulfil their own unique potential and destiny. Benziger's ideas are at the heart of this very modern sort of organisational philosophy.

Now back to the model. Here's how Benziger's model relates to Jung's Four Functions. Remember while Benziger certainly acknowledges and makes use of Jung's Extravert-Introvert dimension, it is not represented within Benziger's four-quadrants brain model. These are Benziger's brain functions or 'modes' in more detail. Note again the correlation to the Jungian functions. Benziger says that people possess one and only one natural leading function or 'mode' in which their brain is naturally efficient. People can and often do however develop competencies in other modes. When they do in practice they will be using more areas of their brain, and when they do this the competencies outside their natural lead are always somewhat draining, which links to Benziger's ideas about the dangers of falsification of type.

If it's 'draining' using competencies that are not our natural strength, it must be more stressful still when we have to work exclusively in a competence other than our natural preference. Benziger's model is particularly helpful for many people in providing an excellent framework for comparing and understanding other personality models, including Jung's original four functional types, Kolb, and one or two other less well-known ideas from around the world.

Once more the colours aim to help show the relationships with Jung's model, and are not part of the original theories. More detail about Katherine Benziger's fascinating theory is on the Benziger page. Inscape has extensively researched and developed its own DISC systems, which according to the company's publicity have been used by over 40 million people since the early s, which are used with the intention of enabling people to " Marston didn't create an assessment tool.

This was done initially by researchers at the University of Minnesota, in according to Inscape. Inscape, and others, have continued to develop, test and validate DISC assessment systems, which are marketed with gusto to the corporate and organisational development communities. There are different interpretations of this model, based on the same underpinning structure. This presentation of the DISC model borrows from various interpretations.

Other than this there is no attempt here to overlay the DISC model or personality traits directly onto any other personality model. There are overlaps and correlations between DISC and other personality systems but not a direct overlay. Logical comparisons and correlations between DISC types and the types contained in the theories of Jung , Benziger , etc, are shown lower in the grid below. As we've seen, none of this is a perfect science, and the correlations are formed by logical extension rather than clear admissions of statements from the originating theorists. Benziger's correlations however are those stated by Katherine Benziger herself. The DISC testing instruments tend to identify people's dominant or preferred type and one or two supporting types from the four available, and this mixture is then represented by a graph or personality description based on the mixture of the types.

In this respect no person is exclusively just one of the four DISC types. Most people have a dominant or preferred main type, plus one or two supporting types in different degrees depending on the person and the situation. DISC systems commonly not only assess the person but also the person's mix of dominant types from different perspectives. Under certain circumstances DISC and related terminology are protected or trademarked intellectual property, so if you have ideas to use any DISC theory or tools in connection with the commercial delivery of personality assessment or testing services it's wise to check whether you can do so freely or whether such use is governed by licensing conditions. Rosenberg creates stories which bring the styles and relationships and implications to life in very clever ways, which provide a fabulous introduction to appreciating and applying the concept and theory of personality profiling.

Dr Meredith Belbin, UK academic and consultant developed the Belbin team roles model in the late s. Belbin's work at Henley Management College demonstrated that balanced teams comprising people with different capabilities performed better than teams that are less well balanced. The use of Belbin tests and training materials is subject to licence from Belbin. Meredith Belbin initially identified a set of eight roles, which, it is argued, are all present in a team provide good balance and increase likelihood of success. The eight roles were later increased to nine, with the addition of the 'Specialist' role. Presumably due to political correctness and changing attitudes in organisations, the names of certain roles have been altered in recent years.

Below are the modern role names and brief descriptions, with notes of what they were previously called where appropriate. There are no 'good' or 'bad' roles. People are as they are, and all roles play important parts in successful teams. Belbin suggested that certain roles tend to be more extraverted outgoing, proactive, outward-looking while other roles tend to be more introverted inward-looking, reactive. It is not easy to correlate precisely the Belbin team roles to specific personality types in other personality models, although there are certain common elements, for example Extraverted and Introverted roles, which are colour coded appropriately below. There are also some useful correlations with the Big Five Factors model.

This colour-coding does not form part of the original Belbin theory, it simply aims to assist comparisons with other models explained in this section. It does not follow that extraverted roles are always self-motivating. Neither does it follow that introverted roles need 'motivating' or instructing. The proactivity, direction, attitude and motivation of any roles, in a Belbin context as for any other personality profiling system , depend on a wide variety of factors, including alignment of organisational and personal aims and values, personal circumstances, emotional maturity, life-stage, leadership influences, reward systems, and more.

Greater understanding of these issues can be achieved by considering many different behavioural perspectives, theories and models. The simplest central point relating to motivation is that different people respond to different stimuli. Therefore the more we understand about ourselves and people, then the more we understand about what motivates us. People are more motivated and happy when they are performing and working in a way that is natural to them. The UK DTI quality management guidance notes provides further some useful interpretation of the parts that these roles play in teams:. The Co-ordinator clarifies group objectives, sets the agenda, establishes priorities, selects problems, sums up and is decisive, but does not dominate discussions.

The Shaper gives shape to the team effort, looking for pattern in discussions and practical considerations regarding the feasibility of the project. Can steamroller the team, but gets results. The Plant is the source of original ideas, suggestions and proposals that are usually original and radical. The Monitor-Evaluator contributes a measured and dispassionate analysis and, through objectivity, stops the team committing itself to a misguided task. The Implementer turns decisions and strategies into defined and manageable tasks, sorting out objectives and pursuing them logically. The Resource Investigator goes outside the team to bring in ideas, information and developments to it. The Team Worker operates against division and disruption in the team, like cement, particularly in times of stress and pressure.

The Finisher maintains a permanent sense of urgency with relentless follow-through. All of these roles have value and are missed when not in a team; there are no stars or extras. An individual's team role can be determined by the completion of a Belbin questionnaire. It is not essential that teams comprise eight people each fulfilling one of the roles above, but that people who are aware and capable of carrying out these roles should be present. In addition, analysing existing teams and their performance or behaviour, using these team role concepts, can lead to improvements, for example:. Despite having well defined roles within a team, the interaction between the different personalities of individuals can be a frequent source of friction.

However, this can largely be avoided by understanding and valuing people's differences. For reasons explained below the model is commonly referred to as OCEAN, being an acronym for names often used for the five traits. This summary and explanation has been provided by psychologist and psychometrics expert Paul Sinclair see Paul's biography below , which is greatly appreciated. While Raymond Cattell 'uncovered' 16 traits from his factor analysis a statistical way of reducing a variety of things down to a smaller number of related clusters in the development of the 16PF ; no one else was able to replicate his work. On the other hand, the Big Five Factors have been replicated in studies across the world and give us a confident summary of our mental building blocks, according to trait theory.

This had led to a number of slightly different 'translations' of the Big Five model, although each version essentially deals with the same theory and content. The words describing the characteristics change, but the basic characteristics do not. The 'translations' between the different interpretations are explained later. This does not necessarily mean we become more stable or reliable, but that our individual personality traits become more fixed and are thus capable of being reliably measured. For example, loud, confident, creative people tend to remain loud, confident and creative people throughout their careers.

Quiet, unassuming, dependable people tend to remain so also. When the first Big Five questionnaire was launched the UK in , people were surprised and a little sceptical about the speed of the personality profiler; it took under 10 minutes to complete. This was because it was only measuring five factors and not sixteen or thirty-two personality factors. Suffice it to say, validation studies were published and presented to the British Psychology Society by the end of the s the Big Five was established as a significant and fundamental personality testing model. The pink colour in the tables is used for the Big Five terminology recommended by Paul Sinclair. Aside from this, colour is used hopefully to improve presentation only, and does not relate to other personality models on this webpage.

The bold names in the left column are the recommended names by Paul Sinclair for these factors. Other names are used for each of the factors, which might equate to names in the left or right columns. While some psychologists refer to the OCEAN terminology it's not particularly recommended for use where people are likely to be sensitive to the words, notably 'neuroticism'. And while 'Conscientiousness' is technically accurate, using this word tends to influence decision-makers notably users of psychometric testing systems towards the characteristic and those displaying it, not least because the other end of the scale would logically be called 'Unconscientious'; better instead to refer to the scale of 'Detail-conscious - Unstructured', which carries no sense of good or bad.

It is generally more helpful to use the Big Five terms as detailed in the grid, which tend to present the scales as 'one or the other' rather than 'good or bad'. See above for the precise description correlations. As these early adaptors implement, test, and refine the program, there is anticipation that much will be learned to advance to field of teamwork and its relation to patient safety. Achievement since has been notable, and we hope that these accomplishments stimulate future research and development innovations. The views herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the positions of the organizations with which they are affiliated.

David P. Baker is now at the Carilion Clinic. Unfortunately, they are too numerous to list here. Turn recording back on. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Search term. Author Information Authors Heidi B. King, Ms. Battles ; American Institutes for Research Dr. Baker, Dr. Salas ; Webster Consulting Dr. Webster ; The Cedar Institute Ms. Address correspondence to: Heidi B. Introduction Public reaction to problems associated with patient safety reached a critical mass with the publication of To Err is Human , which concluded that medical errors cause up to 98, deaths annually.

Table 1 Team KSAs and the coordinating mechanisms of teamwork. Figure 3 A shift toward a culture of safety. Serve as the champions responsible for ongoing coaching and reinforcement of the team behaviors and skills on the unit or department. Develop an approach for continuous improvement and spread of the intervention throughout the organization or work unit. Acknowledgments The views herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the positions of the organizations with which they are affiliated. References 1. To err is human. Floyd D. DoD medical team training programs: An independent case study analysis.

Medical teamwork and patient safety: The evidence-based relation. Reducing medical error in the military health system: How can team training help? Hum Resour Manage Rev. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press; The impact of cross training on team functioning: An empirical investigation. Hum Factors. Training team performance-related assertiveness. Pers Psychol. Error reduction and performance improvement in the emergency department through formal teamwork training: Evaluation results of the MedTeams project. Health Serv Res. Gaba DM. Research techniques in human performance using realistic simulation. Simulators in anesthesiology education. New York: Plenum; Simulat Gaming. Anesthesia crisis resource management training: Teaching anesthesiologists to handle critical incidents.

Aviation Space Environ Med. Developing observational measures of performance in surgical teams. Qual Saf Health Care. Translating teamwork behaviors from aviation to healthcare: Development of behavioural markers for neonatal resuscitation. Flin R, Maron N. Identifying and training nontechnical skills for teams in acute medicine. The role of teamwork in the professional education of physicians: Current status and assessment recommendations.

Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements. Team effectiveness and decision-making in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; Developing teams and team leaders: Strategies and principles. Leader development for transforming organizations. Barach P, Weingart M. Trauma team performance. Trauma: Resuscitation, anesthesia, surgery, and critical care. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc; Measuring and managing for team performance: Emerging principles from complex environments. Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations. Backup behavior in teams: The role of personality and legitimacy of need.

J Appl Psychol. Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. The changing nature of performance: Implications for staffing, motivation, and development. Klein G, Pierce LG. Adaptive teams. Driskell JE, Salas E. Collective behavior and team performance. Shamir B. Calculations, values, and entities: The sources of collective motivation. Hum Relations. Wagner JA. Studies of individualism-collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Acad Manage J. Klimoski R, Mohammed S. Team mental model: Construct or metaphor?

J Manage. The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance.

Ian used the telepathic helmet to reach the Doctor, who explained the situation. Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary team performance. Sidlow, Beth Henschen Test Bank. Resisting temptation, the Doctor ran from Gallifrey once again, aware that his Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary destination would be his last. Enjoy the Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary Learning A New Language: Challenges Immigrants Face After George Howard Tannenbaum Case Summary Patricia, the Doctor convinced him to break the loop after it reset and she was restored.

Web hosting by Somee.com