Wy wife has me doing aptitude tests.
Too late honey, we are already married.
She really should have done these before she said yes, but love is is blind to all the flaws - for a short period. So, I had a narrow window to trick her into putting that ring on, and then knocking her up with a cute child, before she realized her error. And here we are today,
Her trying to figure out where it all went wrong.
The small win we celebrated last week was her getting a certification in an aptitude test recruitment tool, and I am one of her guinea pigs. I should have done it a while ago, but it was only today that I chose to carve out some time to get it done.
And it was annoying.
It didn't take me that long and under the average time, but in two parts of the test the explanation and the UI of the task was not intuitive at all, which meant that I made two mistakes in one of the tests, that I don't think I would have made, if I could have gone back. But, when I told my wife about it, she was surprised, because I did well in it. I haven't been given "the talk" yet, but I got the candidate side of the results, which are apparently far more positive than what my wife sees on the backend report.
Should be a fun discussion!
I get a view of the questionnaire components that go through different "styles" where for instance in the Task Style, it says I am generally easy-going and relaxed, comfortable with ambiguity, able to move from task to task etc. The Adaptation Style say I have broad and varied ideas and prefer development opportunities that have immediate practical value. My Achievement style say I have high expectations and standards but willing to compromise on some things, and comfortable leading by example, taking on leadership roles, but also comfortable as a team player. My Interaction style notes I am confident sharing opinions I feel strongly about, enjoy debate and draw energy from interacting with people. The Emotional style says I am in touch with, but tend to keep my emotions in check, am critically evaluating situations and aware of potential problems, and am realistic or conservative in making promises. And lastly, the Teamwork style states I enjoy self-drive work, aware of emotional sides of situations but not overly impacted by it, and kind and forgiving to people I know well.
Yeah... okay.
While that is only a short selection, it could be anyone I guess, though I recognize some of the traits in there. Yet, I also know it is missing a lot of the negative sides of my character, so it will be interesting to hear even more about those aspects from my wife in a more formal setting. I guess if it is based on the testing,
It doesn't count as nagging.
These were based on choices between two statements with a scale of strength of agreement in one test. And on the other, it was where t6 tokens of importance could be spread amongst three statements to denote importance. But the next two tests were a little more "formal" perhaps, where they were testing for inductive and deductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning involves starting from specific premises and forming a general conclusion, while deductive reasoning involves using general premises to form a specific conclusion.
This was done through a pattern test for the inductive reasoning and some kind of shape sudoku test for deductive. These were timed, meaning that it was ranked on a speed and accuracy scale.
When it came to the inductive testing, I feel I could have gone much faster than I did, but regardless, I tested averagely and got a statement that says something along the lines of "It is as easy for me as it is for other participants to handle the tasks in the test successfully". Well, I feel like an idiot, so what does that tell about the average person?
Hmm... inductive reasoning.
The second test was the one that frustrated me, because the interface wasn't intuitive. With the shapes, it was possible to put placeholder in empty spots to deduce what was missing in a particular square. However, if I did what was intuitive, it filled the square with the wrong placeholder and moved to the next question, with no way back. This happened twice to me. The two questions I got wrong.
"Compared to other participants, it is much easier for you to handle the tasks."
I was "quite fast" (average) in terms of how many questions I attempted, but "extremely accurate", so I answered more correctly. Which now knowing that, annoys me even more because if I hadn't had the click issues near the start, I might have got them all right.
A perfect score could have been a trump card for future conversations with my wife.
But alas, I am going to have to be content with having told her the issues I had before I got the results. However, she seemed genuinely surprised that I did so well in the test, which means she has already seen my results. But after I came home from the gym and asked if she wanted to go through it with me, she said it was late and she was tired, so we can do it at another time.
What is she hiding!
The other day we were discussing the relevancy of these types of tests and how while they might be indicative in some cases, context matters a lot. For instance a person might be very committed and when they decide to do something, they follow through, but that can also lead to compulsive and addictive behaviors also. And then, there is the issue that when doing these tests, a person can be in various mindsets. For example, I took it at home on my lunch break, but it could have been different if I did it in the office. We have many sides to us, and our casual selves can be vastly different to our professional selves. And then of course, some people will answer on what they think they should answer to make them look the best, which voids the value of the results.
The last time (and first time) I did any real psychological testing was when I got my job almost six years ago, and I "didn't test well" for what they were looking for, but my supervisor chose me anyway. I also did a very different kind of test than this a few years ago twice, because the company had a tool that they started using, and I took it again six months after I had the stroke to see what the difference was.
There was a difference.
Oh, and of course, I had cognitive function tests a couple months after the stroke too, where I tested "average or above", so they couldn't help me in any way, even though average isn't good enough to do my job. But, perhaps it is good enough, because I seem to be doing it, and I am far less capable than I was earlier.
And this is the problem with inductive reasoning. Because based on the narrow fact of my own situation and expectations on myself as to what standard of quality is required, I assume that everyone has a similar average. but, through observation and deduction, it tells me that on average, people don't seem to expect as much from themselves as I do from myself. And this could mean that they might expect a similar result from other people also, which means,
I am over delivering.
Next time, I will just add a picture, a paragraph, a few bullet points, and a one line reflection, rather than something to the standard that I expect from myself.
I can forgive others, but would I forgive myself?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]