When Bad Tests Happen To Good People

At the moment a lot of blog traffic is directed towards online quizzes and tests (in a spirit of self-discovery). Darren Rowse has a link to a interesing worldview test that had a number of bloggers, including Duncan Macleod pondering the meaning of being a cultural creative (that test gave me postmodern over cultural creative by a narrow margin). Another quizfarm test that has been popular lately is which religion is right for you? Not surprinsgly that test gave me a strong first preference for Christianity, but it was interesting to see Paganism and Judaism rounding out the top three spots

Jason Clark links to a fascinating BBC test on art and personaility. Although some folks are debating the results the test gave them, I found that suggesting a preference for early 20th century abstract art and personality oriented towards high intellectualism was very accurate. It was also interesting that the test suggested people with my profile often have a preference for Cubism and Japanese ukiyo-e.

By contrast the results when I took the Pew Research Centre’s political typology test (linked from The Emmaus Theory) was less than thrilling. That test rated me “upbeat,” which puts alongside strong (63%) Bush supporters who are moderately young, suburban, married, reasonably wealthy and prone to mainline religion. Whilst it is not a totally innacurate picture, it fits badly on several key points. This feels like another example of what is wrong with trying to compress political and social viewpoints into a narrow two pole political framework, as typically happens in the US. Political compass and political survey are far mre accurate and insightful tests for those not wedded to the simplistic US approach to politics.