7 min · free · no account

Cognitive Functions Test — All Eight, Scored Separately

The eight functions a four-letter code compresses into shorthand, each measured on its own rather than inferred from a type you were assigned.

Original scale

Items: 32
Time: 7 min
Scales: 8
Scale: 5-pt

Free, no account needed. Your answers are not shared.

You'll find out: Which two of the eight functions are actually running, measured directly instead of inferred from a four-letter code by rule.

Want to understand what you’re about to do? The sections below explain what this assessment measures, where the questions came from, and what you’ll see at the end. Already decided? The start button is up top.

What this is really asking

Eight scales, four items each. Ti, taking a claim apart until the structure holds by itself. Te, owners and dates and whether the thing shipped. Fi, a private read on what is right that does not need anyone to agree with it. Fe, reading and tending the temperature of a room. Si, precedent and stored specifics. Se, contact with what is physically in front of you now. Ni, one image of where this ends, arriving whole. Ne, one idea opening into six before the sentence finishes.

This is what Jung actually proposed, and it is the layer underneath the letters. A four-letter code implies a fixed stack — a dominant function, an auxiliary, and two more in a prescribed order — derived from the letters by rule rather than measured. That derivation is where a lot of type description goes wrong: two people with the same code can have genuinely different second functions, and the type description written for that code will fit one of them and not the other.

So all eight are scored independently here, and you see the two or three that are actually running rather than the four a code would predict. The common result worth looking for is a pair that a type system says you should not have together. That is not an error in the measurement; it is the measurement telling you something a type code structurally cannot.

One honest limitation, stated here rather than in a footnote: there is no validated eight-function instrument with the standing that the Big Five inventories have. The functions are a theoretical framework, widely used and poorly operationalised, and this is our own scale on it. Read it as a useful description of how you process, not as a measurement with published norms behind it.

The parts it pulls apart

Ti · Internal Logic — Taking a claim apart until the structure holds on its own
Te · External Order — Owners, dates, measurements, and whether it shipped
Fi · Internal Values — A private read on what is right that does not need agreement
Fe · Social Attunement — Reading and tending the temperature of the room
Si · Stored Detail — Precedent, specifics, and what the body remembers
Se · Present Sensing — Contact with what is physically in front of you now
Ni · Convergent Foresight — One image of where this ends, arriving whole
Ne · Branching Possibility — One idea opening into six before the sentence ends

What lands on your screen at the end

Eight bars on a radar chart, each on its own range, with your top two named as the pair doing most of the work. Every function gets a reading at low, moderate and high, so a low score is described as what it is rather than as a deficiency — low Si is not a memory problem, it is a preference for the current situation over the stored one.

You also get the codes your top two are conventionally associated with, and, more usefully, the ones your combination cuts against. If your strongest pair is a combination no four-letter code assigns together, that is stated plainly. It is the most common reason a type description feels three-quarters right, and it is invisible from inside a system that hands you a stack instead of measuring it.

Where these questions came from

Jung's theory of psychological types (eight functions)

Jung, C. G. (1921). Psychologische Typen. Rascher Verlag. English: Psychological Types, Collected Works Vol. 6 (1971), Princeton University Press.

This version: An original 32-item scale built on Jung's eight-function framework, with four items per function. No validated public instrument for the eight functions exists, so there are no published norms to compare against and none are claimed. Unlike a four-letter code, the function scores here are measured directly rather than derived from letters by rule.

For self-reflection and education. No account is required and your answers are not shared.

Common questions

What are the eight cognitive functions?

Four mental operations, each of which can be directed inward or outward, giving eight. Thinking becomes Ti (internal logical consistency) or Te (external measurable order). Feeling becomes Fi (a private value standard) or Fe (attunement to the people present). Sensing becomes Si (stored, remembered detail) or Se (immediate physical contact with now). Intuition becomes Ni (a single converging read on where something ends) or Ne (branching possibility). Jung proposed them in 1921; four-letter type systems compress them into a stack inferred from your letters.

How is this different from a four-letter type test?

A four-letter test measures four preference pairs and then derives your function stack from the resulting code by rule. This measures all eight functions directly and reports what it finds, including combinations that no code assigns together. That matters because the derived stack is the part of type theory with the least evidence behind it, and it is also the part most type descriptions are built on — which is why a description can feel accurate in its first half and wrong in its second.

Can I have two dominant functions?

The theory says no and the measurement often says yes. A close-scoring pair is common and it is a real result, not a failure to answer carefully — it usually means both functions are well developed and which one leads depends on the situation. This assessment reports the scores as it finds them rather than forcing a single dominant, because the forcing is where the information gets lost.

Is the cognitive function model scientifically validated?

Not in the way the Big Five is. The eight functions are a theoretical framework from Jung's 1921 typology with a large following and no single validated instrument behind it, and the derived function stack in particular has little empirical support. It is genuinely useful as a vocabulary for how people process information differently. It should not be used for hiring, selection, or any decision about another person, and any test that offers you a certainty score on it is overselling what the framework can support.