Intertype relationships

Dual

It's a relationship of complete psychological complementarity. Dual relations are the most optimal for ensuring the life activity of an individual. This relationship is the most convenient, there is no need to adapt to each other. Communicating with a dual, a person can remain himself. Mutual understanding is quickly established and there are no internal sources of tension. When communicating with a dual, a person does not feel particularly comfortable at first. Everything goes ordinary and does not cause any emotions. The dual is perceived as a shadow, as something quite natural. After getting used to the dual, after gaining the experience of dualization, you finally begin to realize that its presence calms you down and gives you a sense of security.

Activation

This relationship is the easiest, communication is established almost immediately. There are no difficulties in communication. The partners “warm up” each other and encourage each other's activity. However, such pleasantness and ease of communication, which is very much appreciated on vacation, is replaced by problems when the partners take on joint daily activities. It is unpleasantly annoying that partners start giving each other advice on weak functions instead of taking these problems on themselves. However, the usefulness of such verbal guidance cannot be denied. Another difficulty is that the activators do not convey each other's information in the form they would like to hear it. Too close and too long a contact exhausts the activators. The term “activation” in its full sense is appropriate for two introverts, who do become together more active, more open. For two extroverts, it kind of works with the opposite sign: it calms, cools, and introverts the couple.

Semi-dual

Relationship of incomplete complement. Understanding between partners is good. Each other's aspirations are clear. Half-duals always have a lot of topics for conversations and these conversations are not tiring. But somewhere halfway to rapprochement, one of them commits such an act, which sharply ruins everything, throws them back to the original boundaries. This means that there is no complement in behavioral functions. Looking from the outside, one can say that passions are boiling here. Comfort in communication with such a partner is contrasting: then the joy of rapprochement, then bewilderment and disappointment.

Mirage

It's a relaxing relationship. None of the intertype relationships relaxes and relaxes the partners as much as a mirage relationship. With a “mirage” partner it is pleasant to relax or discuss extraneous topics. With such a partner does not want to do business. Business cooperation in this type of relationship is difficult. The motives of each other's actions are completely incomprehensible. What the partner strives for seems unimportant, not worthy of attention. Disagreements in these relationships, as a rule, not long. Partners are drawn to each other. At times the relationship becomes very good and warm. But it is unlikely that much can be achieved together because of the inability to get together and work to the best of their ability.

Mirror

This relationship got its name because of the fact that the words of one are reflected, as in a mirror, in the actions of the other. What one of the “mirrors” likes to talk about, the other unconsciously implements by his behavior. However, such realization is never complete, 100%. For this reason there is perplexity, and sometimes even claims to each other. Everyone strives to correct the partner's behavior, but such attempts of re-education have no chance of success. On the other hand, if we take into account the purely verbal side of communication, mirror relationships can be called relationships of constructive criticism. As a result of joint work there is mutual correction, clarification. Mirror people are often good buddies, they are interested in each other, although their communication lacks full frankness and warmth. 

Identical

A relationship of complete understanding but inability to help each other develops between identical partners. Identical personality types look at the world with the same eyes, analyze incoming information in the same way, make almost the same conclusions, and face the same problems. Seeing this, each person feels sympathy for the other. You want to support your partner, justify him or her in one way or another, because you feel that in this situation you would do the same. On the other hand, identical communication quickly gets boring. Without receiving new information from your partner, you see the uselessness of such communication. The exception is when there is a big difference in experience or knowledge.

Business

It is a relationship of equal partners. They cannot be called fully friendly, but rather comradely. There are no barriers in communication, you can say anything to each other. In this relationship there is always a sense of security: each of them feels that the partner can not come from a threat. A game of “cat and mouse” is possible: deliberate alternation of pressure and relaxation in conversation. Within the framework of this relationship, joint business cooperation is possible. Usually partners try to help each other. In any case, the request for help is perceived correctly. But the help itself is not provided intensively enough. To summarize, we can say that this relationship has a medium degree of comfort. You have nothing against such a partner, but at the same time you have nothing for it. There is a feeling of a reasonable minimum, which reflects the satisfaction of communication with an equal and not boring partner.

Quasi-identical

It is a relationship of coexistence with complete misunderstanding of each other. Quasi-identical partner does not touch, as a rule, your weak points. Threats from his side is not felt. But you do not feel equality with him either. He seems less capable, but in those matters that you do not succeed, somehow achieves much more. The most unpleasant thing in this relationship is the impossibility to understand a person to the end. There is always the problem of “translating” his information into your own language. Deciphering his information takes a lot of effort. A conversation with a quasi-identical person is not hard, but it is not satisfying. It seems that he confuses everything on purpose, complicates or simplifies it, takes it aside. The main argument is that the same thing can be stated in a different, understandable language. Quasi-identical people can find common topics of conversation, complain about the same things. But they see quite different ways out of a difficult situation.

Opposites/Extinguishment  

This is a relationship of unstable distance. In these relationships it is very difficult to establish the right psychological distance. It can be done only when the partners communicate together. The appearance of a third person destroys everything: competition of reasoning begins. The partner's manner of social behavior, his cordiality, warmth is impressed. This contributes to the transition to a close distance.  When communicating in a group, the psychological climate suddenly begins to change. The introvert is gradually alienated, the relationship loses its warmth, becomes formal, there is wariness. Both begin to regret in their hearts about the previous transition to trusting relationships - the extrovert feels that he is misunderstood, treated with prejudice. This peculiar relationship remotely resembles the alternation of semi-duality and revision. Only a high level of culture of the partners can help to avoid mutual accusations.

Social Request 

This relationship is asymmetrical, i.e. unequal. The first partner treats the second in a different way than the second treats the first. The first partner, called the order transmitter, or simply the customer, looks at the second, called the receiver, from top to bottom, as an inferior, underestimating him. The second looks at the first (the receiver at the customer), on the contrary, as a person interesting, significant, overestimating him at first. The receiver in the presence of the customer involuntarily begins to ingratiate himself to him, to please him for some unknown reasons. It starts with small things, and then it is done more and more, until the receiver himself begins to restrain himself. And from the outside it is perceived as if the receiver for some reason justified before the customer. At the same time for the receiver there is in the behavior of the customer and unpleasant, annoying moments. From the outside, social order relations are perceived as smooth, conflict-free. The initiator of them is almost always the customer. Attempts to negotiate with the customer on an equal footing are not successful, feedback is not established. The customer, alas, does not hear the receiver. As a consequence, the receiver moves away from him and tries to keep his distance, or even hurt him in some way, using his strong function, which the customer is the subject of only occasional care. Thus, this relationship can be called a patronage relationship in the absence of feedback.

Kindred

Relationships of distant relatives who talk about things that are formally necessary under the circumstances, observing the laws of politeness and hospitality, but do not want to get into details of each other's relationships. Over time, such conversations get tiresome, as it seems that the person takes up the problem from the wrong end or in the wrong sequence and does not want to stand on your point of view. Therefore, partners often strive for some middle ground, a compromise.  The same case is viewed by partners from different angles - as if it benefits the other and harms themselves. That is why partners often seem selfish to each other, although they do not make such claims directly. There is no mutual understanding in the methods of doing the same work either. Their most developed behavioral functions are opposite. 

Superego

A relationship of respect for one another. The partner is perceived as a distant and somewhat mysterious ideal. His manners and way of thinking arouse interest. Outwardly rather cool relations are formed with inner sympathy for each other. This is how these relationships are manifested at a distance. If there is no topic for conversation, in which both would be interested, communication is rather formal.  One wants to express one's point of view more than to listen to the partner. This is explained by the fact that the topic of conversation always falls into the area of the leading, strong function of one and the normative, trained function of the other, which is of little interest to listen to. An impression of understanding and self-interest is created, although one suspects that it is shallow. Misunderstandings and disagreements arise at close range.

Social revision

This is the second type of asymmetrical relations in the socion. It is as if the auditor is constantly watching the sub-revisionist, paying attention to his weakness. It seems that the auditor constantly wants to find out what the sub-revisionist is doing and how he is doing it. The sub-auditor often has the impression that the sub-auditor is always being watched like a guinea pig. However, this does not mean that the auditor necessarily verbally points out the subauditor's shortcomings. The subrecipient inwardly feels that the auditor can do this at any time and is therefore initially tense in his presence. The Auditor constantly underestimates the subauditor, whose thoughts and deeds seem insignificant to him, which cannot but cause resentment on the part of the subauditor. The sub-revizny seems interesting and capable, but he lacks something. He needs help, advice, but all advice is useless. The sub-revolutionary does not perceive them, which further strengthens the desire of the supervisor to reeducate him. The audit relationship can be called a relationship of tutelage of the auditor over the subauditor, which can be quite intrusive for the latter.  

Conflict

This is a relationship of underlying conflict. The degree of psychological compatibility in this relationship is the lowest. Contact and rapprochement at first both seem possible. But on this path is constantly something does not go well. In quarrels conflicters often verbally hit the most painful places of each other. Conflicter all the time wants to prove something, to clarify, to finish, and he is like at spite does not want to understand you. This causes over time deaf inner irritation or nervousness. The worst thing is that the partners bound by conflict relations, there is no mutual assistance in deed. They do not defend each other at all against outside attack. This does not mean verbal defense, but the ability to do for the partner that part of the work, which is clearly not in his power, falls on his weak functions.