Differences between IEI (INFp) and EII (INFj)

1. INFjs tend to plan ahead, making decisions early. On the other hand, INFps tend to prefer a wait and see, more spontaneous approach.

2. INFjs tend to put more effort than INFps into finishing any new project they start.

3. When describing reality, INFjs are more likely to talk about the properties and structure of reality. INFps are more likely to describe reality as movements, interactions, and changes.

4. INFps are able to change and make adjustments to their goals more easily than INFjs (depending on how progress is being made, etc.). INFjs on the other hand, prefer to stick with their original goals.

5. INFps tend to have a more democratic leadership style than INFjs.

6. When doing a task, INFps are inclined to work for the sake of the result (for example, a reward or bonus for completing the task). In contrast to INFjs, INFps can renounce their comforts and conveniences for this; INFps evaluate their place of work by looking at what returns they get for the effort they invested (e.g., monetary, prestige, etc.).

7. When developing a plan of action or process, INFjs tend to see themselves as "within the process"; they are immersed in it. Often because of this, they have more difficulty managing several plans at once. On the other hand, INFps tend to place themselves "outside of the process"; they dissociate from it. For them the process or situation is something external from themselves.

8. When something is perceived by INFjs as being incorrect, they are more likely (than INFps) to tell the person who made the error what they did wrong and how to do it the right way. INFjs are focused on who made the error and helping them to correct the mistake.

9. When contemplating a task, it takes INFjs longer time to mobilize than INFps; i.e., INFjs prefer to spend some time in a more natural state of relaxedness which will then prepare them to subsequently mobilize and concentrate at the crucial moments, improving their performance.

10. INFjs tend to have stiffer more angular movements. INFps tend to have more relaxed fluid movements.

11. INFjs tend to have a more authoritarian, hierarchical leadership style than INFps.

12. INFps are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than INFjs.

13. INFjs are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as INFps. INFjs assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and INFjs often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than INFps, INFjs apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; INFjs consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.

14. INFps have a relatively higher stress tolerance than INFjs. INFjs often struggle with continually changing situations more than INFps do.

15. INFjs are relatively more rigid and stubborn than INFps.

16. INFps are relatively more flexible and tolerant than INFjs.

17. INFps are more likely than INFjs to tackle a task in its entirety, rather than breaking it up into smaller separate stages.

18. INFjs tend to perceive events in an episodic manner, i.e., they see events evolve in discrete states rather than continuous changes. On the other hand, INFps tend to perceive events in a continuous sequence; i.e., they see events evolving fluidly rather that one state to the next.

19. When discussing work, INFps are more likely than INFjs to focus on the fruits of their labor, about what their effort will yield. INFjs on the other hand are more likely to focus on the environment they work in, e.g., their work conditions, conveniences, commute time, etc.

20. INFjs tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like INFps. E.g., INFjs see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. INFps are more likely to internally separate out having fun with other activities, although the two can be interchanged at a high frequency.

21. When describing why they undertook a project, INFps are more likely than INFjs to focus on the moment when a decision is made and to speak in detail about the stages of its implementation.

22. When meeting someone knew, INFps are not as likely as INFjs to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. INFps know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). INFps, in contrast with INFjs, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather INFps immediately establish the necessary emotional distance in contact and can regulate it if needed. To bridge the gap between poorly acquainted people in a group INFps amp up the emotional tone; this can be mutually experienced happiness or misfortune. The name and title of the person are of secondary relevance to INFps and their relationship with the other person.

23. When something is perceived by INFps as being incorrect, they are more likely (than INFjs) to ask why it was done that way. Instead of necessarily trying to correct the person who made the error, INFps attempt to understand the person's reason for their decision/action.

24. INFjs are more likely (than INFps) to use special rituals or other culturally accepted formalities when forming relationships with others. What that means is that the emotional proximity and relationship status for INFjs be more externally predetermined. Additionally, INFjs generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than INFps. INFjs tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than INFps, and INFjs assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.

25. When working on a project, INFps experience more discomfort (than INFjs) if the project does not have a clearly delineated end-goal or result. This happens because INFps have more difficulty monitoring and understanding how the project is developing than INFjs because they are outside of the process.

26. When conversing, INFjs types are inclined to communicate in the form of monologues, where each party has "its turn." Because of that they subconsciously attempt to transform a dialogue into a series of monologues. Conversely, INFps tend to prefer more of a question and answer style format.

27. When getting ready to start a project, INFjs spend more time planning and preparing for the project than INFps. In particular, INFjs spend more time discussing the plan, discussing options and ways to approach the project, etc.)

28. INFps tend to start more tasks and other projects than INFjs, but the INFps are less likely to complete all of them.

29. INFps are more likely (than INFjs) to seek new and novel experiences rather than returning to something already lived through. They will generally only re-read a book, re-watch a movie, or revisit the same place if they have forgotten it or are hoping to learn something new from it.

30. When describing their reasoning for their actions, INFjs (more so than INFps) tend describe how and why they came to a certain decision, and focus less on the timing and initiation of the action.

31. INFjs are more likely to believe in objective truths than INFps. That is, INFjs are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than INFps.

32. When describing the stages of an event, INFps are more likely to focus on how stage A leads to stage B, how stage B leads to stage C, etc. INFjs, on the other hand, focus more on the stages themselves without necessarily seeing or emphasizing the transitions or causes and effects of the stages to the extent that INFps do.

33. When planning to complete something, INFjs are more likely to focus their attention on the goal itself, overlooking and deprioritizing the individual actions needed to reach that goal. On the other hand, INFps tend to focus their attention on the each action; i.e., they're focused on how each decision and choice is being made (towards reaching the goal), in a step by step process.

34. INFjs are more likely than INFps to use "emotional anchors" that resonate with their internal emotional condition. These emotional anchors could be a book, a movie, a place, a song, etc. INFjs use these anchors to strengthen their inner emotional state and thus will repeat the experience: e.g., re-reading a book, re-watching a movie, continually going back to a place to experience the emotions associated with it.

35. INFjs tend to judge their available options by how likely the option will help them reach their goal. If a choice no longer helps INFjs reach their goals, it will be dismissed and discontinued. On the other hand, INFps prefer to continue pursuing their current option, opting to adjust their ultimate goal in order to fit the current choice.

36. INFjs are rmore relaxed in their natural state than INFps. However INFjs will mobilize and concentrate when needed to accomplish an objective. After the task has been completed, INFjs demobilize again. This state of demobilization is the natural state of INFjs.

37. INFps are comfortable making changes and adjustments to their decisions quite frequently. INFjs, on the other hand, prefer to not make changes to their decisions.

38. The "comparison and verification of concepts" is a more common phenomenon among INFps than INFjs. This comparison not only concerns INFps methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. INFps are attuned to the fact that different people might understand and interpret different concepts and terms differently. They perceive terminology as well as actions of other people as part of the subjective concept inseparable from personal opinion, position, intent, etc. In contrast to INFjs who perceive terminology as "objective," INFps understand personal differences behind terminology (this applies even to well established terms) and they attempt to compare and verify them.

39. When it comes to completing a task, INFps are more likely than INFjs to mobilize for longer periods of time. Specifically, INFps tend to mobilize for an action early and stay mobilized for a longer period of time after the task has been completed. For INFps, this state of readiness is their natural state.

40. INFps are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than INFjs. That is, this relativity is perceived by INFps as an extenuation of the differing beliefs, opinions, intentions, etc. of each person.

41. When working on a project, INFjs are more likely than INFps to break up larger tasks into several stages. Then INFjs mobilize to carry out each stage (and demobilize between the stages).

Type Comparison Tool

Compare Socionics Types

Intertype Relationship Calculator

See how compatible you are with someone else based on your socionics types!