Take Dr Helen Fisher’s Why Him/Why Her Personality Test for Love

Helen Fisher

Dr Helen Fisher

I have converted the scientific test from Dr Helen Fisher‘s absolutely fascinating book, Why Him? Why Her? Finding Real Love by Understanding Your Personality Type, into a text format you can use in any place where you can edit text, whether a word processor or Facebook Note. This very scientific test will give you a lot of insight into the nature of your personality, who you fall for and why, and you can decide whether that’s what you’re looking for because wanting and doing aren’t necessarily the same thing. While designed to be used for singles looking for love, I’m sure it would be just as interesting for couples to do it rather than just singles. Dr Fisher has tested outcomes against existing couples to verify the theory. I would bet the outcomes couples get would make for an interesting discussion. That’s discussion, not argument!

To get that insight, you’ll need to do Dr Fisher’s test first, then click here to get an interpretation of results. This test is also the core test used on the very successful match-making site, Chemistry.com, that has been the buzz of that scene for a few years now with over 7 million people tested.

Why Him Why Her by Helen Fisher

If you want to do the full, serious test, you can do it on Chemistry.com for free, though you have to give some personal information. You should still check back on my interpretation of the results, though, because I have more information than the site gives you, from Dr Fisher’s book and other sources wherein she has provided additional information.

To use this test in Facebook Notes, select and copy everything below the dotted line. Create a New Facebook note and paste into that note. Give the note a name, like Dr Helen Fisher’s Why Him/Why Her Personality Test for Love, or maybe Who I Am and Who I Love, if you want to be a little more intriguing. Or make up your own name. Then follow the instructions in what you pasted.

Tag friends you want to try this note. For some friends, it would be fun to know their results. For others, you might find you were made for each other!

No affairs, though, please, if you were already taken! πŸ˜‰

Have fun!

You can also print out the text below in PDF to do it on paper by clicking on the link below:

Text and instructions for Why Him Why Her test.PDF

I plan to get an Excel self-tabulating version out between Christmas and New Year’s, 2011, as I am swamped right now with work and gift making.

For more introspective Facebook notes like this, though far less intense, please see https://digitalcitizen.ca/facebook-notes/

—————————— Β  COPY ALL TEXT BELOW INTO YOUR NOTEΒ Β  ————————————

If you were tagged, you should do the note and tag me in return. You can get the original note at https://digitalcitizen.ca/category/why/ if you don’t want to copy this note and erase my answers before filling out.

This is Dr Helen Fisher’s Why Him / Why Her Test for your personality type and the types which you fall for. It is very scientific and has been used on the match-making site Chemistry.com by over 7 million users.

Read each statement and choose the number that best describes your agreement by the following scale.

0 = Strongly Disagree
1 = Disagree
2 = Agree
3 = Strongly Agree

Please note the number choices are ZERO to THREE. Put your choice for each statement in front of the statement. Try to answer as honestly as you can for who you are, not who you want to be.


– I find unpredictable situations exhilarating

– I do things on the spur of the moment

– I get bored when I have to do the same familiar things

– I have a very wide range of interests

– I am more optimistic than most people

– I am more creative than most people

– I am always looking for new experiences

– I am always doing new things

– I am more enthusiastic than most people

– I am willing to take risks to do what I want to do

– I get restless if I have to stay home for any length of time

– My friends would say I am very curious

– I have more energy than most people

– On my time off, I like to be free to do whatever looks fun


– I think consistent routines keep life orderly and relaxing

– I consider (and reconsider) every option thoroughly before making a plan

– People should behave according to established standards of proper conduct

– I enjoy planning way ahead

– In general, I think it is important to follow rules

– Taking care of my possessions is a high priority for me

– My friends and family would say I have traditional values

– I tend to be meticulous in my duties

– I tend to be cautious, but not fearful

– People should behave in ways that are morally correct

– It is important to respect authority

– I would rather have loyal friends than interesting friends

– Long established customs need to be respected and preserved

– I like to work in a straightforward parth toward completing the task


– I understand complex machines easily

– I enjoy competitive conversations

– I am intrigued by rules and patterns that govern systems

– I am more analytical and logical than most people

– I pursue intellectual topics thoroughly and regularly

– I am able to solve problems without letting emotion get in the way

– I like to figure out how things work

– I am tough-minded

– Debating is a good way to match my wits with others

– I have no trouble making a choice, even when several alternatives seem equally good at first

– When I buy a new machine (like a camera, computer or car), I want to know all of its technical features

– I like to avoid the nuances and say exactly what I mean

– I think it is important to be direct

– When making a decision, I like to stick to the facts rather than be swayed by people’s feelings


– I like to get to know my friends’ deepest needs and feelings

– I highly value deep emotional intimacy in my relationships

– Regardless of what is logical, I generally listen to my heart when making important decisions

– I frequently catch myself daydreaming

– I can change my mind easily

– After watching an emotional film, I often still feel moved by it several hours later

– I vividly imagine both wonderful and horrible things happening to me

– I am very sensitive to people’s feelings and needs

– I often find myself getting lost in my thoughts during the day

– I feel emotions more deeply than most people

– I have a vivid imagination

– When I wake up from a vivid dream, it takes me a few seconds to return to reality

– When reading, I enjoy it when the writer takes a sidetrack to say something beautiful or meaningful

– I am very empathetic

Total of your answers for Scale 1 and put it at right:
This is how much you have of the Explorer personality type. They are attracted to other Explorers.

Total of your answers for Scale 2 and put it at right:
This is how much you have of the Builder personality type. They are attracted to other Builders.

Total of your answers for Scale 3 and put it at right:
This is how much you have of the Director personality type. They are attracted to Negotiators.

Total of your answers for Scale 4 and put it at right:
This is how much you have of the Negotiator personality type. They are attracted to Directors.

Identify your highest and second highest totals as your “primary” and “secondary” personality types, respectively. Replace those quoted words in the first of two numbered sentences below (keep caps).

Identify the attractions with your “primary” and “secondary” personality types above. Replace those quoted words in the second of two numbered sentences below (keep caps).

1. I am a PRIMARY/Secondary combination.

2. I am most attracted to PRIMARY/Secondary combination, but also those whose personality type is predominantly PRIMARY or Secondary.

Please visit https://digitalcitizen.ca/y/ to interpret your results. You can paste sections that apply to you into your note, if you like, but please leave this instruction for others to do the same.


34 thoughts on “Take Dr Helen Fisher’s Why Him/Why Her Personality Test for Love

  1. I guess I have a bit of a problem here. For Explorer I was 22, for Builder I was 26, for Director I was 26 and for Negotiator I was 29. While yes, Negotiator is the highest, there was enough uncertainty with some of my answers that I don’t think any of the four traits is all that dominant in my personality. I read the page for interpreting my results, but when I read it, I saw myself relatively equally in all four categories. Perhaps it should be noted that I have noticed that my personality is full of paradoxes.

    Since all four are relatively equal, how then would I be classified? (And if you think I am a negotiator type, I’d still like to know how someone would be classified if they got equal scores.)
    And what does this classification mean for me? (As in what type of people should I seek out?)

    • Thanks for the comment and excellent question! It’s something I think everyone could use and I’m in the same situation. Obviously, I can’t say if Dr Helen Fisher would agree with my answer or not, but I think she would.

      The nice thing about tests like this one and Myers-Briggs (personality) is that they don’t say you are something and not something else. It says you have a bit of each opposing features. It’s just a matter of how much of each you’ve got, and which are dominant based on their relative scores. That’s why if your scores were close, as yours were not statistically significantly different for Director, Negotiator and Builder, you would easily read some decent amount of truth into each category as you did.

      What that means is you don’t have a dominant set of traits like some people in one of two forms. You may not have set of traits that stands out because they are all quiet. In this case, it’s hard to figure out what to make of you, via this system. In my case, my scores were basically 33-36 for the top 3 (all but Builder). That means I exhibit various sets of traits in dominant ways so that someone may recognize them, but they have lots of examples where I exhibit something else quite strongly. It’s almost like figuring an introvert and extrovert. One doesn’t say much so nobody knows what is the real her. The other is a loud mouth that says all kinds of things so nobody knows which is the true him. Get it? πŸ™‚

      Now, not having a dominant set of traits, it probably means you and I are not going to be as STRONGLY appealing to as many people, compared to others with dominant traits. This is on personality matches only, nothing with your looks, life status, etc. If Negotiators love Directors, they’ll likely love the strongly dominant (as in high score, not overbearing) Directors. You and I might not be that. Well, I had a high score in it, but I have lots of “noise” to give them doubt whereas you do not give them enough “signs” you are a Director, especially with a stronger Negotiator score.

      On the contrary, you and I would be more appealing to more types. You would be appealing to Builders, Directors and Negotiators. Those with stronger dominance on two traits would only appeal to two types to any extent.

      As for who we’d like, we’d like a more complex combination than others with two dominant trait. We’d probably want someone with a balanced set of traits to match each of our own as the theory says. I wouldn’t want to guess whether we’d want them to have the same level of score, ie. whether you’d want someone with scores in the 30s in your desired traits because your Director might not like a Director that’s got lots of Director in him/her. The Directors may butt heads far more than your Negotiator would like, but your Negotiator may find the strong Director appealing.

      The fact we’d want someone with a triple set rather than a double set of dominant traits makes it harder for us to maybe find really good matches. People would be a lot harder to figure out if most of us ran around with triple dominant personality sets rather than two each! However, once we can be assured someone has the triple set, it should be easy to determine whether they’d be an excellent match. It’d just take long to verify presence of 3 sets of dominant personality traits than 2. πŸ™‚

      So in short, just on personality, we might be able to flirt more but neither find our perfect match easily, or win our person of choice as easily, even if s/he isn’t our ideal match because s/he only has a double set of dominant personalities.

      Other things will compensate, of course, like looks, status, abilities, etc. We have to sort through that noise like anybody else. But going for someone with a double dominance and double deficiency will be settling, and that might be the proverbial grain of sand in an oyster that is a nuisance that has to be covered up for the rest of life. It might turn out nice, but remember the pearl is nice to humans, not oysters!

      Does that make sense? πŸ™‚

  2. This “test” is interesting, but like all psychometric ‘tests’ it is confusing. Many of the questions cannot be clearly answered. It is very easy to ‘score a draw’!

    The real test for Dating is SEXUAL SELECTION. There is a distict scale of SOCIAL SUCCESS ie a person’s ability to succeed and dominate others (not nessessarily financial).

    A Bond can only be formed between partners who are in approximately the same position on the scale of social success. “Broken Hearts” are the result of a miss match. The neurochemical process starts, then stops uncompleted, as a result of sexual selection.


    • It’s a little complicated, but not confusing. You just have to get it. Questions may not be clearly answered because there is no clear answers. Humans are grey in a lot of areas. That’s what makes us human.

      Sexual selection is about as flawed a test as one can get, and the social success scale is meaningless in the human world. If it were so good a test and set of indicators, we need not have any hopes and we’d be a lot more like our animal relatives without a lot of our human components, but that theory doesn’t even apply well to many, if not most, species in the animal kingdom. And that definition of a bond is ridiculous!

      That’s not biology. That’s crap! Elitist crap, not that it’s better than regular crap, though. I’d delete the comment except for my highly tolerant commitment to leave comments on here aside from the blatantly offensive.

  3. Sorry for my less than speedy response. (I love alliteration.)When I tried to answer a few days ago, for whatever reason, it wouldn’t let me post.

    Thank you, that was understandable.

    If I understand you correctly, I’m confusing to a degree. People don’t often feel one way or the other about me. Because I have more things that I look for in someone, there are more people that I will develop interest in, but for the same reason, true perfection is much harder to find.

    I think I should say, I took the quiz again and got very different results. Explorer: 28, Builder: 28.5 (I couldn’t decide between 1&2 on one question), Director: 30, and Negotiator: 29.
    I’m not really sure why I got higher scores in everything, I guess I feel different some days than others. I think it’s interesting that they are much closer than they were the first time.
    So, you addressed people with three dominant traits. Would people with no traits being dominant (or all of them being dominant as another way to think of it) be basically the same way, just more extreme, as in more confusing, less polarizing, potential with even more people, and perfection with even fewer?

    I think it should be noted that, yes while I do like for people to be rather balanced, when I think about it, I am more interested in women who are Explorer Director types than anything. This is in theory though. (My current lifestyle has severely limited any romantic opportunities. That will change relatively soon though.)
    So I don’t know for sure, but I like the idea of someone who can take care of themselves if need be.
    Rather than two people who can’t live without each other, I personally think that the perfect relationship is one where the two can function without the other, but being with that person makes life all the more enjoyable. I think it would be a lot less stressful that way.

    Thanks for your time.

    • Thanks another nice response, JPendragon. I’m not so great at getting back on big answers, either, as you can tell. πŸ™‚

      First, on you being confusing. I’m not sure that’s fair to say because it’s others’ fault if they can’t accept people who don’t fall into their generally simplified system of “boxes” to categorize people. You may not be giving them anything dominant and consistent to easily identify you by, for whatever system of labels they may use, but what’s wrong with the balanced individual who has some of each, whether a little or a lot, but all a little or all a lot so as to be balanced?

      As for this a little or a lot, that’s the difference between someone who doesn’t show any or many dominant traits, compared to someone who show many or all of the dominant traits. The first is like someone not giving you signs, with the second like someone giving you conflicting signs. I would say it’s fine to feel different on different days. Myers-Briggs allows for that since it has a classification for emotional decision-makers, as well as those evenly split on certain traits so as to be one in certain situation, and the other in other situations… or one on certain days, and the other on another day. I think if the scores vary the end results, then a more honest effort might be required to pin down each question with more satisfaction of certainty. With your score variance, triple or quadruple lack of dominance, it’s not much of a difference. You’re not giving people a simple picture to classify you by, but that’s their problem they don’t fit you. It’s just an inconvenience to you they impact your life with these views, like maybe determining you’re not right for them.

      As for having no dominant traits? Yes, I think you’ve nailed it. You’re less polarizing (which can be bad for some situations like if you need to lead in a polarizing situation). You might be able to find more people attractive since there’s a side of you to which every trait appeals, but you would probably find fewer people to be soul mate types because there’s also a side of you that dislikes each of the types you find attractive… unless they were evenly balanced like you, and there would be far fewer of those types than the dominant types. After all, the theory works on big numbers on the dominant types to identify the categories, not the masses in the vague types.

      The attractiveness and soul mate dilemma might be seen in your preference for Explorer/Director types. Try giving an objective classification to all the women you’ve had relationships with. Then answer which types have your best relationships been with? Worst? Were they clearly Explorer/Director types or just marginally dominant with those traits. I know too many factors outside of personality can skew your answer pending how those relationships ended, when they took place, life conditions with the woman, etc. but those are the questions I’d analyze. Now, I’m not expecting you to have enough “samples” to get a statistically significant answer, but see what you get.

      If it’s a match to your preference, then maybe there’s something to that. If not, then I’d trust the numbers to a certain extent. But I’m sure when you find one you really feel in love with with a little thought (not just spur of the moment lust), none of this will matter. πŸ™‚

      Have you tried emailing Dr Helen Fisher? I wonder what she’d say if she had read our correspondence so far. πŸ™‚


  4. 1: 27
    2: 29
    3: 33
    4: 31

    I guess I need to find a country and start a revolution to become a dictator somewhere someday, also start a new religion while I am at it, sadly though, I don’t like to make up big lies, otherwise that place will be too beautiful for common souls to step in, ha ha ha…..seems like I were being borne into a society with too much stabilities in it.

    • You wouldn’t be a very good dictator because your scores are too close that you wouldn’t be decisive enough. You’d be wanting to negotiate half the time and explore and build the other quarter of the time. πŸ™‚

  5. 1: 29
    2: 27
    3: 30
    4: 38

    I guess I am a director strongly and a negotiator next. As I am listening to the good Dr.’s book right now, i will see what she has to say on this πŸ™‚ I would have thought I was a negotiator first, but goes to show.

    Seems the Director trait is clearly the winner here. Is that good?

    • I’d say the secondary scores are too close for you to call which is second, but the Director is clearly tops. Whether that’s good depends on your partner or who you date. If s/he is another Director, you’re generally heading for trouble, especially if you PERCEIVED you were a negotiator! That’s a bossy person who thinks s/he is a peacemaker, to propagate stereotypes to emphasize the point. That’s also one of many dictators in sci-fi, whether Darth Vader or Megatron, who believe peace is achieved by conquest of all. πŸ™‚

      You need to be matched up with strong Negotiators, or learn to bring out your Negotiator more often if you’re dating Directors. Check out my detailed results page for more info.

  6. This is very interesting. I took a personality test a while back (Myers Briggs?) and it showed that I was very High D and I. The two letters were very close. I was low on C and S.

    My results for this test are
    1. 32
    2. 21
    3. 27
    4. 26

    What are advantages/ disadvantages with my personality when it comes to dealing with people? Any insight? Thanks for the help.

    • That wouldn’t have been Myers-Briggs with those letters of D or C. If you check https://digitalcitizen.ca/y/ for Explorers, that’s what you are for this test. You can interpret what it says about how you deal with mates as how you deal with others. You’d just have less tolerance for others, probably, cause one tend to allow one’s mates more leeway with a stronger relationship. That’s what stronger relationships are ultimately about, more tolerance for stuff you wouldn’t put up with weaker relationships.

  7. My results for this test are
    1. 26 – Director
    2. 25 – Explorer
    3. 24 – Negotiator
    4. 22 – Builder

    NO ONE would say i was indecisive or wishy-washy. I have an opinion and you’d have to have a very strong argument to dissuade me. But, having said that, I can put my “rightness” opinion to the side readily to listen to someone else and often fall to their point of view if it truly has some merit. And yes, its sometimes difficult to live with me, because even when I am wrong I’ll be the first to recognize it and eat crow for it, *pass the ketchup please?* to make things right. Soooo, yes … that means even in my most wrong moments I strive to be very ‘right’. I’ve had to learn that sometimes ‘right’ means you lose, so I try not to be competitive with it.

    Are there many others with very even scores? Would be interesting to see how this plays out in their lives.


    • I’m a lot like you, Tessa. Strongly opinionated but not hard-headed not to change. I’m just generally very confident in my opinion, and would be able to prove it via a good debate, being able to stand strong. I’m rather balanced, though not quite as much. Balance is the trademark to my personality with all the different things I try that seem rather opposite to each other sometimes. I look at it as having an array of options to deal with any situation and choosing the best one, not necessarily by thinking it through, but a combination of natural instincts and thinking it through (the latter is often an instinct to be patient or give in to temptation). There can be underlying themes like my opinionated nature that might be clearly described, but how I’m opinionated (i.e. where my opinions lie), is a little harder to figure out. It’s not all right, left or middle, but all over the spectrum. That’s my experience, at least.

    • Explorer: 30
      Negotiator: 28
      Director: 26
      Builder: 26

      It makes sense now why I’m so irreverently picky. I do find it difficult to find a “good fit,” and I can easily define pros and cons of many things, including mates. I find that needing to switch gears in context and situations come easily to me. I am opinionated in some areas, very laid back and flexible in others.

      This makes me think my “fits like a glove” is even more rare that for others whom have two clear personality types. Great.

      I’m thinking define my priorities, limit them, and pick one?

      Neat article(s).

      Thanks for posting!

    • You got ZEROES??? Like Darth Vader said, “Impressive!”. That’s seems like it would be a polarizing personality that could rub a lot of people the wrong way cause practically nobody is ZERO on any thing. That means they have some, and some tolerance, for those traits. If you don’t, it’d be like having no humour, or anger, or some other such trait. Interesting! Thanks for sharing.

  8. I got 30, 13, 28 & 37. So I am a a negotiator followed by explorer. So I should be attracted to directors. But that is not what I tend to go for. I am not a fan of directors. Does my high director score of 28 cancel out my negotiator prefferences? Or perhaps a balance between director and negotiator traits in my partner is just important to me because of this. My least favourite match is that of a builder/director. They are the people I am least drawn to in my experience. Can somone be a director/negotiator type in any meaningful sense? Or would theses 2 traits counterbalance each other making the 3rd trait (builder or explorer) the defining dominant one?

    • Hi Jane, excellent questions! I don’t know if there are definitive answers, but if you’ve got life experience as you’ve shared to back it up, that may be good enough.

      I wouldn’t look at your high Director score as “canceling out” your secondary Explorer score. They’re close enough to have a margin of error that you could well be a half and half of Negotiator/Explorer and Negotiator/Director. Nobody is ever just one thing or another anyway. It’s a continuum and just a matter of how much of each one has, not whether it’s all or nothing.

      You may well prefer a balance of Negotiator/Director as you say. That is rather similar to you, not just in the sense of the balance, but the compliments to two of your strong suites. You will note how Dr Fisher explains the match in the descriptions I quoted in that the Negotiator/Director match is one of conflict so if you don’t like that, you won’t like Directors. Negotiators also wouldn’t have anything to negotiate if everything were presented to them in a manner they already liked! πŸ™‚

      Also, it’s only a 36% preference female Negotiators have for male Directors. While this may be greater than preference for the other types, 36% is not even the majority! I’d say if you have life experience, listen to it. Use the results here as something to think about to maybe break out of the box every once in a while if you’re still looking for someone, or maybe look for someone of the balance you mentioned. There are people who know when to take charge and when to back off, when to step in and when to give others the space they need, but also when to give Negotiators enough opportunities to smooth them out to be meaningful and feel some sense of dominance every now and then. Seems to me like you are looking for one of those. I’m not that far from that, albeit in a reversed kind of way, so I have an idea what you’re talking about. πŸ™‚

      Good luck!


      • Yes that makes a lot of sense. This rings true for me. I definitely expect/want people to know when and how to dig their heels in to get what they want when its important and to be able to negotiate when that’s important too. I instinctively expect people to play either role and know when to do so. Because that’s what I do. It is natural to me. I have often been annoyed and confused by people who don’t do this. I think of these things as skills and expect people to adapt to the situation and utilise these skills accordingly. In the past I have struggled with people who ‘decide’ not to negotiate or direct when this is what the situation clearly demands. But if these characteristics can be seen as characteristics as part and parcel of who some people fundamentally are then that’s different. I guess in a relationship I don’t like to be the negotiator all the time. I expect them to negotiate with me at least some of the time. Otherwise I feel like its unfair. I also expect them to do the director thing sometimes and clearly tell me what they want and need directly. I read Helen Fishers book recently. I am fascinated by this stuff (which I guess lines up with my high negotiator score).

        I am not looking for anyone atm because I have a boyfriend. We have been together for a long time. Interestingly I got him to do this test. He got 26% Explorer, 24% Builder, 24% Director and 26% negotiator. That also rings true. He is very much a chameleon able to adapt to any situation. And on occasion I have wished he would be himself more. Wishing he would be more like he is with me with other people. More authentic. But this profile makes me think perhaps he is being authentic lol. He just has a lot of different sides to him and different situations bring out different sides.

        The profile also reflects our differences. He had a high builder score and I didn’t. I find the things builders enjoy just boring really. This may be part of the reason I tend to be a big ball of kaos. My boyfriend tends to organise me. Strangely my boyfriend seems to enjoy ordering the kaos. He also seems to appreciate the unpredictability. Often he actually schedules in time with me (in his actual schedule) as unplanned time during which ‘anything could happen.’ Always seemed pretty strange to me but in the context of his personality profile it makes sense. He has those builder like qualities. He brings a bit of order to my life which is good for me. It is useful to have someone who knows where my keys are when I don’t. And he has explorer qualities so he finds my unpredictability exhilarating (you know as long as he schedules the unpredictability in first lol.) Hillarious!

    • Thanks for sharing, Daisy. Here’s how I would interpret your results.

      Instead of two secondary components, you’re basically equally open to two types of partners, one each for 1&4 and 3&4. Chances are, though, you might not match as strongly with either someone who only has one secondary components. You can look at it as either they know more of what they’re looking for, or you’re more flexible with your options. Your choice. πŸ™‚

      That said, personality is only one component of attraction. You might find that between two potential mates of your two preferred personalities, any number of factors might make one much more attractive than the other. Maybe it’s looks. Maybe it’s common interests, or lack thereof. Maybe it’s jobs, family situation, etc. In the right mix, someone of some other personality might have enough qualities otherwise to throw out your personality preferences all together! Love is a funny thing, after all. πŸ™‚

      In that sense, though, I would interpret your results as you being more flexible to personalities of your preferred mates. Then let the other factors decide who it might be. Good luck!

  9. So I got:

    32 – Explorer
    30 -Negotiator
    29- Director
    28- Builder

    No wonder I confuse myself of who I am! I am basically nearly all three/four.
    So what type should be more suited to me?

    • Wow! Aren’t you the balanced person, Ann!

      I need to qualify I’m not the expert in this matter, but from what I know and would deduce, you would want someone who is NOT strong in any of the categories. You are flexible in your balance so you can probably handle any type. It’s just that a strong score in one type will result in a weak in another. You would have to tolerate too much of one and too little of another, both of which might lead to a double frustration. That would be my suggestion. Hope that helps, or at least gives you something to think about. Good luck!

  10. I’m a negotiator – definitely fits me. Builder secondary. I’m divorced. I have tended my whole life to be attracted to directors (among them, my ex-husband). But in re-evaluating where my heart is, I’m finding that I’m really more attracted to fellow negotiators – others who share my commitment to people, my values and vision for life, my philosophy for parenthood. Directors feel cold and harsh to me. While I can appreciate their strengths and we may be great friends or complementary business partners, I want to go through life with a man who feels like my soul mate, who values our relationship as deeply as I do. I don’t feel like I am ever going to get the emotional depth, the connection, the passion, the understanding, the intimacy, the meaning, the purpose, the shared vision for life that I can feel in a relationship with another negotiator.

    It feels very strange to me that anyone with this personality would really match up best with someone who is so opposite from them at their core – and vice versa with directors – yet that is what Dr. Fisher suggests. That is the marriage I chose for 22 years, and I was absolutely miserable. And not just him – but I’ve watched myself in dating again as well. I can have wonderful intellectual conversations with these director men – admire their brilliance and drive, their success, appreciate the protector/provider role that many of them are happy to fill (I’m traditional and that matters to me – but I’ve found that many men of other personalities are happy to fill that role as well). But there is a shallowness always, a hollowness. I feel empty, like something is missing, like there is a depth they cannot go to, a whole world inside of me they can’t begin to understand, nor do they care to.

    I want to be with a man who wants to go there with me, and who is capable of it. I just find it very difficult to believe that builders and explorers are best matched with their same personalities, but that negotiators and directors would be happiest with partners who are their exact opposites, with people who may help to balance out their strengths or weaknesses to some extent, perhaps – maybe children born of such unions would be better off if parents could at least get along, although they will probably never be examples of wonderful marriages – but stuck with people who also will never really understand them or appreciate who they truly are. Feels like a tragedy to suggest it to so many people to me. I feel baffled by where she got her information. Personally, I feel in awe to find as a middle-aged woman what is truly possible in a relationship, and I wish I had known to seek out someone more like myself to begin with. I would have been far better off RESISTING my initial natural inclinations and searching a little more deeply inside myself.

    • Hi Lily, thank you for your comment and insights. The theories Dr Fisher has won’t hold for everybody, no more than your or my variations might. It is also just one of many factors, like how personality is just one component of a perfect or practical match. It is sad to hear your case did not work out, and I wish you all the best in your new approach. However, given the number of interviews (almost 30,000) and other work done by Dr Fisher, it’s hard to argue with her data on the prevailing trend. Still, hold on to your insight. It’s probably the right one for you. All the best!


Leave a Reply to Digital Citizen Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.