Historical Facebook research · 256 personality profiles

Television and COMPILER Personality Types

Television fields contain a mixture of programs, channels and genres. Comparing their listing rates across personality profiles separates widely shared favorites from more distinctive associations.

Eight COMPILER dimensions define the type codes. The same weighted factor scores and fixed global cutoffs are applied to every category; only the recorded preference field changes.

133,477 profiles have usable data for this comparison. Type samples range from 17 to 2,556, with a median of 412.

247 of 256 types meet the 70-profile sample minimum. 212 have at least five qualifying distinctive entries; 108 have twenty.

These are historical, unadjusted associations, not individual predictions. A missing mention is not a dislike. Age, gender, geography and list length may contribute to differences.

Distribution of category sample sizes across the 256 personality types

Patterns with substantial differences

These examples require at least 25 mentions in a type of at least 300 profiles, in addition to the common screening rules. They are examples with larger cells, not a claim of independent replication.

Army Wives

: 1.7% list this entry, compared with 0.3% outside the type. That is 5.17 times the listing rate, a 1.3-percentage-point gap (25 of 1,495 profiles).

Inuyasha

: 2.8% list this entry, compared with 0.6% outside the type. That is 4.95 times the listing rate, a 2.2-percentage-point gap (25 of 904 profiles).

Fullmetal Alchemist

: 4.3% list this entry, compared with 0.9% outside the type. That is 4.83 times the listing rate, a 3.4-percentage-point gap (28 of 657 profiles).

Common short list entries supplied the catalog. Obvious aliases were combined; unrelated fan-page slogans were omitted. Ambiguous one-word names require a standalone list entry. A television-field mention is not a measure of viewing time or current viewership.

Explore the 256 profiles

Personality type

Reading the eight letters

COMPILER uses the original proposed pole names below. These are provisional shorthand for broader dimensions, not clean logical opposites, abilities, diagnoses or judgments of worth.

Position	Higher factor score	Lower factor score	Meaning
1	C: Caregiving	A: Autonomy	Prioritizing care for others and family or close relationships.
2	O: Openness	T: Traditionalism	Intellectual, imaginative and artistic exploration.
3	M: Materialism	F: Frugality	Placing importance on appearance, money and expensive consumption, not actual wealth.
4	P: Prudence	S: Spontaneity	Orderliness, caution and deliberate self-control.
5	I: Intimacy	G: Guardedness	Emotional openness, accepting help and interpersonal trust.
6	L: Leadership	Y: Yielding	Wanting to lead or control and being comfortable with confrontation, not leadership skill.
7	E: Equanimity	V: Volatility	Emotional calm and steadiness rather than a strong need for reassurance.
8	R: Religiosity	N: Nonreligiosity	Religious faith and conventional restraint.

In particular, Autonomy does not mean an inability to care; Frugality is broader shorthand here than thrift alone; Leadership includes control/confrontation preferences rather than demonstrated skill.

What the comparison can establish

The catalog contains 289 entries. Distinctive rankings require at least 70 usable profiles in a type, 200 mentions overall, 10 in the type, 50 outside it, and at least three in each deterministic half. Listing-rate lift must be at least 1.25, the absolute gap at least 0.25 percentage points, and the direction positive in both halves.

Lift compares the selected type with everyone outside it in the same usable category cohort. Lists can contain fewer than twenty entries. The split-half rule screens consistency; it is not external validation or a multiple-testing guarantee. Larger ratios based on ten or twelve mentions remain uncertain.

Each person counts at most once per matched entry, but can match several entries. Common whole-field dislike/negation phrases are conservatively screened out of preference fields. Education concentrations are not dislike-screened. The matching catalogs are not exhaustive and may miss languages, aliases or prose descriptions.

The factor model combines 35 original trait scores. Each of its eight global cutoffs splits 253,717 eligible historical profiles into 126,859 higher and 126,858 lower scores. Marginal balance does not guarantee equal-sized combinations. The source spans 2008–2011; it is not a representative sample of current tastes or the general population.

Download aggregate rankings CSV · Aggregate results · Full scoring and matching methods

All 256 sample sizes

Type	Usable profiles	Qualifying entries
	2,556	51
	2,196	55
	1,992	18
	1,598	89
	1,538	79
	1,495	69
	1,399	51
	1,394	45
	1,393	43
	1,360	65
	1,333	47
	1,329	41
	1,196	35
	1,193	41
	1,188	33
	1,141	92
	1,141	45
	1,135	40
	1,133	39
	1,094	27
	1,092	41
	1,078	42
	1,054	27
	1,045	26
	1,037	28
	1,034	63
	1,018	31
	1,004	50
	1,003	50
	988	20
	974	25
	971	43
	970	38
	961	17
	960	32
	955	68
	955	66
	948	52
	925	55
	916	46
	906	27
	904	71
	904	44
	901	52
	888	13
	861	47
	861	49
	851	20
	849	50
	848	14
	830	20
	825	34
	813	53
	805	34
	798	28
	789	34
	752	32
	751	33
	747	79
	744	13
	737	32
	736	29
	732	39
	730	39
	727	20
	720	50
	711	23
	706	32
	678	20
	676	17
	676	30
	670	32
	668	31
	659	12
	657	54
	655	37
	647	36
	642	40
	641	29
	637	38
	618	20
	617	26
	616	27
	615	13
	602	18
	594	35
	591	32
	583	49
	569	14
	567	18
	561	29
	560	17
	554	30
	540	16
	539	17
	538	17
	521	17
	503	27
	501	13
	490	28
	489	19
	487	20
	476	8
	476	23
	475	38
	473	16
	467	28
	467	20
	466	23
	465	27
	463	17
	462	16
	456	14
	451	11
	449	13
	442	20
	440	29
	437	8
	436	9
	432	13
	429	19
	427	11
	427	23
	425	15
	423	9
	422	10
	420	17
	413	24
	412	9
	412	10
	406	14
	402	31
	396	34
	395	16
	395	14
	390	24
	390	19
	382	8
	378	2
	378	12
	377	37
	376	10
	370	21
	367	20
	365	12
	360	4
	355	11
	346	14
	345	15
	343	9
	341	12
	339	7
	339	28
	338	22
	336	25
	335	23
	334	3
	334	6
	333	14
	333	13
	331	11
	325	10
	324	12
	321	6
	316	18
	312	27
	310	8
	310	2
	306	29
	303	7
	299	20
	289	8
	287	8
	285	4
	285	12
	284	6
	282	13
	282	10
	281	3
	275	12
	274	13
	274	12
	273	5
	268	6
	267	6
	264	10
	263	10
	261	14
	261	20
	260	17
	260	10
	254	5
	248	9
	241	9
	240	3
	240	9
	237	6
	236	7
	234	4
	233	11
	230	11
	230	6
	221	13
	215	7
	214	1
	211	3
	208	6
	207	18
	207	6
	206	8
	203	3
	198	5
	197	10
	194	2
	194	4
	189	4
	188	5
	180	12
	178	2
	178	9
	172	13
	172	3
	164	2
	157	8
	154	9
	139	2
	136	2
	132	2
	130	3
	129	3
	127	0
	126	8
	124	5
	122	0
	121	7
	121	6
	119	2
	119	0
	108	2
	107	2
	105	0
	94	2
	90	3
	87	1
	82	1
	79	3
	73	0
	68	0
	67	0
	63	0
	56	0
	56	0
	48	0
	42	0
	28	0
	17	0

Find out your COMPILER type

Explore your profile with the experimental 63-item assessment: 56 new items and seven MOTIVES comparison items.

Take the COMPILER Short Test

Version 0.1. New-questionnaire scores are provisional and are not calibrated to the historical Facebook cutoffs.