I am almost evenly split between auditory and visual. I think they need one for "body-language-oriented," since I do best with the combination of visual and auditory you get in a lecture.

I'm feeling frustrated and overwhelmed because of work. I wish I had some Buffistas I could call up and say "hey, what about a drink after work."

Or, well, anyone I could call up and say that to, but right now there's not.

I'll console myself with all the tv on my overloaded dvr.

I got mixed/multimodal on all three tests. A lot of my strong areas in what it calls visual I've always thought of as verbal. I pretty much live with my nose stuck in a book, I have to write directions down to remember them, I forget to pass spoken messages on unless I immediately write them down, etc. I'm weaker on non-verbal visualization--I don't get vivid mental pictures, and I have to work and work at description and action in my writing. Dialogue and narrative are what come naturally there. I have to watch for overlong passages of introspection and info-dumping because they come so easily to me.

Most of my kinesthetic scores were on the low end, but I have some definite kinesthetic traits. Back when I was skating, I did best with a coach who described what the moves should feel like, i.e. where my weight and balance would be if I was doing it right. I never could get that from watching a move like you'd expect a visual learner to do. And when I sing, for sight-singing or challenging passages I tend to play a sort of air keyboard to help me hit the notes. Also, and for some reason this surprises my choir-mates, I can always tell if we're singing a song in a lower or higher key than it's written because of the way the notes feel in my throat.

I came up much more visual than I expected; like Susan, a lot of the traits I have that are apparently Visual don't seem that way to me. I wonder if having really poor vision affects either my learning style or the way I perceive it.

Very strong visual, pretty even auditory/kinesthetic. I can see how words fall under visual when the word input is through the eyes as opposed to the ears. I read by absorbing blocks of words, not seeing each word as an individual unit with a sound. Reading a passage can have a different effect on me just by changing the font. The image of the word contains at least as much information for me as the sound.

I can read with a fair degree of general comprehension in nearly every European language. I cannot understand the spoken language unless I can understand it well enough to picture the words. This is all because I can see the inter-related words from the Romance languages and deduce the meanings.

Isn't that what Google is for? Or something? Annotated Bibliographies are a lot of work.

heh. Since you are you vw I know you know how to do research, and how to analyze secondary sources. But this amused me because I give my students an annotated bibliography assignment before the research paper, and I do it for one reason: the average grade on the research paper rose from a C+ to a B/B- once I started requiring it.

I was 5 for Visual and Auditory each, and 8 for Kinesthetic.

I just talked the Porsche people out of a cool idea that would have turned out really badly had we tried to do it this year.

I just talked the Porsche people out of a cool idea that would have turned out really badly had we tried to do it this year.

Built in machine gun turret?

I just talked the Porsche people out of a cool idea that would have turned out really badly had we tried to do it this year.

Built in machine gun turret?

"Oh no, not again!"