Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

[pucky18]

What are your thoughts on the accuracy and usefulness of this test?

test: http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers_Brig ... _Indicator

[Enforcer Talen]

I think its fun. I hand it out to most friends I just meet, and the majority of the time its been fairly accurate. Its especially fun to combine with http://www.xeromag.com/fun/personality.html

[Azazal]

True story, where my soon to be girlfriend used to work they had just gone through this to help build team work. She really loved the system and what it told about people. Needless to say, within 2 weeks of dating she had me take the test to see if my personality was compatible with hers. Fast forward, we've been married for 8 years, have a 2 year old daughter, etc..

[Mad]

I've found the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator's accuracy to be between okay and frighteningly good, as long as nobody tries to use it outside its intended scope.

If you look at the descriptions for an INTJ, you'll pretty much know what to expect from me.

It isn't as accurate for my wife, though. You can tell which type she favors from the descriptions, but there's a lot more variation.

In my experience, the MBTI is very useful for understanding yourself and other people.

For example, you might discover why an N-type tends to be lost when an S-type is giving step-by-step instructions without explanation: the S-type is comfortable remembering the details of each step, while the N-type has difficulty doing the same if the relationship between each step can't be determined. Likewise, the S-type might become impatient when the N-type "needlessly" explains too much background information.

Or you may see why two personality types clash during conflict when one type expects communication to be tactful and the other expects direct criticism.

In either case, you can adapt to the situation knowing why the other person is communicating that way (or expects to be communicated to a certain way).

You will, however, always want to keep in mind that each person's type indicator can change depending on his or her current environment. Some people have a different type indicator in their personal life, social life, and business life. (The person's state of mind can also change things. A depressed person may have be different type than he or she normally would be.)

And, of course, each letter is a sliding scale. Don't expect people to fit their prototype perfectly. The MBTI shouldn't be used to determine whether or not somebody can perform a job well or if that person will be happy doing it.

[Ariphaos]

I had a couple of even results on the test, which annoyed me to no end. If one question is enough to put you over...

[the wicked prince]

ENTP

extremely accurate

i do not mean as in horoscope like; compare for example with other profiles. no need to write an essay here

[CaptainChewbacca]

INTJ, just like the last few times I took the test.

[Dark Hellion]

INTP for me. It's a good description, but I think this is a rather "no shit sherlock" test when than a super accurate test. It relies a bit on the fact that we are going to confirm it for ourselves, or retake it til we get an answer we are happy with.

[andrewgpaul]

ISTJ last week, INTJ this week. Possibly to do with my different interpretation of 'theory' to that of the test writers. Also, the one I sat last week was "translated for a UK cultural bias", whatever that means.

[andrewgpaul]

ghetto edit; 12% preference for iNtuitive. Like I said, it' sprobably the wording of the questions. A whopping great 88% preference for Introvert; Perhaps I should just hide under the bed and never come out again

[Surlethe]

I'll echo Mad on this. The Myers-Briggs types are very good, I've found, at explaining peoples' habits. It's important, though, to remember that they're descriptions, not constraints: Mad's not a cold, opinionated bastard because he's an INTJ, he's an INTJ because he's a cold, opinionated bastard (stereotypes FTW ).

And personality types do change based on environment and just as time goes on; I was speaking with a professor last semester about them, and she mentioned she was an ENFP before and after grad school, but during her last year of it, she tested consistently as an ENFJ because she just had to buckle down and work.

I myself am an INTP bordering on INTJ.

[Larz]

It always tickles me slightly that I've taken this test at least once every 2 years for the past decade and have always gotten the same result: INTJ ... with my percentages always remaining about the same: 85-90% I; 35-45% N; 60-70% T; and 20-25% J. What I find interesting is that I personally view my personality and reactions as changing at least somewhat from when I was 12... but apparently according to this that is not the case. Or at very least, my underlying motivations and personal reactions to things haven't changed despite other changes.

[Howedar]

I third the fairly impressive accuracy of this evaluation. It's not the beginning and end of all interpersonal relationships or some such nonsense, but I certainly think it has worth.

I've been a solid ESTJ for as long as I've been taking it.

[Metatwaddle]

INTP, as usual. I've been taking these things pretty regularly for years and always gotten the same thing, although it's possible that I know what test questions and answers refer to what letters, and I answer them in such a way that will make me the INTP that I expect to be.

These things are fun, and I used to be really into them. I think the MBTI's chief merit is that the descriptions that you get from it (for my money, the best ones are here) don't exemplify the Forer effect as much as most of the personality-typing stuff you see.

From what I can understand, though, the MBTI isn't scientific at all, and so it's rather unfortunate that it's used in job selection so often. Apparently it's also pretty unreliable; people's "personality types" change quickly. One study apparently finds that up to 50% of people's types change in a five-week interval. I can't find the study that says this since I don't have access to journal articles at home, but it's the 7th source cited here if anyone wants to check it out.

A test so unreliable hardly seems like a good measure of whether a particular person is suited for a prospective job.

[Metatwaddle]

And personality types do change based on environment and just as time goes on; I was speaking with a professor last semester about them, and she mentioned she was an ENFP before and after grad school, but during her last year of it, she tested consistently as an ENFJ because she just had to buckle down and work.

Gee, I wish my workloads would turn me into a J-type! It would be better than getting nothing done and then getting furious at myself for it while my academic career goes to hell in a handbasket.

I myself am an INTP bordering on INTJ.

*high fives you*

Despite my misgivings about the test, some of the letters sure are useful for summing up a whole host of patterns: P-types are spontaneous and laid-back, which makes them undisciplined and irresponsible in their excesses. And I bet most people here have known people who won't accept rational argument because they feel that something's true, like they have experienced the profound healing grace of Jesus and that can't possibly be in their heads. That's all F.

Even when I know it's sort of a pigeonholing technique, I sometimes end up trying to pin down people's types, which is a lot easier when you understand each letter individually, rather than just trying to start from scratch with 16 types. It's usually pretty easy to tell if someone's an I or an E when you see them in a social situation, a P or a J when you see them at work, a T or an F if you ask them about their political opinions or religious beliefs. (It's not about the opinions and beliefs themselves, but more about why the person holds them.) The only one that's hard to pin down is N or S, yet for some reason I get the feeling that might be the most important distinction. Go figure. Maybe someday I'll have an argument to back that up.

[Spoonist]

What are your thoughts on the accuracy and usefulness of this test?

My three problems with Myers Briggs:
1) They rely on people being truthful and self-aware.
If I'm consistently self-delusional I'll get the same result regardless if that is how I really act in a real situation.
If you get the same result on the test several times in a row is not an indication of the quality of the test, instead it is an indication that it is simplistic enough so that someone with a consistent self image will answer the same way time and again.
If people are in a situation where they have something to gain from it they are more inclined to lie to get it. So if such a test is used in sorting people for tasks or projects people will answer as they think that they 'should' answer.
2) It does not take into account that people change personality in different contexts.
Lets take the example of most children. They behave as shy extroverts, that is they are shy around strangers but when they feel secure they are extremely extroverted.
Stress and competition is two common contexts that will greatly affect peoples personality. But Myers Briggs ignores this.
3) Out of the 16 personality types, any given person will think that 3-6 of the types describes them very well.
If it could actually predict and determine a personality type, then one and only one description should fit an individual very well. So an indicator of how good a test is how few of the different types that people feel fit them very well. Astrology for instance usually get > ~70%.
One of the reasons being that it is based on Jung's black & white fallacy that removes the grayscale between extrovert-introvert etc. Most people are in the middle, not at the extremes.And if you are in the middle you are not at all prone for the conflicts that extremes can have.


With all this said I think that Myers Briggs longevity says a lot on the thought that was put into it and in the right context it is a very helpful tool. Sometimes resovling issues between people in a workgroup is easier if you can talk of types instead of individuals (saying "how can an extroverted perceptive type best cooperate with an introverted judging type?" instead of saying "how can Tom and Tim resolve their issues with eachother").

As another 'funny' side note, I've taken Myers Briggs in three different languages and I get consistently different personality types depending on the language. This because of the implied emotions in the questions given the YES/NO answers.


So for accuracy, well its a form based questioneer based on the flawed Jungian personality types, so it cannot be truly accurate since it has no real life test part.
But for usefullness I'd rank it high since it is a very useful and effective workplace tool. Especially with people who are not used to self scrutinization.

[Bounty]

ISTP. I think the test is broken, because I have two left hands - couldn't handle a tool if my life depended on it.

[Mad]

From what I can understand, though, the MBTI isn't scientific at all, and so it's rather unfortunate that it's used in job selection so often.

It's not scientific, but it's pretty accurate for what I mentioned above. It'd be interesting to see what a version that follows the scientific method would result in.

The MBTI is poorly suited for job selection for several reasons. First, as I mentioned earlier, a person's type can change depending on their situation. A person's personal life, social life, and work life could each have a different type. If a person is answering questions in a general context or from a non-work context, then the results may not match up to his or her work-type.

But even if all the questions were answered from a work context in mind (and that supposes the questions were answered honestly instead of "correctly" for that job), each letter is still a sliding scale; that doesn't tell anyone what the strong points of each letter are. In any case, a person could happily work very well doing a job their prototype would normally despise. Or hate/do poorly for a job the prototype should love and excel at.

A better use for the MBTI, though, would be to improve team communication by understanding how the other team members operate.

Apparently it's also pretty unreliable; people's "personality types" change quickly. One study apparently finds that up to 50% of people's types change in a five-week interval. I can't find the study that says this since I don't have access to journal articles at home, but it's the 7th source cited here if anyone wants to check it out.

I wonder if those people were answering the questions in different contexts or not.

I know several people who, when taking an online MBTI test, complain "well, it depends..." The context of each answer could be different each time they take the test, perhaps due to what's on the person's mind.

The only one that's hard to pin down is N or S, yet for some reason I get the feeling that might be the most important distinction

It seems useful for teaching or learning.

An N-type prefers to get the overview first and then go into the details. That way, the N-type can see how all the pieces fit together. The N-type may not be comfortable following step-by-step instructions without an accompanying "big picture." The N-type may not be comfortable with what he or she views as arbitrary rules.

An S-type prefers a step-by-step approach. The S-type may learn by example more easily and be more detail-oriented.

3) Out of the 16 personality types, any given person will think that 3-6 of the types describes them very well.
If it could actually predict and determine a personality type, then one and only one description should fit an individual very well. So an indicator of how good a test is how few of the different types that people feel fit them very well. Astrology for instance usually get > ~70%.
One of the reasons being that it is based on Jung's black & white fallacy that removes the grayscale between extrovert-introvert etc. Most people are in the middle, not at the extremes.And if you are in the middle you are not at all prone for the conflicts that extremes can have.

Your 3-6 types is probably because of the shared traits between those. If there is a 1 letter difference, for instance, then the common traits of the other 3 matching letters will appear in the other descriptions. In addition, each person will have traits from the opposite letter that will describe them since nobody fits the prototype perfectly.

Most people are going to favor one side over another, though.

[Surlethe]

Gee, I wish my workloads would turn me into a J-type! It would be better than getting nothing done and then getting furious at myself for it while my academic career goes to hell in a handbasket.

Well, when you have to get it done, you just get it done. I'm trying to be more disciplined (hence 11% P instead of the ridiculously 85% P I tested back in the school year), and I figure the professor had to make discipline herself to make certain that her PhD happened. I find that the change manifests in little things: making my bed in the morning instead of letting it lie; forcing myself to do pushups and situps instead of putting it off. That sort of thing.

I myself am an INTP bordering on INTJ.

*high fives you*

Despite my misgivings about the test, some of the letters sure are useful for summing up a whole host of patterns: P-types are spontaneous and laid-back, which makes them undisciplined and irresponsible in their excesses. And I bet most people here have known people who won't accept rational argument because they feel that something's true, like they have experienced the profound healing grace of Jesus and that can't possibly be in their heads. That's all F.

Oh man, tell me about it. I love my Dad dearly, for example, but he says he has "a profound sense of Christ's presence." He's on the border between INTP and ENFP, and I can't really argue with him: he'll agree that the experience of religion is subjective, but won't follow that to the conclusion that it's all in his head.

And this is leaving aside the INFJs I know; some have professed a profound suspicion and distrust of logic.

Even when I know it's sort of a pigeonholing technique, I sometimes end up trying to pin down people's types, which is a lot easier when you understand each letter individually, rather than just trying to start from scratch with 16 types. It's usually pretty easy to tell if someone's an I or an E when you see them in a social situation, a P or a J when you see them at work, a T or an F if you ask them about their political opinions or religious beliefs. (It's not about the opinions and beliefs themselves, but more about why the person holds them.) The only one that's hard to pin down is N or S, yet for some reason I get the feeling that might be the most important distinction. Go figure. Maybe someday I'll have an argument to back that up.

You're obviously an N, then. I also try to pinpoint peoples' types just for fun. Most of the prominent members of the board are Ts, obviously, and probably Is since they can spend time alone making arguments. The two more difficult letters to determine are J/P and N/S. J/P is hard to pinpoint because you can't observe someone in his work environment, you can't tell whether he plans or is laid-back, and you can't read his body language in a debate to see whether he's sure of himself or not. N/S is hard because that particular letter choice details (as I understand) how people understand things. Are they abstract or concrete? Do they focus on the data itself or on how it fits together?

[Rye]

Hmmm, apparently I'm a born leader and organiser, not too sure about that. I do like contingency plans, though, but a lot of whether I'm introverted or extroverted is situation and mood dependent. Habitually I am introverted, but there's times and situations I'll have a load of confidence and be extroverted (for instance, if talking about religion or a film I really hated).

[Akhlut]

I usually test as an INTP, but, apparently, my job at Walmart and getting a girlfriend have steered me toward INTJ.

That, or this test is different from the one I take at similarminds.org to the point that it gives me a different type. Although, to be fair, I consistently get something between INTP and INTJ, depending on how responsible and confident I feel at time.

Also, I agree with Surlethe and Mad about their analyses of the test.

[Darth RyanKCR]

Since my days studying for my BA in Psychology I still test at an INFP. I've never wavered and usually score very hight in each of the indicators.

[chitoryu12]

ENTJ for me. Scary. This is probably one of the only Internet tests with somewhat accurate results.

[Starglider]

I've done a few of these over the years, I generally get ENTJ, which is definitely the right one.

It's about as good a low-resolution personality classification system as you can get, but it still isn't really useful for much. Not enough people are familiar with it for it to be a useful shorthand for describing personalities of people you know.

[Mange]

I scored as INFJ.