Myers-Briggs results.

[Shadow Wolf]

To be fair, that can be said about most things that emerged from psychology in the past few decades. Even the Kinsey scale is sort of going out of style when it comes to evaluating something like human sexuality.

The Myers-Briggs came from a mother and daughter with no background in psychology or psychiatry. While Katharine Briggs did push the boundaries, as she received her education when it was still thought that too much education was bad for a woman, her education was in agriculture. At least the Kinsey scale was developed by people who academically studied sexuality.

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

Adventurer (ISFP-A)

 

[Laika]

 

[StarryNightshade]

The Myers-Briggs came from a mother and daughter with no background in psychology or psychiatry. While Katharine Briggs did push the boundaries, as she received her education when it was still thought that too much education was bad for a woman, her education was in agriculture. At least the Kinsey scale was developed by people who academically studied sexuality.

Fair enough. To both points.

I guess I was just saying that, regardless of how something is started, how relevant or "correct" it's viewed will inevitably change; especially in a field that is constantly evolving like Psychology. Whether it's something with little empirical grounding like the Meyers-Briggs, or something heavily academic like the Kinsey scale. Which, for the record, I think the Kinsey scale is still relevant. It was just an example.

Also, the more I look at it, the more I disagree with my score. The only things that I think are 100% spot-on are the "I" and the "J".

 

[Penumbra]

I'm INTJ but to me the quiz is just a game.

It's more accurate than random for me, in the sense that the questions pretty clearly figure out where I am on the introversion/extroversion spectrum, whether I focus more on emotions and support or logic and planning, and whether I like to get decisions settled or keep options open.

From skimming through the 16 profiles before, probably 2-3 can apply to me fairly well. The idea that there are four variables of two choices each, leading to 16 separate types, looks arbitrary to me. The structure of it doesn't seem scientific at all.

 

[Vouthon]

I did the test today and got INFJ. Apparently this is the rarest personality type? It does describe me very well though.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I don't know, I'm not convinced these tests are really any more objective than having your palm read. Why do people need somebody else to tell them who they are and what they are like?

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't know, I'm not convinced these tests are really any more objective than having your palm read. Why do people need somebody else to tell them who they are and what they are like?

On top of that, what use is it to assign 4 letters to our personalities?

 

[illykitty]

I kind of doubt these tests but the little positivity they offer is that they make you wonder about yourself, ponder on your behaviour, your reasoning and motivations. The negative side is that some people become elitists, stereotype others and might not be interested in someone simply because of their type. All of this can probably be summed up by saying "I can't get along with an ISFJ, they are too traditional and won't understand my superior intuitive thinking."

Also, I think my level of scepticism depends on the approach, I tend to distrust ones that over-rely on black and white letter dichotomies and/or so called "cognitive functions" more. On a side note, I've also taken a Big 5 test, which was interesting but doesn't tell me anything I don't already know. I guess it's useful though for people who have trouble observing themselves.

So anyway, I got INFP-T from 16personalites, which claims to have their own MBTI theory adjusted to resemble the Big 5 (here's their explanation). At least I give them some level of credit for updating and presenting percentages rather than dichotomies or questionable "cognitive functions". It's some good fun, especially when I made my husband take it, he predicted he would get an evil result (knew nothing of MBTI at the time) and he was correct (INTJ known as the "evil mastermind" to some). I was just laughing while he was making and evil face. And although he has recognised some accuracy to the description, he also says it's too simple to think of people as 16 types.

It takes a big level of honesty and clarity as well, the results can be influenced by your bias. For example, I got INTP in my teens because of my "rational" phase... Which wasn't at all, it was clearly fuelled by deeply repressed angry emotions when looking back. So take this with a salt shaker, cause you'll need more than a grain!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

On top of that, what use is it to assign 4 letters to our personalities?

The only use I can see is to say: "Oooh, you're the same as me." Might be a good chat-up line I suppose.

 

[Revoltingest]

The only use I can see is to say: "Oooh, you're the same as me." Might be a good chat-up line I suppose.

Hmm...I could socialize with others who are NERD!

 

[Quintessence]

I don't know, I'm not convinced these tests are really any more objective than having your palm read. Why do people need somebody else to tell them who they are and what they are like?

It has applications for research, but as far as I know, this particular metric is not used in the social sciences. The metric of choice back when I was taking coursework in undergrad was the Big Five. Not sure if that's still the standard.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't know, I'm not convinced these tests are really any more objective than having your palm read. Why do people need somebody else to tell them who they are and what they are like?

No one who has put these tests under scientific scrutiny does. Myers-Briggs is so invalid that your personality can easily change from day to day. One article I read, written by a college professor, told the story how he gave it to his class, and that most of his class was shown to be extroverted, even the ones he knew are introverted. If you want a decent personality test, you're going to have to be administered something like the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), and the test must be scored by someone who is qualified to do so. But even still, there is concern about the MMPI and the testing of non-white ethnicities, as these groups typically do not score the same.

 

[Vouthon]

I agree it's psycho-babble but still, it is kind of fun to read the descriptions. And I can totally see why it would be useful for a novelist in their characterisation.