Wow.

 

:) :)

 

Basically, the only reason the Myers-Briggs is still around is because it has a big marketing budget behind it, and managers like it because it puts people in one of 16 neat categories. But they're taking you all for fools! Think about it, are you really one of 16 types of people in the world, or is it more complicated than that?

 

 

 

When we had to take it in college for a future possible careers thing, the lady giving the exam said afterwards that many people will get different results everytime they take the test. I've read some of the descriptions of other types and I think about 4 of them describe me. Besides crazy business people, I think the test is more geared toward having people critically think about themselves and who they are. It seems to work in that respect.

Same thing goes for political compass test, I've never gotten the same results twice- Even when I took them right after each other.

Additionally, there is no evidence for the Types. If everyone is either E or I, then you'd expect lots of people to score high on E and lots of people to score high on I. In fact, what you find is that most people are near the middle. So, splitting it up into a dichotomy is a stupid idea because the person that gets 51% isn't very different from the person who gets 49%.

 

Hence why you're encouraged to read other personality types. Knowing your own is useless if you've nothing to compare it to, or cross validate it with. Most websites will confirm that the types are merely archetypal, you won't completely match with any Jungian personality type, and you aren't meant to 'box yourself' in to a given personality because of the results. The whole point is to be aware of your negative traits, and work on ways to counter them.

 

 

 

Myers-Briggs is also based on Jungian psychology, which no one uses any more and has little relevance to modern psychology.

 

In the same way Hippocrates is no longer relevant to modern day medicine, or Homer is no longer relevant to modern day poetical literature, yes.

 

 

 

The fact of the matter is this: the whole field of personality psychology is subjective, since we all have distinct personalities. 'Subjective' doesn't equate to 'wrong' though, so long as it doesn't claim to be a scientific analysis without objective evidence first.

 

 

 

Myers-Briggs should also not be used for candidate selection at job interviews because it is inappropriate. You will also struggle to find any research papers that use the Myers-Briggs for anything.

 

I've not come across any interview process which does use it. In some ways, that entire statement is like the IQ test debate. It's a non-issue since so few organisations actually use them, and they're more designed for team-building, personal development, and above all else, to point out how irrelevant they actually are on the grander scheme of things.

 

 

 

Basically, the only reason the Myers-Briggs is still around is because it has a big marketing budget behind it, and managers like it because it puts people in one of 16 neat categories. But they're taking you all for fools! Think about it, are you really one of 16 types of people in the world, or is it more complicated than that?

 

Again, you're raising strawmen. Of all these tests I've taken, not even one has been offered to me by a workplace! No one's claiming there are 16 personality types, and every single person fits perfectly into one of these types. There's other people who have been flagged the same type as me in this thread, but are not otherwise similar to me in any way.

 

 

 

The test is not meant to be taken literally as a guide on how to perceive or act on things in life in accordance to personality. As Quoi_Tu says, it's meant to provoke people into thinking critically about why other people and themselves act the way they do, what qualities we like in other people, and why some people just can't get along with one another.

 

The test is not meant to be taken literally as a guide on how to perceive or act on things in life in accordance to personality. As Quoi_Tu says, it's meant to provoke people into thinking critically about why other people and themselves act the way they do, what qualities we like in other people, and why some people just can't get along with one another.

 

The first time I took this was at school, it was part of some activity to help us make new friends or something. We got together with other people who got the same result, two other people were INTJs. Now, one of them is one of my best friends, the other is one of my worst enemies. :lol:

Additionally, there is no evidence for the Types. If everyone is either E or I, then you'd expect lots of people to score high on E and lots of people to score high on I. In fact, what you find is that most people are near the middle. So, splitting it up into a dichotomy is a stupid idea because the person that gets 51% isn't very different from the person who gets 49%.

 

Hence why you're encouraged to read other personality types. Knowing your own is useless if you've nothing to compare it to, or cross validate it with. Most websites will confirm that the types are merely archetypal, you won't completely match with any Jungian personality type, and you aren't meant to 'box yourself' in to a given personality because of the results. The whole point is to be aware of your negative traits, and work on ways to counter them.

 

 

 

Myers-Briggs is also based on Jungian psychology, which no one uses any more and has little relevance to modern psychology.

 

In the same way Hippocrates is no longer relevant to modern day medicine, or Homer is no longer relevant to modern day poetical literature, yes.

 

 

 

The fact of the matter is this: the whole field of personality psychology is subjective, since we all have distinct personalities. 'Subjective' doesn't equate to 'wrong' though, so long as it doesn't claim to be a scientific analysis without objective evidence first.

 

 

 

Myers-Briggs should also not be used for candidate selection at job interviews because it is inappropriate. You will also struggle to find any research papers that use the Myers-Briggs for anything.

 

I've not come across any interview process which does use it. In some ways, that entire statement is like the IQ test debate. It's a non-issue since so few organisations actually use them, and they're more designed for team-building, personal development, and above all else, to point out how irrelevant they actually are on the grander scheme of things.

 

 

 

Basically, the only reason the Myers-Briggs is still around is because it has a big marketing budget behind it, and managers like it because it puts people in one of 16 neat categories. But they're taking you all for fools! Think about it, are you really one of 16 types of people in the world, or is it more complicated than that?

 

Again, you're raising strawmen. Of all these tests I've taken, not even one has been offered to me by a workplace! No one's claiming there are 16 personality types, and every single person fits perfectly into one of these types. There's other people who have been flagged the same type as me in this thread, but are not otherwise similar to me in any way.

 

 

 

The test is not meant to be taken literally as a guide on how to perceive or act on things in life in accordance to personality. As Quoi_Tu says, it's meant to provoke people into thinking critically about why other people and themselves act the way they do, what qualities we like in other people, and why some people just can't get along with one another.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you're saying that the Myers-Briggs isn't an accurate representation of personality, but that people should use it anyway for self-development purposes. In that case, why not just use a random number generator to generate a random personality description and then get people to reflect on it?

 

 

 

Or, better yet, there are personality tests that do not have the disadvantages that the Myers-Briggs has (e.g. Big Five personality test). So why not just use one of them?

 

 

 

#1: ESTJ - The "Overseer"

 

#2: ESTP - The "Persuader"

 

#3: ESFJ - The "Supporter"

 

#4: ESFJ - The "Supporter"

 

 

 

Meh, I'll take it again some other time.. just to be sure :lol:

 

 

 

 

- Most frequent type among women with coronary heart disease.

 

D:

 

 

 

 

ESFJs are warm-hearted individuals who highly value their close personal relationships. They are very service-oriented, and their own happiness is closely tied into the happiness and comfort of those around them. They are valued for their genuine warm and caring natures, and their special ability to bring out the best in others. They usually do not handle conflict well, and may tend to be very controlling or manipulative. Relationships are central to their lives, and they put forth a great amount of energy into developing and maintaining their close interpersonal relationships. They expect the same from others.

 

Damn straight. :x

 

 

 

----

 

BTW, I heard somewhere that if you want to figure out what Myer Briggs personality type you're attracted to, you change the first and last letter to the opposite in your personality type.

 

 

 

Eg mine is ESFJ, I am attracted to people who are ISFP

So you're saying that the Myers-Briggs isn't an accurate representation of personality, but that people should use it anyway for self-development purposes.

 

It depends on how accurate you want it to be. There are no 100% accurate personality tests, and no person's personality is 100% identical to someone else's. End of.

 

 

 

Nor did I say it was a representation. The Myers-Briggs test was originally designed as an analysis.

 

 

 

In that case, why not just use a random number generator to generate a random personality description and then get people to reflect on it?

 

Just because something isn't exactly precise does not make it 'random'. Everyone has a unique personality, but it is still predetermined through experience, thus cannot possibly be 'random' by definition.

 

 

 

Or, better yet, there are personality tests that do not have the disadvantages that the Myers-Briggs has (e.g. Big Five personality test). So why not just use one of them?

 

I find that, speaking generally, getting a second opinion in life is never harmful. Your analogy is like getting two plumbers to look at a burst pipe, but instead of weighing both their opinions against each other, discrediting one of them in ignorant belief the other is automatically 'less wrong'. Surely it's wisest to take both tests, read into the subject in detail, and take everything into consideration?

 

 

 

As I said before, no one, and I mean no one, is recommending you base your whole life on a single personality test taken as a teenager. Has anyone even claimed this is scientific?

 

 

 

However:

 

BTW, I heard somewhere that if you want to figure out what Myer Briggs personality type you're attracted to, you change the first and last letter to the opposite in your personality type.

 

That really is rubbish.

 

 

 

Pretty much spot on, a teacher was on the list and that's what I want to be (an English teacher). Which again fits in with me being verbal/linguistic.

 

 

 

Funny, eh?

 

Li Chef

 

^Not really. A lot of the questions don't leave much of a choice...

I love these :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

INFP - The "Dreamer"

 

Jungian Personality Types (Free Test)

 

INFPs are introspective, private, creative and highly idealistic individuals that have a constant desire to be on a meaningful path. They are driven by their values and seek peace. Empathetic and compassionate, they want to help others and humanity as a whole. INFPs are imaginitive, artistic and often have a talent for language and writing. They can also be described as easygoing, selfless, guarded, adaptable, patient and loyal.

 

pretty definitive of an answer for personality type.

 

 

 

oh, and for my full personality profile, these are some of the fictional characters listed.

 

 

 

Fictional ISTJs (Characters)

 

 

 

Angel Eyes - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

 

Bruce Wayne - Batman Begins

 

Cliff Clavin - Cheers

 

Dallas - Alien

 

Darth Vader - Star Wars <---best ever.

 

Eeyore - Winnie the Pooh

 

Evelyn Cross Mulwray - Chinatown

 

Frankie Dunn - Eastwood in Million Dollar Baby

 

Fred Mertz - I Love Lucy

sounds like a myerrs briggs

 

 

 

in that case I am an INFP

 

 

 

Meh, interpersonal my [wagon]. Empathy my [wagon]. I couldn't care less about the feelings of others. . .

 

 

 

Everything else is pretty much right.

 

 

 

Same personality as Beatrix Kiddo from Kill Bill, and Princess Leia -.- (Although The Bride is pretty pwnsome.)

 

I reckoned. I think I'll like the Multiple Intelligences Test more. I'll post the results for it, too.

 

 

 

EDIT: Put them both on one. \

 

 

 

Yeah, this was obvious for me.

 

 

 

They're all the same. You really need a personal experience to find out what a person's about. Nobody's actually the same - just similar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whoop woop for extrovert, down with introvert :twisted:

 

 

 

We seem to be kind of alike except for the multiple intelligences :D (well we do have the musical and interpersonal on the same place)

 

 

 

This test was better than that other one they had on offtopic a while ago, with the narcissistic and such, the personality disorder test. But it still makes me wonder, I'm one of the few extravert people on tif, and one of the few with no personality disorders (according to the test :mrgreen: )

 

 

 

Weird ;)

I've taken this a few times with school activities and I consistently get the INTP type. Given that it's typically quite a rare type I find it interesting how many there are on here (or INTJ), which I suppose goes to show how likeminded people tend to congregate, roughly. When I've taken it with friends three of us were INTP's and one was an INTJ.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was frightened by people who share my personality.

 

 

 

Arnold Schwarzenegger

 

Augustus Caesar

 

Dr. Jonathan Crane (Scarecrow from Batman Begins)

 

Hannibal Lecter (From Silence of the Lambs)

 

Vito Corleone (Godfather)

 

 

 

The scariest result of all was Katie Couric. :shock:

 

I was personally fairly surprised with these results, even though I retook the test, only to get nearly the exact same results. It's mroe the extroverted part.

 

 

 

For the Multiple Intelligences, I was far fro surprised. I have taken quite a few of these, and always end up with the same. Musically inclined, physically inclined, logically/mathematically inclined. I always have considered myself a weird kid, my results almost contradict eachother. Musically inclined and Mathematically almost go hand in hand, but physically inclined goes against both of those I'd say.

 

 

 

Also, my the fact that Intrapersonal is my lowest Intelligence contradicts me supposedly being extraverted. While I can agree with that, I think it could jsut be the fact that I lack confidence. I enjoy being social, but have always been socially awkward. It's weird.

Time to go take the test again for no real reason

 

 

 

EDIT: just retook it, same results, slightly different percentages.

Anyone can create a semi accurate personality test (nothing will ever be spot on). Just basically re-ask 20ish different questions rephrased a few times over that revolve around the most common personality traits. If you've ticked in 5 boxes that basically say "I'm shy", then hey, chances are quite likely you're a shy person. OMG test is right! How did it know! :P

 

 

 

That being said, it's always fun to do ;)

 

 

 

If you've ticked in 5 boxes that basically say "I'm shy", then hey, chances are quite likely you're a shy person. OMG test is right! How did it know! :P

 

 

 

That's a misconception about personality tests. Proper tests are not meant to tell you things that you don't already know. If they do, then they're probably not a very good test (e.g. tests that ask you to pick colours).

 

 

 

What a good test does is gives you a framework to describe yourself, so that with your results you can compare your self-description to how others describe themselves. By standardising the results in this way, it is also possible to see how far a certain personality predicts various outcomes.

 

 

 

For example, anyone can say "I'm shy", but until you get them to answer a personality test, you can't find out whether they're "more shy" than someone else who also says "I'm shy". It's also difficult to find out the extent to which people who say "I'm shy" are also likely to become accountants rather than salespeople.

Well no, it's a quick run down on the conception of personality tests. You've just read too far in to what I'm saying and adding in extra things I haven't gone in to detail about. While it remains quite simple to create a test, it also remains quite simple to compare to others. Difference being, collect a larger data sample. It's also quite simple to then use it in jobs to figure out the extent of which personality is likely to work where and likely candidates. By the way your second paragraph just reinforces what Ginger has been trying to say. If you want to get in to political correctness, your short run down on personality test misconception, is a misconception too :(

 

 

 

...rather unemotional, does not like attention, more interested in intellectual pursuits...

 

 

 

ISTPs have an adventuresome spirit. They are attracted to motorcycles, airplanes, sky diving, surfing, etc. They thrive on action, and are usually fearless. ISTPs are fiercely independent, needing to have the space to make their own decisions about their next step. They do not believe in or follow rules and regulations, as this would prohibit their ability to 'do their own thing'.

 

 

 

...their particular nature is most easily seen in their mastery of tools of any and all kinds... Sometimes Crafters will use their body as a tool.

 

 

 

Wow, this is alot like me, almost like it was based off me :ohnoes: