Meyer Briggs type indicators

S

Spacealien2

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2012
1,827
176
63
Heaven
It's a personality test and analysis that was able to explain pretty much everything about me. I was astonished. I'm wondering what you all's results are.

http://www.16personalities.com/

Took it 4 times over the years. Got INTJ thrice and INTP once. Basically, one of the rarest and geeky type.. Think Toby Macquire's Peter Parker.
 
fuji said:
I get a different answer every time I tend these sorts of things.
Click to expand...

My results got a bit more consistent when I stopped answering questions that I need to think about. But yes, it is possible to get different results. It depends on your mental state when you take the test.
 
CAMPAIGNER (ENFP-A)

Slightly ext**********ted, slightly assertive .. the rest midrange.

Sample celebrity includes Robin Williams ... really ??
 
It takes time to learn what it really means when you get an MBTI score or classification.

The quick version is that these are four *ranges* and that everyone will typically be able to exhibit along a wide range of each typifier, but that it's trying to identify your most natural "home". And that can change over time, too.
 
The assumption behind these tests is that the distribution along a line like "extrovert" and "introvert" is bipolar, that most people are either one or the other. The studies I've seen refute that, and if extrovert/introvert is even a valid concept, there is a normal distribution rather than a bipolar one. In other words, the median person is neither extroverted nor introverted but a little of both and that more people are near the middle of the range than the ends.

As for whether it's a valid concept at all, there's also reason to think OTHER FACTORS explain most of what people think of as "introvert" or "extrovert" behavior, and these factors may not even cluster. So, for example, whether you like being the center of attention may have nothing to do with whether being around other people energizes you, whether you enjoy speaking to a room may be totally unrelated to your being a charismatic outgoing conversationalist. And so on. There is a social assumption and cultural belief that these things cluster together and that there are "introverts" and "extroverts", but there isn't a whole heck of a lot of actual scientific data to support that belief -- other than some dodgy studies published by people who profit from selling products based on Meyers Briggs.

I have also noticed that my results changed as my career changed. Early in my career when I was focused on being an individual contributor in my organization, beavering away on my own work, I scored more highly on the introverted thinker stuff. When I increasingly moved into management rolls I started scoring higher on other factors, moving more towards the E side.

I don't that at some level it was a good description of how I was behaving at that time in my life BUT the M-B claim is you should use this stuff to find out what job is best suited to you. I'm inclined to believe it's the other way around--the job you're currently doing influences how you score on this test. As in, whatever skills and behaviors are prioritized by your current employment are going to be things you decide to exhibit and emphasize in your behaviors -- that your employment choices determine your M-B categorization, and not the other way around. The implication being that you shouldn't change careers because of your M-B scores, on the contrary, your scores will change if you change careers.

TLDR; you find M-B discussed primarily in pop business books, and hardly ever discussed in serious social science journals
 
I think the test is fairly accurate. I have taken it 3 times in my life, first in my 20s, then late 30s, and last one was a few months ago. All the outcomes were the same.

In my 20s, self employed, 30s while back in school full time, and 40s, as a senior manager.
 
fuji said:
As for whether it's a valid concept at all, there's also reason to think OTHER FACTORS explain most of what people think of as "introvert" or "extrovert" behavior, and these factors may not even cluster. So, for example, whether you like being the center of attention may have nothing to do with whether being around other people energizes you, whether you enjoy speaking to a room may be totally unrelated to your being a charismatic outgoing conversationalist. And so on. There is a social assumption and cultural belief that these things cluster together and that there are "introverts" and "extroverts", but there isn't a whole heck of a lot of actual scientific data to support that belief -- other than some dodgy studies published by people who profit from selling products based on Meyers Briggs.
Click to expand...

I am not clear on what you are trying to tell us, but introvert vs extrovert is not about shyness or energizing, rather I believe it is about how you process information. Do you internalize and make a decision, or talk your way through it.

fuji said:
I have also noticed that my results changed as my career changed. Early in my career when I was focused on being an individual contributor in my organization, beavering away on my own work, I scored more highly on the introverted thinker stuff. When I increasingly moved into management rolls I started scoring higher on other factors, moving more towards the E side.

I don't that at some level it was a good description of how I was behaving at that time in my life BUT the M-B claim is you should use this stuff to find out what job is best suited to you. I'm inclined to believe it's the other way around--the job you're currently doing influences how you score on this test. As in, whatever skills and behaviors are prioritized by your current employment are going to be things you decide to exhibit and emphasize in your behaviors -- that your employment choices determine your M-B categorization, and not the other way around. The implication being that you shouldn't change careers because of your M-B scores, on the contrary, your scores will change if you change careers.
Click to expand...

This hasn't been my experience, and your's is the first I have heard to change dramatically. As mentioned in another post, mine has been consistent in various roles and stages in my life. What MB teaches you, is how to recognize and work with others based on their style.
 
huckfinn said:
I think the test is fairly accurate. I have taken it 3 times in my life, first in my 20s, then late 30s, and last one was a few months ago. All the outcomes were the same.

In my 20s, self employed, 30s while back in school full time, and 40s, as a senior manager.
Click to expand...

Some people think horoscopes are accurate too.
 
huckfinn said:
I am not clear on what you are trying to tell us, but introvert vs extrovert is not about shyness or energizing, rather I believe it is about how you process information. Do you internalize and make a decision, or talk your way through it.
...
This hasn't been my experience, and your's is the first I have heard to change dramatically. As mentioned in another post, mine has been consistent in various roles and stages in my life. What MB teaches you, is how to recognize and work with others based on their style.
Click to expand...

This is closer to the truth. But there are very introverted extroverts as well as extroverted introverts. The MBTI is attempting to identify which situations drain your energy and which situations you find more restorative: some people find being in a group to be very draining and need more alone-time to recharge, others are energized by it and drained by being on their own. It has nothing to do with your capabilities - many introverts are great public speakers, for example. And you can certainly train yourself to be more adept at situations outside your "comfort zone" (for lack of a better term here).

And while you might change your underlying MBTI type, it's less likely that you would change very quickly.

At the end, it's about gaining a better understanding of who you are, and how others in the world might encounter the same situations different from yourself.
 
huckfinn said:
...and some think fuji posts are accurate too...lol

You can't compare MB to horoscopes......
Click to expand...

I can indeed compare it to horoscopes. Like a horoscope the types describe very common human behavior, stuff that everybody does sometime, and claims that a specific type does that behavior more than other types. But since it is describing common behavior it is possible to see yourself in any of the types.

And while I agree that it is based on more than just your birthday, I'm unconvinced that these types are real. Like I said, much human behavior is driven by your situation.

We know from REAL science that if we randomly make one person a "guard" and another person a "prisoner" and let them "play" a prison game for a few days that the guards soon adopt a very domineering and outspoken personality while the prisoners become submissive and meek.

Is that because the guards are all extroverts and the prisoners are introverts or some such type?

No. It is because you ADOPT BEHAVIORS that society expects of you based on your social role. If I make you a manager you will copy the behavior you think a manager should have and behave differently than if I made you an accountant or a sales person.

So since we KNOW people adjust their type to suit their role my claim is that how you score on these tests depends on the job you have chosen.

The ONLY reason it might be stable over a few years is you are still doing the same or similar job a few years later.
 
fuji said:
I can indeed compare it to horoscopes. Like a horoscope the types describe very common human behavior, stuff that everybody does sometime, and claims that a specific type does that behavior more than other types. But since it is describing common behavior it is possible to see yourself in any of the types.

And while I agree that it is based on more than just your birthday, I'm unconvinced that these types are real. Like I said, much human behavior is driven by your situation.

We know from REAL science that if we randomly make one person a "guard" and another person a "prisoner" and let them "play" a prison game for a few days that the guards soon adopt a very domineering and outspoken personality while the prisoners become submissive and meek.

Is that because the guards are all extroverts and the prisoners are introverts or some such type?

No. It is because you ADOPT BEHAVIORS that society expects of you based on your social role. If I make you a manager you will copy the behavior you think a manager should have and behave differently than if I made you an accountant or a sales person.

So since we KNOW people adjust their type to suit their role my claim is that how you score on these tests depends on the job you have chosen.

The ONLY reason it might be stable over a few years is you are still doing the same or similar job a few years later.
Click to expand...

My apologies...I thought you meant reading the daily horoscopes, as opposed to a person's zodiac sign.

We also know from REAL science that manager or guard has nothing to do with your personality type. Domineering, outspoken and submissive has nothing to do with MB.

We also KNOW the same for adjusting your behaviour to a role or specific circumstance so you are right on that point. It still doesn't change how you process information though.

The ONLY constant is your personality type indicates how you SEE the world; how you ACT in it is called adaptation. How you perceive the world doesn't change.

My personality type has been the same over 3 distinctly different career situations/positions, and 20 years.


LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom
Back