[redshifter]

the new yorker debunks the myers briggs type indicator.

 

[1117]

No, I think the test is rather accurate. The problem is with the test-takers. See, when people take the test, many aren't truly honest with themselves and pick what they would LIKE to be as opposed to how they really are. No one wants to answer "yes, I am a cold-hearted person" to a question. Everyone wants to think they are "fun, spontaneous people." Thus, this messes up the results.

Also, some people don't like the results, and depending on what they get the first time, they change their answers to the SAME test the second time to get another result.

The point is, be truthful with the test every time you take it.

 

[plainsong]

Well of course these things are just silly. Perhaps it's more valid in the hands of an actual psychiatrist or psychologist who may perhaps realize that personalities are not either or, but the scary thing are that often idiot bosses use this test. I had one give me this test when I came in for an interview... then he told me I failed.

Mom's therapist explained that if one was to really "fail" such a test, you'd be sitting in a padded white room rocking back and forth and stareing into middle distance.

And who doesn't know themselves well enough to know full well what they are. It's just a bit of fun, to see if a website has a program that can get close.

 

[redshifter]

the article is worth reading if you are really interested in the myers briggs test. it goes into the history and the writer actually takes the test from a trained therapist.

 

[1117]

well, I started reading the article, but it is a lengthy one. Perhaps I will change my opinion. Anyhow, this is just a light-hearted thread. No one here is using this for psychiatric/psychologicla reasons.

I hope so, at least.

 

[Illah]

Found this, though I'm not sure about the background for the data. They even admit that the data is skewed for the internet population so it's not fully representative of the world.

http://www.personalitypage.com/demographics.html

Seems the ENTj's have us beat!

Seems to make sense in a way, according to the Keirsey profiles:

ENTj = The Field Marshal (Leader)
INTj = The Mastermind

Teddy Roosevelt was an ENTj, and Eisenhower was an INTj. That should pretty much sum up the personality types for anyone familiar with those folks. Both are highly capable leaders, but obviously Teddy is more outgoing and boistrous, which in the business world is can be highly valued (CEO, more sales & leadership). Eisenhower on the other hand won WWII, and was a somewhat cold and decisive leader (COO, more strategy & operations). Not as showy, but one can argue more effective in the right situation.

--Illah

 

[DJ e]

INFp "The Romantic" or INTp "The Observer"...it can't seem to decide

.
that was pretty exhaustive...

 

[redshifter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1117 well, I started reading the article, but it is a lengthy one. Perhaps I will change my opinion. Anyhow, this is just a light-hearted thread. No one here is using this for psychiatric/psychologicla reasons. I hope so, at least.

here is the crux of the article:
Quote:

Once, for fun, a friend and I devised our own personality test. Like the M.B.T.I., it has four dimensions. The first is Canine/Feline. In romantic relationships, are you the pursuer, who runs happily to the door, tail wagging? Or are you the pursued? The second is More/Different. Is it your intellectual style to gather and master as much information as you can or to make imaginative use of a discrete amount of information? The third is Insider/Outsider. Do you get along with your parents or do you define yourself outside your relationship with your mother and father? And, finally, there is Nibbler/Gobbler. Do you work steadily, in small increments, or do everything at once, in a big gulp? I'm quite pleased with the personality inventory we devised. It directly touches on four aspects of life and temperament-romance, cognition, family, and work style—that are only hinted at by Myers-Briggs. And it can be completed in under a minute, nineteen minutes faster than Myers-Briggs, an advantage not to be dismissed in today's fast-paced business environment. Of course, the four traits it measures are utterly arbitrary, based on what my friend and I came up with over the course of a phone call. But then again surely all universal dichotomous typing systems are arbitrary.

 

[Carl]

INTx. With the p/j part being inconclusive.

 

[marvin]

Tested INTJ in college. Pretty much all my answers fell into what 1117 termed the "yes, I am a cold-hearted person" answers.

I don't like personality type tests much, but Gladwell's "debunking" is rather pathetic. His basic objections are: (a) borderline people may move between close catagories and (b) that there are exceptions to the rule. Both of which would be expected such since these classifications aren't meant to be hard and fast rules for individuals, just quick and dirty generalizations for the masses. Wikipedia leads to much better critiques of the MBTI test.

/Of course, I find Gladwell's work to be rather shoddy in general.

 

[Mr.PD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Illah I've taken these before and I'm also INTj. --Illah

Where did you all see these designations like INTj????
All I got was boxes of what percentile I placed in, in various catagories.

 

[sagekoala]

same here; I've almost always tested as a intj ... every once in a while I'll get something else. I guess it depends how i feel that day what which test I'm actually taking.

 

[kramer5150]

I came out an ESTx....??

what does that mean?

 

[smeggy]

Bah!
I took the test and it told me I was a lampshade

 

[mikuhf]

oh yeah -- MBTI

I usually end up INTJ, but the I/E split is 60/40 and the J/P split is 65/35. To make up for that, the NT part is very dominant.

M