Whats your "Meyers Briggs" personality type?

The_Traveler · Oct 19, 2018

Watch: Why the Myers-Briggs test is totally meaningless

vintagesnaps · Oct 19, 2018

Exactly. That article is consistent with other information I found - such as...
1/2 the people who take it get different results each time.
:048:

Yeah, that's reliable. <--- sarcasm

The company that produces this makes $20 million a year from this and whatever else they sell. Mostly all it seems to do when people use it is to put money in someone's virtual pocket for an outdated quiz thingy that in what, 80 years?? has yet to be shown to have any validity at all. :boggled:

SquarePeg · Oct 19, 2018

Really? I did this at a workshop for work many years ago with my team. The results were on the money for everyone. N0w, whether or not someone can effectively make use of the self knowledge is up to the individual. I found it insightful and I think that the more we are self aware, the easier it is to find happiness and avoid situations/jobs/relationships that will be toxic to that happiness. That being said, I don’t see it as any more or less valuable than knowing your zodiac sign and all that comes along with that insight. Good to know and usually accurate when it c0mes to personality and compatibility.

Derrel · Oct 19, 2018

I Think that the results being perfectly applicable to everyone is just about the same way that horoscope predictions seem to be "perfectly applicable"' to anyone. We want to be lucky,we want to find the perfect person, we want to have success,we want to find love. When horoscope prediction tells us that we will do the above things, most people want to believe it. Because you know , zodiac and all, you know,right?

waday · Oct 19, 2018

Derrel said:
I Think that the results being perfectly applicable to everyone is just about the same way that horoscope predictions seem to be "perfectly applicable"' to anyone. We want to be lucky,we want to find the perfect person, we want to have success,we want to find love. When horoscope prediction tells us that we will do the above things, most people want to believe it. Because you know , zodiac and all, you know,right?

The Barnum (or Forer) effect... but, I would think/hope that these results might be a little better than horoscopes, because at least these results are based on answers to questions rather than the time of year born.

But I agree, there's a little something in each of them that is easily relatable to pretty much anyone.

One thing I disagree with in the article/video is that I don't think we should unfairly judge something just because they're making a profit off of it. Otherwise, one could say that this website is "useless", because it's here just to make a profit. Or, doctors are useless just because they make a profit. That's not necessarily true. (Or, why should I listen to Vox, when they have ads placed throughout their website...)

And, I don't think we should take the test and put ourselves in a box based on the results, either. It's something that might aid a person in one direction or another, but it probably shouldn't be used to place/pigeonhole them in a career without other inputs and thoughts. Everyone is different--pretty much what Jung said.

vintagesnaps · Oct 19, 2018

I don't have a problem with someone making money from selling products. But I think it's unethical to sell something and market it as any sort of valid test when it apparently has not been significantly validated by any research in the field. Since at least the 1940s. (I mean, it would been validated long before the 21st century if there was anything to it.)

There's a reason that professionals in the field don't use this. I've found that there can be a study to show just about anything, but any one study needs to be backed up by further research. It should be consistent with other work done in the field.

Pigeonholing people based on something like this can be counterproductive. It's the ol' self fulfilling prophecy; keep telling someone something about themselves and they might be likely to believe it whether it's accurate or not; they may become what they were told they are (which is why verbal abuse can be so damaging to children). It allows little room for growth - if someone thinks they're one thing and not another, they may never believe or try anything different.

I figured that out of 25 questions, on 5 I really couldn't say one or the other - it might be both, it might be neither. There shouldn't be 1/5 of the possible questions with that result; a few out of 100+, maybe. Taking stats in college was too long ago, who can remember?? lol but this is out of whack.

At most I think this just tells people what they already knew about themselves if they really thought about it. I don't have to go look this up in JAMA do I?? I'm retired, I don't have to do that anymore (although usually it was JAMA Pediatrics).

CherylL · Oct 19, 2018

I took it 20+ years ago and then recently and was about the same INFJ with I & J at only 3% each. The few articles I read regarding the results were fairly spot on. I think the long MMPI test is more accurate. My husband took that one in college for one of his classes. With over 500 questions there are certain questions that rephrase to get a more accurate result.

jcdeboever · Oct 19, 2018

Well, it is ironic that I did the test for the wife. She printed it out and it seems to have me in the right box so to speak. She had to do the test with her people from work, it was mandatory. They were looking at ways of improving communication and seeing if their people might be better in another position. She had 3 controlled properties where they made some changes in the leasing department, and others. I guess they swapped some people around. Interesting results in the leasing sales, the new people outperformed the old and with impressive results. Others were more productive in their new assignments.

SquarePeg · Oct 19, 2018

Derrel said:
I Think that the results being perfectly applicable to everyone is just about the same way that horoscope predictions seem to be "perfectly applicable"' to anyone. We want to be lucky,we want to find the perfect person, we want to have success,we want to find love. When horoscope prediction tells us that we will do the above things, most people want to believe it. Because you know , zodiac and all, you know,right?

My reference to zodiac signs was in relation to the character traits that people with a sign typically have and the compatibility between various signs both in love and in friendships. I wasn’t referring to the horoscope column predictions of love or money coming your way this week or whatever.

limr · Oct 19, 2018

Just because a tool is misused doesn't mean it should be thrown out. I sometimes use a tape dispenser as a de facto hammer. Sometimes it works for simple jobs, but sometimes it doesn't. When it can't get the job done, do I throw it away? No, because it's still great at dispensing tape. I just have to stop using it as a hammer.

When used inappropriately, many standard psychological tests could be considered 'useless' because they are overreaching, stretching the limits of what can be learned or interpreted from the results. But that doesn't mean they have no value. If nothing else, the simple act of taking the test is a valuable exercise in self-reflection, something that I think is in short supply these days.

Yes, there is a limit to how useful these kinds of tests can be, but once again, limited =/= useless.

TreeofLifeStairs · Oct 19, 2018

I didn’t realize there was such opposition to the test. The author of the article clearly had his position on the subject. I’m not entirely sure he understood the limitations of the test though. Several times he/she talked of it predicting how happy or how well suited a person would be for a position or in life. I’m not sure where that idea is coming from. I’ve taken a number of the tests over the years but I’ve never thought it was predicting anything. I’ve always thought it was simply reporting the strength of personality characteristics. They (Meyers Briggs) chose 4 scales to rate people on. I don’t think they make any claim that those are the only spectrums that make up a person’s personality.

As far as test takers getting different results each time they take the test, I think there’s two likely reasons. First, the test takers may not have been properly instructed in how to answer the questions. Similarly to how @justjazzy wasn’t sure to answer them situationally or as to what felt natural. The author of the article had a section about this. The second reason would involve people that are close to the middle of one of the spectrums that may sway one way or another causing them to show up on different sides when taking different tests. I think the number of people with changing results would be far less if these two factors were taken into consideration.

The test naturally has more empirical evidence about someone’s personality than the zodiac signs but it’s not something that can be used to predict specific behavior simply by knowing what someone scored off of it. I think it better describes the general tendencies of a person though. If I needed to hire an administrative assistant I’d look for someone that was a high S (they are likely to be detailed oriented). This is not a guarantee, nor would it be the only factor I would look at but it would be part of my decision making process.

I think of the test as more of a tool, and like any tool, it needs to be used correctly.

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app