|
Stephann -> RE: Myers-Briggs personality types (3/5/2007 7:02:54 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Emperor1956
quote:
Stephann: At 18, I was an ENFP. Ironically, I am now an ENFJ, though only 'slightly' a J. Something about accepting a dominant personality, and the requisite judgement of people that it requires, I wonder...
Wonder no more. The reason your M-B profile changed is probably completely unrelated to your acceptance of your "dominant personality". Most likely it is because the M-B is an unreliable instrument.
I'm sure I'll get flamed by the lovers of Ms. Myers and Ms. Briggs for saying it, but in fact there are significant problems with the reliability of the test. Personality types determined according to the M-B change upon retesting at least 50% of the time with various studies measuring retesting weeks or years later, and many people's types also found to vary according to the time of the day the tests are taken. Empirical research (which by the way neither of the authors of M-B did in formulating the "test") finds that the highest percentage of people who fell into the same category on the second test is only 47%.
So what does this mean? Given 100 people taking the M-B, at least 1/2 of them will "change personality" in a subsequent retest. Now you can choose to believe that personalities are volatile (and to some extent they are) or you can choose to question the instrument. I'm a cynic - I question the instrument.
But some people love the M-B: It is seemingly scientific, it gives you warm and fuzzy feedback about yourself, and most of all it confirms the "truthiness" of what people feel about their personalities. This gives rise to the other major criticism of the test. Many experts believe that M-B is highly subject to the Forer effect, which is the observation that persons will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that are (1) generally favorable and (2) supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. In studying this effect, Forer used a "personality description" he cobbled together from a variety of non-scientific venues. He administered a "test" to his students, and then gave every one of them the same generic, favorable and bland description of their personality. On a scale of 0-5, with 0 being completely wrong and 5 being "excellent description", the average was 4.26.
So, no matter that M-B's results may not be much different from one of those "Chinese Zodiac Personality Tests" you get on a placemat at a Chinese resturant, folks continue to treat it like a meaningful instrument.
E.
By the way, there are many other criticisms of the M-B, just Google it and read with an open mind. Skip anything promoted by CPP, Inc, who owns the M-B and gets a hefty fee each time a "certified" test is given, by the Center for the Application of Psychological Type (which provides training in the MBTI) or as papers in the Journal of Psychological Type (which is edited by Myers-Briggs advocates).
Actually, I don't know that the test is any more (or less) flawed than any other test. A huge range of social, intellectual, and psychological factors impact the scores.
I mentioned what I did, because I remember how I answered some of the questions before, and I know that my perspetive and outlook has change a fair bit in the past ten years. I'm not overly surprised to find that small bits of my personality have changed, especially in relation to how I judge people. Younger people will typically be more tolerant, friendly, and open minded. Older folks tend to be more set in their ways, and thus appear more judgemental towards others.
Regards,
Stephan
|
|
|
|
