What author Merve Emre uncovered about the origins of the Myers-Briggs personality test

well i got protagonist.... which reading the description, is completely wrong. I've done this, & slightly different but based on the same idea, tests about 10 times over the last 20yrs, 15yrs ago it was all the rage in the corporate world, & i suppose it still is. I've done the MB test 5 times & every time it comes up with something different, - i must answer differently depending on my mood.
It's all as has been said already... absolute drivel.

The only value in this type of thing imo is in sometimes getting people who think that their way of being in the world/doing things, is the only legitimate/valuable way, to at least consider that other people & their perspectives might have value too.
and i have seen it have that effect on occasion
 
JemPD said:
The only value in this type of thing imo is in sometimes getting people who think that their way of being in the world/doing things, is the only legitimate/valuable way, to at least consider that other people & their perspectives might have value too.
and i have seen it have that effect on occasion
Click to expand...
yes good point I had someone in my team at work who was very blinkered in their view of how others should be and I discovered they’d never done any training courses that involved reflecting on how they behaved as part of a team, understanding how to work effectively with others.
 
I think sometimes these tests are used just to inflict someone else’s view of how people should behave at work...it seems to be lapped up by those who can’t help but try and control others ...perfect for the micromanager. Ideal for managers who don’t have a clue how to manage their team.

Quite useful to identify these poor managers I suppose. Anyone I find referring to these tests as at all valid at work is a red flag for me and I tend to give them quite a wide berth.
 
I came out as a highly introverted Logician.

I would love to see what the results would be if my husband took the test

a) while answering in the way that he thought was true about me and
b) while answering in the way that he thought I would answer.

It would never happen though - he would (rightly) consider it to be a total waste of his time. *sigh*
 
It should be noted that the standard in Psychology now seems to be the 'Big Five' personality traits: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness, Neuroticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

These might be worth digging into at some point.

@Carolyn Wilshire would it be accurate to say that this is a 'standard' in psychological research? I wouldn't really know, but they pop up in podcasts consistently and I never know what to think about them.
 
James Morris-Lent said:
It should be noted that the standard in Psychology now seems to be the 'Big Five' personality traits: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness, Neuroticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

These might be worth digging into at some point.

Carolyn Wilshire would it be accurate to say that this is a 'standard' in psychological research? I wouldn't really know, but they pop up in podcasts consistently and I never know what to think about them.
Click to expand...

Psychologists love to point out how pseudoscientific MBTI is and how we should all abandon it.

Conveniently, they leave out the fact that four out of the "Big Five" correlate with MBTI and it is easy to see why.

Extraversion = Extraversion/Introversion scale
Openness = Intuitive/Sensor scale
Agreeableness = Feeling/Thinking scale
Conscientiousness = Judging/Perceiving scale

Neuroticisim is another factor that covers emotional lability.

I don't see this as a coincidence at all. It could be that the questions they used in the factor analysis studies are themselves biased by the inclusion of questions biased towards prior personality constructs including the MBTI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom