Expecting a bland, ordinary writing assignment, I idly scrolled down my eighth grade writing schedule, only to discover *gasps* Career Week---an entire week dedicated to introspection and the assessment of our skills! There was a skill inventory, a list of strengths, and even a business letter we could write to practice applying for our dream jobs, and of course, what better to assess oneself than through the analysis of one's own strengths, skills, and most importantly personality?
The curriculum at the time required students to complete an MBTI Test---a test assessing and identifying users' "personalities" based on four different dimensions: Introversion (I) or Extroversion (E); Sensing (S) or Intuition (N); Thinking (T) or Feeling (F); and Judging (J) or Perceiving (P). Once I received my results, I was ecstatic! It was like a shining white computer screen understood who I was! Ever since then, I saw the world for its introversion and extroversion; senses and intuition; thought and feelings! I was even prompted to write about what it was like to be an individual of my MBTI as well as add my MBTI score to my Goodreads profile!
Now, a year later, I look back, asking myself, "Is MBTI really the best self-assessment?"
How, exactly, should users interpret their results?
An Overview of MBTI Assessment:
Users' personality results are calculated and assessed based on the scores they receive in four dimensions:
1. Extroverted or Introverted:
Introversion/extroversion is intended to explain how a person interacts with their environments and the people in them. As summarized by the 16 personalities website, extroverts enjoy the "power of engagement" whereas introverts see the "strength of reserve." In other words, according to the site, extroverts tend to engage with their environments and the people in them, whereas introverts tend to observe their environments and the people in them.
2. Sensing or Intuitive: A person's senses/intuition are intended to explain how a person perceives their environments. Sensing individuals tend to be oriented in what they can clearly perceive---in other words, in what's real and concrete, whereas intuitive people tend to be oriented towards abstract things like ideas, emotions, et
As the website puts it, sensing individuals prefer "doing what works" whereas intuitive individuals keep their "eyes on the horizon."
3. Thinking or feeling: "Thinking" and "feeling" are intended to assess the nature of an individual, according to 16 Personalities. Thinking individuals are described to be methodical people likely to ask, "How does this help?" They prefer to use logic, science, and/or any other rational process to facilitate decisions. Feeling individuals, meanwhile are described to be compassionate individual likely to ask "Who does this help?" These people prefer to incorporate emotions, values, and the welfares of others in the decision-making process.
4. Judging or perceiving/prospecting: "Judging" and "perceiving/prospecting" are intended assess the tactics of an individual. Judging individuals are said to prefer setting goals and "making things as they ought to be" whereas prospecting individuals tend to "figure things out as they go," adapting and facilitating their decisions based on the environments they are in.
A Critique of MBTI:
One ENTJ user described that the results of MBTI were "truly eye-opening," and another user, an INFJ, wrote that she "felt like she had been vindicated." The test sounds truly powerful, doesn't it?
But is it actually as powerful as some people say it is?
Overgeneralized dichotomization:
One criticism of MBTI is its rigid dichotomization of certain traits.
One would think that if each of the four features of the sixteen personalities were bipolar dimensions, there would be a bimodal distribution in the data representing each of these dimensions. For instance, if we assume that all people are either introverts or extroverts, there would be two bell-shaped curves--one representing introverts and one representing extroverts. However, in a study authored by researchers Tammy L. Bess and Robert J Harvey, there was an apparent lack of bimodality. As the researchers themselves stated, "Past reports of bimodality were artifacts caused by BILOG's default use of a small number of quadrature points; when larger numbers of points were used, score distributions became strongly center-weighted." This means that contrary to bimodal distribution, people are more likely to score somewhere between introversion and extroversion, not on introversion or extroversion. As psychology professor and researcher David Pittenger interprets these results, "This means that although one person may score as an E, his or her test results may be very similar to those of another person's, who scores as an I."
The statistics of MBTI rigidly dichotomizes a person into only one of two categories, regardless of their range of introversion or extroversion or what exactly their results may be. This in turn makes the personality descriptions provided by MBTI prone to overgeneralizing the depth and complexity of a user's personality.
Introversion/extroversion, sensing/intuition, etc. can still provide some insight into a person's personality. Most likely, each person prefers or lean towards one side of each of the dimensions, although I would probably still take some of this stuff with a grain of salt.
Speaking from experience, a four-letter acronym determined by a series of dichotomized dimensions cannot fully encapsulate who a person truly is. The result I received (and still receive) on the MBTI test is INTJ. I admit, I do strongly identify with many aspects of the acronym, being obsessed with intellect and open-ended analysis while hating group work and large crowds. However, the label itself is a bit rigid. I know in my mind that I am not solely and inevitably INTJ. I am surprised to admit it, but I have this small, somewhat suppressed ISFP alter ego that just wants to travel to Middle Earth and Narnia and immerse herself in humorous and relatable storytelling, and I see smaller but crucial components of my personality not just in the single four-letter acronym I got, but also in multiple others: I see myself in the INTP, INFP, and the aforementioned ISFP personality results. Unfortunately, MBTI, with its rigid dichotomization, does not fully take into account the circumstances, statistics, and variation that consists of the fluidity and intricacy of a person's traits---a single letter may not be able to encapsulate these pivotal aspects of a person's identity.
False Application:
A variety of different personalities can be found in every field. The diversity of approaches, thought processes, and workflows brings novelty and insight into every occupation. For instance, Carrie, a painter by profession, might enjoy using art to encourage self-expression and help her community visualize inexplicable emotions. Meanwhile, Ethan, another painter by profession, might enjoy using art as a way to convey clear, direct messages to audiences and help others visualize how things work.
Same occupation yet different perceptions.
Unfortunately, however, some people believe personality should be used to facilitate decisions in career counseling. Career counselors Paul Tieger and Barbara Barron-Tieger, for instance, are proponents of the utilization of MBTI in influencing career choices, writing that "matching a person's personality type...to a career is the best guarantee of finding that job match made in heaven." They, for example, write that ENFPs are more likely to enjoy careers as artists, social scientists, and inventors.
While personality traits and values really can influence what a person may want in a career, it should not necessarily be used as a way to dictate what occupation you should be in. In fact, Pittenger points out that the "proportion of MBTI types within each occupation is equivalent to that within a random sample of the population."
The false application of MBTI personality results in career counseling is astounding. Once again, a person's personality really can influence how they perceive their career, but the rigid sorting of individuals into their careers is strongly indicative of narrow stereotypes about occupations and the people who work in them. For instance, some may often believe people with Analyst personalities will enjoy careers as mathematicians, since they may enjoy the ability to problem-solve with numbers and ponder their relevance. However, an individual with a Diplomat personality might enjoy mathematics just as much, yet nonetheless perceive it differently: for instance, they, as mathematicians, may want to expose the beauty and elegance of mathematics to their communities or use mathematics to improve societal well-being.
Although a group of people might work in the same occupation, each one has their own way of perceiving it.
While the false application of personality results is not necessarily the fault of MBTI, it is important to note how the dichotomization of personalities into certain categories does make the test more prone to the stereotyping and false association described above.
Barnum effect:
The Barnum effect is defined as "the tendency to accept certain information as true, such as character assessments or horoscopes, even when the information is so vague as to be worthless."
Although some individuals might use MBTI results for valid, objective self-reflection, the comforting descriptions of each of the personality types most certainly leaves the majority of users susceptible to the Barnum effect.
As I mentioned previously, the rigid dichotomization of each of the four dimensions tends to struggle to truly encapsulate the complexity and fluidity of human nature. Hence, the first criteria of "the Barnum effect" is fulfilled: the information provided is vague. While it might provide some broad insight into one's personality, the result overall may be quite worthless in pinpointing the intricate details and subtleties of the personality.
Then, there is the tendency to accept that vague information. The personality descriptions in MBTI tend to describe users in a positive light. Although there is a "Strengths AND Weaknesses" section in each Type result, the description overall is pretty positive. The results for my MBTI, INTJ, stated that "Architects can be both the boldest of dreamers and the bitterest of pessimists. They believe that, through willpower and intelligence, they can achieve even the most challenging goals." Such a vibrant, admiring description of one's personality would make almost any human being lured into believing it. Appealing, glamorizing titles and descriptions like "logician," "defender," or "campaigner" can easily satisfy the ego, regardless of how broad and inaccurate the descriptions may be.
Again, an attentive, reflective test-taker may still be able to use MBTI as a good starting point for learning who they are, but the average person taking this test in their downtime may succumb to the Barnum effect and misinterpret their results. The vague, admiring descriptions provided by MBTI may not be objective enough to prevent the Barnum Effect in users, hence self-assessment citing MBTI results may be quite dubious.
Is MBTI Completely Useless?
The overgeneralized dichotomization, false application, and apparent Barnum appeal in MBTI will give us a big, unanimous NO!
That teeny, tiny grain of salt, though, silently but passionately whispers otherwise.
MBTI results should still be taken with some skepticism, but they are not completely useless. It all depends on how the results are perceived.
MBTI test results may not be entirely representative of a person's entire personality, but they are a pretty decent starting point. Some tips that may help you more fully assess the person you are with MBTI include:
Compare your personality results with that of the other personalities. Understandably, not every person may want to research the descriptions of all sixteen personalities, but a good start in analyzing your personality is reading about each of the four dimensions (as opposed to sixteen results) to assess how some of them may appear or vary in your own personality. While I do identify with the INTJ result I got more than any other result, I was able to discover some key aspects about other aspects of my personality by delving into deeper self-evaluation. We are all probably aware that a single four-lettered acronym will not be able to fully encapsulate one's complex and fluid personality traits, which is why it is important to explore, analyze, and assess them at a deeper level than MBTI may provide. Being able to analyze the multifaceted aspects of my own personality, I was able to observe the adventurous, ISFP-like alter ego that takes up a small but critical part of my personality. Likewise, I am aware that while I do prefer to formulate beliefs and ideas over learning about things as they are, I do tend to have INTP-like curiosity and enthusiasm when it comes to approaching new topics I am interested in---I definitely would enjoy absorbing information over defending information. Plus, in my case, the actual process of developing ideas during the writing process does manifest in an INTP manner.
View your results as a measure of preferences, not personality. While some aspects of a user's MBTI really can align with the person you are, others may indicate the person you prefer to be. Speaking from experience, this strongly applies to me, especially when it comes to looking at the last three dimensions of MBTI personality. As an INTJ, I prefer to think abstractly (N), I prefer to use logic over emotions to influence my decision-making process (T), and I prefer to analyze information over absorb it (J), but these preferences don't necessarily make me any less observant, emotional, or perceiving! I can still be observant and seek tangible details, but I don't always want to. I can still discuss emotions, but I would do it reluctantly. In fact, in the article I wrote about what it was like to be an INTJ, I admitted that I am capable of empathizing with others, but I just don't want to show it. I described how I felt as if "revealing emotions to others was like revealing a naked body part." As seen here, I indeed prefer discussing accomplishments and discoveries (hence the T in my results), but I am still capable of having tangible emotions. Being able to distinguish preferences from personality can further alleviate the rigid dichotomization characteristic of MBTI and help you further assess the more complex aspects of your personality.
Use MBTI to determine your perceptions of a potential hobby/occupation, not the actual hobby/occupation! As I said previously, personality results should not be used to dictate what you should and should not do during your career. However, preferences and personality really can help an individual analyze how an individual may perceive and work in an occupation. Using the results as well as some of the self-assessments mentioned above can be immensely helpful.
A lot is said about MBTI. Amid its popularity, MBTI is still a pseudoscience, but depending on one's perception and application of it MBTI can provide users with a good start into analyzing who they are.
References and Further Reading:
Opmerkingen