i like to do such tests after a while again to see how my personality changes. though the results are a little funny weightened, they still seem to apply.
(diplomat, constant improvement)
(diplomat, constant improvement)
- introverted: 81%
- intuitive: 78%
- feeling: 56%
- judging: 55%
- turbulent: 59%
I already looked this up and made it available off-line in PDF form. Has certain advantage - I also see the data potentially used in wrong / un-consented ways through on-line route. But I’m not sure and that’s half of it perhaps…
Personality Type Test – MBTI
- Introverted 74%
- Intuitive 64%
- Thinking 89%
- Prospecting 53%
- Turbulent 66%
ENTP-A (‘The Debater’)
Strategy: People Mastery. Yeah!
‘The ENTP personality type is the ultimate devil’s advocate, thriving on the process of shredding arguments and beliefs and letting the ribbons drift in the wind for all to see.’
AKA Troll! hahaha. That’s too funny!
'ENTPs don’t do this because they are trying to achieve some deeper purpose or strategic goal, but for the simple reason that it’s fun. ’
No! being fun is just a bonus!
‘No one loves the process of mental sparring more than ENTPs, as it gives them a chance to exercise their effortlessly quick wit, broad accumulated knowledge base, and capacity for connecting disparate ideas to prove their points.’
‘An odd juxtaposition arises with ENTPs, as they are uncompromisingly honest, but will argue tirelessly for something they don’t actually believe in, stepping into another’s shoes to argue a truth from another perspective.’
heh. I take back everything I said about this type of test being meaningless.
“THE LOGICIAN” (INTP-T)
ANALYST - CONSTANT IMPROVEMENT
My Results are not clear, but the classification of “Analyst” und “Diplomat” is rather sure.
INFJ-A (“Advocate”) to 60%
INTJ-A (“Architect”) to 59,5%
ENFJ-A (“Protagonist”) to 59,5%
ENTJ-A (“Commander”) to 59%
INFP-A (“Mediator”) to 53%
INTP-A (“Logician”) to 52,5%
ENFP-A (“Campaigner”) to 52,5%
ENTP-A (“Debater”) to 52%
I’d call that “well-rounded character”.
Your personality type: “The Debater” (ENTP-T)
It is just me, or is the Assertive/Turbulent just a rebranding of the “neuroticism” trait of the Big Five traits in order to pigeonhole it into pseudo-scientific MBTI?
Additionally, why should we assume personality trait distributions should be bimodal?
Yes, it is indeed an adaptation of neuroticism to MBTI, but I don’t see any problem with that. It’s just taking an idea from a theory to improve another theory.
For absolutely no reason at all, they probably aren’t, these personality types are drastic simplifications of human minds, but that doesn’t the test can’t be useful.
The reason I posted this link here is because I, as many others, found out that the test results described my personality with incredible accuracy, so I guess that it does have some empirical backing.
I believe that the theory must have flaws, maybe even serious flaws, but if it works for so many people, I don’t see any reason to make a fuss by comparing it to astrology.
Anyway, I’m not saying that modern psychology should be fully based on the Myers-Briggs indicator, but I think it has proved it’s utility for many people.
I’m not sure what you mean by that exactly. Do you think that personality trait distributions being bimodal contradict them following a normal distribution?
Perhaps there’s a psychological need to “polarize” the results of personality tests. I mean, who would be interested in reading something like “Your personality type is normal / normal / normal / normal / slightly neurotic”?
Sorry, I was skeptical of this test because it largely references MBTI while sourcing Neuroticism, and I think people should cite their references/inspiration when possible as to indicate that they are not simply re-branding existing concepts, even if it should seem obvious.
It seems to me more like grafting newer data on an antiquated theory. All it does it add another dimension, a subpar compromise between an less popular data-driven model onto a popular psychoanalytic theory, without doing anything to deal with the baggage associated with it.
Yes, a normal distribution is quite simple: it has two moments: a mean (which is also the median), and a variance. Anything which classifies things into types has a dichotomy (which might or might not be necessarily bimodal, but it is polarizing: e.g. the median is not the mean).
MBTI retains popularity because it has a theory, it has a correspondence to the four humors/elements (as people don’t like being disconnected from the past), and by having Types instead of Traits, which yes, assumes dichotomies (as people like to be able to classify things). The Big Five traits don’t have these features that make it popular. I hope that people can do better by offering the means by which to build on these models rather than data that exists disconnected to any explanatory aspect. Perhaps a model of a system in which agents develop an ensemble of preferences rather than a uniform optimal strategy would be better in that it would open doors for additional research?
i thought about astrology, as well, while reading about my personality -type. i think the comparison fits well. it is written in a positive manner, so that even the “flaws” of your personality seem to be funny and in a way nice. so there is a “pro”- attitude the whole time and people tend to agree with everything that is presented nicely: to be not so critical with wrong and incorrect aspects and to be overhappy with aspects that seem to fit …it is the same with astrology. our mind does a great job to believe, what we want to believe.
but nevertheless astrology and psycho tests are fun. and you can use them to find something out about yourself, when you ask the right questions. for example: what aspects do you WANT to be reflected?
Except that this test actually tries to evaluate how you think and behave in your everyday life while astrology simply assigns you personality traits according to your date of birth.
The Myers-Briggs Type indicator may have its flaws, but at least it doesn’t scorn reason like astrology does.
Aditionally, I think that these test have proven their validity through its success in bussinesses. You don’t see many successful companies applying astrology to optimize their performances, do you?
This tests assigns you a percentage associated with each trait. No one is 100% introverted or 100% extroverted and the people who made the test know that.
The only reason why they use a bimodal system is to assign people personality types that can be explored with signifficant detail.
I belive that trained psychologists could draw more precise conclusions from other types of approaches, but, for common people, it’s just easier to read about a personality type in which they fit, even if they don’t fit completely.
the problem is, that i repeated the test, completely convinced, that i will have the same intp-t but then i was a debater: 52% extraverted, 83 % intuitive, 53 % thinking, 77% prospecting and 60% turbulent. maybe the percentages are not so different than before? or am i deluding myself because i want the test to be true?
you are right, that the stars may have something to do with ones personality seems to be unreasonable. but that does not mean that it is reasonable enough to reduce a personality to only 5 aspects. another point that is illogical is, that thinking and feeling should be contradictions, because they are not! and intuition is a result of observation and prospecting leads to interpretation and judging. maybe today i am more extraverted, tomorrow i will be introverted again…
No, they are not very different. You were 55% introverted before and now you are 52% extroverted, it’s only a difference of 7 percentual points.
It’s a drastic simplification, I’ll have to agree with that, but I wouldn’t say it’s unreasonable. Treating things as if they were more simple than they actually are is (to a certain extent) perfectly legitimate for people aiming to achieve practical results. In fact, it’s often the only way to achieve those results.
I have some difficulty doing that myself, but we have to recognize that it is necessary.
They are, or, at least, the thinking and feeling aspects of this test are. Either you make your decisions based on logic and rationality or you do what you feel like doing.
I’m not saying that a person’s reasoning can’t be influenced by emotion or that emotions can’t be influenced by reason, I’m just saying that you can either be generally cold-headed or generally hot-headed.
Introverted individuals prefer solitary activities and get exhausted by social interaction. They tend to be quite sensitive to external stimulation (e.g. sound, sight or smell) in general.
Extraverted individuals prefer group activities and get energized by social interaction. They tend to be more enthusiastic and more easily excited than introverts.
You have to remind yourself that the theory doesn’t apply the words according to their literal meanings (maybe they could have comoe up with better names for the aspects, or maybe not, I don’t know)
Observant individuals are highly practical, pragmatic and down-to-earth. They tend to have strong habits and focus on what is happening or has already happened.
Intuitive individuals are very imaginative, open-minded and curious. They prefer novelty over stability and focus on hidden meanings and future possibilities.
Judging individuals are decisive, thorough and highly organized. They value clarity, predictability and closure, preferring structure and planning to spontaneity.
Prospecting individuals are very good at improvising and spotting opportunities. They tend to be flexible, relaxed nonconformists who prefer keeping their options open.
It’s true that some traits, like introvertion and extravertion tend to fluctuate considerably, but, unless you’re in the line (as, apparently, you are) you are generally extraverted or generally intraverted.
Anyway, as I said before, this type of test shouldn’t be the basis of modern psychology, and one should not take it too seriously, but I just don’t think it’s fair to compare it to astrology.
I m an INFJ-A, very intriguing test, thx for sharing. I got the feeling the test now knows me better than i do