The Furry Forums
Furry Chat => General => Topic started by: Trixsie Vixen on August 18, 2014, 07:32:38 PM
-
I was thinking about how the distribution of MBTI results in the MLP fandom are significantly different than in the general population. So even though there are criticisms of the value of this personality test, I thought it would be interesting to see if TFF was also atypical also.
Here is the version of the test I took, it is quick and simple and the website has supporting info
http://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test (http://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test)
Here's the wikipedia entry for an independent spiel suitable for the lay person
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator)
Results can vary based on the mood you're in, so while you can only "vote" once, you can update your result.
This version provides scores to give an indication of the strength of each of the four dichotomies.
So if you want post your result link too! (select receive result by email and it generates the link)
Though this test has become popular with recruiting agencies it should be treated as a rough estimate and a bit of fun.
So have fun! :D
My result around age 15 was INTP but I just got ENFP
http://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test/a96b8f53f1fd97a5410598c63f875580 (http://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test/a96b8f53f1fd97a5410598c63f875580)
-
Got INFP
Should dig out some old test results just for the heck of it, since I know I've done the test before.
EDIT:
-First time I did the test and saved the result, 8th of December 2013.-
ISTPIntrovert(100%) Sensing(1%) Thinking(1%) Perceiving(11)%You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (100%)You have marginal or no preference of Sensing over Intuition (1%)You have marginal or no preference of Thinking over Feeling (1%)You have slight preference of Perceiving over Judging (11%)
-
I had you pegged as a IFBW Cheza (interesting former bird-woof), just goes to show ;)
But yes, the "full administered version" has weightings for age and career type too, which this does not. So seeing different results over time is very intriguing to me. And creates a slightly dodgy Within-Subjects experiment design.
For those interested creative writing and Serious RP, just using the details descriptions of the 16 types can help flesh out a character you are working on.
-
I'm ENFJ apparently- 7% extraverted, 27% intuitive, 51% feeling, 28% judging, 13% turbulent- ~2% of people.
-
Got INFJ.
-
I'm ESTJ
-
ENFP
You are one of the Diplomats - an empathic and idealistic individual who enjoys exploring interesting ideas and prizes morality. You are known for your enthusiasm, optimism and intuitive skills. Above you will find a brief overview of your personality traits - proceed to the type overview to learn much more about your personality type. Prepare to be impressed.
-
I get INFJ online and ESTP on approved tests and in most forum questionnaires.
ESTP:
Habitual (dominant): Se - consciously attentive to details, aesthetics and real life interactive sensations (hugs and epic scenery :3)
Talent (auxiliary) - consciously attentive to logical sense, how things relate to long term understanding (I write more theory than read them)
Motivator (crutch): Fe - semi-consciously attentive to the needs of an entire group (I am drained by helping others but try my best to do it in a non-direct way)
Goal (Achilles heel): Ni - semi-consciously attentive to the task and data corresponding to the general idea (I have a trouble motivating myself to execute my own ideas/goals)
It rings true but I don't believe the stereotypes, I'm either a INFP or INFJ in my own mind in terms of stereotypes but then stereotypes aren't scientifically accurate by some %
So I'm basically left clueless x3
I don't really trust MBTI but I believe in the enneagram, it basically tells you what you know about your aspiration type and it's easier to explain a number (plus it isn't so stereotyping).
DISC personality test is good, too as it indicates what role in anything you'd prefer work-wise which is easy to be aware of.
I wouldn't trust socionics anymore than MBTI, psychology isn't horoscopes, application of the Forer effect isn't a scientific validation of cognition as far as I've learned.
-
The Guardian
As an ESTJ, your primary mode of living is focused externally, where you deal with things rationally and logically. Your secondary mode is internal, where you take things in via your five senses in a literal, concrete fashion.
ESTJs live in a world of facts and concrete needs. They live in the present, with their eye constantly scanning their personal environment to make sure that everything is running smoothly and systematically. They honor traditions and laws, and have a clear set of standards and beliefs. They expect the same of others, and have no patience or understanding of individuals who do not value these systems. They value competence and efficiency, and like to see quick results for their efforts.
ESTJs are take-charge people. They have such a clear vision of the way that things should be, that they naturally step into leadership roles. They are self-confident and aggressive. They are extremely talented at devising systems and plans for action, and at being able to see what steps need to be taken to complete a specific task. They can sometimes be very demanding and critical, because they have such strongly held beliefs, and are likely to express themselves without reserve if they feel someone isn't meeting their standards. But at least their expressions can be taken at face-value, because the ESTJ is extremely straight-forward and honest.
The ESTJ is usually a model citizen, and pillar of the community. He or she takes their commitments seriously, and follows their own standards of "good citizenship" to the letter. ESTJ enjoys interacting with people, and likes to have fun. ESTJs can be very boisterous and fun at social events, especially activities which are focused on the family, community, or work.
The ESTJ needs to watch out for the tendency to be too rigid, and to become overly detail-oriented. Since they put a lot of weight in their own beliefs, it's important that they remember to value other people's input and opinions. If they neglect their Feeling side, they may have a problem with fulfilling other's needs for intimacy, and may unknowingly hurt people's feelings by applying logic and reason to situations which demand more emotional sensitivity.
When bogged down by stress, an ESTJ often feels isolated from others. They feel as if they are misunderstood and undervalued, and that their efforts are taken for granted. Although normally the ESTJ is very verbal and doesn't have any problem expressing themself, when under stress they have a hard time putting their feelings into words and communicating them to others.
ESTJs value security and social order above all else, and feel obligated to do all that they can to enhance and promote these goals. They will mow the lawn, vote, join the PTA, attend home owners association meetings, and generally do anything that they can to promote personal and social security.
The ESTJ puts forth a lot of effort in almost everything that they do. They will do everything that they think should be done in their job, marriage, and community with a good amount of energy. He or she is conscientious, practical, realistic, and dependable. While the ESTJ will dutifully do everything that is important to work towards a particular cause or goal, they might not naturally see or value the importance of goals which are outside of their practical scope. However, if the ESTJ is able to see the relevance of such goals to practical concerns, you can bet that they'll put every effort into understanding them and incorporating them into their quest for clarity and security.
-
I wouldn't trust socionics anymore than MBTI, psychology isn't horoscopes, application of the Forer effect isn't a scientific validation of cognition as far as I've learned.
LOL I totally agree, it's useful as a way to tease out how people self-identify and the positive attribution effect makes the medicine go down.
*Bounces*
I like polls :D
-
I wouldn't trust socionics anymore than MBTI, psychology isn't horoscopes, application of the Forer effect isn't a scientific validation of cognition as far as I've learned.
LOL I totally agree, it's useful as a way to tease out how people self-identify and the positive attribution effect makes the medicine go down.
*Bounces*
I like polls :D
I'm addicted to polls, tbh I think that's all that keeps the MBTI going, the poll-lovers :3
-
I'm an ISFJ…
The Protector, yay or something.
-
I'm the Guardian
-
ENFP
You are one of the Diplomats - an empathic and idealistic individual who enjoys exploring interesting ideas and prizes morality. You are known for your enthusiasm, optimism and intuitive skills. Above you will find a brief overview of your personality traits - proceed to the type overview to learn much more about your personality type. Prepare to be impressed.
Twinsies! Only our mother can tell us apart! :3 :)
-
There seems to be a large amount of _NF_ votes, with 27% of votes being INFJ, and 18% of votes being ENFP, although it's too early to get conclusive data.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/MyersBriggsTypes.png/1280px-MyersBriggsTypes.png)
-
ISFP apparently. That's interesting.
-
Trolls and MBTI advisors on YouTube seem convinced most furries are INFP or INTJ. INFP are highly individualistic and enjoy a sense of identity (tend to be enneagram 4s) and INTJs tend to be among the most into eccentric due to counterculture attraction (particularly into strategy in roleplay) and may be mistaken as autistic (because of obsessive Ni traits and Fi values pertaining to this). So it actually seems substantial.
aperson1: that chart isn't very accurate in MBTI theory as it doesn't take in the P/J i/e, for example INFJ according to that would be a T type by that (as Fe-Ti forward diagonal is equal to T) which is why INFJs love science and treating people scientifically (like counsellors).
MBTI isn't meant to be read by the 4 letters directly. I/E tell you the first function will be the introverted / extroverted function (shown by the last letter), J tells you F/T is the extroverted function and P tells you the N/S function is the extroverted function. The opposite function is introverted. For example, ENFJ becomes ENFe, ENiFe, then Fe Ni. Then the i/e opposition of Fe is Ti and Ni is Se and the first function is the extroverted one so thus ENFJ becomes "Fe Ni Se Ti".
Has anyone done an enneagram test or assessment, by the way?
I tend to score high as a 1.
-
I've done the enneagram before but don't recall what I got. I did a short version just then, though forced choice statements rely on a larger inventory to tease out distinctions. Even so for fun I scored a tie between Type 2 (The Helper) and Type 7 (the Enthusiast).
On of the things I do like about the MBTI is that is offers four continua as the source of the matrix for its 16 types. I just happen to believe they are not the best choice of continua and the the poles are probably false dichotomies.
I would want to see the factors tied to biological function to determine this. Eg, happiness and unhappiness measure two separate things rather than being the extremes of one continuous thing even though it easily can be thought of as a continuum. But starting with a theoretical model derived from factorial analysis which is then tentatively tied to biological origins is fraught with post-hoc problems.
There is good reason to think there are more than 4 factors. The OCEAN model uses 5. I think the HEXACO model with 6 factors is pretty neat, it creates types modified by the adjacent types much like enneagram's wings. Though it in practice makes for 6 primary types and 6 on in-between types.
All these models suffer from conflating cognitions, emotions and behaviours IMHO. If how I feel about things is measured then I am introverted. How I think is a combination of education and the ideas I have built up to justify my emotional perception. What I do is a product of learning theory and cultural contingency. Exposure to drama, music, art and performance generally has taught me/let me learn behaviours which score for extroversion, but my feelings remain those of an introvert. Because I feel confident speaking before I know what I am going to say I am scored as an extrovert, but that does not account for me having learned to improvise and be thinking about what I will say next WHILE speaking.
Hmmmm.... tricky stuff.
-
http://9types.com/ should help, just see the thought processes :3
I get 1w2-4w5-7w6 and PerC forums reckon it, too.
I hear there is no science behind MBTI but Enneagram and Big Five do as they hold all possible major traits by the amount measured.
Most people, in life experience, are prone to denying their natural abilities and even get good at what they weren't naturally inclined to (talents). I think personality is best measured in what you think rather than things that are prone to change. I noticed people type you as Si dominant if you're health-focused and Se if your active a lot, but research shows those who are actually physically better, without phobias and in the right environment will occupy these traits. Even if the MBTI was right, the mind is often too complex to analysise on such a low level. MBTI is also based on outdated left-right brain psychology somewhat. There's also no evidence the brain sees the external world different to the inner one, besides in terms of psycho-physical effort (thus introverts simply have more social fatigue or avoidance and self-interest induced preferences).
Preference vs habit vs ability is MBTI's biggest sorting fault. MBTI, however, in its primitive form, can capture your current mindset or how you wish you were.
-
INFJ. less than 1% is INFJ? Wow... :o
Apparently I'm the protector.
Yeah, that's me. X3
-
Im an INTJ, I say INJay because the T is silent to me lol.
http://www.16personalities.com/intj-personality (http://www.16personalities.com/intj-personality)
INTJs are imaginative yet decisive, ambitious yet private, amazingly curious, but only if their interest is piqued.
This isn’t to be misunderstood as impulsiveness – INTJs will strive to remain rational no matter how attractive the end goal may be, and every idea, whether generated internally or soaked in from the outside world, must pass the ruthless and ever-present “Is this going to work?” filter.
White lies and small talk are hard enough as it is for a type that craves truth and depth, but INTJs will go so far as to see many social conventions as downright stupid. Ironically, it is often best for them to remain where they are comfortable – out of the spotlight – where the natural confidence prevalent in INTJs as they work with the familiar can serve as its own beacon, attracting people, romantically or otherwise, of similar temperament and interests.
High self-confidence. INTJ personalities rarely doubt themselves or care much about their perceived social roles, expectations, etc. Consequently, they are not afraid to voice their own opinions. This exudes confidence and reinforces the INTJ’s self-esteem even further.
Hard-working and determined. INTJ personalities can be very patient and dedicated if something excites or intrigues them. They will work hard to achieve their goals, often ignoring everything else. That being said, INTJs may also appear lazy in situations that do not require them to flex their mental muscles. For instance, they may take risks and not study that hard at school, knowing that in all likelihood, they will be able to tackle the tests anyway.
Imaginative and strategic. INTJs are very good strategic thinkers, often using this strength to devise multiple contingency plans in both professional and personal situations. They like to plan ahead and be prepared, imagining all the potential scenarios and consequences.
Honest and direct. People with this personality type hate playing social games and putting comfort or social expectations above honesty and facts. INTJs tend to see these activities as pointless and irrational, preferring inconvenient truth over a comforting lie.
Open-minded. INTJ personalities do not mind being proven wrong and enjoy being exposed to something they were not familiar with. They will embrace a competing theory if it makes more sense, regardless of the existing traditions or expectations. Not surprisingly, INTJs also tend to be fairly liberal in a social sense, believing that many social norms are outdated and unnecessarily restrictive.
Often clueless when it comes to romantic relationships. Many INTJs are likely to have difficulties dealing with anything that does not require logical reasoning, and this weakness is especially visible in interpersonal relationships. They may overanalyze everything, get frustrated trying to understand how the other person thinks, try to use a nearly scientific approach to dating, or just give up altogether.
-
1w2 corresponds to INFJ in a Ni Ti loop and Fe reflex in the wing so I would be a INFJ, a broken INFJ for now though, susceptible to repetitive/reflective self-doubt (not in the sense of finding individuality but rather reassurance and being understood is a need) and feeling unhelped despite a desire to help others. My heart type is romantic and reflects itself to create a inner individualism to seek true love that just clicks with that. Realistically that would be someone who is a bit more "with it" than me and is in good understanding of how things work in the practical realm (Se Ti). My gut type (spontaneous attraction) is ENFP as it is an opposite click and corresponds to my inner compliment but the issue can be a lack of groundedness when I act this role or rely on someone with it.
This basically means I'm confused, misunderstood foxy who needs a hug and assurance and friends that he can merge with and trust. I have a hard time expressing my logical mind so I have to express it in written form especially in depth to try to rationalise my own intuition and share so anyone like me or not can understand, Though, the internet is both kind of live and not at the same time so I can type in quite some depth which is nice :3
So for conversation I will vote INFJ.
-
*hugs Kozy* :D
-
*hugs Trixsie* I kind of wish I was a P type in that case, though. Being driven by your aux, tert and inferior function can be exhausting.
-
reading your personality generalisation makes me want to hug you.... I don't know why honestly.
so i'll do it anyways Kozy *hugs you*
-
lots of INFJs here.
-
*hugs Tim* :3
I haven't voted until now, I never feel like I can read myself 100%
I'm sure of my enneagram, however, and that I use Ni Fe Ti Se a lot but I have no idea on my natural preferences or if natural preferences are a real thing and not just hypothetical. In the end of the day, we're all individuals and our individuality can defy our preferences. If anything, really here we should be identify as ourselves but that ourselves are furry. Because of all the labels in the world, there's not many labels more fluffy and warm than "furry". My advice is: be you, be fun, and be kind :3
-
I'm always skeptical about these things, fun that they are, do they really tell what your personality is? I'll give you a few reasons why this could be inaccurate.
1. Expectational values
Basically, if you consider yourself of some personality, you'll answer questions that correlate with what you'd believe that personality would do. It becomes irrelevant on what your actual actions indicate, but instead you answer what you THINK your actions indicate, and so the personality you get is more the personality you THINK you have rather than the personality you actually have.
2. The Forer Effect
The descriptions of the personalities are vague enough, in my opinion, for the Forer Effect to apply. That is, given a set of general descriptions, you'll tend to wrap these descriptions in your mind to believe that they are describing specifically you and so you'll tend to give a high accuracy rating for them. An example is something that goes "You are decisive", now everybody in the world is neither completely decisive or completely indecisive, but saying "you are decisive" will make you think of all the times you were decisive and make you agree with that statement, even though it could potentially apply to anyone.
-
Well I tried to make my decisions completely without an intent, simply wondering 'what am I?' and ended up with ENFJ. And looking at the descriptions of other people's personalities, I know that I don't fit into those even if I try to fit myself in.
-
Well I tried to make my decisions completely without an intent, simply wondering 'what am I?' and ended up with ENFJ. And looking at the descriptions of other people's personalities, I know that I don't fit into those even if I try to fit myself in.
I did the same thing and ended up with INTJ
-
@anoni:
Everything is subject to being rendered believable from a subjective angle, from scientific doctrine to scientific doctrine, from theory to theory, from religion to religion. I haven't seen a psychologist or scientist in their life who hasn't changed their doctrine. You either believe it or you don't. Hence, the world of knowledge is full of challengers, philosophers, they forget the original idea and unfortunately this sometimes even creates conflict or dispute.
However, there is actually an in depth, advanced theory behind MBTI, so you can't really judge it false without an in depth understanding. MBTI is about cognition not behaviour which is merely an influence on personality in terms of how they prefer to think, the issue is whether it is sound in the first place or not and there are actually more approvals than disapprovals then what I have seen.
I am certain I use specific functions, Ni rather than Si, Fe rather than Fi, Ti rather than Te, Se rather than Si, my issue is knowing which way around. My assessments point to Ni over Fe. The fact I prefer to judge things on the inside from internal knowledge rather than consensus outside more is Ti. When making decisions I am more concerned about others' feelings rather than agreeing with some standard, which is Fe. I wrap the world to my own perspective (Ni) and use myself to manifest an idea while testing said idea from various angles (Ni) and reflecting on substantial data towards an idea (Se); rather than wrap the world to my own wisdom and use myself and use myself to reflect on what is a good experience (Si) while such recalled experiences to create new various possibilities in the world around me (Ne).
Try to see what functions you use more of, Ti and Fe vs Fi and Te, Si and Se vs Ni and Ne if you wish.
To figure if you use T over F you should try to see whether it is your T or F function that you are more consciously aware of and may even take pride in using, I think for me that is Fe. To figure out if you use N over S you should try to see whether it is your N or S
By the way, if you are curious and it helps you understand, the little i next to a function means introverted, that means when you wrap worldly context to yourself, when it is e that means when you wrap yourself to worldlyy context. T stands for Thinking and represents the abstract logic behind how things work it experiences good emotion when right and negative when wrong. F stands for Feeling and represents our relationship with others and actually preserving the good of our own or others' emotions. N stands for iNtuition and takes/perceives data values, synthesising them into a mental framework in terms of how things relate to each others, identifying the context of data so to speak and seeing the general idea and how to employ that and why, when, etc. S stands for Sensory and refers to the perception of actual sensory information in the past and present as it is rawest form of cognition it has to work with the Judging functions (F/T) in a thought process otherwise it purely becomes sensation seeking and Si remembers and prefers familiar and safe (thus wise) experiences where as Se merely engages things for the thrill (sports, listening to heavy/detailed/unusual music, photographing everything that looks sensationally awesome (one of my biggest obsessions) and if you have a lot of it perhaps more hard sports and jumping out of an aeroplane).
In reality we use all of the functions but certain ones significantly more which is why the MBTI uses 4 dimensions. The MBTI questionnaire was merely designed as a quick assessment of this, the four letter Type Indicator has a special coding method when done by correct, certified tests, I have already mentioned this in a previous post ^^
-
Well, I got ISTP 52% introverted 12% observant 5% thinking 35% prospecting 10% assertive. Anyone else get similar results?
-
What makes something truly believable is not just the theory, but the data as well. Did you know that around half the papers ever published about the Type Indicator was published by Center of Application of Psychological Type and the Journal of Psychological Type, which are organizations that teach, advocate and have a stake in promoting Myer-Briggs Type Indicators as a legitimate method support their industries. Many studies have shown that the distribution of people getting one result on a test creates a normal distribution of statistics, however if people had types you'd expect a more even distribution. The other problem, which is what I've mentioned before, is that the "success" of the test is entirely based on whether or not the subject claims it was successful or not, the fact that there are numerous positive qualities and few negative qualities in the descriptions of each of the types opens the doors up to self-serving bias, which is an extremely well documented, studied and experimented phenomena which basically states "people will be more prone to agree with something if that thing says they have positive qualities". The Forer effect is also a widely experimented on effect that has probably more data in terms of it's analysis than Myer Briggs.
You don't need to completely understand the theory in order to make a claim to disprove it. A theory that doesn't make accurate predictions, for example, is probably wrong without even knowing what that theory is. As well, in this case, a theory that contradicts other well studied and well documented theories, is also probably wrong, unless there is substantial evidence to suggest that the previous theory is correct, in the Myers Briggs case though, there isn't. My problem is based on self-assessment, I don't believe people can accurately self-assess themselves and their behavior, there's just too many known biases that can warp your sense of reality. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases)
@anoni:
Everything is subject to being rendered believable from a subjective angle, from scientific doctrine to scientific doctrine, from theory to theory, from religion to religion. I haven't seen a psychologist or scientist in their life who hasn't changed their doctrine. You either believe it or you don't. Hence, the world of knowledge is full of challengers, philosophers, they forget the original idea and unfortunately this sometimes even creates conflict or dispute.
However, there is actually an in depth, advanced theory behind MBTI, so you can't really judge it false without an in depth understanding. MBTI is about cognition not behaviour which is merely an influence on personality in terms of how they prefer to think, the issue is whether it is sound in the first place or not and there are actually more approvals than disapprovals then what I have seen.
I am certain I use specific functions, Ni rather than Si, Fe rather than Fi, Ti rather than Te, Se rather than Si, my issue is knowing which way around. My assessments point to Ni over Fe. The fact I prefer to judge things on the inside from internal knowledge rather than consensus outside more is Ti. When making decisions I am more concerned about others' feelings rather than agreeing with some standard, which is Fe. I wrap the world to my own perspective (Ni) and use myself to manifest an idea while testing said idea from various angles (Ni) and reflecting on substantial data towards an idea (Se); rather than wrap the world to my own wisdom and use myself and use myself to reflect on what is a good experience (Si) while such recalled experiences to create new various possibilities in the world around me (Ne).
Try to see what functions you use more of, Ti and Fe vs Fi and Te, Si and Se vs Ni and Ne if you wish.
To figure if you use T over F you should try to see whether it is your T or F function that you are more consciously aware of and may even take pride in using, I think for me that is Fe. To figure out if you use N over S you should try to see whether it is your N or S
By the way, if you are curious and it helps you understand, the little i next to a function means introverted, that means when you wrap worldly context to yourself, when it is e that means when you wrap yourself to worldlyy context. T stands for Thinking and represents the abstract logic behind how things work it experiences good emotion when right and negative when wrong. F stands for Feeling and represents our relationship with others and actually preserving the good of our own or others' emotions. N stands for iNtuition and takes/perceives data values, synthesising them into a mental framework in terms of how things relate to each others, identifying the context of data so to speak and seeing the general idea and how to employ that and why, when, etc. S stands for Sensory and refers to the perception of actual sensory information in the past and present as it is rawest form of cognition it has to work with the Judging functions (F/T) in a thought process otherwise it purely becomes sensation seeking and Si remembers and prefers familiar and safe (thus wise) experiences where as Se merely engages things for the thrill (sports, listening to heavy/detailed/unusual music, photographing everything that looks sensationally awesome (one of my biggest obsessions) and if you have a lot of it perhaps more hard sports and jumping out of an aeroplane).
In reality we use all of the functions but certain ones significantly more which is why the MBTI uses 4 dimensions. The MBTI questionnaire was merely designed as a quick assessment of this, the four letter Type Indicator has a special coding method when done by correct, certified tests, I have already mentioned this in a previous post ^^
-
@anoni
Jung typology isn't about MBTI, MBTI is a resellable remake of it, like Socionics. I am referencing classic Jung typing, which is nonetheless classed as MBTI now.
Just because something is sold doesn't make it wrong, most science papers are expensive to get a hold of and what is noteworthy legally is registered under a paid government-licensed roll. Statistics are a result of people, many answer tests as the ideal self which I agree is inconsistent and mood dependent. But I know my functions have never changed, they simply can't. Order is my issue. How worthwhile MBTI is is indeed a concern but for the New Age and as a community thing there is nothing wrong with it, it's become to be about self improvement.
If you answer the questions wrong each time, that is your inconsistency, tests are about preference - how you've always been. Forer effect is affected by the dynamics of changing action, yet it is extremely rare for people to change their cognitive style considerably, even through trauma. Minds don't change, philosophy and wants can. I don't know what convinces people that the psychology that has survived the test of time is more defining to psychological reality than the words of a few recent people, even neurology shows we have cognitive bias which in fact demonstrates what Jung expressed.
If anything, typology is more subject to the Galatea effect, for example those who get typed as thinkers and see themselves as thinkers started to express more of this expectation and excel better at it when working, feelers started to believe they were more people persons. However, T and F is not actually to do with what kind of people you are, everyone thinks and everyone feels. MBTI isn't about self-efficacy, it's about finding what you will enjoy better, career-wise, etc.
No theory is 100% verified, that said, most modern particle and cosmological theories are constantly debunked then reaffirmed. When done right, MBTI is actually very accurate. I'm not say it is right 100% but it is substantial.
Contrast it with Model A Socionics, based on a reinvention of Sigmund Freud's egos, both theories are compatible but states mode of thought in quadra. If you check out some official archives and communities around the theories, you'll understand that MBTI is so dependable in most cases, that it is ever increasingly mainstream. You can't disprove MBTI on people's misuse anymore than you can disprove mathematics by those who all keep getting their paper wrong.
For the most part I'm not overly bothered by the legitimacy of the MBTI so much as that is an interesting thing, to see what adds up from the inside out, I've always enjoyed people and how they relate to each than rather than math, people are far more complex.
Certainly, I do agree, however, a test simply isn't reliable due to not so much cognitive bias or idealism as philosophical, post-test belief and situational ones.
-
http://www.16personalities.com/intj-personality
I've taken this before and I always get INTJ. I'm happy with it as the description is flattering.
-
I was thinking about how the distribution of MBTI results in the MLP fandom are significantly different than in the general population. So even though there are criticisms of the value of this personality test, I thought it would be interesting to see if TFF was also atypical also.
Though this test has become popular with recruiting agencies it should be treated as a rough estimate and a bit of fun.
So have fun! :D
I hope we're having fun?
*secret INTP gangsign*
-
Trixsie you kind of seem INFJish to me. You're very verbose for an ENFP, anyway, I'd say Fe-INFJ (more bouncy) as opposed to me who's a Ni-INFJ (more aloof). ENFP is kind of like Simba from the lion king or something, kind of in a world of their own and throwing ideas around. Ask an ENFP what an ocean is and they're like "deeep" it's like they project their feelings about oceans then probably invent new ones mentally and an INFJ would be like "well, they're blue usually, *imagines pacific and Atlantic Ocean* why you ask?". xNFP use metaphors to express depth because of their Fi and Si, xNFJ use verbosity. I think aperson1 is INTP, as is anoni which is an awesome type by the way to the eyes of an xNFx, and tend to win over INFJs at arguing by arguing at us death if they really want to no matter who's right if anyone at a x3
-
I completely forgot what I was ):
-
INTJ
I will RULE THE WORLD
-
ooh! the Myers-Briggs did this one im an ESFP XD
(http://i.imgur.com/mMmROGU.jpg)
-
Haha, this one made me laugh, it's so true! (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_OLuKIEzyu4U/S6QPAl3eBHI/AAAAAAAAAbQ/klpiubzIdD0/s320/INFJ+Simon.JPG)
-
It's not a horoscope you know, look deeper into the psychological functions and join a forum like Personality Cafe and do several go to professionally tested assessments over time. Don't adopt it like a persona, also, that can be overly self expecting and push you past your capabilities in a subconscious attempt to embrace your ideal self.
-
Haha, this one made me laugh, it's so true! (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_OLuKIEzyu4U/S6QPAl3eBHI/AAAAAAAAAbQ/klpiubzIdD0/s320/INFJ+Simon.JPG)
LMFAO i thought all E'S sweard lots
-
I got INTP. This is the best thing that I found regarding INTP. Pretty good summary
(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6493295104/h42D9F69E/)
-
This is why I love INTP!
-
INFP :3
-
Ooooh! The first INFP!
Totes unique Kuro!
-
Hooray! I pride myself on that, actually ;)
-
I ended up getting ISTP, and the little picture is a guy looking like an engineer saying "hey I can fix this"
I find that this is pretty fitting, though I don't know how much merit these things have. Cant say they were ever discussed in any of my psyche or abnormal psyche courses. I have a very factual mindset on how to look at the world, evaluate it, and tackle it bit by bit. I am emotional though, so its in direct conflict with my love of Order and Logic.
*shrugs* I don't know if this is good or bad. I am a vulpine Vulcan I guess. "Live long, and Prosper" ,\\//
-
Hooray! I pride myself on that, actually ;)
we need some more of them infp :D lol fun fact Virgin mary was a infp :3
-
I ended up getting ISTP, and the little picture is a guy looking like an engineer saying "hey I can fix this"
I find that this is pretty fitting, though I don't know how much merit these things have. Cant say they were ever discussed in any of my psyche or abnormal psyche courses. I have a very factual mindset on how to look at the world, evaluate it, and tackle it bit by bit. I am emotional though, so its in direct conflict with my love of Order and Logic.
*shrugs* I don't know if this is good or bad. I am a vulpine Vulcan I guess. "Live long, and Prosper" ,\\//
You're half human, half vulcan (just like Spock), all vixen!
Fox maths ftw!
-
AHAH I SAW THT TOO! and *Vulcan salute* :D
(http://i.imgur.com/Hpfp9oO.gif)
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcsv4dv5wX1rq0hnm.gif)
-
I generally get INTP, occasionally INTJ. Took it again as it's been a while and not surprisingly got INTP (http://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality) once more. Reading it over, it's very fitting.
-
Personally I believe referring to yourself as one of them can be misleading. As was mentioned, personality fluctuates a bit, so I like to tell people to do it three or four times, switching answers that give you pause.
I'm an INFP at my core, but INFJ also matches me very well, as well as INTP and INTJ at different times. If you're less than 30% thinking over perceiving, for example, and you got ENTP, check out ENFP too. It's best to use two for most people, IMO.
-
Took the test again (for science) except this time I went neutral each time I thought I was given a pairing which I did not see as being in conflict for me. I got ENFP again.
Yay! I guess... :?
-
The best fit I've found, if I avoid the really nasty descriptions that paint types as either brilliant humanitarians or corporate drones, is ISTJ.
-
^Corporate drones! XD
I really must read all the descriptions again and see which one I think fits me best.
They tend to overlook fluffiness as a character trait unfortunately >.>
-
I personally am an ESTJ while one of my best friends is Apparently opposites really do attracts lol.
-
INTP.
Of course I've known this for a while now. :)
-
Yay! INTP ftw!
-
I made this myself from the voting results.
1 quadrillion, 521 trillion, 686 billion, 430 million, 21 thousand, 2 hundred.
Yeah, I got bored. Lol, made numbers.
1,521,686,430,212,00
something isn't right....
152,168, 643, 021, 200
Ohp! It's 152 Trillion, 168 Billion, 643 Million, 21 Thousand, 2 Hundred.
I had it right at first, my tenths placing was off.
-
1 + 5 - 2 - 1 + 6 - 8 + 6 - 4 - 3 - 0 +2*1 - 2 + 0 = 0
INTJ/P thing?
-
I don't even know
-
I am an INTP aka the Architect.
(http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130918024930/dragonage/images/c/cd/The_Architect's_Profile.jpg)
NOT THAT KIND OF ARCHITECT!
-
ESTJ, that's me
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/originals/61/7b/60/617b60ed7434f764d89205498439ce36.jpg)
lmfao im Iceman YASS :P
WHICH ONE R U GUYS? :D Spiderman tho lmfao thought he was isfp
-
This is awesome!
Sue Storm (meh) and Xavier Cross (yes)
-
i took the test ISTP
-
I am also ISTP, though STP were all real close to the middle, but it's very similar to a test that had more questions that I was given, so yeah.
-
Oh noes, I just finished a course which was about Personalities and the tests you could use to determine personality, but gjeez.... the amount of theories on personalities and the amount of well worked-out critique is... astounding ^^
Maybe it might be interesting and perhaps even helpful if not only is discussed who has which personality and why, but also why the test and results might not be good to use as an indicator to check one's personality.
I dunno, just a thought x3
-
Yeah, personality theories and tests are pretty interesting stuff. I've tended to avoid the technical in this thread coz it's more for fun. But the MBTI suffers on a few levels for me.
Construct validity: the theoretical underpinnings of this test are pretty arbitrary IMHO and I don't think the test actually even measures those theoretical constructs very accurately.
Content validity: the facets it DOES measure it only measures a very narrow aspect of them and so would do better to make more modest claims about what it IS measuring. I find I get measured as an extrovert because I have performance confidence. Doing things in front of an audience/public speaking without preparation all that sort of thing. But those are skills I have learned more than personality aspects and many introverted people "come out of themselves" with the confidence that wearing a costume or mask can give. However I think of myself as an introvert because I need solitary time especially after a social interaction. So it is trying to measure my cognitions and emotions based on behaviour which is not representative (at least in my case).
If you just look at measuring concrete behaviours to predict future behaviours (Criterion validity) it could be much better if it just focussed on that.
Also, the methodology is all subjective and so if people put in what they believe about themselves they will typically generate a summary which is what they believe about themselves. If this is all you want then it's actually rather good, but if you want to measure the accuracy of those personal beliefs it doesn't really help and so how well it compares to similar measures (concurrant validity) is limited to other subjective measures.
Now... if you read this and think I'm not a big fan of the test I couldn't blame you. And basically I do think it's a pretty crap measure of personality. But I have a few caveats:
I don't believe there is a current personality theory which actually does the job that professionals or laypeople want from them, so I'm gonna be critical of all of them. Not that this is the best of a bad bunch per se, but it could be worse XD
Also, it is SO widely used by people that there is an enormous amount of data which can in turn serve to measure the construct and concurrent validity of other tests by having them account for the findings of the MBTI.
Mostly though, something that interests me is comparing distribution of results in a sample against a population. So in a broad sample which represents the wider population the distribution of types is pretty well documented because there is so many data. So when (I forget the name of the researcher) measured Bronies and found their distribution was different than the populations they were sampled from it might not be able to accurately define what makes Bronies different but I can say with authority that Bronies' distribution of types IS atypical.
That is in fact why I started this. Even though it's not a rigorous experiment design, I was curious if the distribution of scores varied from the general population and in what way and if so was it in the same was as Bronies (since our fandoms are quite similar). Then if that is established (and you would want to replicate it on a bugger scale of course) is there a correlation between types and some other feature peculiar to Furries. Here I'm thinking of how atypical the sexual orientation distribution is. IF that was the case then without having a good test of personality you could have, in effect, a predictive test for sexual orientation which doesn't ask about sexual orientation.
Then as better understanding of biological causes of orientation are known they can be measured against personality theories and actually lead to better theory and measures.
TL;DR I'm Xavier Cross!! Yay *cartwheels* ^_^
-
Im DareDevil *inhale* WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
-
This is awesome!
Sue Storm (meh) and Xavier Cross (yes)
yasss omg i love them :D
Post Merge: November 14, 2014, 11:15:48 AM
Im DareDevil *inhale* WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
WHICH mbti ? :D
-
DareDevil is INTJ.
-
I got ESFP
-
I'm a big fat INTJ! Muauahhahahahahahahahhaha!!! >:3
-
I love seeing the huge differences in personalities
-
I don't really believe the stat about "3%" of the population. Anyways:
INTP
-
3% for what one?
-
INTP = 3% of the supposed population of poll takers.
-
Oh haha yeah that's a bunch of crap
-
Yeah 3%! *pokes data* Names your sources jerk! What sample are you generalising from huh?
Does it really represent the population? And what population is it meant to represent, all westerners?
Hmm? *pokes again for good measure*
Anyway, INTP is the best so it's probably only like 0.0006% anyway ;)
-
Haha you guys got at least two of us intps to deal with suckas
*puts up paw for trixie*
-
*high fives*
Never leave a fur hangin' XD
I still believe I'm an INTP at heart, I've just learned how to externalise my internal world. Maybe I'm just bigoted by preconceived notions of extroverts having less complex internal lives based on some crap I heard in high school.
It does raise the question of development of personality. People change across their lives and personalities develop but it seems that the thing which makes a person the same person as a child and a geriatric is a a stability of personality. So if the MBTI doesn't track those core personality traits perhaps it isn't actually a measure OF personality?
Also, I was thinking of starting a thread involving a psych test of romantic style. It measures what your romantic style is among several possibilities and offers compatibility details also.
Just like this it's more for fun than anything. Sound interesting?
-
Hmm that does sound quite interesting trix. I am an introvert at heart, but if I'm surrounded with only introverts that are even more of an introvert than I am, I tend to turn into more of an extrovert type of personality. On that notion, I have also been less of an introvert that in years past, quite the change I must add XD
-
There is a thing called the STAI (State-trait anxiety inventory) it measure your levels of anxiety, but it differentiates between anxiety as a state (how you are feeling atm) and a trait (what is usual for your personality). It's one of the better measures in that area IMHO. I wonder if there is something like that for introversion?
I should look into that and if there isn't how would you differentiate?
Hmmm... *strokes chin*
-
Well, i got ISFJ :P
-
I do generally believe that any personality test measure will change during dramatic changes in life or even mood swings. Whatever is necessary to handle daily life, more or less.
-
I did this the other day I think I got INTJ now I got ENFJ what does that mean?
-
It means the same thing placebo medications say "Results may vary"
-
Oh ok. I think I just answered the questions differently ^^
-
I would guess Kaiyo that your I/E and T/F scores were close to the middle point in each case, whereas the N and J stayed the same. How high were those scores I wonder?
-
How high were those scores I wonder?
About balanced in I/E and T/F, really if I remember.
-
i got da INFP - appearently no one can stop me from dreaming X3
-
i got da INFP - appearently no one can stop me from dreaming X3
Do you think this is a FiNe SiTe then?
-
Boom! Personality inventory humour is the best ^_^
-
Indeed.
Also I really am curious as to what I am.
I feel like everything at once but clearly I act as only certain things.
-
So based on this rendition and run through the test, I got the ESFP. I do believe I got INFJ before, but I definitely feel this one suits me a bit better. I know that I have changed a lot from the last time I took the test, and apparently it shows. Pretty sure I'm felf-actualized by this point, according to Maslow's Hierarchy, so the change kinda feels like a proper turnaround.
-
*self-actualized five*
Nice one. I'm definitely still struggling there :/
-
So based on this rendition and run through the test, I got the ESFP. I do believe I got INFJ before, but I definitely feel this one suits me a bit better. I know that I have changed a lot from the last time I took the test, and apparently it shows. Pretty sure I'm felf-actualized by this point, according to Maslow's Hierarchy, so the change kinda feels like a proper turnaround.
lol u an esfp HAH! IN UR WILDES DREAMS! jk :D Awzomess welcome to deh party -opens gates of extravertion and wild suprises- XD XD XD XD
-
Am ENFP today? Cool.
-
I guess you have multiple personalities X3
-
I guess may be lol.
-
Consistently a cynical, stoic INTJ
-
I do generally believe that any personality test measure will change during dramatic changes in life or even mood swings. Whatever is necessary to handle daily life, more or less.
*Adjusting shades intensifies*
-
So based on this rendition and run through the test, I got the ESFP. I do believe I got INFJ before, but I definitely feel this one suits me a bit better. I know that I have changed a lot from the last time I took the test, and apparently it shows. Pretty sure I'm felf-actualized by this point, according to Maslow's Hierarchy, so the change kinda feels like a proper turnaround.
have u done the myer briggs one?
-
That I have, Crystali. Twice in about four years. Pretty interesting turnaround, really.