Is the Myer-Briggs personality test psuedoscience?
ENTP here, more like JUST
I always get INTP in these tests and I'm very fond of Stirner.
I don't think that MB test is necessarily bullshit, but if it weren't, self-analysis on online tests are not worth anything on that account. A person can hardly see its own being objectively.
>I feel analytical
but you may not be
>I'd rather read a book than go to a party
maybe that's how you'd like to be, not who you are
OP here. That's the thing.
For the longest while I assumed I was INTP (not only an assumption; I actually took the test and scored it). Then I realized that some of the answers I gave, I either twisted or exaggerated, and some of the answers weren't representative of my "true" self (e.g. I tend to avoid social situations, but only because I have anxiety, not because I'm naturally asocial).
One day I kind of realized I'm more extroverted than introverted despite the fact I spend 99% of my time by myself, and I eventually realized I'm ENTP. And it honestly makes more sense than INTP, because I'm an attention whore at times and I like big ideas, but never follow through with my plans.
look up the big five,
factor analysis gives 5 stable personality dimensions, except openess to experience correlates with IQ, so that depends onwhat you like to define as personality,
if you set your factor analysis to find more factors you can get 16 or so which are more stable, but less useful,
Big five is the best model for predicting most behaviour.
Myers briggs is elegant, and appeals to people who like patterns, but really it doesn't tell you much more than you tell it.
I've never seen it used in psychologica research because it relies on too many assumptions, and predicts too little.
most personality traits are normally distributed, very few things are binary,
interactions between different personality variables are complex, and do not give a neat 4X4 grid of combinations
Don't feel bad, I bought into this nonsense myself
look into peer review research on personality, and look for things you are interested in predicting eg. career choices, then take the personality tests listed and you can make some predictions/generaliztions
>but really it doesn't tell you much more than you tell it
>most personality traits re normally distributed, very few things are binary
These. It's really just a shorthand way of describing a person. It's certainly not "astrology," but there's also not much to it.
I get different results each time I take the test. And I'm answering as honest a I can.
Seems it is more dependent on momentary feelings and the situations you are in then actual characteristics of you.
Two possible answers to that:
>Your character and personality change very often, sometimes within days
>The test is wrong (pseudoscience as you call it)
I think these kinds of tests are more like the circlejerk teen magazine love horoscope things. You will find what you want to find in them so they are pointless for discovering deeper personality problems.
The entire graph is /pol/ tier bullshit.
Hitler was an INFJ, but that personality type was put under anarchism and cosmopolitanism. That's completely retarded.
And then nationalists are given the best types like ENTJ or ENTP to seem like a superior bunch, lol.
I would always get INTJ 100% of the time when I was a dumb child. Now that I am older and much more intelligent I get ISTJ 100% of the time. The test isn't wrong, basically you're just fucking shit at answering simple questions.
the MBTI is too inaccurate.
it has nothing in place to see if the individual is lying, or if they provide congruent answers.
there are other more accurate personality tests out there.
like the MMPI. its got the most literature backing.
only issue is its difficult to find a free one.
also protip: if you work in a field that involves handling people who are in delicate situations (healthcare, law, etc.) id recommend against getting professionally assessed.
if they find you have a mental condition that is liable to put others at risk of harm from you, they have a right to inform the authorities. (i.e. you'll lose your job)
>mfw this is why mental illness rates are so high among healthcare profession
>Is the Myer-Briggs personality test psuedoscience?
Go to scholar.google.com and see for yourself.
>I've never seen it used in psychologica research because it relies on too many assumptions, and predicts too little.
pretty much why i consider it a pseudo science
the methodology, the reasoning is all just mumbo jumbo with too many assumptions
Every time something like this comes up with my girlfriend she plays agnostic.
Healing crystals, "You never know"
God, "Im not denying it"
Astrology, "How are you so sure?"
Toothfairy, "wtf of course not"
How come things like the tooth fairy can be dismissed but something as irrational like star signs cannot?
Because comparing self-assessed personality isn't the same as arbitrary traits ascribed to your birth month. People that compare MBTI to astrology are idiots, to be honest.
The problem with Myers-Briggs isn't that it's completely made-up pseudo-science woo -- it's that it suffers from repeatability issues and aspirational bias. desu,
if there was a methodology for other people to describe your traits semi-objectively and normalize that over enough people, MBTI would be a lot more useful.
>I tend to avoid social situations, but only because I have anxiety, not because I'm naturally asocial
>i-im not asocial, p-promise
if there's *one* board it's okay to admit you're socially insecure, this must be the place. it's okay anon
>I think these kinds of tests are more like the circlejerk teen magazine love horoscope things
Are you mad because the test tells you that you are an insecure introvert with no clue about leadership whatsoever?
What do you mean is it pseudoscience? The personality categories are obviously arbitrary and the distinctions between them can't be clearly drawn. The division of personalities into 16 types isn't based on a particular phenomenon that can be observed.
However, the system does provide a useful and interesting means of classifying people and drawing connections between them, in other words it constitutes what we might call an (accurate) systematic analogy. Moreover the distinctions are fairly empirical in the sense that the characteristics associated with particular personalty types can indeed be evaluated to a large extent by empirical investigation (namely observation of human behavior).
What we can't do in terms of empirically investigating the theory, however, is falsify whether or not someone belongs to a particular personality type.
So in short, its scientific in the sense that its claims are plausibly based on observable human behavior, and it provide a nice means of classifying people. However, its unscientific in the sense that the distinctions themselves are arbitrary and can't be derived from observable phenomenon, and in the sense that assignment of a personality predicate to a particular individual can't be conclusively falsified.
No anon you are the /pol/. Do you think the adoring fascist masses were INFJ?
I wish there were more,
then I might have irl friends.
soooooooo you wanna post a pic of yourself and we can work from there?
I mean it's a little easier to keep your concentration when you can rest your eyes on something ;^]
Introversion has nothing to do with being asocial, it has to do with whether ones conflicts are internal vs. external. Being an introvert just means one has the intellectual and/or emotional capacity to hold a mirror up to oneself for a good healthy reflection. Sheep tend to be extroverts, because they do things to become accepted rather than to achieve internal peace.
Hello fellow AnCap how do you feel about Molyneux going full racist?
I wonder if he's trying to pander to /pol/fags for views/donations? It's ridiculous, he's only a few steps away from being a white supremacist.
Every fucking MBTI thread. You guys are killing me.
How can one be wrong in a test like this? The test is designed to gather data and translate it to a matching personality. Manipulating your answers different will give you a different trait every time. example if you chose to answer more on the introvert side do you expect the analysis would show that your an extrovert?
It's not manipulation if you answer truthfully each time. The reality is that there are multiple fitting answers for each question depending on cirumstances. Meaning, these tests are unreliable and overgeneral.