Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks RobOMonk
Perl: the Markov chain saw

My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...

by hok_si_la (Curate)
on Apr 01, 2010 at 09:26 UTC ( #832260=poll: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

vote on My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...

ESTJ (Extraverted-Sensing-Thinking-Judging)
[bar] 20/2%
ESTP (Extraverted-Sensing-Thinking-Perceiving)
[bar] 4/0%
ESFJ (Extraverted-Sensing-Feeling-Judging)
[bar] 1/0%
ESFP (Extraverted-Sensing-Feeling-Perceiving)
[bar] 3/0%
ENTJ (Extraverted-Intuitive-Thinking-Judging)
[bar] 36/4%
ENTP (Extraverted-Intuitive-Thinking-Perceiving)
[bar] 38/5%
ENFJ (Extraverted-Intuitive-Feeling-Judging)
[bar] 6/1%
ENFP (Introverted-Intuitive-Feeling-Perceiving)
[bar] 16/2%
ISTJ (Introverted-Sensing-Thinking-Judging)
[bar] 31/4%
ISTP (Introverted-Sensing-Thinking-Perceiving)
[bar] 29/3%
ISFJ (Introverted-Sensing-Feeling-Judging)
[bar] 4/0%
ISFP (Introverted-Sensing-Feeling-Perceiving)
[bar] 6/1%
INTJ (Introverted-Intuitive-Thinking-Judging)
[bar] 146/17%
INTP (Introverted-Intuitive-Thinking-Perceiving)
[bar] 128/15%
INFJ (Introverted-Intuitive-Feeling-Judging)
[bar] 27/3%
INFP (Introverted-Intuitive-Feeling-Perceiving)
[bar] 38/5%
IHND (I-Have-No-Idea)
[bar] 107/13%
IDFC (I-Don't-Friggin-Care)
[bar] 203/24%
843 total votes
Comment on My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Apr 01, 2010 at 09:42 UTC

    ...depends upon how much I spend. The 52.15 profile is much more palatable than 23.10 option. Wonder why?

      You've spent your hard-earned money, and want to feel positive about your purchase. Also, you equate inflated price with increased quality, which may or may not be correlated.


Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by BioLion (Curate) on Apr 01, 2010 at 10:29 UTC

    I can't remember which one it is, but i am "The Wizard"... Which was certainly more flattering than "The nerdy one"... Actually, i was a little freaked out about how well the 'profile' fit, and ( being a unique and beautiful snowflake ) got annoyed that i was apparently that easy to sum up, at which point the profile pointed out this is also typical sentiment for a "Wizard"...

    Just a something something...
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by ZlR (Chaplain) on Apr 01, 2010 at 10:31 UTC
    Your Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator indicates that your best +fitting job is PIZZA DELIVERY BOY. Please proceed to chip implant facility.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by ramrod (Hermit) on Apr 01, 2010 at 12:11 UTC

    Which is funny considereing I'm an engineer. This is the complete opposite for personalities suited for my field. I won't complain though, I knew what I was getting into even before I learned of my temperment.

    What's also funny is that I took the test with a friend of mine, and he didn't like his results. He went back and changed some of his responses until he got the personality he wanted. I wonder who he's fooling?
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by nimdokk (Vicar) on Apr 01, 2010 at 12:39 UTC
    To be honest, I don't really care. A famous philosopher once said "I am what I am and that's all that I am." I've taken these types of tests numerous times and it's quite easy to get them to give you whatever results you want. To get the truest results, I suppose you simply need to stop thinking, get your head out of the way (as an aikido sensai of mine once said) and simply answer the questions as fast as possible.
      There are too many tests falling in this category which are just plain crap. However I think the Myers-Briggs test stands out from this pile of crap (eg. the daily bullshit of "what kind of animal would I like to be") since the authors have made serious effort to really measure something.

      If you look at the referred wikipedia page, you will find this:

      ... studies have found strong support for construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability, although variation was observed.

      And of course you can test it yourself (at least to some extent): just fill in the test found somewhere by google, write down your results (and even your answers to the questions) then forget it. Pick a suitable timeframe (eg. half a year), just make sure you will forget what have you answered the first time, and fill it in a second time. Then ask yourself: Are the results differing from the first time? Which ones differ? The ones that made you hesitate to answer? And so on... (extend your scope of investigation)

      After all of this you're probably still inclined to ask: okay it seems to measure something, but what it is?

      And for that I don't have a good answer. For instance if I have to measure time (eg. while I finished some of my work) and I follow some procedure (take a stopper watch, start the counter when I started then stop it when I stopped), then do I need to answer the question "What is time?" to be able to use this measurement?

      At the end of the day what I want to say is: "psychological measurment is not possible" is not a consequence of "there are gazillions of shitty psychobabble tests". And also not a consequence of "I can cheat while filling in the test".

      And I think the Myers-Briggs test is a good candidate of being not shitty.

      p.s.: Seeing the results up to now (almost half of the voters chose "I Don't Friggin Care"), I think I will get a lot of negative votes for this node, but I Don't Friggin Care. Reject anything if you want but based on investigation and not on ignorance.

      p.p.s.: This answer is not really meant to you, but all the voters of IDFC.

        I actually agree with you. I wasn't so much thinking about the "What color am I?" or "Which Star Wars character am I?" type of personality quizes that you might find at places like "facebook". I'm thinking more of standardized "inventory" psych tests (some of which I have taken multiple times). My mom worked for a psychologist and used to score some of these tests. Every so often when I was bored, I would sit down and take one of the tests for fun in addtion to when I took them in more formal settings (such as in school). Some of them (not necessarily MBTI mind you) can be open to interpretation and may also be reflective more of a particular point in time. I admit I don't know a lot about MBTI's development but I would think the questions would be set up in such a way to take certain variables into account. I think they may be good guides, but shouldn't be hard and fast "written in stone" interpretations of the results. I'm sure results change as people change both chronologically and emotionally. Thanks for the link to the Wikipedia page. I'd write more but I've got a meeting to head off to :-)
        Funny you ask "what it is". My best effort of answering that question was, ( and of course the answer made sense for me only, not necessarily to someone else) this. It seems to me that it measures force (in physical sense) which you use for several types of activity (emotional, physical etc). People train with age and experience, and that can explain why boundaries between types are so blurred. But if, as I suspect, it all comes down to how many synaptic connections we've got to emotional core and logical core for example, then it just shows the speed at which we digest different types of information.
        There are too many tests falling in this category which are just plain crap. However I think the Myers-Briggs test stands out from this pile of crap (eg. the daily bullshit of "what kind of animal would I like to be") since the authors have made serious effort to really measure something.

        They may have made an effort, but they're not measuring what they think they're measuring.

        In the first place, too many of their questions make unwarranted assumptions, and your answer can only mean anything if the assumption happens to hold true for you. This creates a lot of statistical noise.

        Additionally, it's a self-evaluation; if you're going to do that, you might as well just ask the subject "Do you pay more attention to your thoughts or your feelings?" and have done. The answers are going to have more to do with the way people think of themselves than the way they actually are. And I can tell you for free that most people don't think of themselves the way they really are.

        But perhaps the biggest problem is that the four continua they chose are highly arbitrary and wouldn't necessarily form a meaningful description of a person's personality even if the results for each continuum were totally accurate. They don't even attempt to measure the stuff that really shapes the way a person thinks, like whether he makes his decisions based on perceived outcome (teleological) or based on some criterion independent of likely outcome (deontological or cetera), whether he believes in per se truth (as opposed to relative truth), or whether he thinks in sounds (verbal/auditory), pictures (visual), abstract concepts, or some other form.

        It is my considered opinion that Myers-Briggs is completely useless for any serious purpose.

        So yeah, put me down as IDFC.

        And yes, I've been given the test a couple of times. I don't remember what the results were, but I do remember that the whole thing was clearly very arbitrary. Am I an introvert, or an extrovert? I don't remember. I'm not really sure the question applies. I have zero anxiety about talking to strangers one-on-one or in small groups, will walk right up to anyone and say hello, have been known to ask personal questions within two minutes of meeting someone, don't at all mind speaking to a large group, even semi-formally (e.g., classroom setting), will willingly make a fool of myself onstage (e.g., clowning), HATE parties, spend almost all of my free time alone, have a small number of very close friends, have no difficulty saying long-term goodbyes even to the closest of them (including family; at age three I had no anxiety at all about spending two weeks away from my parents), live in my parents' basement (literally), and understand both dogs and computers better than I understand people. Does any of this matter, or set me apart from the rest of the population? Meh. None of that is really even an important part of who I am. Fundamentally, they're asking the wrong questions.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by tbone1 (Monsignor) on Apr 01, 2010 at 12:56 UTC
    Where's the option for PUGD (Push off-Up yours-Go away-Die psychobabble bser)?

    tbone1, YAPS (Yet Another Perl Schlub)
    And remember, if he succeeds, so what.
    - Chick McGee

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by Fletch (Chancellor) on Apr 01, 2010 at 14:40 UTC

    <ObRecoveringSysadmin>Where's the "SMTP" option?</ObRecoveringSysadmin>

    The cake is a lie.
    The cake is a lie.
    The cake is a lie.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by merlyn (Sage) on Apr 01, 2010 at 14:53 UTC

    -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.

      That's a very common result for the senior personnel at server farms in Edinburgh and Glasgow.
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by bradcathey (Prior) on Apr 01, 2010 at 17:17 UTC

    I'm definitely TGIF

    "The important work of moving the world forward does not wait to be done by perfect men." George Eliot
      I lean towards TANJ ...
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by jedikaiti (Friar) on Apr 01, 2010 at 19:05 UTC

    It's kind of funny, I took this repeatedly in high school and college. I started off solidly INFP, then gradually moved to ENFP and stayed there.

    Swiss Army Nerd
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by talexb (Canon) on Apr 01, 2010 at 20:42 UTC

    The last time I evaluated myself using this test, I was a split between INTP and INTJ. The problem is that the psyche is such a slippery thing to measure.

    Alex / talexb / Toronto

    "Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds

      I read a while back that for Introverts, the J/P axis isn't clearly differentiated, while for Extroverts, F/T is unclear. So it's common to slip between INTJ and *P.

      If the test has any merit at all, it's in trying to make sense of very complex patterns in an organized way that we can easily comprehend. The brain probably doesn't actively slot itself into one of 16 pidgin holes, but doing so is a useful tool for understanding.

      Some of the main differences between INTJs and *Ps are that P's tend to disdain social rules as artificial constructs and doesn't think there is any good reason to follow them. J's tend to go along with social rules, if they can figure out what they are. The developer who wear's his hair a pony tail and gets into heated arguments with the boss is probably a P, while the one who just doesn't know when to shutup is probably a J.

      "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 02, 2010 at 07:53 UTC
    Voluntary profiling? I-Don't-Friggin-Care
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by Xiong (Hermit) on Apr 02, 2010 at 17:31 UTC

      The aspie test is pretty interesting, actually. Thanks for sharing that!

      Your Aspie score: 127 of 200
      Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 72 of 200
      You are very likely an Aspie
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by zow (Sexton) on Apr 03, 2010 at 01:09 UTC
    A not so surprising trend in the distribution?
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by davies (Vicar) on Apr 05, 2010 at 12:32 UTC
    Hmm. INTJ is the commonest, at 40% of those who have given a recognised type (at the time of writing). But the blurb (here) reckons that INTJ is rare, at no more than 1% of the population. So, what does this imply? a) People aren't replying honestly? b) Being INTJ predisposes people to programming (it's a suggested career choice, after all)? c) Being programmers makes people become INTJ? d) The blurb is not worth the paper it isn't printed on?

    Perhaps we have another poll here.


    John Davies

      b. (Kind of, I'd rephrase it as "INTJs are attracted to programming")

      I remember an incident in a computer lab in college when someone mentioned the Myers-Briggs test. The room was full of CS majors. We thought it was quite amusing that among those who had taken the test, all but one was an INTJ.

        There absolutly NO TRUTH to the rumor that my first progran started out as: INT J%, K%, L%
      I and N are both unlikely in the general population. (1/4 for each.) Both are strongly selected for in computer programming. Programming also selects for T over F, but T is not rare in the general population. Therefore INT? is over-represented in programming.

      As an extrovert I'm painfully aware of how my personality and profession don't always get along...

        You are ENTP, I wager?

        FWIW, the statistics I saw indicated that I/E is nearly evenly split as well, and that only the S/N axis shows a significant skew (at 3:1, as you said).

        There is also an interesting nature/nurture question posed by the data in that T/F is only evenly split overall, whereas if you break it down by gender you get a 3:2 split on both sides – in favour of T for men while in favour of F for women.

        (I also have to note here that the names “Thinking” and “Feeling” are very misleading. This axis not about thoughts vs emotions, it’s about one’s rational decision-making priority – objectivity vs values. In Socionics, which is similar to MBTI but not identical, that axis is termed “Logic” vs “Ethics”.)

        Makeshifts last the longest.

      Not just programming, but most of the higher levels of Science and Math. It's almost all INTJs and INTPs (the other personality type that's overrepresented here).

      Those two types are also the ones most likely to have analyzed psychology and came to the conclusion that it's a pseudo-science. Most of the IDFC responses can be chalked up to that.

      "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by gloryhack (Deacon) on Apr 05, 2010 at 19:28 UTC
    Labels are great for products on shelves and the controls of machinery, but are bad when applied to human beings.

      That's banal. Labels are excellent when applied to human beings. It's impossible to get through life without applying labels to people, and ridiculously tedious to try.

      I've labelled everyone I've ever met or known. I have a Mother and a Father and a Brother. I've had Bosses and Coworkers, Friends and Lovers, Mentors and Mentees, Accomplices and Foils. It's a rare person who merits only one descriptor, and for that matter many occupy more than one at a time. Most, probably.

      What you mean by that hackneyed and rather unctuous statement is that labels are descriptions, not definitions. Any programmer knows you'll get yourself in deep trouble if you confuse reference and referent :)

        You've apparently overlooked the context in which my statement was made. HAND.
      I would say that labelling or categorizing things (people, places, animals, &c.) is a part of human nature. As fullermd wrote, it's the difference between "description" and "definition." At various times in our lives, we ourselves have different lables that can be applied to us some of which change over time, some stay with us for our entire lives. Some describe our relationships with others while others may describe what we do (and it could even be argued that what we do is still a relationship to other humans). For example when I was a young, I had the labels: Child/Son, Grandchild/son, Nephew, Cousin. As I grew older, I could add: "boyfriend" to the list. Now instead of "boyfriend", it's "fiance." Soon, that will again change to "husband". This doesn't even include specific descriptions like "student" "employee" "hockey player" or labels of age or appearence. I suspect that we humans have been labelling things for purposes of description since Og first picked up a bone and hit an animal over the head and called it dinner instead of animal. Just my 2 cents - interesting conversation though - definite food for thought.
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by ssandv (Hermit) on Apr 06, 2010 at 18:08 UTC
    ENTP or ESTP, depending on the day. I've taken various forms of the test over the course of several years and always come out near the center on N/S, and fairly far to the E_TP extremes. Especially the E.
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by walkingthecow (Friar) on Apr 07, 2010 at 00:50 UTC
    I am an ENFP, but you have it listed as "ENFP (Introverted-Intuitive-Feeling-Perceiving)".
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by arc_of_descent (Hermit) on Apr 20, 2010 at 11:31 UTC

    Don't really believe in all this, but it's good fun. Also I think it's a good way to find like minded people.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by papidave (Monk) on Apr 20, 2010 at 22:06 UTC
    ENFJ, mostly. Of the various tests I've taken, I find the MBTI to be most interesting. I have seen some variation in test/retest on this one, but mostly it's the J/P questions, which seem to correlate highly with left brain/right brain differences. As a left-handed (right-brained) person who does a lot of (left-brained) analytical work, this seems reasonable to me -- my test results depend heavily on whether or not I have my "work hat" on at the time.
Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Apr 24, 2010 at 20:06 UTC

    Larry, btw, is INFP.

    Makeshifts last the longest.

Re: My Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is ...
by chacham (Deacon) on Aug 26, 2012 at 06:34 UTC

    A nitpick. There is no such thing as "Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator". MBTI stands for "Myers Briggs Type Inventory". Also, the MBTI deals with "Function Type" not "Personality Type".

      So now we all know what your MBTI is. :)

        Heh. Do you really now? :)

View List Of Past Polls

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others musing on the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-04-16 05:54 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    April first is:

    Results (414 votes), past polls