[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 154 KB, 1090x743, 1279604547871.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4898812 No.4898812 [Reply] [Original]

Alright i have been going on /soc/ lately and the Myers-Briggs Personality research has really got my eye. INTJ here anyone cares.

But I i wanted to ask /Sci/ if there is any readly avalible notes/books/reports on Myers-Briggs. Or more so is it accepted in the science community? Or is it more like a more science Facebook personality test? Any other leads on this topic of personality would be fantastic

>> No.4898817

>Or more so is it accepted in the science community?
no

>Or is it more like a more science Facebook personality test?
yes

It's really useless. The only people who find those things interesting are directionless fools.

>> No.4898821

It is (at least it's principles, not sure how much it's been advanced/amended) fairly well established in psychology I think.

Whether psychology is /sci/ence is a different question.

>> No.4898841

Fuck, where is the correction that accounts for relativistic effects where I need it.

>> No.4898855

You're probably going to find lots of credible scientific literature for a personality test that is largely based on the work of a psycho-analyst that worshipped a sun god and based his scientific theories on explorations of the same. gtfo soft sci

>> No.4898863

The portion of it that measures each trait on an individual scale is incorrect (such as 46% extrovert, 64% intuitive, etc.)

As far as cognitive function theory goes, in terms of what your type tells you about the way you think (such as the dynamics of a Ti-Ne axis in an INTP or something to that nature), it is relatively credible as far as personality tests go.

>> No.4898882

>>4898817
Hmm sad to hear.

>>4898821
True, Im sorry if it isnt /sci/ or soft /sci/ as someone else called it. Better info then /b/ honestly

>>4898863
Interesting. I honestly wanted to look into this more only because it is kinda fascinating that something out there exist on depicting a persons personality that is even slightly creditable. People as individuality are just too damn interesting.

>> No.4898892

I think it's relatively accurate, there are a lot of well-known psychology minds behind it. That said, the archetypes read like horoscopes.

>> No.4898918

It's a watered down version to allow for quick assessment, basically.

Not that Personalty psychology isn't entirely baseless speculation at this point.

>> No.4898920

MBTI is a failed psychometric and is not taken seriously in academia. Test-retest is low, standard error is not distinct for a test that should have binary outcomes for the letters (the reality is most people are not one letter or another in a significant way, they fall right between, which makes total sense), it fails factor analysis, some letters correlate with each other despite supposedly being independent, and it fails to actually predict anything (e.g., success in a career), and of course the biggest elephant in the room is that it's self reported - it doesn't measure your personality, it measures the personality you give it. It's actually a good text-book example of how to poorly make a psychometric.

Most people do not realize the MBTI is not used as an internet test for shits and giggles, even though that's how a lot of people use it. It's big money and psychology companies sell it to big businesses by convincing them it has some sort of power to assess employees quickly. That's why it still exists and remains popular in the culture.

Of course, there's no reason to be a dick about it. Most people just take it for good fun. The creepy people who make clubhouses for their elite 4-letter tribes are fortunately a minority.

>> No.4899133

At least it's not socionics, right?

>> No.4899212

>>4898812
>The creepy people who make clubhouses for their elite 4-letter tribes are fortunately a minority.

but on 4chan however... they're everywhere. Why the fuck is this?

>> No.4899227

> i have been going on /soc/ (stopped reading)
You are an attentionwhore obsessed with you own looks and looks in general.
That's all you need to know.

>> No.4899269

>>4898841
brb making it

>> No.4899281

>>4898920

Good post anon

>> No.4899323
File: 317 KB, 1090x743, cumwiththeforceof1000suns_v2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4899323

And there you have it

>> No.4899403

Myers Briggs is pseudoscience. Try modern tests. Read the relevant Wikipedia articles. Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_psychology

FFM is awesome. There is an online test here: http://www.personal.psu.edu/j5j/IPIP/ipipneo300.htm

You can find the various correlations between FFM traits and outcomes of life. For instance, earnings:

http://infoproc.blogspot.dk/2011/04/earnings-effects-of-personality.html