How Reliable Are MBTI Personality Types in Real Life?

  • Context: Medical 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Monsterboy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reliability of MBTI personality types in real-life applications, exploring the consistency of results from various tests, and comparing MBTI with other personality assessments. Participants share personal experiences and opinions regarding the accuracy and scientific validity of the MBTI framework.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether individuals of the same MBTI personality type would agree on their traits or behaviors, suggesting that they would not.
  • There are inquiries about the consistency of MBTI results when taking the test multiple times, with some participants reporting varied results while others claim consistency.
  • One participant notes that their experience with the official MBTI test yielded accurate results, but emphasizes that mood can influence outcomes.
  • Another participant points out limitations of the MBTI, arguing that it oversimplifies personality traits into binary categories without accounting for degrees of introversion or extroversion.
  • Concerns are raised about the scientific validity of the MBTI, with one participant stating it is highly unscientific and suggesting that the Big Five personality test is a more reliable alternative.
  • Participants express interest in the personality types of others in the forum, indicating a curiosity about potential patterns among members.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express differing views on the reliability and scientific backing of the MBTI, with some defending its usefulness while others criticize its validity. No consensus is reached regarding its accuracy or the implications of personality typing.

Contextual Notes

Limitations mentioned include the potential influence of mood on test results, the binary nature of personality classifications, and the lack of scientific support for the MBTI framework.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in personality psychology, those considering taking personality tests, and members of the Physics Forums community exploring the intersection of personality types and academic discussions.

Monsterboy
Messages
305
Reaction score
96
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/understanding-mbti-type-dynamics/

I recently came across this personality type thing, i am interested to know how reliable this is, are there any psychologists here ? I did not take the official MBTI test, i took the test in some other websites. If i put 50 people of the same personality type in a room will they all agree ?
 
Last edited:
Biology news on Phys.org
Monsterboy said:
If i put 50 people of the same personality type in a room will they all agree ?
No.
 
If you took the test 50 times,
would it always say you have the same personality type?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Monsterboy and Bystander
BillTre said:
If you took the test 50 times,
would it always say you have the same personality type?

I did that several times( less the 50 times) in several websites , I got the same type but that didn't work for my brother he got 3 different results in the first 3 attempts. Maybe the official MBTI test is more consistent but we need to pay for that !
 
I've taken the actual Meyers-Briggs test twice, given at my place of work by the actual test company. I also took DISC, my results were different, though very similar each time based on my mood that day.

I'd say if you answer honestly with your first real thought, they are pretty accurate. Of course if you answer the way you wish to be perceived, they will be false.

I wouldn't worry about a result you disagreed with or get too self absorbed if it said you were awesome. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Monsterboy
I took this many years ago. I think it was pretty accurate, but with a couple of limitations.

One limitation is that it condenses what is really a continuum, into digital designations. For example, the first letter is either an I for introverted or an E for extroverted, but there are no degrees. I would expect someone who is 99% introverted to be somewhat different than someone who is 51% introverted. The 51% person may test as an I or an E depending on their mood.

Also, even if this sort of personality typing is accurate in describing how someone perceives, processes, and interacts with the world, everything is going to be colored by each individuals history. You and I may have the same personality types, but we've had different experiences that have taught us different things so we won't always agree on things or do things the same way, even though we may be the same type.

I'm INTP.
I'd be interested to know what everyone else is. There may be an interesting pattern to the types of personalities that show up on a physics forum.
 
Im always an INTJ on these things by my I is not far from being an E.
 
The Myers-Briggs test is highly unscientific. There are severe criticisms on it which you should look up and be aware of. It's a very popular test though, but science just doesn't back it up.
 
A good test that is more scientifically backed is the big five. So you could try that.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
10K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
16K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K