In-depth discussion: Does the MBTI actually work?
You must have seen many self-representations labeled "INTP" and "ESFJ" on the Internet, and you must have seen self-identifications such as "Person I" and "Person E". So, is MBTI reliable? How should we look at it?
Through this article, I would like to clarify this issue for you in a comprehensive and in-depth manner.
Whether you are for or against MBTI, I hope to clear your doubts.
First of all, I would like to say a few words of justice for MBTI.
You've probably read a lot of criticism of the MBTI in several places - if we think of it as a rigorous, professional psychological test, then it's obviously not up to snuff, and there's no question about that.
But if we lower the bar a bit and use it as a reference and support tool without overly trusting and relying on its results, then it still has some value.
A simple truth is that what MBTI measures is not the "real me" in the usual sense, but the "me I want to be".
For example, if you are an INTP (Introvert - Intuitive - Thinking - Perceiving), what does that mean? Does it mean you are an INTP?
No, it doesn't. What it says is that you think you are closer to being an INTP now of the test, or that deep down you want to be an INTP.
This may go against many people's intuition.
In fact, the MBTI is a series of tests that give you an answer and make you agree with that answer -- in this process, the answer itself is not important, but the fact that "you agree with the answer" is more important.
The fact that the result of your test is INTP, and that you think it is accurate and agree with it, means that no matter what your real personality is, you think that INTP is suitable for me, and you don't exclude yourself from getting closer to INTP, and you don't exclude yourself from using INTP's way of thinking and acting.
From this perspective, MBTI is a kind of self-revelation and self-reinforcement.
Each of us has a set of thinking and behavioral patterns that belong to ourselves, a vague view of ourselves, our own preferences, habits and tendencies. But in our daily life, these things are hidden under the level of consciousness and cannot be seen by us. Tests such as the MBTI synthesize these things and give you an answer.
Is the answer accurate? Is it a perfect reflection of your thinking, behavior, habits and tendencies? Not necessarily. But if you agree with the answer, it is valuable.
You will know exactly what you recognize, what you want, and what you hope to become.
The fact that you measured yourself as belonging to I means that, whether you're introverted or not, you believe in your heart that 'I'm supposed to be introverted' and aren't averse to making yourself an introvert.
This is a kind of self-reinforcement. You tend to be introverted, and by taking this test, you are reinforcing the recognition of that tendency. This is probably what the MBTI can provide.
Is this self-reinforcement good or bad? It really depends on the situation. If you are convinced by it and use it to guide your behavior and decision-making, then it may not be good: because you are abandoning all other possibilities and running in one direction. This can be detrimental to your ability to adapt better to your environment.
But if you are simply using it to understand yourself better and to help yourself listen to your inner voice, then it is useful.
Some people may say: but I don't agree with the results of the test, I don't think it's accurate, or I'm a little surprised, I didn't expect it to come out like that, so what does that mean?
That's interesting. It means that you have an inner view of yourself that is in conflict.
For example, if you test as an INFP, but you don't think it's accurate, and you think you should be an INTP, what does that mean? It means that deep down, you still can't let go of the behavioral pattern of judging things and values through emotions, and you can't abandon the principle of dealing with things based on emotions and morality; but at the same time, your reason tells you: I can't do that, I should be more rational, and I should judge through logical thinking, not through emotions ......
In other words: it's like you are standing at a three-way intersection, with reasons in each direction that you can't let go of, and it's difficult to decide just which direction you should go in.
This is actually a very good opportunity to get a better understanding of your inner kinks, to know what's bothering you, and to make a better decision about which direction you should go.
So, as I said earlier: the value of the MBTI is to help us understand the direction we want to go. It doesn't matter what the result of the measurement is, it's how we perceive the result that's more important.
This is one level. The other level is that the MBTI makes it possible to present ourselves better, to be 'seen', no matter what type of person we choose to be.
What is a big part of what the MBTI does? It is to save time and energy by labeling yourself with a corresponding label that allows you to communicate with each other more efficiently.
For example, if a person says he is an "I person" instead of an "E person", what does it mean? It means he may be trying to convey the following information:
I am an introvert, I prefer to be alone, I don't like to be too busy, I'm more formal in front of strangers, I'm probably quieter in general, and I prefer things that require concentration, I hope you can understand.
Then, you may know: if you want to pull him out to play together, it may be more appropriate to choose some quieter, more focused activities, rather than pulling him to a crowded place. This is a way to save on communication and communication costs.
Similarly, if a person identifies himself as an F rather than a T, it may be a sign that when communicating with him, it may be more effective to infect him and touch him from an emotional point of view to make him resonate with him, rather than from a logical point of view to make things clear in a logical way.
Therefore, many people like to put MBTI in their profiles or use it to introduce themselves. The subtext is: by showing my MBTI, I want to tell you what kind of person I am and hope you will treat me in a corresponding way.
This has a very positive effect: it soothes out prejudices between different personalities.
Traditionally, we may think that introversion is bad, and extroversion is good, emotionality is bad and rationality is good .But inside the system of MBTI, there is no superiority or inferiority of the 16 types, they are just 'different', not 'good or bad'. This gives many people the courage to show themselves.
We may be reluctant to call ourselves 'introverts', but we can call ourselves 'I people';
We may be less inclined to say we are 'emotional' but we can say we are 'F people'.
This is a big step forward, and a very meaningful thing, and it allows everyone, to look at their own personalities straight on, regardless of whether they are good or bad, and what kind of preconceptions they have within the context of society.
Of course, this practice of labeling groups can lead to stereotyping, which is an inherent consequence of labeling.
But still, as stated before: this can be circumvented by not overly trusting and relying on it, but rather treating it as a tool that can be used to one's advantage.
This also explains why the MBTI has become so popular even though it is not well received by the psychological community.
The reason is simple: we crave both difference and sameness.
Why do we always like to label ourselves? One very important reason: we need to show that we are different and unique from others. This uniqueness adds value and meaning to our existence, and thus we need to show and tell others about it.
Therefore, you will find that the more niche the label, the more likely it is to be favored, and therein lies the reason.
Take the MBTI for example. It is said that INTP is the rarest type of MBTI, but there are many, perhaps even more INTPs than many types of MBTIs who are happy to present their MBTI information online, and this probably explains it: the rarer and more unique I feel, the more I am happy to put it out there.
It may be a little bit of vanity at work, but it can't hurt -- who doesn't have a little bit of vanity already? It's part of our humanity.
But at the same time, in addition to the need to show uniqueness, we also need to find our own kind. Because uniqueness gives us a sense of superiority, and kindred spirits give us a sense of security.
When we label ourselves as "INTP", "ESFJ", etc., we not only want to show our uniqueness, but also imply that we want to find "the same as ourselves".
This kind of "same" can be someone who belongs to the same type as us, or someone who recognizes this discourse system and is able to understand and communicate with each other.
Some people may be looking for the same kind of people through geography, some may be looking for the same kind of people through culture and language, and some may be looking for the same kind of people through religion, beliefs, and values, but all of these may not be very suitable for most young people. Either they are too distant or too 'superficial', they don't represent themselves.
What we prefer is to look for similarities through more "in-depth" ways: such as hobbies, behavioral patterns, and habitual tendencies ......, that is, all kinds of labels that can represent ourselves.
That's why the MBTI has become such a popular choice.
It may not be all that good, but it's at least a little better than a horoscope.
So what is the problem with the MBTI? Why can't the MBTI be a professional psychological test?
Because, it has three fatal flaws.
- The MBTI categorizes personality into 16 types. But this way of categorizing types (the professional term is "typology") is exactly what the psychological community is against.
Why? We know: the larger the scale of a naturally occurring thing, the closer it tends to a normal distribution. That is to say: whichever personality dimension you choose to measure, if it is real, then with great probability it conforms to a normal distribution.
What does that mean? Assuming that introversion to extroversion is on a scale of 0 to 9, that means: about 68% of the people who score near 5 are neither obviously introverted nor obviously extroverted; only about 16% are typically introverted, and likewise only 16% are typically extroverted.
However, within the MBTI system, there is only a one-size-fits-all division of the population into "Person I" and "Person E," which is clearly unreasonable.
Consider three people: A has an introversion level of 4.5, B has a level of 6, and C has a level of 0.5. The MBTI would categorize A and C as "I people", but obviously A and B would be more appropriate for the same category.
Therefore, in modern psychology, personality is generally viewed as a continuum. The more recognized personality tests (e.g., the Big Five personality) also tell you directly: what is your score on this dimension. It lets you know where you stand and what your tendencies are, rather than directly categorizing you into a certain type.
This model is called 'trait theory', which means telling you: how many components of this trait you possess. It is the antithesis of the type theory represented by the MBTI.
In short, any test that divides personality into multiple types is basically unrecognized by modern psychology. Modern psychology will only tell you “How strong your tendencies are in certain areas", but it will not put you into a certain type.
- The MBTI has poor reliability and validity.
Validity refers to the extent to which a statistic reflects the truth, while reliability refers to the stability of results when a statistic is repeated. For a test to be valuable, it must have both high reliability and validity.
Unfortunately, in the decades since the MBTI was introduced, the results of its reliability and validity studies have been very unpromising: the reliability and validity of the MBTI are poor, it is difficult to comprehensively reflect a person's true personality, and the results are also quite unstable.
For example, you must have encountered this kind of confusion when taking the MBTI test: I seem to have both options, and I don't want to choose either one, what should I do? This is a sign of poor validity.
Similarly, if you take the same set of questions a few days apart and in a different mood, the results may be very different. This shows that the reliability of MBTI is limited. It cannot fully reflect the more stable personality state of the tester but can only describe the tester's current thoughts.
Of course, as I said earlier, the MBTI can be used if we are not concerned about whether the answers are accurate or not, but more concerned about our attitudes towards the answers.
- The MBTI was not developed in a scientific manner and lacks scientific theoretical support.
Orthodox psychological tests are produced by formal psychologists and institutions, after conducting research on a large number of people and factor analysis of the results and will be tested and optimized many times. Therefore, relatively speaking, the statistical effect will be better, more able to reflect the characteristics of the real population.
The MBTI was developed by a mother and daughter, Myers and Briggs, in 1944. They did not have any psychology background, but purely based on their own interest in research, and introduced Jung's theory to support their results.
However, Jung's theory does not belong to the category of science (psychoanalysis is not a science, it is a self-contained system), and even Jung himself did not approve of the MBTI, and there is no other scientific theories to support the MBTI, and there is no rigorous large-scale statistical data, so there is a "congenital deficiency" in the MBTI.
The MBTI has caught on in large part because of the Barnum effect: people often feel positively about vague descriptions of their good qualities. But this description is not rigorous.
In fact, most popular tests (including horoscopes) basically rely on the Barnum effect. What they have in common is that the words used to describe them are usually rather vague and can be placed on you as well as others; they can be said positively as well as negatively.
This may also be a trait of popularity: it may not be nice, but it's pleasing to the eye.
Finally, let's briefly summarize my point.
The MBTI is not a professional personality test, it lacks a scientific basis, and the results are not trustworthy. It would be a mistake to take it at face value, to use it as a guide to action, or to rely too heavily on it to provide judgment.
However, the MBTI is not useless, and there is nothing wrong with using it as entertainment, as a talking point, to understand oneself, or as a communication tool.
The key is not how it is, but how we view and utilize it.
It is better to find everything that can be used for us to take control of it, rather than rushing to find a position for or against it.