The research is from comparing the systems; both individual types (or temperament combinations) and the factors (such as I/E, etc).
They way the theory is applied, is that it creates a sort of "unified theory" of personality. Both classes of theory (FIRO/APS, and MBTI/Keirsey) are useful in understanding yourself and others. Yet they view it from different angles, or are measuring the same things in different ways.
I like the way the FIRO/APS system is layed out. Three simple E/w matrices covering three areas of interaction, and APS maping the ancient temperaments to each matrix, and discovering a new temperament in the process.
The MBTI letters I find are a bit harder to learn, but they are based on the cognitive processes, which make a lot of sense, and seem to explain the drives of our behavior from another, equally valid perspective. So I woujld much like to see both used together, but it seems in these days, FIRO is diminished in favor of MBTI. That is understandable, being that FIRO only claims to measure changeable behavior. However APS, while using the same structure, does go for inborn temperament.
A lot of people also like too compare Enneagram with MBTI, and since the APS system has a lot of similarities with Enneagram, it can be used as a jumping point for correlations with the MBTI.
|