Quote:
Originally Posted by Haight
Although your post seems more like a statement then anything else, I'd like to debate this a bit. However, I need two questions answered first:
a/ When one says, "The amount of INTJs in the population is 1%," for instance, is that a world population total, or could, or has, that been broken down into country statistics?
b/ How do these samples work, exactly? In other words, would one type be more likely to respond to the sample/survey relative to another type?
|
Thanks--I s'pose it was a statement, kind of a report on "how it's done" in some circles. I find it useful when working with groups of educators because a) when your school district has students who speak over a hundred languages you need something for convenience! b) it helps point out how students can differ from their cultural backgrounds as far as learning styles and c) it often prevents negative stereotyping. But to answer...
The samples are done country by country and there are two kinds
- Samples of convenience, which means people who use type professionally turned in results of verified (hopefully) type from workshops. These can be really skewed, though, because often they're all corporate managers or something. The samples do show similarities around the world on who goes into management!
- National representative samples. With these, the statisticians use their methods to figure out how many people they need to poll to get an adequate representation of the population--it was 3,009 in the United States, from across different demographic groups.
They do their best to correct for things like, will E's or I's be more likely to answer the phone, etc. There are a lot of details in the MBTI manual about how they chose the sampling. I do know they had trouble finding enough people from minority populations as, with good reason, they tend to be suspicious of tests and experiments...for the National Representative Sample, they multiplied these responses to equal their % in the general population--not perfect but a statistically acceptable method and better than nothing???