FIRO-B & MBTI in conjunction

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by rivercrow

I agree with the bias from familiarity. I've seen that in myself.

But I don't think that simple greed is behind keeping the tools under some form of control.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that is what the cause is; I do, however, remain doubtful that the commercialisation of these instruments have not played a role in how they are controlled and how they are investigated.

[Xander]

Well this is a little hypocritical isn't it? Surely as two seperate theories they don't integrate at all and such

[rivercrow]

Originally Posted by Xander

Well this is a little hypocritical isn't it? Surely as two seperate theories they don't integrate at all and such

Integration and corroboration for validity purposes aren't the same.

[rivercrow]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

I wouldn't go as far as to say that is what the cause is; I do, however, remain doubtful that the commercialisation of these instruments have not played a role in how they are controlled and how they are investigated.

I think the commercialization of these instruments is what causes them to be more widely available, not the other way round.

The investigation work is still done by research and/or practicing psychologists. Regardless how we slice the pie, the things still remain psychometric devices.

On a related note....

You can't take free online versions of the SAT/ACT/GRE/etc and use those scores for getting into school. You *can* use those scores as a study guide *if* the tests are considered valid. How do you know if the tests are valid? Someone compares the methodology or wording used in the free tests against the actual tests.

Hm. The other technical certification exams I've taken are all copyrighted. Reproducing the test is a theft of intellectual property rights. So are these online free exams violating copyright as well?

[meshou]

They violate copyright if they claim to be MBTI.

However, the use of the E/I, N/S, T/F, and P/J variants are not copyrightable, I do not belive, especially since Keirsey made use of them as well (and apparently they didn't defend use of that), and second, since they are ideas first presented in off-copyright works by Jung which the MBTI built upon. Again, socionics, a different system based on Jung, is perfectly legit legally.

So, given that Jung is off copyright, and given they didn't defend their lettering system, someone can claim they made the test from scratch using off-copyright work and are using the reasily available terminology and lettering system to classify someone and may be mostly legally off the hook.

[rivercrow]

Originally Posted by meshou

They violate copyright if they claim to be MBTI.

However, the use of the E/I, N/S, T/F, and P/J variants are not copyrightable, I do not belive, especially since Keirsey made use of them as well (and apparently they didn't defend use of that), and second, since they are ideas first presented in off-copyright works by Jung which the MBTI built upon. Again, socionics, a different system based on Jung, is perfectly legit legally.

So, given that Jung is off copyright, and given they didn't defend their lettering system, someone can claim they made the test from scratch using off-copyright work and are using the reasily available terminology and lettering system to classify someone and may be mostly legally off the hook.

I don't believe Jung's works are off copyright. Copyright, IIRC, extends 70+ years past the creator's death, and Jung died in 1961.

We are here talking MBTI and we're discussing non-MBTI tests as equivalent to the official indicator. We are outside the scope of the discussion.

Free online versions of the Keirsey instrument have been removed. The person who ran the free Keirsey site was ordered to remove his version by Keirsey's organization.

I don't know anything about the validity and research behind Socionics, so I will not comment on that tool.

[Xander]

Originally Posted by rivercrow

Integration and corroboration for validity purposes aren't the same.

"used to add more" sounds like integration and not corroboration. The FIRO-B adds details of the persons behaviour (interpersonal I think but it could be more wide ranging). How this would essentially be different from say integrating the enneagram escapes me unless we're talking prejudice towards one system or another.
________________________________________
Having done the FIRO-B it does add detail to my description but it's not really a good map onto the MBTI without including a lot more facets. IT maps better onto a combination of the MBTI and the enneagram.

If you have a look at my sig you'll see I have all three sets of results listed. Now trying to explain an INTP with high inclusion is difficult. Trying to explain an INTP 9 with high inclusion makes a little more cohesive sense.

[rivercrow]

Originally Posted by Xander

"used to add more" sounds like integration and not corroboration. The FIRO-B adds details of the persons behaviour (interpersonal I think but it could be more wide ranging). How this would essentially be different from say integrating the enneagram escapes me unless we're talking prejudice towards one system or another.
________________________________________
Having done the FIRO-B it does add detail to my description but it's not really a good map onto the MBTI without including a lot more facets. IT maps better onto a combination of the MBTI and the enneagram.

If you have a look at my sig you'll see I have all three sets of results listed. Now trying to explain an INTP with high inclusion is difficult. Trying to explain an INTP 9 with high inclusion makes a little more cohesive sense.

I don't think we're talking integration at all. That was part of the problem with the Enneagram/MBTI discussion.

These are different ways of looking at one thing--the individual. MBTI looks at processing/gathering information. Enneagram looks at motivation and barriers. FIRO-B (and some of the others) look at interpersonal relations and outward behaviors.

There are behaviors that we would logically assume to be related to type. For example, someone preferring an Extraverted function as dominant would logically behave in a way that shows an active engagement with the outside world. Extravert dominant preference usually leads to a breadth of interests, rather than a depth of interest--especially with the person is younger. (I say that because I believe an Introvert dominant's depth of interest may widen over time and an Extravert dominant's breadth of interest may deepen over time--if only because of accumulation over time!)

So what I balk at when you, Xander, want to integrate tools is that you seem to want to make a wrenchscrewdriverhammersaw. It's too unwieldy, and in many cases all you need is a hammer or a screwdriver, not all four. Or you need one only--just a hammer--but you can't efficiently use a saw as a hammer.

Whereas corroboration says: How does a wrench and a screwdriver work similarly and what can we gather from that inference?

Now, if you said "integration" but meant "corroboration," then we have a different issue to address.

Using all the tools appropriately can provide a fuller image of the individual. Instead of looking from one direction only, you're looking from different directions. You can't see the back of a building without walking around to the back of it. Same concept.

[Xander]

in·te·grate /ˈɪntɪˌgreɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-ti-greyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -grat·ed, -grat·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to bring together or incorporate (parts) into a whole.
2. to make up, combine, or complete to produce a whole or a larger unit, as parts do.
3. to unite or combine.
4. to give or cause to give equal opportunity and consideration to (a racial, religious, or ethnic group or a member of such a group): to integrate minority groups in the school system.
5. to combine (educational facilities, classes, and the like, previously segregated by race) into one unified system; desegregate.
6. to give or cause to give members of all races, religions, and ethnic groups an equal opportunity to belong to, be employed by, be customers of, or vote in (an organization, place of business, city, state, etc.): to integrate a restaurant; to integrate a country club.
7. Mathematics. to find the integral of.
8. to indicate the total amount or the mean value of.
–verb (used without object) 9. to become integrated.
10. to meld with and become part of the dominant culture.
11. Mathematics.
a. to perform the operation of integration.
b. to find the solution to a differential equation.

So if you combine two systems what does this tell you about the person?

cor·rob·o·rate /v. kəˈrɒbəˌreɪt; adj. kəˈrɒbərɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[v. kuh-rob-uh-reyt; adj. kuh-rob-er-it] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -rat·ed, -rat·ing, adjective
–verb (used with object)
1. to make more certain; confirm: He corroborated my account of the accident.
–adjective 2. Archaic. confirmed.

I continue to fail to see how looking at someone's FIRO-B results or their enneagram can confirm or deny their MBTI results.


(If you don't watch it I'm gonna keep a score sheet (admittedly I lose it or lose interest in keeping score but... yeah I'll... ooo... )

[Xander]

As for corrolation between MBTI and FIRO-B I would expect a certain amount of it to show as it would make sense that preferances for certain cognative functions would also display a similar preference for the seemingly corresponding behaviour. However I'd lay good money that there's a lot of those who fall outside such links. Myself being one.

Perhaps it displays what could be termed as the actualised self where as the MBTI is more the raw self? (strictly ignoring the imbalance between the two systesm and other such intricacies)