User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 81

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTx
    Posts
    224

    Default

    "Forer Effect
    The Forer Effect is the observation that individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people."

    The Forer Effect is for stupid people. Sure, lots of things are general enough to give the impression of certain things being tailored to the specific circumstances of people who observe them, but if you use your brain, you can tell whether or not most of those things are actually things that can be shared by other people generally and when they aren't. If I have a cousin named, and let's just use a very common name here to avoid any identity issues, "David", yeah, anyone in general could also have a cousin with the very same name. But let's say then that there are some general descriptions of "David" known only to me. THOSE THINGS are NOT shared by others and are generally specific only to ME. If I encounter certain information which describes those sorts of things known ONLY TO ME, then THAT is NOT the Forer Effect.

    Still, on this and other forums, I have come across pictures of high school aquaintances, certain family members and even artwork which is SPECIFIC TO ME and I have certainly read a lot of very disturbing descriptions of activities and conversations that have ACTUALLY taken place in my OWN LIFE. How this information is being broadcast in this way, I really don't know, but it isn't the Forer Effect - it's information that is NOT SHARED by other people in general.

    Still, BECAUSE I don't understand exactly how it happens, I tend to TRY to IGNORE it in a general sense and chalk it up to the Forer Effect even though I DO KNOW there is something going on other that that.

    Finally I will say that noticing things which you people here would call the Forer Effect is what actually keeps me quite sane. It's the dichotomy. Noticing and paying attention to hard phenomena vs a general tendency to see things in soft shades of black and white seems to chase away certain fears and vulnerabilities that have plagued me my entire life.

    So, Forer Effect or not, it doesn't matter when the result a small measure of sanity.

  2. #12
    Feline Member kelric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INtP
    Posts
    2,169

    Default

    Here are my thoughts...
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Evidence for the bipolarity of the introversion/extroversion dimension was weak, and findings did not support the bipolarity of the sensing/intuiting or thinking/feeling dimensions. Results provide evidence that high negative correlations within MBTI dimensions are an artifact of its forced-choice format.
    I agree with Jaguar's source. Bipolarity, while making classification relatively simple, just doesn't seem to be an accurate way of representing the issues. How many times, when considering type, are we asked to prefer a to b? And how often do we make conclusions on this a/b decision (or a small sample size of a/b decisions) when our "real" answers are more along the lines of "well, a is good in this situation, b in this other one, well, except if something else also happens, but when I was in a similar situation, I really didn't think a *or* b, or I thought *both*, or "*neither*. There really isn't one answer that's better in general, but I have to pick one, so I guess I pick a". For me, it's pretty often. Simplifying can sometimes give insight, but it can also sometimes discard the complexity that is absolutely integral to understanding - I think that's the case here.

    Bipolarity just doesn't ring true for me, and I'd say that this goes double for introverted vs. extroverted functions. Not a fan of that theory at all, in that the "introverted" functions and the "extroverted" functions just don't seem to be dichotomous. A simplistic analogy is that it's like saying that liking oranges is opposite from liking broccoli, and that I have to have a preference for one over the other, and that this says something important about me. I just don't accept that the two are related in any significant way.


    That's not to say that I don't find it a help:
    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    I see it working in two ways:
    1. Helping us keep in mind that there are perspectives, methods, reactions, interpretations, etc. that can differ quite a bit from our own.
    2. Helping us gain insight into what a particular person needs to properly function and grow. (IMO, a caveat in this second endevour is similar to what people in the medical proffesion preach, "seek to do no harm.")
    I think that these are the two most important things that can be taken from the whole discussion of personality typing and preferences for methods of thought. Sometimes it really *is* difficult to realize how our perspectives and needs differ from those of other people, and what this means for ourselves and others. A tool that helps us understand that has value.

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Edcoaching's response to a particular set of questions I had, I found very illuminating, and forms the basis for how I now think about Myers Briggs.
    I agree - I've read quite a few similar stories over the years.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  3. #13
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540

    Default

    And unlike our DNA, MBTI is not digital - MBTI is analog.

    MBTI comes from a world before DNA, computers and natural selection were even thought of.

    So MBTI is intuitive just as the Sun going round the Earth is intuitive, and just as astrology is intuitive, and just as alchemy, phrenology, Lysenkoism, creationism and poker machines are intuitive.

    But the literate world is counter-intuitive and has given us astronomy, chemisty, psychology, biology and natural selection, genetics, quantum mechanics, relativity and statistical probability.

    So how interesting it is that we should regress using MBTI to type our pets.

  4. #14
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    ^^^ MBTI isn't astronomy, chemistry, genetics, etc.

    It is:

    Do you have a preference for:

    introversion or extroversion?

    sensing or intuition?

    thinking or feeling?

    judging or perceiving?

    ...and it is decided by questions that, with the better tests, cover aspects of the definition of extroversion, sensing, etc... to determine which ones fit the person best.

    I have met the specific requirements to have a preference for introversion, intuition, thinking, and perceiving. Therefore, by definition, I am INTP.

    It is just what the test says, and what I relate to. It fascinates me. It is something that I can analyze while discovering my awesomeness as well as the awesomeness of others I didn't see very clearly before.

    It is, for most people, just that sort of thing. It is not necessary to look for INTP written in my DNA or for INTP patterns in my brainwaves. The color purple may have waves that distinguish it from the other colors that can be measured, but it is not necessary for people who can see color to distinguish purple from blue. That sensation of color=X. That combination of personality traits=ABCD.

    I'm not sure how this is a regression, and even if it is, it is not a very serious one.

  5. #15
    4x9 cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    4 so/sp
    Posts
    6,931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    l.

    Beliefs/Hypotheses I Hold[*]We are not "tabular rasa" but are born with some innate tendencies. These tendencies in-turn color our interactions with the environment, while the environment shapes our personalities further.
    I'd agree with this. We are born with innate tendencies/preferences, and we are also shaped by our environment and experiences - and react/adjust to our environment uniquely, based on our personality.

    I think it's important to keep in mind though that while some of our preferences might be innate, it doesn't mean we were born a certain type. To clarify: We are not a personality type; we are a personality whose traits best fit into one of 16 human-created/defined categories. Our personality is a given, we are who we are. But the 16 types (or any other personality theory) are simply a system concocted by us. I think it's easy to get caught up in: which type have I been from the beginning? Which type was I born as? That seems backwards to me - we aren't genetically notched as 'INFJ' or 'ESTJ'. Yes, we each have an innate personality - but it may or may not fit the mbti theory to a T. The theory was created to explain differences, and the differences themselves - the dichotomies, the functions, whatever - are in a sense arbitrary. One could create a different theory - People who like animals vs. People who could care less about animals -- granted, that's silly on many levels, but it's a similar concept. WE created the categories.

    Certainly the theory is useful, as I think it is natural for people to classify, and personality trends are obvious. We all do it. If there wasn't mbti, we'd still be classifying people according to our own systems. But the theory at its root is simply that each person operates differently, and perceives/prioritizes things differently. That's basically it.

    [*]Temperaments and Interaction Styles are excellent ways to behaviorally get a first guess on the personality.
    Sure, as a system, I would agree. It's a good way to categorize different types of people/different tendencies.

    [*]The top two cognitive functions do determine type, and are important to understand for growth…i.e. I believe Isabel Myers's extrapolation of Jung's work was reasonably sound. However, unless obvious, I don't believe it is easy to type people directly like with functions.
    Given the mbti framework/ how it is defined, sure, the top two functions determine type. It's very black and white as far as theory goes; my problem is simply that I don't think many people in real life follow it to a T, in terms of top most-used functions. And I think it's easy for people to want mbti to explain everything about human personality and behavior - simply not true. There's a lot more to psychology than that.

    Re. growth: Going back to what I was originally trying to express, It's perfectly reasonable if one wants to utilize the theory as a means to grow. But this could also be viewed as trying to grow according to how you're supposed to grow according to theory - i.e. forcing your personality to conform to what the system says you're supposed to be doing. Forcing your personality to fit a system, when in fact what if the system itself is wrong in some fundamental ways and trying to over-simplify what isn't terribly straightforward?

    [*]Jung was onto something with archetypes, and with Function-attitudes (functions).[*]John Beebe was onto something with Archetypal Complexes, and that Berens was tracking the same something.[*]Lenore Thomson was onto something with the tertiary temptation as well. [/list]
    Yeah, this is where I start disregarding mbti theory.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints
    https://docs.google.com/uc?export=do...Gd5N3NZZE52QjQ

  6. #16
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    ^^^ MBTI isn't astronomy, chemistry, genetics, etc.
    MBTI is a confidence trick.

    And it was a confidence trick to induct women into the US war machine in WW II.

    And after the war it was a confidence trick taken up by US business to control employees.

    So MBTI is a confidence trick used by the US industrial/military complex.

    But worse, MBTI is a confidence trick that the US has exported to the world.

    And MBTI has many of the characteristics of a cult and it has its own evangelists operating here.

    But at a deeper level, if you knowingly take part in a confidence trick, you become a confidence trickster yourself.

    But if you take part unknowingly, you have merely been tricked.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    And MBTI has many of the characteristics of a cult and it has its own evangelists operating here.
    MBTI evangelists.

  8. #18
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    MBTI is a confidence trick.
    And it was a confidence trick to induct women into the US war machine in WW II.
    And after the war it was a confidence trick taken up by US business to control employees.
    So MBTI is a confidence trick used by the US industrial/military complex.
    But worse, MBTI is a confidence trick that the US has exported to the world.
    And MBTI has many of the characteristics of a cult and it has its own evangelists operating here.
    But at a deeper level, if you knowingly take part in a confidence trick, you become a confidence trickster yourself.
    But if you take part unknowingly, you have merely been tricked.
    Confidence trick? People often use it for confidence, but I don't see how it is a trick. Tricking people into what? Feeling good for themselves? MBTI isn't tricking anyone, it is taking self reports and putting them simpler to tell them the good about them that they have self-reported, to perhaps use as a tool for confidence. Where's the trick??

    And I don't see how the history of MBTI in the industry/military, true or untrue, is relevant to the test itself. It does not make any sense to me to judge the psychological test itself based on its history or the way some no-good groups might use it (wink wink).

  9. #19
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    Confidence trick? People often use it for confidence, but I don't see how it is a trick. Tricking people into what? Feeling good for themselves? MBTI isn't tricking anyone, it is taking self reports and putting them simpler to tell them the good about them that they have self-reported, to perhaps use as a tool for confidence. Where's the trick??

    And I don't see how the history of MBTI in the industry/military, true or untrue, is relevant to the test itself. It does not make any sense to me to judge the psychological test itself based on its history or the way some no-good groups might use it (wink wink).
    Good heavens Luna, no Psychology Department in any accredited University will touch MBTI because they know it is a confidence trick like astrology.

    And good heavens once again Luna, no Astronomy Department in any accredited University will touch astrology 'cause they know it is a confidence trick like MBTI.

  10. #20
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    MBTI is a confidence trick.

    And it was a confidence trick to induct women into the US war machine in WW II.

    And after the war it was a confidence trick taken up by US business to control employees.

    So MBTI is a confidence trick used by the US industrial/military complex.

    But worse, MBTI is a confidence trick that the US has exported to the world.

    And MBTI has many of the characteristics of a cult and it has its own evangelists operating here.

    But at a deeper level, if you knowingly take part in a confidence trick, you become a confidence trickster yourself.

    But if you take part unknowingly, you have merely been tricked.
    The US military will try any Loony Tunes idea (read "tactic") to gain a strategic advantage over the enemy.

    It's interesting that MBTI is used predominantly in competitive environments and the land of one-upmanship, rather than some joyous global harmony.

    It is a business that guards it property. More fool you if you steal the TM, as MBTIc found out.

    And, as Victor said, it has absolutely no proven veracity. Anywhere.

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] A Myers-Briggs questionnaire I posted on my Tumblr that I am now sharing with you!
    By OneLovelyAdventure in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-15-2016, 07:59 AM
  2. [MBTItm] What You Should Binge Watch On Netflix According to Your Myers Briggs (MBTI) Type
    By CarolineForbes in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 08-17-2015, 12:20 PM
  3. Hogwart's Sorting Hat based on Myers-Briggs
    By LadyMary in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-20-2014, 02:42 PM
  4. English Paper on Myers Briggs
    By raz in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-24-2008, 11:34 PM
  5. My thoughts on the I phone
    By Opivy1980 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 06:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO