• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Step II

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
There's a Step II now.

Step I is the 16 types--or your preferences among the dichotomies.

Step II is the 16 types plus facets. There are five facets to each dichotomy preference. This is part of showing how individuals within the same type can differ.


So... five? There's five? Holy crap. It never ends.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
There's been a step II for a while now.

Step II gives some much needed subcategorization to the four basic binary-pair selections... since we all know how much variance exists in people within the same MBTI type.
 

Shaunward

New member
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
297
Step II gives some much needed subcategorization to the four basic binary-pair selections... since we all know how much variance exists in people within the same MBTI type.

Needed for whom, investors that were late to jump on board and want to see greater ROIs?
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I discovered this about a month ago. Here's how it came out:

2-6-20101-39-00PM.png

2-6-20101-46-55PM.png

2-6-20101-33-47PM.png

2-6-20101-36-06PM.png

2-6-20101-37-09PM.png

2-6-20101-37-51PM.png
 

Heart&Brain

New member
Joined
Mar 29, 2009
Messages
217
MBTI Type
ENFP
Looks interesting, Highlander. Do you have a link testing for the five subkategories (I suppose you did a test)?
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
That is interesting, high.

So, right out of the box, one has to wonder, where did these facets come from? Is there some model-theoretic justification for it? I don't quite see how.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Shaunward said:
Needed for whom, investors that were late to jump on board and want to see greater ROIs?

Oooo, inherent skepticism -- don't just accept things at face value. I'm proud of you, keep up the good work! :smile:

As far as needed, from a theory POV? Of course it is... it's pretty apparent that there's a wide range of behavior within each of the 16 types and some people do not identify with the basic type, so the Step 1 scoring/descriptions are of inadequate granularity.

I discovered this about a month ago. Here's how it came out:

I'm guessing you paid the full $90 for the test?
(I'm not aware of free online scoring yet.)

Was it worth it? it seems kinda stiff to me, although the expanded categorizations seem interesting. The price is one reason why I have not done it.

That is interesting, high. So, right out of the box, one has to wonder, where did these facets come from? Is there some model-theoretic justification for it? I don't quite see how.

Haven't looked at it a lot recently.
I'm actually going to guess the traits were categorized by some sort of theoretical brainstorming factor break-down rather than empirically derived tested clusters... but that's just a guess on my part.

It doesn't mean that the subcategories are not useful on their own, but they might not accurately map the breadth of a particular function (e.g., T, or S).
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My thoughts on this have been that people have enough trouble with Step I.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
That is interesting, high.

So, right out of the box, one has to wonder, where did these facets come from? Is there some model-theoretic justification for it? I don't quite see how.
+1
Kinda of unravels existing theory...rather than building on it.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
So, right out of the box, one has to wonder, where did these facets come from? Is there some model-theoretic justification for it?

I ask myself the same question every time I read about the 4 main dichotomies.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Many people are dissatisfied with the four scale model. Sometimes it's hard to decide if you're an Extravert or an Introvert. Many report, "It depends on the situation." If that's you, then this is the test that will give you clarity.

Kind of says it all. There might be some facets of extroversion that a person matches up with and others that he doesn't, which might be useful to know.

How did these facets come about? Yeah, probably just brainstorming and speculation. I seriously doubt whether the facets of any given dichotomy are independent (as they should be), given that studies have shown that the dichotomies themselves aren't.

You will finally understand why the Keirsey just can't cut it. When you need individual results, tailored to the way you really are, you need the Step II.

Also kind of says it all. Good ol' marketing and competition. Breaking the dichotomies down into sub-dichotomies makes the product look more attractive.


Oh, yeah, and also there's a Step III. Good luck with that one.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'm guessing you paid the full $90 for the test?
(I'm not aware of free online scoring yet.)

Was it worth it? it seems kinda stiff to me, although the expanded categorizations seem interesting. The price is one reason why I have not done it.

Yes I did pay the $90. Was it worth it? For me probably yes because I was interested enough in seeing the results. I've always felt that there somehow needed to be more granularity in MBTI. Still, the $80 - $90 that it costs does seem pretty expensive.

I came across this thread from a couple of years ago related to this. It looked interesting.

http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...y-matrices/388-mbti-vs-mbti-step-ii-test.html
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
this seems conceptually empty. there are no relationships that mean anything in particular, it just quantifies. if anything it is a way of measuring a moment in the system, like blood pressure. bc it doesn't show anything in the way of developmental patterns, potential, etc.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
good to see the dichotomy dwellers are at least being proactive.

however none of this is necessary if you'd just learn how to identify functions by behavior and calculate type based on that.

My thoughts on this have been that people have enough trouble with Step I.

yeah, 'cause of how confusing and inconsistent it is.
step one is obsolete.

step two is the future of second-rate typology.
at least they're being proactive.

that said, the vocabulary used above offers a wide array of handy tools for exacting and formulating thoughts about personal identity - this of course being the most common purpose in typological inquiry.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
this seems conceptually empty. there are no relationships that mean anything in particular, it just quantifies. if anything it is a way of measuring a moment in the system, like blood pressure. bc it doesn't show anything in the way of developmental patterns, potential, etc.

Interesting point on a "snapshot in time". What I do know is that my results seem to be reasonably accurate and point out some nuances that I know to be true.

How do you know if it's conceptually empty?

however none of this is necessary if you'd just learn how to identify functions by behavior and calculate type based on that.

yeah, 'cause of how confusing and inconsistent it is.
step one is obsolete.

step two is the future of second-rate typology.
at least they're being proactive.

that said, the vocabulary used above offers a wide array of handy tools for exacting and formulating thoughts about personal identity - this of course being the most common purpose in typological inquiry.

It seems to me that the pragmatic usefulness is what matters most regardless as to which way you look at things. Maybe both views are worthwhile.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
I'd really like the facets to have come from somewhere. And here's a bizarre thought I've been toying with:

Socionics, to my (barely interested) understanding, is a bunch of stories. The types are characterised in depth and with a Russian lack of politeness too. And there's a lot of function role characterisation too. Out of something like that could come a deeper sub-categorisation of function usage, it seems to me. In other words, if someone went and whipped up some rich, detailed, storylined descriptions of the Jungian functions, one could pop out "facets" sort of systematically... couldn't one?

One would need a measure of Russian bravado, though. Characterising imaginary objects like functions. An in-depth detailing of what the modelled objects are in the model... it's like making up stories.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
It seems to me that the pragmatic usefulness is what matters most regardless as to which way you look at things. Maybe both views are worthwhile.

worthwhile, sure.
but they don't really measure the same things.

that both systems use the same words means nothing.
MBTI and 'step II' are derivatives of jungian typology, and should be thought of that way.

personally, i've found that jungian analysis is less of a headache. even if they have the same level of effectiveness, that factor alone gives jung's setup the advantage. hence my bias.
 
Top