User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 46

  1. #21
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    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.
    You, Xander, fall outside a lot of links.

    This is where statistics are used. Not 100%, but preferably upwards of 70%. Or lower than 30%. Either suggests other than simple chance. As you move into the edges (<10% or >90%), then you have more reliable evidence.

    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)
    I'm not comfortable with this. I'm much more comfortable with saying you're looking at different aspects of the personality.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  2. #22
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rivercrow View Post
    You, Xander, fall outside a lot of links.
    I suppose I am alone in this ol' Crowsie?
    This is where statistics are used. Not 100%, but preferably upwards of 70%. Or lower than 30%. Either suggests other than simple chance. As you move into the edges (<10% or >90%), then you have more reliable evidence.
    Precisely why other systems integrate to provide better insight and allow for higher tolerances even within one system. If the context is clarified then the content is illuminated etc.
    I'm not comfortable with this. I'm much more comfortable with saying you're looking at different aspects of the personality.
    Actualised as in what you are (what you are being more what you do than what you say or think) more so than heirarchy type actualised. Still, yes the wording would need improving.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  3. #23
    shoshaku jushaku rivercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    1,555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Precisely why other systems integrate to provide better insight and allow for higher tolerances even within one system. If the context is clarified then the content is illuminated etc.
    I don't see any reason for an all in one tool. That's my final offer.
    Actualised as in what you are (what you are being more what you do than what you say or think) more so than heirarchy type actualised. Still, yes the wording would need improving.
    I'm not following you.
    Who rises in the morning, looks in the mirror and says, "I think I will do something stupid today?" -- James Hollis
    If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
    Whaling is illegal in Oklahoma.

  4. #24
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rivercrow View Post
    I think the commercialization of these instruments is what causes them to be more widely available, not the other way round.
    I would disagree in part, simply because I can go and take a half dozen FFM tests without too many issues. The public MBTI tests are styled after decade old theories and research. How many MBTI tests are as robust as something like this?. Or even something like the twins test?

    Good or bad is open to interpretation - Someone needs to take these tests and model them into something that companies and individuals can use... But it doesn't remove that these companies are dependent upon keeping their tests proprietary and profitable, hence it does influence the way research is done, the way information is disseminated and their motivations in furthering the tools.

    (FWIW, I’ve been very impressed with CAPT, no doubt because of its dedication to the founders of the organization!)

    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.
    Yah, don't get me wrong. I hate having the crappy free tests around. I also, however, hate that I can't get the tests without shelling obscene amounts of money. I just got my quote for the KAIT test I wanted to take - $450. In fact, if I want any g loaded test, I need to shell out enough for a little vacation. For a test an hour long.

    That divide irritates me… a lot. I understand the need for keeping the tests under wraps (especially IQ), but the cost still seem outrageous.

    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?
    No, because they are depreciated versions of the same test. It is not a violation if you recreate an original work that emulates another - you just can't work from their test - hence why FFM, MBTI, 15FQ, 16pf, FIRO, DISC... are all similar. It's only the instrument itself that is copyrighted.

  5. #25
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rivercrow View Post
    I don't see any reason for an all in one tool. That's my final offer.
    That never was the point but if you have a screwdriver, a saw, a drill and a block of wood it don't mean you know how to make joints properly. For that you need to understand what the tools can do and what they represent in the process of making something with the wood.

    Ok that's a poor analogy. However all these little tools are fine. You've got your MBTI, your enneagram, your FIRO-B etc etc. You can test a person under each system and then end up with results from more than one system. However for each of those sets of results to be of any use then you need to be able to interpret one in reference to another. An INTP with low wanted control is not the same as an ESTJ with low wanted control. The two differ in style and how they actually play out. Ergo at some point the tools and results from these theories, therefore the theories themselves too, must integrate.
    I'm not following you.
    Your actualised self being that which others experience as a result of your type & enneagram. The experience which is Rivercrow.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  6. #26
    Senior Member meshou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INXP
    Posts
    238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Your actualised self being that which others experience as a result of your type & enneagram. The experience which is Rivercrow.
    Uh, all these types are just descriptions. Person causes test results, they are not all inherent characteristics.

    The test which comes closest to describing inherent universal characteristics, I believe, is the Big 5, but even so, it's a description.
    Let's do this thing.

  7. #27
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meshou View Post
    Uh, all these types are just descriptions. Person causes test results, they are not all inherent characteristics.

    The test which comes closest to describing inherent universal characteristics, I believe, is the Big 5, but even so, it's a description.
    Okay you got me. I should have said as a result of those things which those tests look at. Specifically I'm not good at specifics.

    To relate it to Johari if the two windows you can see are 1 & 2 and the two that others can see are 2 & 3 then the MBTI and enneagram test windows 1 & 4 where as the FIRO-B is more about 2. 3 is of course hearsay
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  8. #28
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Sorry to "necropost", but I had just found this on a periodic search of FIRO-MBTI comparisons I do in looking for new insights.

    I had actually been trying to strike up a discussion on this since I joined, but it seems people can't really get intot he FIRO system. Then, I discovered Xander as being interested in it, and have been discussing it privately. He was interested in making a thread about it, but I was relectant being it was so hard to find any interest. But now since there was this thread here already, I might as well add to this.

    I had made my own comparison of how the systems roughly correspond. My wife uses a Christian temperament analysis directly based on FIRO. Unlike FIRO, which only measures "behavior"; this new one was somehow tailored to measure inborn temperament, much like the Keirsey sorter. It was when a friend introduced us to that test, that I became interested in comparing it and the MBTI. Obviously, E/I will parallel expressed Inclusion and Affection. It was T/F and J/P that seemed to correspond to the "wanted" scales, and the task for me was finding out how, and where S/N would fit.

    It was when I learned about Linda Berens Interaction Styles, that I saw a good match for expressed and Wanted Inclusion (E/I and Directing/Informing). When I found about about her additional "Structure/Motive cross factor pairing NF with SP and SJ with NT, that seemed like wanted Control. I've recently been pointing this out, in discussions of why the TJ's are "the most directive". Because they are both "directing" and "structure" focused, and both are forms of low w! So then I determined that Cooperative/Pragmatic would be a good fit with expressed Control. And most of the types fit really well:

    Melancholic: (low E and W); Inclusion: "Chart the Course" or IST/INJ
    Control: SJ "Guardian"

    Sanguine: (high e and w); Inclusion: "Get Things Going" or ESF/ENP; Control: SP "Artisan" or "Improvisor"

    Choleric: (high E/low W); Inclusion: "In Charge" or EST/ENJ; Control: NT "Rational"

    Phlegmatic: (low E/high W); Inclusion: "Behind the Scenes" or ISF/INP; Control: NF "Idealist". There is also a fifth temperament, "Supine" that fits the low E/high w place, with Phlegmatic being more moderate in fact, but both seem to fit this place in the four temperament models.

    Here is my site explaining not only this, but also the comparison to Enneagram as well. Enneagram is actually very similar to FIRO, and once FIRO is understood, it may actually provide an intermediate point in MBTI-Enneagram comparisons.

    Temperament Part 2: The APS and other theories and Instruments
    The first part explains the basis of the temperament system and FIRO scales from scratch:
    Temperament for Dummies

    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.
    And all of this may correpond to each other in indirect ways. FIRO does discuss motivations (such as the fears tied to low expressed or high wanted behaviors, for instance), and our temperament theory emphasizes this even more. Perception, which may appear both Enneagram (tap3x.net article) and FIRO may be "blind" to, in my theory tie together diametric opposite Control scores. If BOTH e and w are either high OR low, the person will be more concrete focused. Those with opposite e and w scores are more abstract. In this excerpt, I explain why:

    [It makes sense that] the area of information gathering ("perception"), by which we then gain the knowledge of the world around us; allowing us to make the decisions to survive with; would fall into the "Control" area. A person's wanting or not wanting of "interaction" in that area (to control or be controlled) would be indirectly tied to his preference for perception. If his perception is concrete; and then if it is also inward-oriented [Si/SJ], he won't want any interaction in control, from the outside. He won't want to control or be controlled by others. [low e and w, or Melancholic/Guardian] If his perception is outward instead [Se/SP], then he will swing back and forth between controlling and being controlled based on the concrete input he is receiving from the outside world. [high e/w or Sanguine/Improvisor] For people whose preference is intuition, the "self preservation" temperament will not be determined by whether the perception is inward or outward. That is too "concrete", where they are abstract. So rather, it will be the judging function the perception is paired with that determines the Control behavior. Thinking (Tough mindedness) will desire to control, but not be controlled 9high e low w or Choleric], and Feeling (Friendliness) will not desire to control, but be more likely to allow control by others. [low e/high w, fifth temperament]
    Even the supposed fifth factor of Neuroticism or Comfort/Discomfort, by Eysenck's original N definition, is implied in the e/w scales. Any "low" score in either dimension will tend to be high N or Discomfort, as it is driven by some sort of distrust of people, or moves the person away from others in some way. The person will tend to be either critical or reclusive, or both. The original "low N" Sanguine and Phlegmatic are repsectively, high and moderate in both scales.

    Another key to looking for comparisons of the systems is to realize that MBTI focuses largely on personality strengths" (more "positive" traits), while Enneagram focuses on what we would call "weaknesses" (or "negative" traits). FIRO; at least Leo Ryan's Interpretation of it, also leans towards the weaknesses, but mentions some of the positive as well. This made it hard to compare. The Temperament system we use is balanced between both strengths and weaknesses.

    I also discuss the statistical correlations. There are three main ones: Thompson, Schnell & Hammer, and Fleenor.
    The latter two particularly do seem to somewhat support my theory. Like NT's and some SP's having the highest Expressed Control (which would be their Pragmatism).
    It is Affection that does not fit directly in this comparison. In some respects, it parallels expressed Inclusion and hence, E/I. In other respects, it may throw some of the other comparisons off (like it seems to make me an NF, when I expected to be an NT).

  9. #29
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Sorry to "necropost", but I had just found this on a periodic search of FIRO-MBTI comparisons I do in looking for new insights. I had actually been trying to strike up a discussion on this since I joined, but it seems people can't really get intot he FIRO system.
    Feel free to post what you'd like.

    It seems us "type theory" junkies who like digging into the guts of things are a minority now, so it's hard to get a topic rolling. But then no one posts anything along these lines. By all means, if you have some ideas (just like you did here), post them... and hopefully it will attract the attention of current members or even new people passing through and perhaps encourage them to stay.

    I had made my own comparison of how the systems roughly correspond. My wife uses a Christian temperament analysis directly based on FIRO.
    Are you referring to the LaHaye humors system that's been around since the 70's, or something different? (No, I didn't visit your page yet, but I will...)

    Melancholic: (low E and W); Inclusion: "Chart the Course" or IST/INJ
    Control: SJ "Guardian"

    Sanguine: (high e and w); Inclusion: "Get Things Going" or ESF/ENP; Control: SP "Artisan" or "Improvisor"

    Choleric: (high E/low W); Inclusion: "In Charge" or EST/ENJ; Control: NT "Rational"

    Phlegmatic: (low E/high W); Inclusion: "Behind the Scenes" or ISF/INP; Control: NF "Idealist". There is also a fifth temperament, "Supine" that fits the low E/high w place, with Phlegmatic being more moderate in fact, but both seem to fit this place in the four temperament models.
    I really never personally liked the humors thing, it never seemed to capture a "full person" within the archetypes. Most people I knew just did not fit into a category. And MBTI tends to deal with perception and motivation, the humours are more about specific externalized behavior...so it's hard to get a good correlation between the two systems to me. I didn't find the humours very useful to me because I think behaviors can change based on conditioning or circumstance... so many of the people I knew didn't even seem to fit.

    I'll read up on your stuff, tho, and come back when I'm done.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #30
    Luctor et emergo Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    SLE Ti
    Posts
    534

    Default

    I can't be arsed with any test that isn't free. The MBTI is absolutely crap, and that costs $99. I don't need a test to tell me what I'm good and bad at. I know how tests work - they base a profile upon what questions you answer "yes" and "no" to, which is essentially giving you no new information about yourself (unless you have poor introspection skills). You'd be better off analysing yourself and your actions and recording them for a year. The thing is, people are always willing to spend money for quick results. They'd rather pay for someone else to do the job they can't be bothered to do; and, interestingly, the results of free self-analysis are always of a higher quality than a test that you pay lots of money for.

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI in the 100 Acre Woods
    By RansomedbyFire in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-18-2010, 09:41 PM
  2. The practicality of MBTI in real life
    By NewEra in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 10:19 PM
  3. MBTI in graphic novel / comic book characters
    By edwartica in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-01-2009, 06:05 PM
  4. MBTI in mainstream media II
    By Economica in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-30-2008, 07:15 PM
  5. MBTI in mainstream media
    By Economica in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-25-2008, 10:09 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