Psychological Disorders and MBTI

[Elfboy]

EFJ: bipolar disorder
ETJ: anti social personality disorder
ESP: ADD
ENP: turrets

ISJ: OCD
INJ: schizophrenia
ITP: schizoid
IFP: ADHD (predominantly inattentive)

 

[Cloud of Thunder]

INxJ = Avoidant Personality Disorder, Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, Schizoid PD.

 

[Seymour]

Or one could, you know, actually look up a few studies:

N & P correlated with ADHD: http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1999-95019-144

Bipolar pateints more E and J than unipolar depressed patients: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1034/j.1399-5618.1999.010207.x/full

Suicidal patients more likely to be I & P: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395601000437

Or a chart from here http://www.uccs.edu/~faculty/dsegal...igation-Jungs-types-and-PD-features-JPT-2.pdf:

Antisocial: N, T, P
Avoidant: I
Borderline: N, P
Depressive: I, T
Histrionic: E, F
Narcissitic: N (weakly)
Obsessive-Compulsive: I, S, T, J
Paranoid: I, T
Passive-Aggressive: I, N, P
Sadistic: N, T, P
Self-Defeating: I, N, T
Schizoid: I, T
Schizotypa: I, N, T, P

(Sorry, INTPs... keep in mind that's just one study. Plus, correlation does not imply causality.)


For Big 5 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/per.543/abstract::

Neuroticisms: +borderline and +avoidaint.
Introversion: +avoidant, +schizoid, -histrionic
Openness: +schizotypal
Conscientiousness: +obsessive-compulsive

 

[Undeclared]

(Sorry, INTPs... keep in mind that's just one study. Plus, correlation imply causality.)

correlation does not imply causation you mean? * other wise I don't know.

and I kind of agree, but where's the fine line between just being INTp and being schizotypal...? -_-"

I know I have multiple personas....and those personas are based on true aspects of myself; I hate lying(misinforming). So could that be considered having multiple personalities?

INTp's have personas, Schizotypal's have personalities? It irks me to try and classify personalities and personas as different things......I'm at a loss for words....


edit: never mind about your quote fix....%!&*##$*#!, I was wrong. I read it over and over again like 20 times and I keep reading 'casualty' T.T

 

[Seymour]

Yes, that was what I meant... I fixed my quote... I got interrupted by dinner before I proof read. My bad.

 

[INTP]

Or one could, you know, actually look up a few studies:

N & P correlated with ADHD: http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1999-95019-144

Bipolar pateints more E and J than unipolar depressed patients: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1034/j.1399-5618.1999.010207.x/full

Suicidal patients more likely to be I & P: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395601000437

Or a chart from here http://www.uccs.edu/~faculty/dsegal...igation-Jungs-types-and-PD-features-JPT-2.pdf:

Antisocial: N, T, P
Avoidant: I
Borderline: N, P
Depressive: I, T
Histrionic: E, F
Narcissitic: N (weakly)
Obsessive-Compulsive: I, S, T, J
Paranoid: I, T
Passive-Aggressive: I, N, P
Sadistic: N, T, P
Self-Defeating: I, N, T
Schizoid: I, T
Schizotypa: I, N, T, P

(Sorry, INTPs... keep in mind that's just one study. Plus, correlation does not imply causality.)


For Big 5 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/per.543/abstract::

Neuroticisms: +borderline and +avoidaint.
Introversion: +avoidant, +schizoid, -histrionic
Openness: +schizotypal
Conscientiousness: +obsessive-compulsive

You forgot to note that the ocd is ocd pd, not ocd mental illness.

Anyways, i kinda see one major flaw in the study. Its looking at MBTI dichtonomies, not functions. Because of this, some correlations may not show. For example if some pd would correlate to dom Ti, but not to Te and not to other P types, Te could remove the correlation factor to T and other P types could remove the correlation to P. Also if there would be a correlation with inferior Ti combined with tert Ne to some pd, it wouldnt show up either, since the correlation would be on ESFJ and there wouldnt be a correlation with other type that have some dichtonomies of E S F and J, but not all of them, so ESFP would remove the ESF correlation and ENFJ would remove the S correlation.
Also you should keep in mind that none of the correlations arent 100%, for this reason for example the ISTJ ocd pd, might not be ISTJ type, but just most common with those dichtonomies, when you look at them separately. You forgot to mention that the S on ISTJ ocd pd was also weak. So the ISTJ correlations could come for example from INTJ ISTJ ISTP ESTJ INFP ISFJ ENTJ types put together, where ISTJ would be like 80% of those with ocd pd..

I have looked that study really long and hard(wrote a research plan for school on MBTI and pd correlations, using that study one of the main sources) and couldnt find any function correlations from the results, because the whole thing by looking correlations on dichtonomies is so flawed from the beginning.

I do think that the study can give pretty good indicators to pd/type, like with the schizotypal and INTP makes perfect sense if you look at INTP gone wrong, but thats the only pd with strong correlation to all four dichtonomies. I mean the whole pd system is a typolgy system, but with unhealthy traits, so naturally there are correlations with other typology systems.

Imo this sort of study should be done using pd and their subtypes and looking at functions and their position.

 

[Seymour]

[MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION], that's only true if you consider MBTI functions to be proven on some level. In reality, the empirical evidence for MBTI functions is fairly weak (though Mark Majors has claimed otherwise, he has yet to publish any evidence that's generally available). For example, Reynierse's The Case Against Type Dynamics makes a fairly compelling case that the relationship between various dichotomies is relatively equal. He states that functions (that is, the relationship between [N/S] + [J/P] and [T/F] + [J/P]) are not descriptively stronger than that for any combination of dichotomies (for example [I/E] + [N/S], [I/E] + [T/F] and [I/E] + [J/P]).

Reynierse posits that most of the descriptive power of types comes from dyads (and to a lesser extend triads). Therefore functions, as such, are not more descriptive than any two dyads (any two MBTI "letters"). He argues that the dichotomies (and their combinations) are fundamental, and that "functions," as such, are not particularly important.

While I'm not sure I believe him, he does make a compelling case and deserves consideration before one assumes that all dichotomy-based research as inherently flawed. This is especially true in light of all the big five research, which assumes an independent trait model (where each axis is entirely dependent of any other). I think the big five model is poorer for failing to consider combinatorial factors, but it's hard to argue empirically that there is nothing there.

 

[INTP]

[MENTION=8074]Seymour[/MENTION]

I didnt read the whole thing, but skimmed it through yesterday before i went to bed and read some chapters whole and all i can really say is holy fucking intj lol.

He uses arguments that doesent prove anything, quotes people that say weird ass things and uses it as an indicator of functions not being true. For example he says things like functions are just type cut in parts and doesent explain anything about the type, therefore functions arent true. And type is larger than the sum of its parts(functions), therefore functions arent real and only type matters. There isnt any empirical evidence, because people had been unable to test the functions, therefore they arent true. Also some study showed that dom Fe leads to social well being and looking to maintain them and succeeding in it, while aux Fe is more concerned and being able to keep family stuff in better shape and because family stuff is about social stuff, Fe being dom or aux doesent matter.

Functions are exactly what explains the type.

Yes its true that functions on themselves is less than the functions interacting together. But so what? Isnt that quite obvious and how can it debunks functions? He also forgot that it doesent only work that way, if you only look at type, you are able to get out more from function i teractions than just from type. If we were just looking at type and disregarding functions, the whole idea of there being a certain pattern on self development would be disregarded, because the development happens with functions, not with type.

Well even tho there isnt any good empirical evidence about functions, that doesent mean that they doesent exist. People have been using flawed methods for this in the past and dario nardis work with eeg and type shows patterns in brain activity linked to functions, not jusr to type. But his studies were more like 5 years long prestudy(what evwr the part is called where you make little measurements before starting the actual study), with shitloads of data, but not the type of that you could use as empirical evidence, but the type of that clearly demonstrates the patterns. When you look at functional brain areas, its clear that N isnt just N, but that Ni and Ne are totally different things and matches with the evidence of E and I that some study earlier has shown(cant remember its name, but it was testing E and I and pathways towards/out from visual cortex).

Is it any wonder that aux Fe(I type) would want to concentrate on fever things with his social stuff than Fe dom(E type)? Him using this as evidence only proves that the guy is retard and doesent understand anything than type, thats why thinking functions are useless..

 

[Randomnity]

ENP: turrets

If you have turrets, it's not a psychological disorder, it's a superpower.

 

[prplchknz]

correlation does not imply causation you mean? * other wise I don't know.

and I kind of agree, but where's the fine line between just being INTp and being schizotypal...? -_-"

I know I have multiple personas....and those personas are based on true aspects of myself; I hate lying(misinforming). So could that be considered having multiple personalities?

INTp's have personas, Schizotypal's have personalities? It irks me to try and classify personalities and personas as different things......I'm at a loss for words....


edit: never mind about your quote fix....%!&*##$*#!, I was wrong. I read it over and over again like 20 times and I keep reading 'casualty' T.T

http://psychcentral.com/disorders/sx33.htm

 

[Undeclared]

I can agree with 5/9 of the symptoms....but that doesn't mean anything.

Just turned 18 though so I'm too young(ish). (•̪●)