• 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.

Big 5 Vs. MBTI

G

garbage

Guest
There are many differences between the two, of course. One of the systems was derived statistically and independently verified several times, while the other was not; one is empirical while the other is theoretical; one is trait-based, while the other is type-based; one is discussed in psychology texts, while the other is ignored. I'll leave it to one's imagination to determine which is which.

MBTI and Big Five are used for a variety of purposes, but they're both used for self-discovery, identification of learning styles, and so on. MBTI is suitable for these purposes, I guess, but there are better tools available. Ethically, if I'm going to be pigeonholed, it ought to be by a system that has some scientific backbone and actual validation behind it.
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
1. How the system works

In general Jungian functions and the Big 5 are pretty blatantly different. For one thing the Big 5 is very simple to use and based entirely on on the surface behavior. MBTI/Functions are based on mental processes of taking in and evaluating information. Pretty big differences there, pretty defined differences.

2. What value it is

Both have pretty equal value I'd say, yet the Big 5 is more readily applied in reality because many businesses know about it. Both should be taken are separate, and just knowing the parameters that they operate should make that obvious enough.

3. How people apply them and the ethics associated with that

Just like you'd apply any other typology I suppose. Use it for a method of understanding people and not scrutinizing.
 

Lily flower

New member
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
930
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
2
I prefer MBTI, since I have known about it longer. The 5 model is probably better, since it is more scientific, but I think 5 traits is too many to make them easy to identify. You can't say - there's an INFJ like you can with the MBTI.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Big5 is too superficial, MBTI is made of stereotypes, jungs typology digs deep into human psyche. Because big5 is such an superficial system it works well with scientific systems that rely on statistics.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Big5 is too superficial, MBTI is made of stereotypes, jungs typology digs deep into human psyche. Because big5 is such an superficial system it works well with scientific systems that rely on statistics.

1. How the system works

In general Jungian functions and the Big 5 are pretty blatantly different. For one thing the Big 5 is very simple to use and based entirely on on the surface behavior. MBTI/Functions are based on mental processes of taking in and evaluating information. Pretty big differences there, pretty defined differences.

2. What value it is

Both have pretty equal value I'd say, yet the Big 5 is more readily applied in reality because many businesses know about it. Both should be taken are separate, and just knowing the parameters that they operate should make that obvious enough.

3. How people apply them and the ethics associated with that

Just like you'd apply any other typology I suppose. Use it for a method of understanding people and not scrutinizing.

One of the reasons I asked about ethics is that I saw somewhere that it was OK to use the Big 5 to screen employees for particular jobs. It shocked me to hear that. That would be a big no-no with MBTI. I don't know how it would be ethical in the one case and not the other.
 
G

garbage

Guest
One of the reasons I asked about ethics is that I saw somewhere that it was OK to use the Big 5 to screen employees for particular jobs. It shocked me to hear that. That would be a big no-no with MBTI. I don't know how it would be ethical in the one case and not the other.

Tools such as MBTI, Big Five, and DISC (especially DISC) are alluring to the business world because they are interpreted as a speedy way to learn everything relevant that there is to know about someone else.

I would love to hear who said that it was 'OK' to use the Big Five for pre-screening and in what context. They would likely (likely!) get their ass handed to them by ethicists and psychometricians alike.

this guy puts it pretty well.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Tools such as MBTI, Big Five, and DISC (especially DISC) are alluring to the business world because they are interpreted as a speedy way to learn everything relevant that there is to know about someone else.

I would love to hear who said that it was 'OK' to use the Big Five for pre-screening and in what context. They would likely (likely!) get their ass handed to them by ethicists and psychometricians alike.

this guy puts it pretty well.

Here are a few quotes, with links to sources:

"2. Personality Assessment:

Most personality assessments that are valid and reliable enough for pre-employment screening purposes are based on the “Big Five” model of personality. The five factors are Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism ( or ‘OCEAN’; funny how that worked out, right? But then again, acronyms always do)."

http://www.monsterthinking.com/2011...-how-to-master-the-pre-employment-assessment/

"Employee Selection

Psychological tests have been found to be one of the most valid and cost effective means for identifying the most suitable applicants for the job (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). When properly conducted, selection testing can contribute significantly to your bottom line.

SIGMA offers a wide range of both personality-based and cognitive selection measures.
............
Six Factor Personality Questionnaire (SFPQ)
The SFPQ is a brief, cost-effective personality measure that encompasses and extends the "Big 5". It is ideal for use in business settings and in research. Among other qualities, the SFPQ draws on an improved model for "Conscientiousness", and has received an exceptionally positive review from the Buros Mental Measurements Yearbook (2000). In addition, items were carefully selected to minimize the effects of social desirability response bias, an issue affecting other popular measures of the Big 5."

http://www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/selection/

"Personality Testing – Although various types of personality tests exist, most
personality tests used in employment settings today measure five basic factors of
personality. These factors, commonly called “the big five”, include: (1) openness
to experience, (2) extroversion, (3) agreeableness, (4) conscientiousness, and (5)
emotional stability. There is growing evidence of the usefulness of these factors
in predicting job performance (Barrick, M.R. & Mount, M.K., 1991). Generally,
conscientiousness has been shown to be the most valid of the five factors across
different kinds of jobs but other factors such as extroversion has been shown to be
an important component for sales and managerial jobs. In fact, the lack of adverse
impact and the consistent evidence of validity have made personality testing a
frequent component of selection procedures for sales professionals. Specialized
tests designed to measure specific predispositions toward customer service have
also been popular in call center and other service environments"

http://www.navientcorp.com/info_center/Employee_Selection_Part_1.pdf
 
G

garbage

Guest
Here are a few quotes, with links to sources:

Cool, thanks!

Counselors and therapists also use psychometric examinations (e.g. the MMPI) in their work, but they do not, of course, rely upon the MMPI to do their jobs for them. Tools used by organizational psychologists are similar and should be treated similarly--for now, at least, there ought to be a human in the loop.

Thankfully, even the monsterthinking.com article hints that, in companies that are smarter in organizational psychology, there is (virtually?) always an interview process to place the personality assessment in its proper context. Psychologists tend to realize that we're not yet smart enough about psychology (especially psychometrics, self-report, etc.) to trust a test to make these decisions for us. These assessments have a way of providing evidence, but, especially as of right now, they ought to be interpreted by someone. I wind up hoping that services like those provided by SIGMA Assessment are either (a) packaged with experts' analysis of results, or (b) considered to be a laughingstock by most companies.


The monsterthinking.com article certainly describes an ideal--that we should be able to answer these assessments as ourselves--but there is always going to be some level of fear that our answers are simply undesirable. I place some hope in the iterative process behind developing personality inventories, deploying them, evaluating their worth, and going back to the drawing board where they are found to be faulty.
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The MBTI is far more theoretical in nature, and more based on qualitative analysis. The 5 factor model came out of heaps and heaps of data mining, it is effectively based on quantitative analysis.

That being said, I would sooner vouch for the 5 factor model. It has received much more scientific validation, and if it should appear that the MBTI is good for being much more predictive than the Big 5, keep in mind that the MBTI's predictions are probably wrong.
 

Thinkist

New member
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
128
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I prefer MBTI, since I have known about it longer. The 5 model is probably better, since it is more scientific, but I think 5 traits is too many to make them easy to identify. You can't say - there's an INFJ like you can with the MBTI.

Agreed. There is almost always one X in someone's type, maybe two. It's also not as useful as MBTI regarding matters of life outside of the business/employment world. Additionally, things like intertype dynamics are lacking. You may be a stubborn rluEn, but what about your interactions with others?
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The MBTI is far more theoretical in nature, and more based on qualitative analysis. The 5 factor model came out of heaps and heaps of data mining, it is effectively based on quantitative analysis.

That being said, I would sooner vouch for the 5 factor model. It has received much more scientific validation, and if it should appear that the MBTI is good for being much more predictive than the Big 5, keep in mind that the MBTI's predictions are probably wrong.

It is interesting, given for example the response to this thread, that people are not particularly interested in Big 5 on the forum. I wonder why that is.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Agreed. There is almost always one X in someone's type, maybe two.
This is because the Big Five is a trait-based theory and isn't intended to categorize people in terms of types. SLOAN is one way to do so; however, so is identifying one's primary trait (e.g. we can categorize people as 'Primary Open' or 'Primary Conscientious').

It's also not as useful as MBTI regarding matters of life outside of the business/employment world. Additionally, things like intertype dynamics are lacking. You may be a stubborn rluEn, but what about your interactions with others?
That's the thing with Big Five--most of the studies and observations (e.g. intertype relationships) made using the tool will be empirical (and disseminated via research articles); they will not be part of the tool as is the case with MBTI, Socionics, or other systems. Studying the Big Five takes a completely different approach than studying, say, MBTI.

You got me curiously digging into studies that show how people that exhibit different Big Five traits interact--a cursory glance into the research doesn't show me a whole fat lot, but I'm sure that there are studies out there. I'd love to come across one and share it.

I'd venture to say that a Big Five type's interactions will completely depend upon context. In some matters, differing levels of Conscientiousness, for example, just won't matter; in others, it will. I would also venture to say that, in general, "like understands like."

It is interesting, given for example the response to this thread, that people are not particularly interested in Big 5 on the forum. I wonder why that is.
My guess would be that it's because Big Five lacks the theoretical depth of MBTI. So, to discuss Big Five at any length, one must discuss its applications--but forums don't seem to be the best place to discuss applications.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Here's a relevant thing. A "Facebook score" as a predictor of job success that appears to use Big Five as a basis:
Conscientiousness: This is someone who appears to be well organized and hard-working, and that’s reflected in the way they set up their Facebook page. Maybe there are a lot of detailed posts and profile, or photos of the person working hard at something.

Emotional stability: You seem to be someone who looks at the glass as half full, and seem able to handle stress. That means your page is lacking lots of negative and down in the dumps type posts; and you’re not overly emotional in images or in what you write.

Agreeableness: This is all about someone who’s able to get along and doesn’t engage in Facebook conflicts, especially heated debates with friends.

Extraversion: Here’s where lots of Facebook friends come in handy because lots of friends is a predictor of extraversion. Also, photos of you in social situations with lots of people are a good thing, compared to pictures of you alone on your couch.

Openness: Travel and intellect play into this category. If you appear open to different experiences and viewpoints, then you’re viewed as open. If you’re posting stuff about classic literature you’ll probably score higher than if you’re dishing about the latest trashy novel. And photos of international travel are also a big plus.

Based on this research, scoring high in all these categories means you’re more likely to be an ideal employee. That kind of predictor would probably make any hiring manager salivate, especially in today’s tough job market where they have to weed through thousands of applicants.

Regarding the ethical implications of this:
Kluemper is not advocating that HR use his groundbreaking social-media research just yet. “This is one study and the sample size is not that large,” he explained. “A lot more studies need to be done.”

But, he admitted some ill-advised HR folks may try and hang their hats on this one study, and that worries him because using such personality tests could be on sketchy legal grounds.

The fact that this is on "sketchy legal grounds" is likely the only thing that would prevent employers from taking this study and rolling with it.
 

FFF

Fight For Freedom
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
691
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
First off, hardly anyone is going to be honest on a personality survey a company they're trying to work for hands to them or requires them to take after filling out an app. Second, being high in all the big five traits is not always the ideal employee. For American sales people it is actually high extroversion and conscientiousness and low neuroticism and agreeableness. Also, this means not very high in the first two or very low in the next two. Openness doesn't matter as much, but sometimes might come into play when selling really complex stuff. You basically want salespeople who are outgoing, goal-directed, calm, resilient, and selfish (making a sale for my own benefit is more important than this being the best product and best deal for the customer). One of the best salesmen where I work was like, "Eventually you get to the point where you're like, 'I don't care. I'm gonna get this bitch.' " That was in reference for getting people to sign up for what I call a magazine scam. I refuse to do it because I see it as greedy and immoral. They're just hoping people will forget to cancel so they can charge them $50 for magazines they don't really want. When that does happen, people get pissed off at us and our company.

The same traits above are what is desirable in managers. The openness trait is best high for managers who need to bring about changes and reforms. Low openness is good for maintenance managers who just need to keep something going that's already going good. Actually, sometimes people can manage just as well or even better with high agreeableness. I used to work somewhere with this manager that everybody thought was such a nice guy. If he asked most people to do something, they're probably going to do it just because he's so damn nice and wouldn't want to challenge him.

Depending on other jobs, the ideal employee profile changes. When it comes to starting level retail jobs, you usually just have to work with whoever you can get that doesn't have a questionable history and also has the right availability.
 
G

garbage

Guest
First off, hardly anyone is going to be honest on a personality survey a company they're trying to work for hands to them or requires them to take after filling out an app.
I imagine that the questions have to be subtle in order to get at the real truth, because, otherwise, the 'right' answer is too easy to spot. I mean, questions like..
I would describe myself as neurotic. [ ] Y [X] N
I am hard-working and notice details. [X] Y [ ] N
..wouldn't exactly get at the truth, especially when a job is on the line. Even still, someone could just as easily convince themselves using a train of thought akin to, "Well, I can see where I could potentially not be described as neurotic. That means that I can legitimately mark 'N'! Cool, this means that I'm not a liar, too! That means that I'm agreeable. Sweet, I'm totally acin' this thing."

No idea how this is typically handled on self-report personality assessments, but I'd like to find out.

It seems that this Facebook method gets around much of this bias by allowing other people to assess someone's Big Five scores. From the article itself:
Self-ratings may incorporate less observable information about motives, intentions, feelings, and past behaviors (Mount, Barrick, & Strauss, 1994), whereas other ratings stem from observed target behaviors or trace artifacts associated with these behaviors. Researchers have argued that ratings gener- ated by having others assess observed behavior may be more predictive of future behaviors (e.g., job performance, academic performance) than are self-assessments of personality (Hogan, 1991;Motowidlo et al., 1996;Mount et al., 1994; Small & Diefendorff, 2006).

Interestingly, according to Table 1 in the article, self-report scores aren't so far off from 'other-report' scores.

Second, being high in all the big five traits is not always the ideal employee. For American sales people it is actually high extroversion and conscientiousness and low neuroticism and agreeableness. Also, this means not very high in the first two or very low in the next two. Openness doesn't matter as much, but sometimes might come into play when selling really complex stuff. You basically want salespeople who are outgoing, goal-directed, calm, resilient, and selfish (making a sale for my own benefit is more important than this being the best product and best deal for the customer). One of the best salesmen where I work was like, "Eventually you get to the point where you're like, 'I don't care. I'm gonna get this bitch.' " That was in reference for getting people to sign up for what I call a magazine scam. I refuse to do it because I see it as greedy and immoral. They're just hoping people will forget to cancel so they can charge them $50 for magazines they don't really want. When that does happen, people get pissed off at us and our company.

The same traits above are what is desirable in managers. The openness trait is best high for managers who need to bring about changes and reforms. Low openness is good for maintenance managers who just need to keep something going that's already going good. Actually, sometimes people can manage just as well or even better with high agreeableness. I used to work somewhere with this manager that everybody thought was such a nice guy. If he asked most people to do something, they're probably going to do it just because he's so damn nice and wouldn't want to challenge him.

Depending on other jobs, the ideal employee profile changes. When it comes to starting level retail jobs, you usually just have to work with whoever you can get that doesn't have a questionable history and also has the right availability.

Interesting notes :popc1:

Yup, this is what got me curious to seek out the original article. I thought it was well-known that, for example, openness makes for less 'effective' police officers (and also, all of your examples). The article doesn't seem to address the issue of which industries the test subjects were employed in or otherwise tested against.


In any case, I'm not sure how to regard "How to impress employers on facebook" other than.. kind of sickening.
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
The big 5 is essentially descriptive - it makes no attempt to explain the traits that it assigns to people. As such, it is a short hand way of describing a person in very board terms. It's alright, as far as it goes, but it pays to remember the limits of system, such as realising that knowing someone has very low neurotisism does not distinguish between a compulsive risk taker and a couch potato who sits on his ass all day and watches the world rot around him.

MBTI attempts to explain things. In my opinion it fails. I regard it was over simplified and generally misguided. Function theory is much better, but as with the big 5 it is still worth bearing in mind that knowing sxomeones type does not specify exactly what that person is like. Each type allows for huge variation. That is why you can fit 7 billion people into just 16 types.

If I was to chose a point where it becomes immoral, I would say it comes when you forget that that and start using the system to confirm your prejudges and build up your own sense of superiority by constructing the idea that your group is superior to everyone elses. You can see it a lot - it's almost like a modern form of racism, like Hitlers believe in the superiority of the Aryan people. It's just that rather than measuring skull shape and colouration they use psychometric profiling instead. Even if that doesn't count as immoral, it is still stupid, as it blinds you to the reality of the world.
 

Hemd

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
16
MBTI Type
NFPI
I think many here don't know, but the MBTI and Big Five are actually pretty similar in what they are measuring:

Obviously Extraversion in B5 is I-E in MBTI and Openness fits pretty close to S-N. Those two have shown very high correlations in studies.
Agreeableness fits T-F and Conscientousness P-J. Altough these two don't have such high overlap than Extraversion and Openness have with the MBTI dimensions, they are still significantly high.

You can read the sources of this it here for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator#Big_Five

So from scientific perspective (where the Big Five are the standard), the MBTI does measure some valid personality dimensions, but has muddied the water here and there with certain aspects that don' fit with the Big Five or similar personality measures.

Bear in mind that this means some scientific support for the personality dimensions Mbti measures, but none for the existence of distinct types or the Jungian functions. These two concepts are widely rejected in science and are considered as bunk. See the Wikipedia link for the study of Costa and McCrae for sources which confirm this.
 

justadbag

New member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
69
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
7w8
what the fuck is Big 5 and DISC?

I prefer to stick to the basics:
MBTI mixed with Enneagram mixed with Socionics.
 
Top