Hello, while I'm new to the forums, I'm quite familiar with the MBTI and Jungs original works (along with a few other systems). It has been a while since I goofed off with the MBTI, its not my favorite system (even then I'm more of a fan of Jung than Meyers), but it is easily the most popular and dominate. Anyways, I was contacted by a group looking to further analyze it and so asked me to help collaborate with their project. Essentially their past polling has yielded heavy numbers towards intuition which bring to question some of the fundamental aspects of the MBTI. So we were gathered to essentially create a measure that was as free from bias as we could possibly make, which translated to flattening the positives connotations of intuition description.
As a heads up, I'm only going to give you the very basic details and results and some of our discussions. Not looking to change your mind on anything, just looking for your opinions.
Subjects were Senors in high school.
This demographic was chosen based on the fact that after high school issues of social stratification can occur due to varying interests and demands which might skew numbers. Polling dependent individuals (or individuals under 25) always poses threats to validity but the benefits of ease of access along with a non stratified population were deemed more beneficial, plus the 25 and under crowd were no strangers to mbti.
We had 3 ways of measuring individuals and compressed scores into a single best fitting type, each test had different weights.
1) Instead of type listings, which individuals may recognize, letters A-P were assigned to cards, which contained strings of single word descriptors, individuals picked their top 3. Obviously this was the easiest to control for neutrality.
2) Second part also listed A-P (assigned to different types than the first), but contained short descriptors, they also picked their best 3.
3) Third we had a cognitive function test
(Type) (Population) (Percent of Total)
INTJ 35 14.06%
INTP 31 12.45%
ENFP 29 11.65%
ENTP 27 10.84%
ENTJ 24 9.64%
INFJ 24 9.64%
INFP 18 7.23%
ENFJ 14 5.62%
ESTP 10 4.02%
ISTP 8 3.21%
ISFP 8 3.21%
ESFJ 6 2.41%
ISTJ 6 2.41%
ISFJ 4 1.61%
ESFP 3 1.20%
ESTJ 2 0.80%
Total Pop 249
We were rather ineffective in providing any significant gains towards balancing out intuitive vs sensors. Obviously we are still looking for areas of improvements, but two strains of thoughts came out of it (none of it is radical or new).
1) The MBTI system has innate and ingrained biases which precludes it to any form of accuracy on any large scale.
Obviously this strain of thought in antagonistic towards the mbti itself since its an internal process based matrix as opposed to behavioral.
2) The MBTI does not correlate with core aspects of personality and is thus subject to culture
Essentially, would 18 year olds in the 30's score the same as 18 year olds in the 60's? 90's? etc? The assumption that more idealistic and eccentric attitudes are much more valued today than in in the past is certainly true, especially since the cultural revolution. So what the MBTI does measure it does so accurately because its inclusive to prevailing values.
Anyways, that is about as much as I'm going divulge on that (what I'm aloud to), if you have any critiques on the basic aspects of the reliability of the methodology I'd love to hear them, while I won't be participating if they have a next one (time constraints), I can certainly past the critiques along (or better ideas of mass surveying mbti).
On a lighter note, I also found this
Myers-Briggs personality thread - Bodybuilding.com Forums
A forum of body builders using the free online humanmetrics test, who have astonishing amounts of iNtuition types along with a high % of INTJ / INTP / ENTJ types for what I would normally/stereotypically ascribe to a population of body builders. So lesson of the story here is don't make fun of NT's, or beat you to a pulp.
Edited, underlined %'s because it was too hard to read otherwise