ptgatsby
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 4,476
- MBTI Type
- ISTP
Then link it.
I don't need another link to a post from you. You said this is the source and linked yourself. It sounds like you're not credible.
Link the study, that's a basic principle. Otherwise, you're committing plagiarism.
Blah blah... If you read the post I linked to (to drive the point you haven't even taken a second to read the thread), the paper was referenced. There were only three lines. Take a second, slow down and read before you fly off the handle.
But here's your google search for you, in case you aren't able to copy and paste. ( The Relationship of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) to IQ Level and the Fluid and Crystallized IQ Discrepancy on the Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT). )
On a side note, the 16 types are not reflected on the functions alone. To depict intelligence on IQ is not conclusive. To link the function 'Ne' is not conclusive. In doing that, you are putting ENTP's and ENFP's in the same category. They're different. Same goes for all of the other functions. Also, the functions aren't singular identities, they all work together. Splitting them apart separates your accuracy in explaining a person's thoughts/behaviors. In short, your study is wrong.
1) No functions were listed in that tally.
2) The factors are considered independently. Like any other paper worth it's salt. Like any other instrument. (NEO, for example, since I'll assume you've read a paper that used that)
3) Functions may work together, or not, but since it has nothing to do with what I posted (or the paper), how the instrument tests and the correlations being talked about, it's irrelevent here.
4) In short, you don't really have a point to make and are just being antagonistic.
And wow, the rest of what you said shows that you barely even looked at the chart, nevermind the paper...