I'm wondering how they arrived these numbers...
That's a whole lot of money... Who are these people? It's terribly expensive where I live, yet, I know no one who makes that much (no, not even couples).
I can imagine that many people wouldn't really care to make any more money if they are already making $60K.
It's also wonder why the demographics aren't as skewed toward IN on personality page as I expected.
The order seems plausible. I can see how EJs and TJs generally do better in big corporations since those are the qualities believed by many to make good managers.
For which type is money the strongest motivator? Sometimes it's not about performance... but priorities.
What's the population distribution of Ts and Fs between gender? 2/3 Ts are male, 2/3 Fs are female? Which gender traditionally earns a higher income?
There's simply too many ways to explain the results... (assuming the stats is valid in the first place.)
Exactly. There are so many things that come into play.
For instance, there is also a difference in what salaries people report when they took that test. For instance, when I took it, I reported my base salary minus the stuff I saved in my 401K. I don't know why I decided to do that; maybe I just don't like people knowing how much money I make.
Also, what if Bill Gates took the test (purported to be an ENTJ)? That would skew the average quite a bit. In fact, I think this effect will be significant on the numbers and can be analyzed to see how much the effect is (I will do so shortly).
Remember that salaries seem to follow a scale-free distribution not a Gaussian (the rich have much higher salaries than the rest) The phenomenon of skewed averages would be even greater when you notice the percentages of the types that took the personality page tests.
They really should be using medians for this sort of stuff.
Just other things to note:
If I assume that the percentages of people listed on personality page represent the people who answered the salary question (a big probably false assumption, but it will illustrate the effect none-the-less, and I can't think of how to estimate the missing info.)
The average salary (weighted by percentages) is: $67096.77
I cannot really estimate the Standard Deviation, since they didn't list the s.d. by type. (I could find it for the NUMBERS, but it would be a fairly meaningless result considering my already stretched assumptions)
Note that the average is only $5531.77 from the bottom, but $17337.23 from the top. That should tell you that the percentages of people of particular types taking the test CAN skew the results dramatically.
One final bit of evidence for this average skewing phenomenon comes from the correlation of salaries of type to the percentages of type, which is -0.32
I realize this may not make much sense to people so I've included a graph:
Notice the prominent downward slope.