User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8

  1. #1

    Default Enneagram Correlation to Big Five Study

    Hey everyone,

    I'm currently a college student who is interested in psychology and personality. A buddy of mine who is majoring in psychology put together a Big Five test as part of research for our school. We're trying to pinpoint what correlations might exist between the Enneagram constructs and Big Five traits. I've provided a link to the test at the end of this post and we encourage you all to take it. After we've received a sufficient amount of responses, we'll crunch the numbers and get back to you with our findings

    Happy test taking!

    Enneagram Constructs and Big Five Aspect Scales
    Likes RadicalDoubt liked this post

  2. #2
    blackbird, fly Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    5w6 sp/so
    LII None


    I found this image of Jordan Petsron debating Slavoj Zizek.

    Can you VI him?

    A path is made by walking on it.


  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011


    It's a hard correlation to make, because the Big Five is just so bland. The best stuff today is found more out on the fringes of mainstream psychology (personality theory) most things. The DSM is the easiest correlation to make with the Enneagram but the DSM classifications don't have much meat on it (though it at least looks more like a classification of personality styles than the Big Five).

    The Enneagram and MBTI/Socionics (Jung) are the most powerful typologies in so far as explanatory/predictability power goes when used in combination. You don't come out with too many loose ends. The Big Five is too bland and general to, say, adequately account for Napoleon's contradictions, maneuvers, drives, obsessions, talents, weaknesses, layers. The enneagram and socionics do a great job of it.

    Keep in mind that validation in personality/cognition theory comes about primarily through clinical data. The DSM disorders haven't been validated by any scientifically designed cause-effect experiment but are derived from clinical data. This is the nature of the beast in social science and a point conveniently skipped over by the author of "personality brokers" -- a book which through horrid reasoning and yellow journalism amusingly tries to turn the MBTI into the scandal of the century.

    As far as science validating the enneagram through some cause-effect experiment, the first problem is the effect that experiments have on people's behavior when they know they are part of an experiment. The only real way to successfully run a cause-effect experiment is to make it so the participants don't know that an experiment is going on. Of course, those type of experiments are no longer sanctioned by governing bodies because they are considered to usurp the individual's freedom of choice. Skinner's arguments of utility are no longer considered acceptable, so Harvard has changed its tune from its approach in the fifties/sixties (50s/60s) when ethical oversight was not really a thing. The other problem is that the scientists running the experiment likely won't know their ass from his elbow about the Enneagram well enough to run such an experiment.
    Last edited by Tomb1; 04-17-2019 at 09:20 AM.
    Click here for my 2500+ Enneagram Type List to type yourself and others with. It's the only valid breakdown for every enneagram type, wing and stack.

    Click here for the only valid visual typing model of stackings on earth and socionics.
    Click here for enneagram type descriptions as a supplement to the only valid breakdown for every type, wing and stack.
    Click here for my typings of 100+ fictional exemplars and here for my typings of 90+ typology central members.
    Likes Zhaylin, Legion liked this post

  4. #4
    Senior Member Zhaylin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    952 sp/so
    SLI Si


    I'm interested to see where the study takes y'all.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Venus Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    4w5 sx/so


    You might want to look at my post here, but I will also fill out the survey.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    487 sx
    EIE Ni


    For me it's something like this :

    O : 378 low, 459 high ; sp low, sx high
    C : 378 high, 459 low
    E : 456 low, 237 high ; sp low, sx high
    A : 468 low, 279 high
    N : 468 high, 279 low

    But these need to be studied more deeply.

    I'm 4sx and I have : average-high O, average-low C, average-high E, very low A, very high N. I think.

    Anyway, I've just done the test.
    I often say "psychological impact" because it's a central concept to me.

  7. #7
    Junior Member Evelina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    7w6 sx/sp


    Interesting... Curious what you'll find. I first did the big five test just a few months ago and thought it was very "meh" but has since then come to change my mind on that as someone talked about more using it to see what area in your life you might want to work on rather than the "true self" or whatever, which I guess is my usual focus.
    "I wear the cheese, it does not wear me."

  8. #8
    Junior Member Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    845 sp/sx
    LIE Ni

Similar Threads

  1. Is my Big Five correlated or relatable with MBTI?
    By Jackobus in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-26-2017, 01:49 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-21-2016, 02:39 AM
  3. Big Five moving closer to the MBTI
    By Franz in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 07-11-2014, 09:57 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-21-2012, 11:13 AM
  5. MBTI Compared to the Big Five
    By FFF in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-24-2008, 03:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO