You're not 100% anything.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I am 200%.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

...
The MBTI is inherently flawed, and I'm not exactly sure how to fix it - or whether it's even worth it to fix it. How you score depends on so many factors - how much you know about the test, how you feel at that moment (I always score as more introverted when I'm depressed; go figure), and whether you're answering as your actual type versus idealized type. Not to mention, the dichotomous nature of the MBTI is rather suspect. I behave differently in different situations, but the MBTI is not exactly designed to test that.

This is something I've been thinking about a bit lately. Even the E and I might not be mutually exclusive and that seems like the clearest potential dichotomy. The way a person is socialized has many dimensions. Just as there are introverts like me who really enjoy the company of one person, but wear out really fast in groups, there are also people who thrive on groups, but then need their private shut-out time. There are people who are in the middle of the E-I pole, and there are people who hang out at both extremes, and then there are every other possible permutation of the two concepts.

Originally the S-N dichotomy seemed plausible because there are people who think and learn concretely vs. abstractly. (edit) I have wondered in particular about the intelligence required for detectives which requires a heightened awareness to every detail in their surroundings combined with intuitive leanings to know where to look and how to formulate based on fragments. (/edit)It occurred to me that perhaps even that is not a true dichotomy, but can have every possible intertwining and interrelationship.

 

[Rajah]

Scoring 100% on at least one of the preferences is somewhat common from what I've seen.

To me, that says something negative about the test.

 

[Mondo]

Anyone who is 100% of anything probably has his or her own set of personality problems...

 

[ajblaise]

To me, that says something negative about the test.

How many questions are there dedicated to each of the 4 dichotomies on the test? About 15? So it's not that far of a stretch for a strong N or F or whatever to get a 100% score on one of preferences.

 

[Rajah]

How many questions are there dedicated to each of the 4 dichotomies on the test? About 15? So it's not that far of a stretch for a strong N or F or whatever to get a 100% score on one of preferences.

Yeah, the test I took when I was 18 was quite a bit longer.

Again, you just keep pointing out flaws with the internet versions of the test - and, IMHO, the test itself. Even the longer version.

 

[ajblaise]

Yeah, the test I took when I was 18 was quite a bit longer.

Again, you just keep pointing out flaws with the internet versions of the test - and, IMHO, the test itself. Even the longer version.

Aren't there some official versions on the net? I'm not quite sure what the offline official tests have that some of the better MBTI tests on the net don't. Other than the fact that you have to be wary of poor versions of the test online.

 

[speculative]

The MBTI is a system of preferences. Therefore, I do feel it is possible to score a 100% on one or more of the spectrums.

Just because you prefer to always be introverted does not mean you can't be extroverted. I always prefer to have a job with a high level of job security. If I lost my job and there were no jobs to be had and I was out of money, the a job was offered to me that had little security yet provided money to live on, I would take it. Does that mean that I changed my preference for a job with security? Nope. I would still prefer to have a job with security.

I do think that this portrays a flaw inherent in the MBTI dualities as they are defined. You can get through life without introversion, intuition, feeling, or perceiving. You cannot get through life without extroversion, sensing, thinking, or judging. If I stuck to my preferences, I wouldn't be able to hold down a job (extreme introversion means I wouldn't talk to anyone to get a job in the first place), I wouldn't be able to drive to the supermarket to get food (extreme intuition means I wouldn't sense things in my external environment), I wouldn't be able to figure out how to get out of my house anyways (extreme feeling means I wouldn't be able to logically think through the steps of turning my doorknob to pull open my front door), and I would be locked into a state of perpetual hesitation to do any of these things in the first place (extreme perceiving means I would not be able to reach a decision on doing any of these things, even if I otherwise would have had the capability to do them).

The first time I had heard of the MBTI, I took it from a psychologist who was trained in giving the MBTI and was interested in personality types. I'd have to dig up the original score, but I scored strongly INFP. Weakest link was T/F; I think I scored a 60F/40T or something like that. I don't disagree that people can "game" the test, but I think people worry about this just a bit more than is warranted. If people make the decision to portray themselves as they wish to be rather than the way they are, they don't require a test to facilitate such a facade...

 

[ajblaise]

The MBTI is a system of preferences. Therefore, I do feel it is possible to score a 100% on one or more of the spectrums.

Just because you prefer to always be introverted does not mean you can't be extroverted. I always prefer to have a job with a high level of job security. If I lost my job and there were no jobs to be had and I was out of money, the a job was offered to me that had little security yet provided money to live on, I would take it. Does that mean that I changed my preference for a job with security? Nope. I would still prefer to have a job with security.

I do think that this portrays a flaw inherent in the MBTI dualities as they are defined. You can get through life without introversion, intuition, feeling, or perceiving. You cannot get through life without extroversion, sensing, thinking, or judging. If I stuck to my preferences, I wouldn't be able to hold down a job (extreme introversion means I wouldn't talk to anyone to get a job in the first place), I wouldn't be able to drive to the supermarket to get food (extreme intuition means I wouldn't sense things in my external environment), I wouldn't be able to figure out how to get out of my house anyways (extreme feeling means I wouldn't be able to logically think through the steps of turning my doorknob to pull open my front door), and I would be locked into a state of perpetual hesitation to do any of these things in the first place (extreme perceiving means I would not be able to reach a decision on doing any of these things, even if I otherwise would have had the capability to do them).

But having a 100% MBTI preference is different than being 100% introverted/thinking/judging... To show that someone can't or very rarely score 100%, you'd have to show how everyone who did score 100% was mistyping themselves with the preference(s).

 

[Little Linguist]

Anyone who scores 100% I, I have news for you. You're not. You can be a strong I - even a very strong I - but I seriously doubt you'd be hanging around this or any forum.

Whenever people tell me their #s - unless they took the test professionally before knowing anything about it - I'm skeptical. The result usually reflects that they know what the test is looking for, and they're idealizing some type in mind. Saying you've taken the test "hundreds of times" and have come out this way each and every time just strengthens the test-gaming theory.

The MBTI is inherently flawed, and I'm not exactly sure how to fix it - or whether it's even worth it to fix it. How you score depends on so many factors - how much you know about the test, how you feel at that moment (I always score as more introverted when I'm depressed; go figure), and whether you're answering as your actual type versus idealized type. Not to mention, the dichotomous nature of the MBTI is rather suspect. I behave differently in different situations, but the MBTI is not exactly designed to test that.

Agreed - and I think this would be the case no matter what. I think every group would know exactly how to manipulate answers on this test. (The Ns through pattern recognition, the Ss through observation, Ts through systems, Fs through gut feelings). Indeed - anyone who is a skilled test taker could manipulate the results. To prove this, I always take a test to match what I think the teacher wants to hear. The first time I took this test, it was given by a psychology professor who tested ISTJ. And guess what results I got? ISTJ. Trust me - no matter what I am - I am not ISTJ.

By the way, want to hear the really weird thing? I did not find out he was ISTJ until after we all got our answers. Muhaha

 

[Laurie]

Getting 100% on a MBTI test doesn't make me 100% E or 100% P. It means that I scored 100% on that test for those items.

No point in getting up in arms about it.

 

[ajblaise]

Getting 100% on a MBTI test doesn't make me 100% E or 100% P. It means that I scored 100% on that test for those items.

No point in getting up in arms about it.

I kind of agree, I would just say that 100% E on MBTI and 100% extroversion are meant to be two different ideas.

 

[Lurker]

Anyone who scores 100% I, I have news for you. You're not. You can be a strong I - even a very strong I - but I seriously doubt you'd be hanging around this or any forum.

Whenever people tell me their #s - unless they took the test professionally before knowing anything about it - I'm skeptical. The result usually reflects that they know what the test is looking for, and they're idealizing some type in mind. Saying you've taken the test "hundreds of times" and have come out this way each and every time just strengthens the test-gaming theory.

The MBTI is inherently flawed, and I'm not exactly sure how to fix it - or whether it's even worth it to fix it. How you score depends on so many factors - how much you know about the test, how you feel at that moment (I always score as more introverted when I'm depressed; go figure), and whether you're answering as your actual type versus idealized type. Not to mention, the dichotomous nature of the MBTI is rather suspect. I behave differently in different situations, but the MBTI is not exactly designed to test that.

:hi:

As you know, I agree. The System also totally glosses over the effect of externals - nurturing, environment, cultural norms, even mental stability. A fearful/phobic person will naturally yield higher sensing scores due to constant scanning of their environment, for instance. I think there should be a neurosis-testing component of the test. The test-retest validity of the MBTI is very damn poor, too.

I always score higher on the sensor stuff when I'm depressed. That doesn't mean sensor stuff is by its nature depressing or that intuition is the realm of the mentally free. It's specific to me.

I score higher on F and I when I'm depressed.

 

[Rajah]

I kind of agree, I would just say that 100% E on MBTI and 100% extroversion are meant to be two different ideas.

Okay, I would too.

However, people still use the concept of 100% on the MBTI as an excuse for why they're so introverted/sensing/thinking/judging. I can't stand to be around people; I'm 100% I. I hate theory; I'm 100% S.

No, no you're not.

 

[EcK]

Anyone who scores 100% I, I have news for you. You're not.

And in Other obvious and shocking facts, the sky is blue!

want more? Steve Todd: Steve's TOP 10 list of little-known but obvious facts

 

[ajblaise]

Okay, I would too.

However, people still use the concept of 100% on the MBTI as an excuse for why they're so introverted/sensing/thinking/judging. I can't stand to be around people; I'm 100% I. I hate theory; I'm 100% S.

No, no you're not.

I agree. And the opposite end, but less annoying, are the people who seem to reject meaning from percentages all together.

 

[Lady_X]

right...i can see the difference for sure aj.

 

[Rajah]

And in Other obvious and shocking facts, the sky is blue!

Yeah, it should be obvious, shouldn't it?

 

[EcK]

But every entp knows the sky is really dark green.. and kinda purple too

 

[Little Linguist]

And in Other obvious and shocking facts, the sky is blue!

want more? Steve Todd: Steve's TOP 10 list of little-known but obvious facts

It is? DOH!