• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

MBTI Step II expanded report

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Has anyone here done the MBTI step II? Did you get any useful insights from it? I'm asking because I'm thinking of taking it myself. I found a couple of places online but they were charging $100 or more, so if you know of anywhere I could take it for cheaper that would be great.

I'm interested in it because I think I'm kind of an atypical INTP in some ways and have the feeling I'd get out of preference on a couple of the subscales.
 

Patches

Klingon Warrior Princess
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
5,505
Maybe this is is easier for me than some people, but when I look at these things I find that I could just assess it on my own. Why would you ever pay money for this?

I mean, if you take introversion as an example, just look up what the sub-categories are... Here's a report from someone elses' Step II test:

istj.png


I can just look at that and estimate how intensely I would rate on each scale. I can assess what my personality is like better than a few yes-or-no questions can. I wouldn't ever pay money for this. =/
 

InsatiableCuriosity

New member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
698
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
Has anyone here done the MBTI step II? Did you get any useful insights from it? I'm asking because I'm thinking of taking it myself. I found a couple of places online but they were charging $100 or more, so if you know of anywhere I could take it for cheaper that would be great.

I'm interested in it because I think I'm kind of an atypical INTP in some ways and have the feeling I'd get out of preference on a couple of the subscales.


I am about to head off to bed but thought I would give a quick answer to this.

I did mine when I trained to administer MBTI in 2001. It will give you a better idea about where you differ in your degrees of preference and what portions are similar to your opposite in each dichotomy. I found it very interesting as I am sure you will also.

For all the chat about leading functions and function order, if you look at the divisions in each dichotomy you will see why it is difficult to type some people, and that, like a fractal, each dimension breaks down into smaller dimensions, and these are still just a broad brush stroke that only partially describes you as an individual. :)

$100 is cheap - each of the Australian licensees for MBTI charge the administrators of MBTI around AU$98.90 to process and generate the report. That is without the consultation (required by MBTI) cost of the Administrator to deliver results. We are only able to purchase marking keys for the standard reports and not Step II. :doh:
 

strychnine

All Natural! All Good!
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
895
If you are in college/university or even high school yo ushould check with your organization. A lot of them will allow you to take it at a discount. (I paid $15, woot woot, actually I should get those results sometime!)
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
If you are in college/university or even high school yo ushould check with your organization. A lot of them will allow you to take it at a discount. (I paid $15, woot woot, actually I should get those results sometime!)

I'm long out of college so no discount for me. Looks like I'll be applying Patches method.

E/I:

INITIATING (Sociable, congenial, introduce people) vs RECEIVING (Reserved, low-key, are introduced)
I'd say more receiving although I can certaintly be sociable and congenial when comfortable. In general I give off a reserved, low-key demeanor and almost never introduce other people.

EXPRESSIVE (Demonstrative, easier to know, self-revealing) vs CONTAINED (Controlled, harder to know, private)
Definitely more contained. I hold alot of myself back, although I'm somewhat more expressive in online forums, I'm very contained in real life. I hold alot of myself back. Theres alot even my family members don't know about me.

GREGARIOUS (Seek popularity, broad circle, join groups) vs INTIMATE (Seek intimacy, one-on-one, find individuals)
Probably out of preference here. I seem to care more about popularity compared to other introverts. I want intimacy but am rather afraid of it. I tend to have a broad circle- I have alot of acquaintances but not many close friends. I like joining groups of people that share similar interests.

ACTIVE (Interactive, want contact, listen and speak) vs REFLECTIVE (Onlooker, prefer space, read and write)
Definitely more reflective. I can spend long periods of time alone and never get bored. I definitely need lots of personal space. Reading and writing appeals to me more than listening and speaking.

ENTHUSIASTIC (Lively, energetic, seek spotlight) vs QUIET (Calm, enjoy solitude, seek background)
Probably more quiet. I seek calm and enjoy solitude much of the time although I can be lively and energetic at times too. Generally, I prefer being in the background to being in the spotlight.


S/N:

CONCRETE (Exact facts, literal, tangible) vs ABSTRACT (Figurative, symbolic, intangible)
I think I'm out of pattern here. Compared to other N types, I tend to press for specifics more, I seem to need things more exact and precise and am prone to taking things to literally. When reading, I prefer a literal, straightforward style, I get frustrated and bored with too much figurative, symbolic stuff. Although, I am interested in many things that are rather intangible like philosophy.

REALISTIC (Sensible, matter-of-fact, seek efficiency) vs IMAGINATIVE (Resourceful, inventive, seek novelty)
Probably more imaginative. Resourceful, inventive, and seeking novelty highly appeal to me. I can certainly be sensible, matter-of-fact, and efficiency seeking but I seem to do those more out of necessity. Imaginative sounds like more fun.

PRACTICAL (Pragmatic, results oriented, applied) vs CONCEPTUAL (Scholarly, idea oriented, intellectual)
Strongly conceptual. My whole life revolves around ideas and intellectual ideas. Learning for the sake of learning and the ideas themselves are more interesting than applying them. Although I do identify with being results oriented.

EXPERIENTIAL (Hands-on, empirical, trust experience) vs THEORETICAL (Seek patterns, hypothetical, trust theories)
Definitely more theoretical. I love seeking out patterns and thinking about hypothetical scenarios. Hands-on stuff tends to bore me. I trust both experience and theories and like them both. I say theoretical, because I don't have to have the hands-on component when learning.

TRADITIONAL (Conventional, customary, tried-and-true) vs ORIGINAL (Unconventional, different, new and unusual)
Clearly more original. Traditional sounds boring to me. I don't like tradition for its own sake although there's are a few traditions that I like that I keep up. I am always questioning conventions and the way things are done. I'm intrigued by the different and new and unusual. I don't mind sticking to methods that work but I'm quick to discard something that's no longer effective and replace it with something better.

T/F:

LOGICAL (Impersonal, seek impartiality, objective analysis) vs EMPATHETIC (Personal, seek harmony, central values)
I'd say more somewhat more logical. I try to take an impartial, objective analysis when possible. Although I do care about having a personal approach and I definitely seek and need harmony. I'm not sure I have that clear of a sense of 'central' values.

REASONABLE (Truthful, cause and effect, apply principles) vs COMPASSIONATE (Tactful, sympathetic, loyal)
I think I lean slightly towards being reasonable but it is a close call. I value both truth and tact highly but if someone were to put a gun to my head and make me decide, I'd probably go with truth. I'm always thinking about cause and effect and applying principles towards things. But at the same time I'm sympathetic and loyal.

QUESTIONING (Precise, challenging, want discussion) vs ACCOMODATING (Approving, agreeable, want harmony)
Honestly, I don't know. I strongly identify with both sides. I'm very precise and always challenging conventions and things. I love a good discussion. However, I value harmony very highly and when discussions get too heated, I'm out of there. Most of the time I have an agreeable and approving demeanor.

CRITICAL (Skeptical, want proof, critique) vs ACCEPTING (Tolerant, trusting, give praise)
Another one I have trouble with. When younger I was far more critical but today I'm pretty balanced between the two. So I guess my natural tendency is probably the former, LOL. In life I've learned to be more tolerant and not critique so much. I want proof for somethings but not everything. There are things I believe in that can't be proved. In some ways I'm too skeptical but in other ways I'm too trusting. I am careful to balance constructive criticism with praise.

TOUGH (Firm, tough-minded, ends-oriented) vs TENDER (Gentle, tender-hearted, means-oriented)
I think I'm somewhat more tender than tough but not in the extreme because I can be tough when necessary. Sometimes I have trouble firmly standing my ground, especially when there's strong opposition. I care about the end result but I don't believe the ends justify the means. It's no good to accomplish something if you have to step on others' toes to get there.

Overall, my preferences on T/F subscales just aren't as clearly defined as they are on E/I and S/N. That's kind of why I'd like to take the real test to see. I don't think three word descriptions tell you the whole story.


J/P:

SYSTEMATIC (Orderly, structured, dislike diversions) vs CASUAL (Relaxed, easygoing, welcome diversions)
Somewhere in the middle. Honestly, I don't know. I am quite orderly and structured but I'm also relaxed and easygoing most of the time. I have mixed feelings towards diversions. If I'm working on something unimportant or something not very exciting, I welcome them, even seek them but if I'm concentrating intensively on a task, diversions are annoying. I hate being interrupted when focused intensely on something.

PLANFUL (Future-focused, advance planner, make firm plans) vs OPEN ENDED (Present focused, go-with-the-flow, make flexible plans)
Again, somewhere in between. I am more future than present focused and I will make plans to ensure the future is well taken care of. Like making sure I have enough money when I retire. But I would much prefer that I didn't have to do any of that stuff. I find planning all the details on things like vacations and weddings tedioius and prefer that others do it. Once plans are made, I do like to stick to them but I don't like overly firm plans. I like some wiggle room in my plans but not too much.

EARLY STARTING (Motivated by self-discipline, steady progress, late start stressful) vs PRESSURE PROMPTED (Motivated by pressure, bursts and spurts, early start unstimulating)
When I was young, I was very much pressure prompted but today I'm more balanced (can subscale preferences change with time?) In truth, pressure is and has always been a strong motivator for me. However, I hate having a lot of pressure on me and late starts are definitely stressful. But if I start too early, its hard to be motivated. My natural tendency is to work more in bursts and spurts than steady progress. I guess if I had to pick I'd be a pressure prompted person whose learned to utilize the early starting side more.

SCHEDULED (want routine, make lists, procedures help) vs SPONTANEOUS (want variety, enjoy the unexpected, procedures hinder)
Again, help me out on this one. I prefer variety to routine and I find things like exercise routines and other tight schedules hard to maintain. I am a rather compulsive list maker and I generally don't like surprises or the unexpected. In general, procedures help more than hinder although having a procedure that's too rigid or complicated is more of a hindrance than a help.

METHODICAL (plan specific tasks, note subtasks, organized) vs EMERGENT (plunge in, let strategies emerge, adaptable)
I think I'm more emergent. I find it hard to plan all the specifics of a task and sometimes I fail to anticipate what's needed until I jump in and start goofing up. Sometimes though, my being emergent is more due to impatience. I get anxious to start some new task or endeavor so I don't think it all through carefully enough beforehand. I would like to be more methodical but sometimes don't know what's needed beforehand.

So overall, maybe I'm just a tad more P than J. With the exception of the last subscale I don't seem to a have a solid preference on any of them.

I took the official MBTI and scored INTP and then INTJ at a later time. Both times the J/P preference was slight. It would be interesting to see where I'd fall on the subscales.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I simulated a Step II when someone suggested I simply grade myself on the subscales directly. Then, I made this bar graph to sort of match the "My Personality" graphs a lot of people had in their signature. (When I used to have this up as my sig picture, people thought it was from some official test or something).
Back when I was having E/I and especially T/F uncertainty, and also seemed J'ish on many test questions, the "out-of-preference-subscales" (OOPS) showed me where the ambiguity lied.
image.php
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Orobas:

Thanks for providing me with the step II test. I wasn't able to send you a PM, looks like you disabled that, so I hope its okay to reply here. I took the step II test a couple of weeks ago and never heard from you. I thought maybe it didn't go through the first time around so I went and submitted it again. Hopefully you received the questionnaire this time. Thanks for giving me access to the test. Look forward to discussing the results with you. If you need my email, its transition-state@hotmail.com
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I just received my results. I want to thank Orobas for administering the test to me and assisting with interpretation of the results.

If you're interested, I posted my results and my analysis in my blog.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
I typed as an INFP here, but with somewhat odd results on N/S. Very borderline.

64830535.jpg



I can't really say it was much help. Some of that N could be reflective of being a sensor with Ni. I still have a mind for experience, empiricism, facts that may very well shoot down abstractions. I'm under the impression that INFPs are still a little more imaginative.. or something.
 

animenagai

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
1,569
MBTI Type
NeFi
Enneagram
4w3
Yeah I took one when I first really started getting into MBTI. I find it interesting that no one on typeC really talks about the subscales, we just talk in terms of functions. I always wondered how the 2 interacted.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The fact that the test costs money and few people had actually seen it (or had a copy of results, aside from samples on the net) is probably one reason why no one discussed it much.

But function theory and MBTI Step II aren't really focused on the same things / the same levels of granularity. Nor is MBTI Step II the same as Jung's eight types/functions.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
E/I:

INITIATING (Sociable, congenial, introduce people) vs RECEIVING (Reserved, low-key, are introduced) : mildly lean receiving (IRL)


EXPRESSIVE (Demonstrative, easier to know, self-revealing) vs CONTAINED (Controlled, harder to know, private) : Strongly lean expressive

GREGARIOUS (Seek popularity, broad circle, join groups) vs INTIMATE (Seek intimacy, one-on-one, find individuals): mildly lean intimate

ACTIVE (Interactive, want contact, listen and speak) vs REFLECTIVE (Onlooker, prefer space, read and write) : mildly lean reflective

ENTHUSIASTIC (Lively, energetic, seek spotlight) vs QUIET (Calm, enjoy solitude, seek background): moderately lean enthusiastic

Makes me a mild extrovert, probably, since my introverted preferences are mild and my two extroverted prferences are strong and moderate.


S/N:

CONCRETE (Exact facts, literal, tangible) vs ABSTRACT (Figurative, symbolic, intangible): mild to moderately abstract

REALISTIC (Sensible, matter-of-fact, seek efficiency) vs IMAGINATIVE (Resourceful, inventive, seek novelty): moderately imaginative

PRACTICAL (Pragmatic, results oriented, applied) vs CONCEPTUAL (Scholarly, idea oriented, intellectual): hmm maybe mildly practical, actually...seems more Te than Ti

EXPERIENTIAL (Hands-on, empirical, trust experience) vs THEORETICAL (Seek patterns, hypothetical, trust theories): errr mildly theoretical

TRADITIONAL (Conventional, customary, tried-and-true) vs ORIGINAL (Unconventional, different, new and unusual): I think I actually am mildly traditional

T/F:

LOGICAL (Impersonal, seek impartiality, objective analysis) vs EMPATHETIC (Personal, seek harmony, central values): strongly empathetic

REASONABLE (Truthful, cause and effect, apply principles) vs COMPASSIONATE (Tactful, sympathetic, loyal): moderately compassionate

QUESTIONING (Precise, challenging, want discussion) vs ACCOMODATING (Approving, agreeable, want harmony): mildly to moderately questioning

CRITICAL (Skeptical, want proof, critique) vs ACCEPTING (Tolerant, trusting, give praise): mildly to moderately accepting

TOUGH (Firm, tough-minded, ends-oriented) vs TENDER (Gentle, tender-hearted, means-oriented): moderately tender


J/P:

SYSTEMATIC (Orderly, structured, dislike diversions) vs CASUAL (Relaxed, easygoing, welcome diversions): moderately systematic

PLANFUL (Future-focused, advance planner, make firm plans) vs OPEN ENDED (Present focused, go-with-the-flow, make flexible plans): moderately open-ended

EARLY STARTING (Motivated by self-discipline, steady progress, late start stressful) vs PRESSURE PROMPTED (Motivated by pressure, bursts and spurts, early start unstimulating): errr evenly balanced on these

SCHEDULED (want routine, make lists, procedures help) vs SPONTANEOUS (want variety, enjoy the unexpected, procedures hinder): mildly spontaneous

METHODICAL (plan specific tasks, note subtasks, organized) vs EMERGENT (plunge in, let strategies emerge, adaptable): mildly emergent


Conclusion: enFp
 

DiscoBiscuit

Meat Tornado
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
14,794
Enneagram
8w9
E/I:

INITIATING (Sociable, congenial, introduce people) vs RECEIVING (Reserved, low-key, are introduced)

EXPRESSIVE (Demonstrative, easier to know, self-revealing) vs CONTAINED (Controlled, harder to know, private)

GREGARIOUS (Seek popularity, broad circle, join groups) vs INTIMATE (Seek intimacy, one-on-one, find individuals)

ACTIVE (Interactive, want contact, listen and speak) vs REFLECTIVE (Onlooker, prefer space, read and write)

ENTHUSIASTIC (Lively, energetic, seek spotlight) vs QUIET (Calm, enjoy solitude, seek background)

S/N:

CONCRETE (Exact facts, literal, tangible) vs ABSTRACT (Figurative, symbolic, intangible)

REALISTIC (Sensible, matter-of-fact, seek efficiency) vs IMAGINATIVE (Resourceful, inventive, seek novelty)

PRACTICAL (Pragmatic, results oriented, applied) vs CONCEPTUAL (Scholarly, idea oriented, intellectual)

EXPERIENTIAL (Hands-on, empirical, trust experience) vs THEORETICAL (Seek patterns, hypothetical, trust theories)

TRADITIONAL (Conventional, customary, tried-and-true) vs ORIGINAL (Unconventional, different, new and unusual)

T/F:

LOGICAL (Impersonal, seek impartiality, objective analysis) vs EMPATHETIC (Personal, seek harmony, central values)

REASONABLE (Truthful, cause and effect, apply principles) vs COMPASSIONATE (Tactful, sympathetic, loyal)

QUESTIONING (Precise, challenging, want discussion) vs ACCOMODATING (Approving, agreeable, want harmony)

CRITICAL (Skeptical, want proof, critique) vs ACCEPTING (Tolerant, trusting, give praise)

TOUGH (Firm, tough-minded, ends-oriented) vs TENDER (Gentle, tender-hearted, means-oriented)

J/P:

SYSTEMATIC (Orderly, structured, dislike diversions) vs CASUAL (Relaxed, easygoing, welcome diversions)

PLANFUL (Future-focused, advance planner, make firm plans) vs OPEN ENDED (Present focused, go-with-the-flow, make flexible plans)

EARLY STARTING (Motivated by self-discipline, steady progress, late start stressful) vs PRESSURE PROMPTED (Motivated by pressure, bursts and spurts, early start unstimulating)

SCHEDULED (want routine, make lists, procedures help) vs SPONTANEOUS (want variety, enjoy the unexpected, procedures hinder)

METHODICAL (plan specific tasks, note subtasks, organized) vs EMERGENT (plunge in, let strategies emerge, adaptable)
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
OK, now I've taken the real thing (before, on the first page, I had simulated it), and I revised my homemade graph:

attachment.php


2-5 on the side of the preference is considered in preference, and on the other side is considered out of preference ("OOPS"), and 1 on either side and 0 in the middle is "mid-zone".

So again, we see me having a lot of F, particularly "Accepting" and "Tender". "Questioning/Accommodating" was dead smack in the middle (0). My wife insists I'm "Questioning", "Critical" and "Tough", but she's thinking about when I'm arguing something. Some of the questionnaire items are picking between two words, and I knew that on several of the T/F ones, I was leaning towards F. But the questions are asking how the word comes across to you, basically, and though I can be all tough and critical, I still don't like others being that way toward me, so the words take on a negative connotation.

Basically, this is as I always say, from being Supine (Inclusion and Affection), where the average INTP is likely Phlegmatic, and thus less sensitive. It basically indicates what I "respond" to or "want", rather than what I "express", and that's not taken into consideration in type theory (though it's implicit in Berens' "directing/informing" and "structure/motive" poles), and is one of the things I like so much about the FIRO system.

In fact, it should be pointed out, that these scores are really, not "strength", or based on numbers of questions graded, but by comparing your responses to an average range of scores for other INTP's in a national sample (there's a chart for this in the back of the report). So what it's saying is that I'm more accommodating, accepting and tender than the average INTP, which figures.
Accommodating is within the standard deviation (which is 4 to -1), but still higher than the mean (at +2); but the other two are -1 beyond the standard deviation, which is +3.5 to -2.5 for C/A and 4 to about -.5 in T/T. So it seems a lot of INTP's do cross over into Accommodating, tender, and especially Accepting. Agian, this is from being an "informing" (people-focused or "responsive", socially) type, and also including a lot of Supines.

On the other hand, I'm actually +1 greater than the standard deviation in the Logical/Empathetic facet! (average INTP runs 1 to 4.5)

So this is what's known as normative data. It's scored against a statistical norm. The regular, basic "Step I", on the other hand, is not normed. I remember the time years ago, when I first heard of it, and then went discussing it on a Yahoo list (before I found MBTIc, as here was known back then), and this resident pair of experts made a big point that this instrument was "NORMED", as they emphasized. I had no idea what the heck that meant, as the psychometric aspect of the theory lied way beyond my area of interest (way too Te; and they actually insisted my use of the theory was all Te!) They did explain about it being scored "TWICE" and compared to an average; as well as subscales based on only one or two questions.
In developing my understanding of type theory, particularly in comparison to the "moderate scale"-based FIRO matrix, I was looking at subscales as explaining ambiguous preferences, and while it technically is not indicating that, it still does give an idea of why one might have uncertainty, and why I might seem more F-like than "typical" INTP's. (And considering I got three mid-zones on E —including "Enthusiastic/Quiet", and I was being typed as E for my "enthusiasm" of the theory; then that's a reason why I might seem to be what else but the very type they were insisting for me: ENFP, "compared" to the "average" INTPs', which they kept comparing me to! INTP's 'just aren't' that "enthusiastic" about anything, or that "sensitive" when challenged:rolleyes:)

Anyway, so [MENTION=10653]SuchIrony[/MENTION], since you're the OP of this thread, you can take this into account when pondering your T/F uncertainty. I'll bet your results would be very similar.
 

Attachments

  • Subscale graph official.PNG
    Subscale graph official.PNG
    11.4 KB · Views: 230

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION], how did you take the test? where / in what setting?

If it matters, I'm not sure what my logical score would be, but I expect to lean toward Accepting and Accommodating myself -- I live a very flexy external life, even if my core is very questioning inside, in regards to my own ideas.
 
G

garbage

Guest
That's a great analysis. I'm interested in taking the Step II as well, largely just for the hell of it.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
We've discussed the Step 2 on occasion here. I think it helps add some nuance to the pretty rigid either/or binary function pairs -- badly needed. At least it could be useful for personal application -- "Yes, I'm and F, but in these kinds of situations, I'm actually more forceful than expected, consistently," etc. More unique outcomes are returned.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION], how did you take the test? where / in what setting?

If it matters, I'm not sure what my logical score would be, but I expect to lean toward Accepting and Accommodating myself -- I live a very flexy external life, even if my core is very questioning inside, in regards to my own ideas.
I'll explain, probably in a couple of weeks or so. It can only be administered online, so you'll have to find a practitioner or site who does that (discoveryourpersonality.com is one)

But I thought of you too, that you would probably get similar results.
 

Seymour

Vaguely Precise
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
1,579
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Here's mine:

stepii-graph.jpg


About the only interesting thing there is the out-of-preference "Reasonable" on the thinking/feeling sub-scales (and the neutral logical/empathetic).

Otherwise, it's all pretty straight-forward.

I used discoveryourpersonality.com, as well (a couple/few years ago).
 
Top