• 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.

Letter and Function %s in the Population

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
Here are letter and function percentages in the population (according to the site below):

Introverts: 51%
Extroverts: 49%

Sensors: 73%
iNtuitives: 27%

Feelers: 60%
Thinkers: 40%

Judgers: 54%
Perceivers: 46%

Si users: 46%
Se users: 27%
Ne users: 19%
Ni users: 8%

Fi users: 30%
Fe users: 30%
Te users: 24%
Ti users: 16%

Studies aren't all-encompassing and totally accurate, so you can't take everything seriously. The site says:

The estimated frequency table was compiled from a variety of MBTI® results from 1972 through 2002, including data banks at the Center for Applications of Psychological Type; CPP, Inc; and Stanford Research Institute (SRI).

You can only assume that approximate distributions in the population are:

Half are introverts and half are extroverts.
There is a signficant preference for sensors.
There is a slight preference for feelers.
Half are judgers and half are perceivers.
There is a signficant preference for Si and a low preference for Ni and Ti.

http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/my-mbti-results/how-frequent-is-my-type.asp
____________________

tl;dr Version:

Type distributions are these approximate ratios:

I-E: 50-50
S-N: 75-25
F-T: 60-40
J-P: 55-45

Si-Se-Ne-Ni: 45-25-20-10
Fi-Fe-Te-Ti: 30-30-25-15

____________________

Discuss:
How you feel less alone/more alone now.
Why nature/natural selection/evolution would disperse the types like this.
The validity of the statistics.

Extra statistics:

ISFJ: 14%
ESFJ: 12%
ISTJ: 11.5%
ISFP: 9%
ESTJ: 9%
ESFP: 8.5%
ENFP: 8%
ISTP: 5.5%
INFP: 4.5%
ESTP: 4%
INTP: 3%
ENTP: 3%
ENFJ: 2.5%
INTJ: 2%
ENTJ: 2%
INFJ: 1.5%

Si-doms: 25.5%
Fe-doms: 14.5%
Fi-doms: 13.5%
Se-doms: 12.5%
Ne-doms: 11%
Te-doms: 11%
Ti-doms: 8.5%
Ni-doms: 3.5%

Si-auxes: 21%
Fi-auxes: 16.5%
Fe-auxes: 15.5%
Se-auxes: 14.5%
Te-auxes: 13.5%
Ne-auxes: 7.5%
Ti-auxes: 7%
Ni-auxes: 4.5%

Si/Ne: 65%
Se/Ni: 35%

Fi/Te: 54.5%
Fe/Ti: 45.5%
 
Last edited:

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
It seems odd that there are twice as many ENFPs than ESTPs. I don't get out a lot, but that doesn't seem right.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Weirdest thing about that is that most people are ISFJs and the least people are INFJs. A difference of one letter bookends the spectrum?

Obviously evolution dispersed us this way because more people are needed to work at Wal-Mart or in factories than other professions.

Seriously though, in terms of nature makes more sense to have builders/protectors be almost half the population, then the next highest be more athletically inclined risk takers...then all those weirdos on the fringes to be shamans and medicine men and witches.
 

Amethyst

¡MI TORTA!
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
2,191
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I feel like there should be more feelers...especially if there is a significantly massive lean towards F in groups of females. I would think ISTJ would be number two.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I feel like there should be more feelers...especially if there is a significantly massive lean towards F in groups of females. I would think ISTJ would be number two.

ESFJ is only half a percentage higher than ISTJ. This may be because there are a tiny bit more women than men.
 

Affably Evil

New member
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
73
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w4
Weirdest thing about that is that most people are ISFJs and the least people are INFJs. A difference of one letter bookends the spectrum?

The data set lists Si at 46% and Ni at 8%, and considering those are the dominant functions in question, that result makes sense.

That being said, this site doesn't list what populations or countries were involved (which would definitely alter the % slant given societal leanings and preferences), nor does it mention how many people were sampled. I found it interesting, but overall not necessarily a particularly credible source.
 

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
Seriously though, in terms of nature makes more sense to have builders/protectors be almost half the population, then the next highest be more athletically inclined risk takers...then all those weirdos on the fringes to be shamans and medicine men and witches.

LOL. I think it's also part natural selection, because people who pay attention to what's immediately going on are more likely to just plain survive than those who don't.

Affably Evil said:
That being said, this site doesn't list what populations or countries were involved (which would definitely alter the % slant given societal leanings and preferences), nor does it mention how many people were sampled. I found it interesting, but overall not necessarily a particularly credible source.

The sad thing is, I keep trying to find other sources (particularly statistics that include decimals...seems more accurate), but all the other sources just quote that site.
 

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
I found it interesting, but overall not necessarily a particularly credible source.

Ah ha. That site might have copied THIS site. http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/my-mbti-results/how-frequent-is-my-type.asp It says:

"The estimated frequency table was compiled from a variety of MBTI® results from 1972 through 2002, including data banks at the Center for Applications of Psychological Type; CPP, Inc; and Stanford Research Institute (SRI)."

...I guess that's still not a whole lot of help.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I still dont understand what such statistics are good for except than advancing your self-made depression, fueling your religious plot of doom or for your plans on creating the Ãœbermensch.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
LOL. I think it's also part natural selection, because people who pay attention to what's immediately going on are more likely to just plain survive than those who don't.

Absolutely true, especially for primitive man. But now that we live longer and have this whole modern technologically advanced society it seems that some of the people who would have done quite well in the wild when the average of death was 25 or 30 are the sort of people we now say are "stupid" and "weeded out by natural selection" because it seems harder for them to adjust to the way society is now...and by that I mean that I think a lot of the people who are currently on welfare or have low-paying jobs and who also usually had three kids by the time they were 21 probably fared better in a more primitive society. Same for Jackass/Crocodile Hunter kinds of risk takers.

I'm just sayin'.
 

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
I still dont understand what such statistics are good for except than advancing your self-made depression, fueling your religious plot of doom or for your plans on creating the Ãœbermensch.

LOL. I guess I just wanted to know what I was dealing with.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I still dont understand what such statistics are good for except than advancing your self-made depression, fueling your religious plot of doom or for your plans on creating the Ãœbermensch.

the kwisatz haderach will come from the union of an INTJ male and ENFJ female
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I still dont understand what such statistics are good for except than advancing your self-made depression, fueling your religious plot of doom or for your plans on creating the Ãœbermensch.

Heresy!

But they're not a lot of good without a sense of how the stats are bounded (i.e., the demographics surveyed).
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
the kwisatz haderach will come from the union of an INTJ male and ENFJ female

*giggles*

Most of the stats likely derive form the MBTI manual in which collections of hundreds of different studies-most with small or questionably controlled sample sizes can be found. The stats about type may be based on years and years of compiled CAP data on MBTI test results. The down side is that about only 70% of folks retake the test and get the same result-likely due to many of the issues we discuss here with respect to alternate ways of using functions and functional maturity. So you assume at least 30% of the data in each of these studies is questionable.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
I'm rather suspicious of any MBTI statistics that puts INFPs above 1-2% of the population. I feel like I've barely come across another INFP in my entire life let alone on a regular basis. I wonder what their methodology was because INFPs' intense interest in MBTI could easily sway it.

And there's more introverts than extroverts? Come on, really? I'm also very surprised at the gap between feelers and thinkers - not that I necessarily question it. But then maybe its just that Es and Ts have a louder voice in society and seem more prevalent than they really are :shrug:

I'm rather shocked at Fi being 30%, not to mention the same as Fe - and I'm not sure what to make of it. I'd like to know what the distribution of the functions is like beyond simply the dominant/aux (which I assume is what is being measured).
 

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
And there's more introverts than extroverts? Come on, really?

Have you heard the phenomenon that people overestimate the number of extroverts in their environment? The extroverts are the ones you hear, so you automatically think there are a lot of them.

Southern Kross said:
I'm rather shocked at Fi being 30%, not to mention the same as Fe - and I'm not sure what to make of it.

Well, I think the Fe difference is that there are a lot of SFJs but hardly any NFJs. Plus, there are many SFPs. And, people say that there's no way there's twice as many ENFPs as ESTPs, so that could be an error.

Southern Kross said:
I'd like to know what the distribution of the functions is like beyond simply the dominant/aux (which I assume is what is being measured).

:) More fun for me!

Si-doms: 25.5%
Fe-doms: 14.5%
Fi-doms: 13.5%
Se-doms: 12.5%
Ne-doms: 11%
Te-doms: 11%
Ti-doms: 8.5%
Ni-doms: 3.5%

The percentages are so close that the only thing you can really conclude is that Si-doms are the most and Ni-doms are the least.

Si-auxes: 21%
Fi-auxes: 16.5%
Fe-auxes: 15.5%
Se-auxes: 14.5%
Te-auxes: 13.5%
Ne-auxes: 7.5%
Ti-auxes: 7%
Ni-auxes: 4.5%

It's close here, as well, so you could say Si-auxes are the most, Ne and Ti-auxes are the second least, and Ni-auxes are the least.

Te/Fi: 54.5%
Fe/Ti: 45.5%

About half and half.

Ne/Si: 65%
Se/Ni: 35%

Since there's so much Si, there's an obvious preferences for Si/Ne.

Does that help or was that not what you were looking for?
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
^ Wow thanks! That's fascinating.

It makes me wonder why evolution doesn't love Ni or Ti. You can understand why Si is so central because its based on past experience and known information; knowing what works and what doesn't, is clearly valuable for the social and technical development of mankind - both on primitive and complex levels. But why are Ni and Ti considered less useful and therefore less prevalent? I'm actually surprised there is such a spread between the most common to least common functions - you'd think evolution would find relative value in all of functions. I mean, look at Fi - its so high on the list and its not exactly the most practical function out there.
 

BlueGray

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
474
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
When I looked at people from my school FPs seemed heavily represented. The most common types were ISTJ, ENFP, and ISFP. This was a small sample of just those at my school but it does match with those types being as common as the statistic states.
 

Random Ness

New member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
270
When I looked at people from my school FPs seemed heavily represented. The most common types were ISTJ, ENFP, and ISFP. This was a small sample of just those at my school but it does match with those types being as common as the statistic states.

Is it just me or does it seem like a lot of people on these forums say they know a "disproportionate" amount of ENFPs?
 
Top