• 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.

Percentage of each typegroup in population - theory

Stephano

Almöhi
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
1,105
MBTI Type
NFP
There are different opinions on how high the percentage of each typegroup (SJ, SP, NT, NF...don't know how you call it) is, but every website tells something different. Well there's a way to calculate it without having statistical data or having done surveys . It's commonly accepted that there are 25-33% Ns in the population, same for Fs (male) and Ts (females). For I/E and J/P there's an allocation of 50% for each preference.I've read that on wikipedia someday.
If you assume that this data is correct use some math now. Multiply the lowest possible percentages with each other, same with the highest.

SJ = 66 • (50/100) = 33% and 75 • (50/100) = 37,5%
That means 33% to 37,5% are SJs. If you think there are more than this, then there has to be a higher percentage of Sensors or Judgers in the population than wikipedia says.
Let's go on!

SP = 33% to 37,5%
NT = 16,5% to 24,75% (male),
6,25% to 11,11% (female)
NF = 16,5% to 24,75% (female), 6,25% to 11,11% (male)

ES/IS = 33% to 37,5%
EN/IN = 12,5% to 16,5%
ET/IT = 33% to 37,5% (male)
12,5% to 16,5% (female)
EF/IF = 33% to 37,5% (female) 12,5% to 16,5% (male)
EP/IP = 25%
ST = 43,5% to 56,25% (male)
16,5% to 24,75% (female)
SF = 43,5% to 56,25% (female)
16,5% to 24,75% (male)
NJ/NP = 12,5% to 16,5%
TJ/TP= 33% to 37,5% (male) 12,5% to 16,5% (female)
FJ/FP = 33% to 37,5% (female) 12,5% to 16,5% (male)

Is this crazy enough to be correct??

Edit: According to this data male ENFP is 1,6% to 2,7%, a lot lower like most sites say.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I = 30%
N = 25%
T = 45%
P = 40%
 

reckful

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
656
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I think you will run into the same problems as anyone trying to make sense of the (mis)information surrounding statistics of type. Firstly the only ones even worth approaching are those with decent sources routed in actual group testing, such as the ones used by Isabel Briggs Myers in Gifts Differing.

But then one has to wonder on the rather immaterial nature of type in the first place and how you can actually know someone is testing to an accurate representation of how their cognition works. People generally hold an image of themselves of varying degrees of a positive or negative nature, (or usually a mixture of the two), and tend to idealise or view certain traits as being possessed of by themselves.

It's easily observed that a person could take a broad view of the world and those around her/him and come to the conclusion that a large portion of that world lives in a shortsighted world of concrete systems and adhere to traditional structures because they do not have the insight and well....intelligence to consider change or other options. But of course this is just a stereotype of an SJ, however that dichotomy is the one usually relegated to the position of the majority.

This of course ignores other information that would offer more options to the contrary. Then again what system are we using? Do we factor in cognitive functions here? Perhaps a bit of keirsey? Maybe some newer interpretation that goes by visual tics and signs, helpfully ignoring environmental factors that usually contribute to such habitual behaviours.

And so on.

Honestly if someone hands me a statistic on type, I want to check where it came from and how it was sourced....and then laugh at it....well sometimes. Other times it has some interesting information.

As long as we can move away from an interpretation which relies upon identifying groups based upon arbitrary understandings of intelligence.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
^^ Yeah... I just... one, it took me years to eventually study and then type myself well enough so that I felt it was definitely the best fit out of 16. Is it realistic to think that the average person taking the MBTI is going to obtain a best-fit result to an extent that it's reasonable to assume that they have? I am an ENFP; tested INFP. My mom is an ESFJ; tested ESTJ. How many others out there have gotten results they later realized were not a good fit? I imagine many.

To continue to the statistics themselves, at least personally, I suspect that SJ numbers are far overrepresented and NP numbers far underrepresented, to start out with.

I do applaud the effort put into application and calculation in the OP.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
How many others out there have gotten results they later realized were not a good fit? I imagine many.

I agree, in fact I would say it is the majority. The most prolific result I received early on was INTJ and as far as I can tell I most definitely did not answer in a manner pertaining to thinking, or introverted intuition. After reading various descriptions of the type I ruled it out completely.

Some of the descriptions were flattering, but that in itself was a warning bell to me and I couldn't bring myself to to buy into a self-delusion, (even though I am sure I lie and delude myself all the time in other areas), of that nature.
 
S

Stansmith

Guest
I think it's much more common for sensors to think they're intuitive than the other way around. N-types are a pretty obvious minority based on observation.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I think it's much more common for sensors to think they're intuitive than the other way around. N-types are a pretty obvious minority based on observation.

Of course. People into this theory aren't usually given a decent incentive for identifying as a sensing type.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Honestly if someone hands me a statistic on type, I want to check where it came from and how it was sourced....and then laugh at it....well sometimes. Other times it has some interesting information.

Every time I've investigated statistics on MBTI, or at least tried to, the trail runs dead quickly - sometimes immediately. So many books give off statistics and have NO reference for where they came from. Often they call it "estimated frequencies" - does that mean pulling numbers out of your butt? :huh:

I will admit, I find the way statistics are gathered to be confusing. Of all the maths, that one is the hardest for me to get my brain around (and I was always good at math in school and college). So I don't really know what is legit, but much of the time, it sounds sketchy to me simply because of what you noted - how do we know people tested accurately? How much verification of their type is there?

Like many here, I did not test my type initially, nor for many years, and I still often do not test my type (I test INTP much of the time). However, I did not identify with the type I tested, so instead of being mistyped, I simply did not settle on anything. It took more thorough investigation on my part to see I was INFP (because Feeling is so poorly represented on most tests).

I think sometimes those MBTI certified coaches make matters worse too; I've heard they sort of coax people into the type they tested as, and they rely on a lot of behavioral stereotypes. Their knowledge of the Jungian theory and cognitive functions may be poor. So even if they are educating people a bit to help them identify their type, they may still be leading them down the wrong path.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Of course. People into this theory aren't usually given a decent incentive for identifying as a sensing type.

Absolutely not. That's part of why I like the function descriptions - Se and Si are really fascinating and impressive compared to the standard "S" descriptions.

N is also made out to be way more "special" than it is. It's just conceptual, theoretical thought. Making connections and forming mental models to understand. It's not necessarily more "advanced"; it's a distortion of information for the purpose of rapid utilization. It's a trade-off, and not always the better one.
 
Top