Some people joke about how typology is an accepted form of stereotyping, but then you hear about others complaining about how type stereotypes suck.
So what is the difference?
this is a good question. since attitudes vary from one individual to the next, reasons vary, but i would condense it down to: stereotype threat, misunderstanding the theories, and failings in the theories themselves.
'stereotype threat' is the anxiety a person experiences when they believe they fall into a negative stereotype. their anxiety often incurs a self-fulfilling prophecy. for instance, in a larger socio-economic context, minorities suffer from stereotype threats that reinforce their performance and behaviors. in one study, black students scored lower than caucasions simply because they were told that they were being tested on "strategy" and "reasoning". similarly, if an isfp is told that they can't do logic because their thinking function is last on the stack, then they will suffer from anxiety. however, in the case of typology, people have more leverage to consider different types, prefer different systems, or even reject systems all together. conversely, it is probable that some people are less likely to reconsider if they don't experience very much stereotype threat.
typology is also a bit like the dsm in the sense that while test-takers might exhibit clusters of traits, they often don't align with every trait listed. since most forms of hard science aim to form consistent explanations, and western culture generally values certainty, typology tends to fail modern scientific expectations. for example, compared to accredited psychological evaluations, online mbti tests do not meet the same level of validity, reliability, and standardization. as evidenced by scores posted on this website, subjects may take the same test multiple times to yield wildly different scores, or take separate tests with different outcomes. therefore, for people who prefer harder science, typology would seem to be a clear form of stereotyping. their method of dealing with this fact is probably influenced by the effects of stereotype threat.
finally, some people don't have a thorough understanding of type theories, and mankind's capacity to develop realistic theories is limited. every category ever conceived was, more or less, an abbreviation for the rich amount of detail housed in the object itself. if i told you i was sitting on a chair, you wouldn't know the exact composition of the chair because the shorthand definition wouldn't tell you. similarly, if i told you my friend was enfp, you might get a general picture of them, but other variables go unmentioned. furthermore, when people don't know the theories, they're more prone to mistype based on superficial behaviors. consequentially, even more generalized stereotypes are reinforced. a person's response to these factors, once again, is probably influenced by stereotype threat. you may see dissatisfaction and rejection, dissatisfaction and a desire to improve understanding, or contentment with the current models.
to sum things up, other factors being considered, i think stereotype threat plays a significant role in how someone interacts with typology. some personality traits like openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism play a role as well. even environmental variations have an impact.
