[Traditional Enneagram] Forum Statistics - % of Enneagram Types

[highlander]

Actually, the mean average (for men and women) according to that link (where it seems to be based on self reporting from couples seeking counseling) is exactly the same as the chart you just made. [eta: ...which seems odd to me because that means an accurate representation from all types went to seek counseling? I'm probably misunderstanding something here. But anyway, the numbers from Enneagram Monthly are apparently the same.]

It's kind of interesting. Even if the numbers are significantly different for those two sets of statistics (Enneagram Monthly vs. Rheti), the charts seem to tell a similar story with respect to forum membership:

1. 2s, 8s, 1s and 9s are under-represented on the forum
2. 4s and 5s are over-represented on the forum

 

[highlander]

I also thought this is kind of astonishing. 82% of INTPs are 5s? That's a lot.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I also thought this is kind of astonishing. 82% of INTPs are 5s? That's a lot.

Well, taking into account that’s about the INTPs here, it doesn’t really surprise me. This is the typical ‘affirmation’ for an e5:

Reflect on this quotation: "Today, realize that fantasizing, theorizing, and speculating can all be enjoyable pastimes, but learn to honestly assess when you are using them to avoid more troubling issues in your real life."

Back to basics today: remember that your Basic Desire is to be understand reality and uncover the essence of things. Can you become aware of how your Basic Desire is the root of many of your most compelling motivations and unconscious actions?

A major feature of your personality is the tendency to become fascinated by offbeat, esoteric subjects, and strange artificial worlds. While these may be interesting to you, they often become a huge waste of time. Watch for this in yourself today.

Be aware that your "characteristic temptation" is to replace direct experience with concepts. Average to Unhealthy Fives literally "think too much," in categories that are not pertinent or useful to solving the problem at hand. How can you stay fully in the direct experience of your body today?

Read: a strong tendency to flee into esoteric, theoretical constructs for a sense of comfort. It goes a long way in explaining the high representation of e5, I think. I suspect the % of e5 in any mbti type here will be higher than that of the general population. I’m not sure about the e4s though (as far as understanding why they’d flock here).

 

[highlander]

Well, taking into account that’s about the INTPs here, it doesn’t really surprise me. This is the typical ‘affirmation’ for an e5:


Read: a strong tendency to flee into esoteric, theoretical constructs for a sense of comfort. It goes a long way in explaining the high representation of e5, I think. I suspect the % of e5 in any mbti type here will be higher than that of the general population. I’m not sure about the e4s though (as far as understanding why they’d flock here).

That makes complete sense as to why we would have so many 5s. It would be worthwhile to look at the number of 6w5s and 4w5s in the forum population as well. There are probably a lot centered around that 5'ness.

Another thing I took out of the individual MBTI/Enneagram stats is that for almost all the types I ran the numbers for, there is one Enneagram type that seems to dominate very strongly. For INTPs, INTJs and ISTPs, it's Enneagram 5. For Ne Doms, it's Enneagram 7. For INFPs and INFJs, it's Enneagram 4. I knew there would be a relationship but had no idea it would be that strong. For some of the types at 3% of the forum membership or below, I don't have quite as much confidence in the distribution because the numbers are low.

 

[highlander]

This is another study that includes a distribution of different types. It's a small sample (241) and 73% of the test takes were female but every bit adds up to something representative.

 

[sulfit]

What would you speculate on these things:
- Why would we have so few Enneagram 9s, 6s, 1s, and 2s compared to the population at large?

The profiles of these type are usually unflattering, while profiles for 4s and 5s are too ubiquitous.

1s are often pictured as boring, rigid, moralistic preachers (who would want to be this type?). Many healthy 1s type themselves as 5s and go on believing this typing for years. 2s are pictured as people-pleasers, which is not as exciting as the glamorous image of type 4 where they end up typing themselves. 6s and 9s are depicted as pushovers. Quite a few 6s type into 8s.

- Why would we have so many Enneagram 5s and 4s compared to the population at large?

The profiles of these types are more complimenting and more universally encompassing than profiles of other types.

- It looks like the previous dominance of 4s and 5s may be decreasing and percentage of 6s is increasing. Thoughts as to why?
- Any other thoughts?

People studying enneagram in greater depth? Stereotypes getting rigorously dismantled? Frankly, I don't have a clue.

 

[SilkRoad]

It's also worth noting that there are a lot of special snowflakes on the Internet and many of them may gravitate toward 4 and 5 descriptions.

It's kind of like people who think they MUST be INFJs because they're "special" and "broken" and the reason other people don't get along with them is because they're sooooo insightful and 100% right about everyone all the time, and you know, that freaks people out.

 

[highlander]

Read: a strong tendency to flee into esoteric, theoretical constructs for a sense of comfort. It goes a long way in explaining the high representation of e5, I think.

I looked up the wing types for Enneagram 4 and 6 on the forum. There are 5.4 4w5s for every 1 4w3. There are 1.7 6w5s for every 1 6w7. It points towards more evidence in support of your theory.

The profiles of these type are usually unflattering, while profiles for 4s and 5s are too ubiquitous.

1s are often pictured as boring, rigid, moralistic preachers (who would want to be this type?). Many healthy 1s type themselves as 5s and go on believing this typing for years. 2s are pictured as people-pleasers, which is not as exciting as the glamorous image of type 4 where they end up typing themselves. 6s and 9s are depicted as pushovers. Quite a few 6s type into 8s.

I've always been confused by this. It defeats the purpose to identify with a type that you are not. There is little positive gain to the individual by doing this. I'm sure 6s are under-represented in our forum population as you state. One of the reasons in my mind is that it is the most confusing Enneagram type to understand. Also it seems reasonable that generally counterphobic 6s would erroneously type into 8s (as I did). There are not a lot of 8s here though.

All the Enneagram descriptions sound bad. That's sort of the point. It's about your fixations.

 

[Cellmold]

It's also worth noting that there are a lot of special snowflakes on the Internet and many of them may gravitate toward 4 and 5 descriptions.

It's kind of like people who think they MUST be INFJs because they're "special" and "broken" and the reason other people don't get along with them is because they're sooooo insightful and 100% right about everyone all the time, and you know, that freaks people out.

You would get along with Vicky Jo.

 

[Ivy]

Neat!

Re: the high number of E5s- it's worth mentioning that this forum sprang forth out of the skull of an INTP-specific forum, and has always been INTP-heavy as a result. INTPs, at least those who gravitated towards INTPC, most often Etype as 5s.

 

[SilkRoad]

You would get along with Vicky Jo.

Why?

(I'm aware that saying "you would get along with Vicky Jo" is considered a huge insult in typology terms)

 

[sulfit]

I've always been confused by this. It defeats the purpose to identify with a type that you are not. There is little positive gain to the individual by doing this.

My experience shows that individuals who engage in this tend to be mentally and emotionally immature, lacking in confidence and a solid sense of identity, they are ridden with anxieties and are overall just not very healthy. They easily over-identify with descriptions and profiles that do not resemble them and go for whatever promises to deliver them even a small portion of an ego-boost.

Then there are people who make an honest mistake because they haven't studied ennegram in more depth. These people usually find their true type after they spend some time reading and posting on typology forums.

Also it seems reasonable that generally counterphobic 6s would erroneously type into 8s (as I did). There are not a lot of 8s here though.

I remember Naranjo commented that type 8s is one he has encountered least frequently. He said 8s rarely come to these kind of "find-yourself" workshops. It could be that 8s are more rare in enneagram community because they have least interest in the enneagram to begin with.

 

[Cellmold]

Why?

(I'm aware that saying "you would get along with Vicky Jo" is considered a huge insult in typology terms)

Well even though im not personally fond of her, I didn't mean it as an insult.

More so that she shares your vitriol for people who mistype as INFJ.

Hmm then again....maybe that is an insult and I didn't realise?

 

[SilkRoad]

Well even though im not personally fond of her, I didn't mean it as an insult.

More so that she shares your vitriol for people who mistype as INFJ.

Hmm then again....maybe that is an insult and I didn't realise?

I don't know if I'd call it vitriol. I just find it annoying that a lot of people assume that because they are difficult to get along with, or because they've had difficult life experiences, or because they have a lot invested in feeling "special", or because they think they're psychic...they must be INFJ.

 

[Betty Blue]

Population - % of Enneagram types in Rheti testing in 1998

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet but there are far more females in the data on that link than males.

Will that not skew things?


EDIT: hmm, idea. [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] could you show us the stats broken down into male/female too please... may help.

 

[Cellmold]

I don't know if I'd call it vitriol. I just find it annoying that a lot of people assume that because they are difficult to get along with, or because they've had difficult life experiences, or because they have a lot invested in feeling "special", or because they think they're psychic...they must be INFJ.

Well of course, everyone finds it annoying when everyone else is assuming. But I can see your point, afterall my type is hardly an idealised one so I dont have to worry about mis-identification.

But even if it was, I wouldn't give it much consideration.

 

[Nicodemus]

I would like to see the actual numbers, not just the percentages.

 

[wolfy]

Without reading the thread... 5 and 4 are often NT/NF which would show up as an imbalance. As for six, maybe it is that almost everyone here is self typed while the percentages are estimates or counselling. Six isn't a popular choice. I thought nine was more common than this.

 

[uumlau]

The following is a set of statistics on forum membership. There are three pieces of data:

Before 2010 - % of forum members who joined prior to 1/1/2010 (earlier members)
After 1/2012 - % of forum members that have posted since 1/1/2012 (active members)
Population - % of Enneagram types in Rheti testing in 1998

The point of this is to identify which predominant Enneagram types are on the forum and compare this to the Enneagram types in the overall population at large. The Rheti stats are the best ones I could find. If someone has anything better, let me know.

Cool graph.

What would you speculate on these things:
- Why would we have so few Enneagram 9s, 6s, 1s, and 2s compared to the population at large?

Um, because the first 3 types (5, 4, 9) are all the "avoidant" types. If you look at the sorting of the types, it's pretty much sorted in order of how much each type typically wants to interact personally (not via computer) with other people.

- Why would we have so many Enneagram 5s and 4s compared to the population at large?

Same reason.

- It looks like the previous dominance of 4s and 5s may be decreasing and percentage of 6s is increasing. Thoughts as to why?

Brainy 6w5s discovering that they're not 5w6.

- Any other thoughts?

I would not have thought 9s were so frequent in the general population, or that 3s were so uncommon.

I suspect that the test takers that represent the general population thought of themselves as nice (9), helpful (2), or romantic (4), and that as such, these numbers don't reflect the real types. No one likes thinking of themselves as bossy (8), an always-right stick in the mud (1), or vain and overly obsessed with self-image (3). As a corollary, I'd bet that the 8, 1s and 3s are the most accurate typings, as the downside of each is clear. Enneagram types aren't initially clear that 9s are often "nice" for the wrong reasons, that 2s are often helpful for the wrong reasons, and that 4s are often romantic for the wrong reasons.

 

[uumlau]

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet but there are far more females in the data on that link than males.

Will that not skew things?


EDIT: hmm, idea. [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] could you show us the stats broken down into male/female too please... may help.

Ah, yes, this would also explain the excess of 2s, 9s and 4s.