narticus
New member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Messages
- 26
- MBTI Type
- INTJ
Lenore Thompson’s Personality Type: An Owner’s Manual opened up the MBTI to me in a way not previously experienced or understood. I still refer to it often. My one major disagreement is with her prioritization of the shadow functions. Her theory would order functions for an ISTJ thusly:
Si Te (Ni Fe | Ti Se) Fi Ne
I have a very small set of data from myself and four friends from the cognitiveprocessesDOTcom. Comparing the S/N split and T/F split, I found that in seven of the ten cases, the pair of i/e functions of one type both scored higher than the opposing pair (for example, both Ss scoring higher than both Ns or vice versa). In two of the other ten, a ‘sandwich’ pattern existed (e.g. SNNS). In only one of the ten comparisons did the LT model hold (Ti > Fi > Te > Fe) for an INTP friend.
Granted this is a miniscule sample size, but to me the results make sense. If, for example, my dominant function is Ni, then my comfort with abstract information supersedes my comfort with concrete information, regardless of i/e attitude. Returning to the ISTJ example, I would order the functions:
Si Te (Ti Se | Ni Fe) Fi Ne
For each of the five people for whom I had data, I ordered the functions in LT’s projected order as well as my own. Returning to the ISTJ friend the scores are below.
LT BB
Si 44.4 Si 44.4
Te 38.2 Te 38.2
Ni 19.6 Ti 37.3
Fe 26.8 Se 29.1
Ti 37.3 Ni 19.6
Se 29.1 Fe 26.8
Fi 27.9 Fi 27.9
Ne 17.1 Ne 17.1
I counted any time that the scores increased when moving from one function to the next one on the list (indicating that a function was out of order), and the size of the jump (an approximation of how far out of place the function is). In each of these two lists, there are two jumps in scores, indicating two functions ‘out of order’. In the case of the Thompson model, the two jumps sum to a magnitude of 17.7, while in my model, the two jumps sum to only 8.3, suggesting that my model was a better predictor of order. For the five samples, results are below. (Pair ordered: Thompson, Me)
INTJ (3,2) (31.5,22.4)
ISTJ (3,2) (37.2,32.4)
INTP (1,1) ( 3.0,10.9)
ISTJ (2,2) (17.7, 8.3)
ESFP (3,3) (19.0,24.0)
The jumps were equal in three of five cases, with my system creating fewer jumps in the other two. In four out of five, the magnitude of jumps also favored my system, the lone exception being a case in which both predictions were quite accurate.
Five data points is certainly not enough. If any of you are willing to provide your own data (please include both the type you think you are as well as the type that the results suggested, if the two differ). PMPM me your results. When I have accumulated a more credible amount of data (or when data stops coming in), I will try to provide more results to the board.
Si Te (Ni Fe | Ti Se) Fi Ne
I have a very small set of data from myself and four friends from the cognitiveprocessesDOTcom. Comparing the S/N split and T/F split, I found that in seven of the ten cases, the pair of i/e functions of one type both scored higher than the opposing pair (for example, both Ss scoring higher than both Ns or vice versa). In two of the other ten, a ‘sandwich’ pattern existed (e.g. SNNS). In only one of the ten comparisons did the LT model hold (Ti > Fi > Te > Fe) for an INTP friend.
Granted this is a miniscule sample size, but to me the results make sense. If, for example, my dominant function is Ni, then my comfort with abstract information supersedes my comfort with concrete information, regardless of i/e attitude. Returning to the ISTJ example, I would order the functions:
Si Te (Ti Se | Ni Fe) Fi Ne
For each of the five people for whom I had data, I ordered the functions in LT’s projected order as well as my own. Returning to the ISTJ friend the scores are below.
LT BB
Si 44.4 Si 44.4
Te 38.2 Te 38.2
Ni 19.6 Ti 37.3
Fe 26.8 Se 29.1
Ti 37.3 Ni 19.6
Se 29.1 Fe 26.8
Fi 27.9 Fi 27.9
Ne 17.1 Ne 17.1
I counted any time that the scores increased when moving from one function to the next one on the list (indicating that a function was out of order), and the size of the jump (an approximation of how far out of place the function is). In each of these two lists, there are two jumps in scores, indicating two functions ‘out of order’. In the case of the Thompson model, the two jumps sum to a magnitude of 17.7, while in my model, the two jumps sum to only 8.3, suggesting that my model was a better predictor of order. For the five samples, results are below. (Pair ordered: Thompson, Me)
INTJ (3,2) (31.5,22.4)
ISTJ (3,2) (37.2,32.4)
INTP (1,1) ( 3.0,10.9)
ISTJ (2,2) (17.7, 8.3)
ESFP (3,3) (19.0,24.0)
The jumps were equal in three of five cases, with my system creating fewer jumps in the other two. In four out of five, the magnitude of jumps also favored my system, the lone exception being a case in which both predictions were quite accurate.
Five data points is certainly not enough. If any of you are willing to provide your own data (please include both the type you think you are as well as the type that the results suggested, if the two differ). PMPM me your results. When I have accumulated a more credible amount of data (or when data stops coming in), I will try to provide more results to the board.