A Quick Guide To Double-Checking Your Type

[FalseHeartDothKnow]

Well, I decided I'm probably more thinking than intuitive a few weeks ago... and I'm certainly no Ti-dominant. So ESTJ is the best fit.

Fair enough

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Well, I'd say I'm more responding than initiating (and I'm definitely informing). I do sometimes try and initiate things because all my friends are lazy and I want to do things, but I really prefer not to if possible. For some reason, I was put as the leader of a group to work on something once, for some reason, and that turned out pretty awful. The group wouldn't listen to me, they didn't understand what I wanted, I couldn't make any decisions, or if I did they ignored them, and I became entirely disinterested rather quickly. I actually suck at working with people altogether. I think that makes me more likely INTP.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

By the way, could a strong T perhaps confuse informing and directing a little? I was just thinking that with some strong NTPs, they can be more direct and unfriendly, even though they are supposedly informing.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

I don't think that this is a 100% certain indicator, really. I think this can be largely effected by cultural differences, and not be 100% anyway. For example, some male ESFJs seem directive, because that is a typical behavioural attitude, and Fe tries to emulate it.

 

[Eric B]

By the way, could a strong T perhaps confuse informing and directing a little? I was just thinking that with some strong NTPs, they can be more direct and unfriendly, even though they are supposedly informing.

T is either directing or structure-focused, or both. Both for TJ's, just plain directive for STP's, and structure-focused, though informative for NTP's. Structure-focus is sort of another kind of "directive"; basically a counterpart of that factor, but for Keirsey's temperaments instead of the Interaction Styles. Both factors determine people vs task focus, or agreeableness.

So the T is what gives the otherwise informative NTP's their critical, "directive"-like edge.

 

[FakePlasticAlice]

INTP? hmmm.. that really doesn't seem right.

 

[Aleksei]

Some sort of NF other than ENFJ. Don't have enough info to narrow it further, but INFJ seems fairly correct.

Socionics, INFp-Ni.

EDIT: Don't worry, I got ENTJ on this thing. It's miscalibrated anyway... there's no way ENFPs are affiliative.

 

[Mysterious15]

It was just a little scary when every trait of one particular type, was correct. Makes you wonder how long scientists thought over, and kept re-checking this personality system, until it was finally completed (excuse me if I said anything inappropriate as I really don't know who came up with the MBTI method)
This was really helpful, Thank you.
Guess its INFJ for me......

 

[cfs1992]

Directing/Informing - Informing, most of the time. Directing only under stress or when I'm irritated, when I become "like a boss" (oh, Te!)

Initiating/Responding - I'm an initiator, in the most of situations. Only in some few cases responding.

Abstract/Concrete - Totally abstract!

Affiliative/Pragmatic - Affiliative.

ENFP.

 

[/DG/]

Ahh... I forgot about this great thread!

IMO, it should be stickied so I can find it again without having to wait for another person to reply to it. :/

Also, apparently I am ISFP or ISTP.

*edit* WOW! I'm blind! It is stickied. I'm a bit slow at times...

 

[Mal12345]

A Quick Guide To Double-Checking Your Type
A note: a lot of this is based on what Linda Berens thinks, feel free to dismiss it if you find you disagree.

Step 1: Determine your Interaction Style

Determining your Interaction Style can help narrow down your type. If you manage to settle on just one, you've only got four left to choose from!
(Adapted/Stolen from here )

Each of us has two other opposing pairs of innate preferences. In our communications we prefer either Directing or Informing. In our interaction with others we prefer either Initiating or Responding.
Directing communications have a time and task orientation with an implication of urgency to get the task done. "Have your report to me by close of business today."
Informing communications are designed to enroll the other in the process by providing motivation with relevant information. "Your report is an essential part of our project."
The directing style of communication is easiest to spot. The extreme form is the style used by traffic cops, stressed parents, and military commanders. It includes communications that would be classified as a "direct order." Examples include: "Sit down", "Put it over there", "Clean your room."

The informing style of communication is harder to detect. Sometimes those with the directing style are simply oblivious to it, not recognizing that a defining interaction just transpired. Extreme forms of this communication include messages that might be classified as "victim talk." Examples include: "I don't have any money", "That music is so loud", I'm not feeling good."
Initiating types are more comfortable with making the first contact and establishing role relationships. They like to engage others in interaction and conversation and are more fast paced.
Responding types are more comfortable letting others initiate contact and accepting the roles established by others. They are more slow paced and are comfortable with silence.

I'll choose to dismiss this on the grounds that it isn't Jungian. Simply stop and compare Jungian typology with Myers-Briggs: consider the fact that the latter had developed their own typology before discovering Jung. You will see that the MBTI represents a fusion of Jungian ideas with ideas Myers-Briggs held to previous to their discovering Jung.

Case in point, little if anything regarding introversion and extroversion survives in the MBTI portraits of types. Where Myers-Briggs considered I/E to be a behavior, Jung considered it to be an attitude. Much could be deduced about behaviors resulting from attitudes, but social psychologists have known for decades (and studies prove it) that attitudes do not necessarily correspond with behaviors. The science of social psychology is practically based on this fact.

From http://wilderdom.com/psychology/social/introduction/Attitudes.html

Can Attitudes Predict Behaviour?

General attitudes are poor predictors of behaviour e.g., attitude to environment
However, attitudes are likely to predict behaviour when:
The attitude and behaviour are specific
Environmental reinforcement matches attitude
Important others share the same attitude
Can Attitudes Predict Behaviour?

...attitudes are likely to predict behaviour when:
Attitudes are implicit (unconscious)
Attitudes are strong
Attitude has developed from personal experience

The relevant part of this quote comes in the first sentence, "General attitudes are poor predictors of behaviour e.g., attitude to environment." That is, introversion and extroversion, as general attitudes, are poor predictors of behavior. (It does not mean attitude toward environmentalism or ecology...)

A difference in general attitude toward one's environment can be visualized through a simple question: When you lose something such as the TV remote, do you immediately: A. ask someone if they've seen it (assuming anybody is around to ask), or B. start looking for it yourself and only ask someone more or less as a last resort?

True, introverts are more "self-sufficient" in the latter sense. However, one cannot predict, with certainty, on any given occasion of losing something whether or not the introvert or extrovert is going to act out with either A (ask someone immediately, if possible) or B (start hunting around without asking for help).

So the insertion of introverted and extroverted behaviors into the MBTI was not based on any kind of scientific fact or study, when there is supposedly some kind of root or origin with Jungian typology regarding general attitude. It is simply original Myers-Briggs typology granted, without warrant, the intellectual reputation and dignity of Jung's great theory of types by mashing it together into one homogeneous blend of theories.

I have nothing against VagrantFarce's theory of communication styles quoted above. But it is reminiscent of some superficial, pre-Jungian idea Myers and Briggs may have come up with before they met up with Jungian typology. And as usual it is being given the respectability, not only of Jung, but of the MBTI which has gained much popular (although not scientific) credibility since it originated around 1940.

 

[COLORATURA]

I am sure that there are plenty of self-help w/ types on the internet. This particular one seems very helpful to me, and if you read the all of the "preferences" she has given, they seem to be the same descripts as MBTI only written slightly different. People are always saying about ALL the personality tests that they can't choose which b/c they do both! Well, obviously if you understand any personality test you will understand that we all behave using all of the functions. The difference is what you prefer MOST of the time! That means, that while I may be an introvert, I may not be as introverted as someone else whom may use introversion more of the time than I do. That doesn't mean that I don't prefer it, it just means that I just don't USE it as often as someone else. Therefore, I may be INTP, BUT that doesn't mean I am like EVERY OTHER INTP. Not at all, b/c I am a HUMAN BEING. Aren't we supposed to be like snowflakes? I may have some things in common w/ other INTP's (and I do), BUT that doesn't mean we are identical. It simply means we prefer the same preferences.

In conclusion, if you are getting pissed off or attacking someone b/c you don't understand personality preferences, calm down, read more, and try to understand before just denying that any of this is valid...

(note...I can be VERY directive when frustrated...after trying to "ask nicely" so many times, I get pissed)

 

[SingSmileShine]

Yup. Still an ENFP. Thank you! That was very interesting.

 

[choccrunchie]

INTJ? i thought i was infp.. more confused now :S

 

[Wolfie]

ACK! I got INFJ...

 

[jcloudz]

maybe i should reconsider my type

 

[Grublet]

The only one Informing/Responding and Abstract/Pragmatic had in common were INTP.

 

[greenfairy]

Confirms xNTP, but doesn't help much with the I/E. Equally Get-things-going and Behind-the-scenes I think. Definitely Abstract, and probably Pragmatic because my first instinct is definitely to act autonomously and independently. I keep the group in mind, but it's not my primary focus. I like group work because 1) it lessens my work load, 2) I encounter new ideas, 3) I get to socialize; but it always makes me feel a bit nervous because I feel bound by obligations I don't entirely understand.

 

[SongswehaveSung]

I believe that this validates me being a definite INFP.

 

[10blackroses]

Hmph. This somehow transformed me into an ENTP. I'm positive that I'm an Introvert.