Combination Enneagram and MBTI Test

[miss fortune]

retook it to get to the handbook thingie like other people said... and this time took it after finally having a full night's sleep so that my brain didn't feel like some sort of sad pudding sitting between my ears!

and still got the same results and I didn't even remember the questions or how I had answered last night...

as for the handbook, as has already been mentioned, there's a definite difference between the relatively well developed enneagram section and the one paragraph mbti description. if it's an enneagram and mbti combo test I'd expect a little more balance from the two halves of the descriptions... also some information on how enneagram type and mbti type can color how the other comes across might be some good information

and not to be picky here, but I REALLY hate suggestions on careers based on personality type because there are a lot of things that can come into play when a person chooses a career and personality type is only a little part of that... this is only my opinion here though, because most sites insist on having those sections to them

also, while the enneagram part had suggestions on other types that you scored high on, there was no such suggestion in the MBTI section... this probably all goes back to the unequal development of the two parts of the description

I actually LIKE the fact that you don't use a bunch of unfavorable descriptors for Sensing in the test (though the last line of the ESFP description is a bit more negative than the other type descriptions... yeah, I've been poking around the whole site )... also in the Intuition description I might remove the bit about relying on thoughts... I mean, Sensors think too. This is all just me being picky though, sorry. Overall, I was actually pretty surprised to finally run across a test that doesn't seem to have a strong pro-Intuitive bias to the phrasing of the questions... good job there!

 

[estorm]

I wanted to see the manual so I retook the test and this time got ISFJ 9. I can be very borderline T/F. Both descriptions for ISTJ and ISFJ fit me quite well.

Very much enjoyed & resonated with the 9 descriptions in the report. I love that the report gives suggestions and tips for how to overcome potential weaknesses, and in multiple different areas of life (and I love that there are more than just one or two suggestions!). Very thorough enneagram discussion. My only complaint would be that enneagram has 3 pages of stuff to talk about, but the MBTI part is more of an afterthought; considering it's a combination test for the two, I would have assumed it spends an equal amount of time discussing each half of the result (or at least more than a paragraph for MBTI). I agree with jscrothers that putting it above the "Learn More" would help it seem like less of an afterthought in this regard.

Overall, I liked it.

Thanks for taking it again. And I'm glad that you liked it overall (whew).

Originally we weren't going to have MBTI results in the manual, so I suppose it is an afterthought. It wasn't going to mention the typology systems of the test, just give them helpful tips. But since we had identified both types, it seemed strange not to list them - especially since they are listed as the results of the test. [Note to self ... I can see the mission drift as I type this ... ] BUT, since we DO have them in there, I like the suggestion about maybe fleshing it out with more tips based on the MBTI results. I'll have to think about how to do this, what would be useful, etc. But I appreciate the perspective you and others are offering here.

Thanks.

 

[estorm]

retook it to get to the handbook thingie like other people said... and this time took it after finally having a full night's sleep so that my brain didn't feel like some sort of sad pudding sitting between my ears!

and still got the same results and I didn't even remember the questions or how I had answered last night...

Thanks for taking it again. And I guess I'm glad you got the same results, though it seems the results weren't great for you.

as for the handbook, as has already been mentioned, there's a definite difference between the relatively well developed enneagram section and the one paragraph mbti description. if it's an enneagram and mbti combo test I'd expect a little more balance from the two halves of the descriptions... also some information on how enneagram type and mbti type can color how the other comes across might be some good information
...
also, while the enneagram part had suggestions on other types that you scored high on, there was no such suggestion in the MBTI section... this probably all goes back to the unequal development of the two parts of the description

I hear you. Thanks. (See my reply to 21lux above.) [Note to self: another vote for more MBTI content]

and not to be picky here, but I REALLY hate suggestions on careers based on personality type because there are a lot of things that can come into play when a person chooses a career and personality type is only a little part of that... this is only my opinion here though, because most sites insist on having those sections to them

I actually agree with you, but it seemed common to not include.

I actually LIKE the fact that you don't use a bunch of unfavorable descriptors for Sensing in the test (though the last line of the ESFP description is a bit more negative than the other type descriptions... yeah, I've been poking around the whole site )... also in the Intuition description I might remove the bit about relying on thoughts... I mean, Sensors think too. This is all just me being picky though, sorry. Overall, I was actually pretty surprised to finally run across a test that doesn't seem to have a strong pro-Intuitive bias to the phrasing of the questions... good job there!

Thanks, whatever. Generally we (and by "we" I mean my wife, who helped, and I) tried to stay positive with just a hint of room for improvement. Each type has something valuable to offer the world, and many people have a hard time relating to their less attractive / health aspects.

Thanks for speaking up for the Sensors
And thanks for looking around the site in general. You all have been quite helpful and I appreciate it

 

[Arctic Hysteria]

First typed me as INFJ then typed me as INFP after some other questions. Type 4.
I guess that's correct.

 

[DaftGuru]

I'm getting a 502 bad gateway error. Anyone else?

 

[Yama]

I'm getting a 502 bad gateway error. Anyone else?

I am not; maybe try this link that leads directly to the test rather than the homepage? Don't know how helpful that will be.

 

[DaftGuru]

I am not; maybe try this link that leads directly to the test rather than the homepage? Don't know how helpful that will be.

That one works better, but it's still messed up. The pages load extremely slowly or not at all. I can't finish the test.

 

[Yama]

That one works better, but it's still messed up. The pages load extremely slowly or not at all. I can't finish the test.

Strange. What browsers have you tried accessing it on?? And who's your ISP? I'm using chrome/cox

 

[DaftGuru]

Strange. What browsers have you tried accessing it on?? And who's your ISP? I'm using chrome/cox

For some reason it works fine now. I'm using Chrome and have Comcast.

At any rate, I had a hard time really matching the options to myself. It said I'm an enneagram 3, which I don't agree with.

 

[RobinSkye]

I got INTP 4. Accurate.

 

[miss fortune]

You're a sexy sensor-intuitor hybrid bot, model B-97993542

wait... you're just saying that because we're now twins on here...

 

[Kas]

Man, I didn't even notice that the questions in round 2 had already been asked before. I guess it made me think about them again.. ?

Does it mean that I'm a details focused freak?...

I'm also thinking that after this flurry of test taking happens, that I'd see what the reported accuracy was for just these few days, knowing that the vast majority are directly or indirectly from this thread.

I can also see what percentage was from which type and a few other nerdy things. Any requests?

Observant nature. I like it very much.
It would be interesting to know people with which results think they are mistype by test most often.

 

[Captain_Invincible]

I keep getting ESTJ, because of the J/P dichotomy. I am fairly organized for my type, which plays into things, and I got an Enneagram 8, which is pretty much how I am:

Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet

 

[estorm]

I have self-identified as a 9, so when the test told me I was a 5, I selected the option to answer more questions. It still told me I was a 5, so either your test is broken or my enneatype is incorrect.

This is the beta version of your test?

Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into it.
I have fixed a couple bugs, though so far nothing that the user would have experienced.
These things are mightily complex, and I keep finding nooks and crannies where things can go astray.

 

[estorm]

For some reason it works fine now. I'm using Chrome and have Comcast.

At any rate, I had a hard time really matching the options to myself. It said I'm an enneagram 3, which I don't agree with.

Sorry you has so much trouble with it.
I'll see if I can see anything on my end.
Thanks for letting me know.
What enneagram type do you most identify with?

 

[estorm]

It would be interesting to know people with which results think they are mistype by test most often.

Yes. Interesting. Thanks.

 

[estorm]

I have self-identified as a 9, so when the test told me I was a 5, I selected the option to answer more questions. It still told me I was a 5, so either your test is broken or my enneatype is incorrect.

I see it as simply that you felt the test's descriptions of 5 fit more than the descriptions of 9. That being the case, you may be a 5 or my test descriptions may not make useful distinctions for your version of 9. And it sounds like 9 and 5 have been top contenders for you for awhile. They say that it is way more likely for a 9 to misidentify as a 5 than a 5 as a 9. I agree that "thinking" doesn't make one a 5. If I had to guess on HOW they think (in a very generalized way), I'd say 5's go more in-depth with complexity, stick with a topic longer, and focus on problems and 9's have more breadth and with summaries and are more likely to connect topics and focus on solutions.

You may have already decided on your type, and if so I'd be curious if you agree with this perspective.

 

[Bush]

This has been a tough nut to crack. I have been surprised by all the ways people have interpreted instructions and possible answering methods. I've tried several and none have been intuitive, for at least some people. Visual presentation is one thing - that probably could be better. But even how to structure the question and which options to give. And suggestions in this department are much appreciated!

I think the questions themselves are pretty good.

Forgive me if you know all of this.. I should've mentioned that what you have now are what are called "rank-order" items. Rank-order's pretty good in some cases, because it doesn't allow participants to simply mark that everything sounds like them.

You could take a look at this for some ways to implement. Right now, you (of course) have what's described here as the Radio Button Ranking. Rank Order - Qualtrics

But what you have now is just as, or more, intuitive than most of the options in that link. Especially with what you have.

With three choices per item, it's difficult to parse any set of instructions. Rank-order is more intuitive with more items -- it's more clear what it is that you need to do. If a participant sees a list such as "McDonalds," "Burger King," "Krystal's," "Sam's," "Cheeburger," "Drakes," and "Five Guys," they'd know immediately that they're probably about to compare them all against one another. With more items, it's easier to draw a pattern on what "class" the items belong to. In this case -- "burger joints."

But I wouldn't, however, suggest to add more choices (or to change the choices presented) simply to make the question layout more intuitive.

I'd see how much feedback you get about how you present those questions, then roll from there.

Does it mean that I'm a details focused freak?...

Yes. I'm sorry. There is no cure.

I'm also thinking that after this flurry of test taking happens, that I'd see what the reported accuracy was for just these few days, knowing that the vast majority are directly or indirectly from this thread.

Oh, man. Correlations between Enneatypes and Jungian types.

 

[Bush]

Another thing to note is -- if a participant has more than a surface-level understanding of Jungian types already, they're going to head into this test with an anchor. Sometimes, if your test gets e.g. Introversion/Extraversion "wrong" -- a single dichotomy -- they may call the thing bunk. "No, that's completely wrong."

Even if their preference is borderline.

So take any feedback of that nature with a grain of salt.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Enneagram 8. ISTP.

I'm pretty solidly 6 but I understand why I got 8. Still, this is a common error in enneagram tests. 6's are difficult. I thought the last question didn't have anything I related to, I picked the closest and got 8 because of that. Maybe adding one more option or changing one could help make this more accurate.

Something like: 'I like to react according to each scenario as it happens. - or - I find it difficult to be consistent in action without knowing details'

That is more 6ish, I think.