# Forum Statistics - % Of MBTI Types

#### Keps Mnemnosyne

##### New member
Careful in what you think about my arguments Keps. I'm not in belief that a lot of people here are correct in their typings as much as I am to believe that a lot of people here are are intuitives by forum topic inclination. I'm speculating both arguments and saying that we cannot be sure of either because we don't have enough extra data beyond our intuition. And our intuitions like to be skeptical about a lot of things. Cynical skepticism is nice to have but a certain level of trust also keeps a good balance for a decent mind.
I already said that bolded, but I see your point after that line, and you're correct of course.

#### Oaky

##### Travelling mind
I already said that bolded, but I see your point after that line, and you're correct of course.
Ah, not much reason for this debate to be ensued then I suppose. Perhaps a misunderstanding of the position of the other from both ends?

#### Keps Mnemnosyne

##### New member
Unfortunately. Heh.

#### Ene

##### New member
Hi,

I know this thread is over a year old now, but it addresses some interesting questions and brings to mind, for me, some real world observations. I've actually wondered about why there seems to be so many more introverts on the forum and I've come to this conclusion. A forum such as this is the perfect place for an introvert to have a conversation. Each person gets their turn to speak without being "cut-off" or interrupted.

It's also the perfect place for N-dominant people, especially introverted N dominants. N dominants tend to ask a lot of abstract questions and in the real world, I know from experience, asking those questions often makes people just shake their heads and look at you as if you are from another world.

While I realize that there have already been many valid points brought up and discussed in this thread, I would still like to go back to the original questions and add my two cents worth [and that's probably a fair assessment of the value of what I'm about to say. Still, two cents=two cents.]

1. The consistency of the membership MBTI types across time sort of amazed me. Any ideas on why the percentage MBTI breakdown of the original members is so similar to the breakdown today?

I find this interesting and it may indicate that the type of people who are most interested in human personality development and cognitive development remain constant from year to year and even decade to decade. I would wager that most major theories and developments on those theories come from the groups most highly represented. That's not to say that others aren't interested, but that they aren't usually as interested.

2. Why do you think there is such a heavy concentration of INXXs?

In the non-virtual world, I've brought up the subject of cognitive development, learning styles, etc., with co-workers, friends and family members. I would guess that 90% of the time, the Se/Si dominant folks are passingly interested in typology, more as a curiosity than anything. They want to know where they fit, sometimes, and then move on to the business of living. Some of them just really don't care about that sort of stuff. One Si dominant person I know says to me when I approach him about typology, "You're silly." Or "You're talking about that...again?" An ESTJ family member is interested in personality, but she wants to neatly just stick everybody into a little box and says, "You're a red. You're a blue. You're a yellow. You're a white." [she's into the color coded personality stuff]. She really does have a hard time understanding why others don't see the world just like she does and do things "the right way." I will say that of the ST's in my life, ESTPs and ISTPs seem to have more of an interest in typology, as a general rule. I've gotten very little response from the SF people I know.

3. We have a lot of Ni and Ne doms but there is a statistically significant number of INFPs in there as well. Thoughts on why this is?

I think INFPs are better at writing than they are at speaking and it just so happens that a forum offers them the time they need to formulate what they want to say and guarantees them an audience of some sort.

4. Do you have any suggestions on how to encourage participation of some of the less represented types?
No, but I wish I did.

5. Do you have any other observations on this?

Not right now.

#### RaptorWizard

##### Permabanned
Why are the most common letters I, N, F, and P, (even if INTPs are more common than INFPs)?

I'm also wondering which types averave the mosts posts-per-day.

N

#### ndovjtjcaqidthi

##### Guest
Why are the most common letters I, N, F, and P, (even if INTPs are more common than INFPs)?

I'm also wondering which types averave the mosts posts-per-day.

It's because of people mistyping themselves.

And weren't you INTP?..

#### RaptorWizard

##### Permabanned
It's because of people mistyping themselves.

What, are people most prone (INFPs at the top) to mistyping as INTP or something?

And weren't you INTP?..

And wasn't I ISTP? Or ENTP? Or INFJ? Or whatever else!?

#### Standuble

##### New member
Why are the most common letters I, N, F, and P, (even if INTPs are more common than INFPs)?

I'm also wondering which types averave the mosts posts-per-day.

The stats are untrustworthy - I've seen stats which label thinkers as rarer than feelers and vice versa but also INFPs being one of the most common N types (second to ENFPs.) If I dig up my sources I let you know.

I sudpect that most if not all INFPs here are typed correctly or are mistypes from a close relative type. It's not like personalitycafe in that regard. I think that these places are appealing because they are related to the human condition but also provide answers and/or suggestions to issues and dilemmas and allow opportunities to optimise performance e.g. suggesting occupations and lifestyles which they were initially unsure about. There is also assistance in there for inferior-Je shortfalls - the world is a difficult place to navigate and advance in.

I have heard several INTPs say "they like MBTI but it's not their favourite subject" including Brad on the NFGeeks videos. I guess the human condition doesn't carry the same appeal and it is reflected in their numbers.

If I were to suggest "they're all mistypes!" I would follow this line of reasoning:

I - internet tests do not measure for an "inner world" (from what I understand every introvert possesses one of some design or another) and extroverts type themselves as I as they cast their mind in favour of anomalies e.g. that time they didn't want to socialose or they were quiet in the corner instead of their usual behaviour and focus on the world outside of themselves.
N - Fuelled by SFJs who have got in touch with their Ne creative, STJs who have their own "visionary style and SFP where their FiSeNi or SeFiNi combination has created a creativitt juggernaut which produces different art forms as if they are coming off an assembly line.
F - No Fi and Fe clarification. Also questions which seem to ask justice vs mercy (as if it were T and F). I don't think it's type related - a T can choose mercy if its a more logical choice and an F can choose justice or vengeance to settle a value dispute if it is irrational. Perfect example: The Landsmeet on Dragon Age Origins. Plus many thinkers want to be fair and fairness in the western sense is compassoon and generosity.
P - Not as much as a problem. However many a P who do not understand the theory as much may confuse their structured and ordered inner world (due to Ji) for them actually being a judger. I suspect the same can occur for J's who don't take themselves as seriously as much as they take the rest of the world (due to Pi). They feasibly could conclude that they are laid back and easy going after introspecting.

#### valaki

##### New member
What frustrates me about the quote that [MENTION=4490]Orangey[/MENTION] just posted, is that they don't make any differentiation between types of theory. As an SJ generally, learning about theory is fun if you know that the theory has a practical application. So, frankly, there's theory that has a practical application, and there's theory that doesn't.

Very good point.

#### highlander

Staff member
I wonder if these percentages have changed at all since they were originally posted.

#### highlander

Staff member
The changes look pretty insignificant. A few more ENFPs and ISFPs as compared to 2012. A little increase in ISFJs and INFPs. 2014 numbers include active numbers of each type that have been on since Jan 1 of 2014.

#### Coriolis

##### Liberator
Staff member
Not sure what differentiates each group in the legend. If "2014" includes "active numbers of each type that have been on since Jan 1 of 2014", does that include the members who "joined before 2010", or only those who joined in 2014? What comprises the "2012" group? Did you go by members' current specified type? How many members did not have a stated type (and presumably were not included in the graph)?

#### highlander

Staff member
Not sure what differentiates each group in the legend. If "2014" includes "active numbers of each type that have been on since Jan 1 of 2014", does that include the members who "joined before 2010", or only those who joined in 2014? What comprises the "2012" group? Did you go by members' current specified type? How many members did not have a stated type (and presumably were not included in the graph)?

The last two numbers are similar. One was midyear looking at percentage of posters that had been on since Jan 1 2012, which was taken in the middle of 2012. The next one was posters that had been on since Jan 1 2014. The first number is total members that had been on prior to 2010 (that is a larger set of numbers)

##### noÊŽ ÉŸo ÇÊ‡nÉ” ÊoH
How come?
I donâ€™t feel it.

#### highlander

Staff member

##### noÊŽ ÉŸo ÇÊ‡nÉ” ÊoH
How come what?

Iâ€™m not arguing against numbers..
But this data is comparing total number of types in three periods..
What I really mean is.. total number.. That seems weird.
How come we have more introverted members?
Too many INTJs? ITNPs?
Iâ€™d agree with INFJ.
But I thought this forum was full of extraverted..

#### Opal

##### New member

Iâ€™m not arguing against numbers..
But this data is comparing total number of types in three periods..
What I really mean is.. total number.. That seems weird.
How come we have more introverted members?
Too many INTJs? ITNPs?
Iâ€™d agree with INFJ.
But I thought this forum was full of extraverted..

Fitting oneself into a system often appeals to introverts, especially given their rarity. I imagine INT is an appealing self-typing, as many introverts feel cold and isolated from others (and perhaps more intuitive and rational to justify their isolation). Nevermind that introversion in the traditional sense has nothing to do with MBTI, and warmth doesn't even correlate with F types (superficial warmth with Fe, perhaps).

Though introverted types could be more drawn to personality forums (rather than, say, achieving material goals) for validation, I get the impression many don't delve deep enough to understand the functions and consider extraverted MBTI types (or S types, for that matter ).

#### highlander

Staff member

Iâ€™m not arguing against numbers..
But this data is comparing total number of types in three periods..
What I really mean is.. total number.. That seems weird.
How come we have more introverted members?
Too many INTJs? ITNPs?
Iâ€™d agree with INFJ.
But I thought this forum was full of extraverted..

Introverted intuitives tend to be more interested in personality type than others. It is sometimes astounding to me how many INFJs and INTJs are online on these forums given how uncommon they are.

#### reckful

##### New member
In the spoiler are November 2014 membership stats (from early this month) for Typology Central and Personality CafÃ©. For each type, the first percentage is the percentage of that type at the forum, the second percentage (in parentheses) is the estimated "general population" percentage from the official MBTI folks (from this page), and the final number on the right is the self-selection ratio for that type â€” i.e., the ratio of the forum percentage to the general population percentage.

Looking at the PerC stats (the larger sample): 62% of the members are INs (as compared to 11% of the general population), and 83% of the members are N's (as compared to 27% of the general population).

Every S type has a self-selection ratio of 0.6 or lower, and no N type has a self-selection ratio below 1.0. And the lowest self-selection ratio for the IN types is 13 times higher than the highest self-selection ratio for the ES types.

The stats suggest than an average MBTI IN is something like 40 times mores likely than an average MBTI ES to join a personality-related internet forum.

And the stats for TC are strikingly similar to the ones for PerC.

#### johnnyyukon

##### Male
It is sometimes astounding to me how many INFJs and INTJs are online on these forums given how uncommon they are.

First of all, just saw this thread, very interesting stats. Good post.

Second, it's probably because they are so rare that they have flocked online for like minded stimulating discussion.

And the stats for TC are strikingly similar to the ones for PerC.

Another great find.

I was going to post before you did that I bet PerC is very similar. Certain personalities, for varying reasons, are just more prone to being online, and crave discussions they just don't find IRL as much. My half-baked theory, anyway.

As one of the only 2 top Extroverts, I kind of accidentally found MBTI forums, and personally, it was very refreshing to find a group of ENTPs with whom to banter with. I've known some ENTPs/INTJs and others in my life that drift in and out, but when they're not around, I suffer from a lack of stimulating conversation.

Nice to know I can always find it on an MBTI forum.

edit: I love the irrefutable consistencies of all these stats.

Replies
2
Views
650
Replies
0
Views
224
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
535
Replies
1
Views
652