Forum Statistics - % Of MBTI Types

[EJCC]

Then I apologise for misreading the situation. I think another non-INTP posted who she thought was best for her Dad or something, rather than who he was currently with, which is a massive .

Oh! I had no idea you thought that. Sorry, I must not have been clear. Yeah, my mom and dad are still together, as they have been for 25 years. That's why I posted the additional post, in that thread, elaborating on their relationship, and how the two of them had begun to shape each other's behavior, by virtue of being together so long.

INTPs can be resentful of the way ESJs have a habit of encroaching or giving unsolicited advice or just telling us we're basically doing it wrong in our day2day lives (most of us have SJ parents/teachers/bosses), so we can bit a bit tetchy and sensitive about it.

Personally, I don't believe that most people have SJ parents; Parents tend to gain traits stereotypical to SJs simply by virtue of being responsible parents. I probably would have typed my mom as ISFJ if she hadn't taken the test as INFJ, and then read both the INFJ and ISFJ descriptions, and said, and I quote, "I may relate to 75% of the ISFJ description, but I relate to 100% of the INFJ one."

This isn't to say that you specifically are mistyping your parents, because there's no way for me to know that, but I do know that half the time that people complain to me about their ESTJ relatives in the "Ask an ESTJ" thread, those relatives end up being another type, generally either ESTP or ENTJ.

Yet at the same time, I think I've mentioned it before, in my entire family (including cousins) of 30+ people, I only had one other N relative... and she lives 700 miles away. Any group I've ever been in has been about 80-90% Sensors. And even at my workplace, which you would expect to have more NTs than other settings, it's still been heavily populated by S types and I only have 1-2 N people I can talk to.

I keep hearing things like this from Ns on the forum, and it always amazes and confuses me, because I am so utterly surrounded by Ns. I have so few Sensor friends, and my extended family is only half Sensor (I think; I have an aunt and an uncle who are Sensors but besides that I think everyone's an NT or an NF). So I keep hearing people talking about how it's a Sensor world out there, and "us Ns have to stick together", and that sort of thing, but to me it's always been an N world. I grew up having to adapt to communication breakdowns between me and my N parents, and somehow attracted almost exclusively N friends all through school, and now I'm at a very heavily N university where most people seem to be xNxJs. Maybe things change once you leave academia. Maybe if you hung out with "normal" people in high school instead of the geeks, you'd meet more Sensors. Either way, this forum is making me realize that I'm outside the norm in more ways than I had previously thought.

So I think it's good to have various types represented, but ... I'm not losing a LOT of sleep over this inequity. What are we going to do -- start bussing in ISFJs and ESFPs from across the 'net?

I like the sound of that! Equal opportunity for Sensors!!

I faintly remember you choosing not to do it... I mean, whatever... it is what it is. I'm sure it would have been at least as good as anything else that might be written. I don't think anything ever was, though.

If it means anything, the first draft of something is typically crap anyway, but this is why we have a community here. I just think, as far as writing descriptions goes, the first goal is to get all the right content tossed into the pot; the second and later drafts just try to make sense of it and weave it together.

That's a good point. If the topic comes up again, I'll write a draft of something.

I think this is what was holding me back before, to be perfectly honest.

 

[Randomnity]

I keep hearing things like this from Ns on the forum, and it always amazes and confuses me, because I am so utterly surrounded by Ns. I have so few Sensor friends, and my extended family is only half Sensor (I think; I have an aunt and an uncle who are Sensors but besides that I think everyone's an NT or an NF). So I keep hearing people talking about how it's a Sensor world out there, and "us Ns have to stick together", and that sort of thing, but to me it's always been an N world. I grew up having to adapt to communication breakdowns between me and my N parents, and somehow attracted almost exclusively N friends all through school, and now I'm at a very heavily N university where most people seem to be xNxJs. Maybe things change once you leave academia. Maybe if you hung out with "normal" people in high school instead of the geeks, you'd meet more Sensors. Either way, this forum is making me realize that I'm outside the norm in more ways than I had previously thought.

+1. I have more N friends than S ones, by my best guess. Not intentionally, but probably mostly because we're all university-educated and Ns probably gravitate to that at higher rates than Ss.

I also wonder sometimes how much culture plays a role. Maybe some countries or regions have more SJs (or otherwise) than others. I'd bet that cities have more Ns than small towns do.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm not trying to compete at "who has it worst", just pointing out that N is only one of MANY factors that influence how "at home" you feel in the world.

I think you're both right to some degree. I mean, it's not like the only Goth people, or piercing people, or tattoo people out there -- or people trying to get some individuality for themselves -- are N. I just think it's about different things. There are various reasons why someone might be misunderstood or see someone as weird. And I'd agree that ISTP women are not "conventional women" who typically are expected to emote, and that you would feel isolated at least a bit because of that.

For me, it was still the N thing, though. i didn't realize until I'd been separated for a few years that my in-laws never actually really understood me. in fact, they had misread a lot of my INTP style behavior (the aloofness in particular, which they saw as disinterest rather than me trying not to step on their toes -- but also the lack of emotional expression as not caring rather than as trying to remain balanced and fair) as something negative, and had merely tolerated me as best as they could because I was related to them and thus society required it of them. I had actually understood them far more than they had understood me. They understood their own children (they were all ISFJs or ISTJs), and so I had been an enigma. I also wasn't really understood by my own parents, mainly because of the N thing, even if in many other ways I had emulated more S style behaviors to make them happy. (It managed to work with my mom.) Once I did something they did not understand, it resulted in a huge rift in our relationship that might never be fixed, and I realize now they never got me either.

 

[EJCC]

+1. I have more N friends than S ones, by my best guess. Not intentionally, but probably mostly because we're all university-educated and Ns probably gravitate to that at higher rates than Ss.

That would make sense, I think. It would also explain why all my SJ friends break those stereotypes, because, since they're smart people, they're capable of thinking abstractly, and maybe it's not hard for them to see practical applications to theoretical knowledge, like it would be if you were a Sensor and not all that bright.

I also wonder sometimes how much culture plays a role. Maybe some countries or regions have more SJs (or otherwise) than others.

That would be VERY interesting to know! And it would be interesting to see how their behavior adapts, depending on the region. It would be interesting to see gender differences by type/region, too.

Edit: I wonder if most Sensors on this forum have been through life experiences like that, i.e. having loads of N friends or N family members, and therefore knowing how to communicate with them. Based on Jennifer's stories about her friends and family, it seems like a lot of Sensors grow up not knowing how to communicate with iNtuitives, and not caring to find out. But -- depending on the type! -- I always knew, growing up. Honestly, I'm better at understanding NFs than I am SPs. SPs are a mystery to me sometimes.

I also wasn't really understood by my own parents, mainly because of the N thing, even if in many other ways I had emulated more S style behaviors to make them happy.

What exactly are S-style behaviors? I ask because I tend to separate Se behaviors from Si behaviors, and I do the same with N; for example, it ought to be pretty obvious from how I behave on the forum, that I understand Ne humor (and can participate, since I have decent Ne too), but that an INTJ can troll his or her Ni at me for hours before I understand what's going on.

 

[Randomnity]

For me, it was still the N thing, though. i didn't realize until I'd been separated for a few years that my in-laws never actually really understood me. in fact, they had misread a lot of my INTP style behavior (the aloofness in particular, which they saw as disinterest rather than me trying not to step on their toes -- but also the lack of emotional expression as not caring rather than as trying to remain balanced and fair) as something negative, and had merely tolerated me as best as they could because I was related to them and thus society required it of them. I had actually understood them far more than they had understood me. They understood their own children (they were all ISFJs or ISTJs), and so I had been an enigma. I also wasn't really understood by my own parents, mainly because of the N thing, even if in many other ways I had emulated more S style behaviors to make them happy. (It managed to work with my mom.) Once I did something they did not understand, it resulted in a huge rift in our relationship that might never be fixed, and I realize now they never got me either.

I don't want to turn personal experience into a debate, and I understand that being N would make it harder for a child to be understood by S parents (I feel similarly about my N parents, but that's beside the point).

I do want to point out that the bolded is IxTx, not S, and is something that's been pointed out about me by many people (and caused quite a lot of trouble and misunderstanding in my life). It's even worse if you're visibly female and expected to emote, etc.

 

[Rasofy]

And just what are they? My point was that they're only what we say they are as someone identified as N or S. When I identified as an N, anything I decided to declare as being a sign of N would have been accepted. Why? Because none of this has any referent outside of itself. It's self-referential.

I think it's better to avoid definitions for now, but I'll work with what I've detected. Let's take this thread, for example. Qlip mentioned Ti literalisms, but, evidently, that's Ne-fueled Ti. That's a form of humor that, ime, almost no sensor seems to understand, much less appreciate.

And humor style is just a minor fraction of the big picture - we're talking about cognitive preferences, and those affect the focus of pretty much everything people write/speak and read/listen. That's part of why sensors are much more likely to misinterpret what I say. So I need to modify my go-to communication style in order to avoid misunderstandings. While that's not a stimulant thing to do, in a world full of sensors we eventually get used to it.

But in a place dominated by intuitives we don't need to adapt much, as our words won't lose much meaning to people who have similar cognitive preferences. Which is quite... liberating.

 

[Totenkindly]

I don't want to turn personal experience into a debate, and I understand that being N would make it harder for a child to be understood by S parents (I feel similarly about my N parents, but that's beside the point).

Would you like to trade parents? I'll give you a discount, mine are an older model most likely.

 

[Jaguar]

To those individuals who are hauling a wooden cross on their back, and dabbing the blood on their scalp where a crown of thorns now rests, here's an old post from one N to another N:

Newsflash for you:

In your example, what happens is that a group of apparently misfit and "misunderstood" people group together and label themselves as Intuitive, and the "others" as Sensors, using "feel-good" 'reasoning' to justify the traumatic "Us vs. Them" attitude -- that's MBTI.

I'm very, very sure that you can't tell me that you wouldn't consider being a Sensor if only Sensors were described better in the literature than Intuitives. What happens to your beloved Intuition then? Don't come up with half-baked excuses about how you are 100% N and how others who have judged you or treated [you] badly are S, that's just a simple distinction in your polarizing mind. You cry me a fucking river now, but you're pretty much a perfect embodiment of the judgmentalism described in the OP.

It's fabricated excuse to antagonize others, I'll tell you that. I can see you're bitter from the things you've lived through, but it doesn't justify what you're doing.

It's those types of posts that I miss reading the most.

 

[garbage]

It's those types of posts that I miss reading the most.

Jesus God. Really. All one has to do to be commonly understood is.. you know, use words properly.

 

[highlander]

In what areas do they use this excellence in school, and high IQ? Part of the issue with that description, I guess, is that people associate disinterest in book learning with lack of intelligence, lack of critical or abstract thinking skill, and inability (as opposed to unwillingness) to spend a lot of time thinking philosophically -- even though that isn't necessarily true.

Based on my limited experience - Incredibly good memory. Strong natural interpersonal skills. Ability to identify simple solutions to problems. Practical and grounded. Logical. Organized. More left brained (I know this isn't really accurate but you get the idea). Disciplined.

You said:

This has a couple of problems.

1. Like [MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION] said, all academic learning involves theory and abstraction. So to say that SJs like to learn in school, but they don't like to learn theory makes no sense. The description I quoted recognizes this fact and at least has the sense to be consistent about it.
2. You suggest that learning new things is stressful for SJs.

And all of this was in an effort to make the original description that I quoted seem more innocuous. You said "it doesn't say they don't like learning or school." Well, but it does. It literally and specifically says, "ISFJs learn best by doing, rather than by reading about something in a book, or applying theory...Traditional methods of higher education, which require a lot of theorizing and abstraction, are likely to be a chore for the ISFJ."

So I don't know what you're on about.

It's called having a good memory and a logical ability to solve problems. They are good at listening and don't overcomplicate things.

What I believe is stressful to ISFJs can be best illustrated by an example. A type like an INTJ likes to be constantly challenged by new problems and conquer new ground. They are invigorated by it. Routine is boring. They love to DO things they haven't done before. It's challenging. An ISFJ would prefer not to live that way. They would prefer to DO things they have experience doing rather than have to re-invent the wheel or constantly being thrown into a new situation where they have to do something they have never done before. A simple example - an ISFJ might not mind balancing the checkbook. The INTJ might like it the first couple of times because it is challenging but become incredibly bored with it after that point and not want to do it anymore. There is nothing wrong with either one though I would say the ISFJ has an easier time with everyday life because much of it is routine.

I think the fact that many Sensors aren't drawn to their type descriptions is quite telling. People tend to like hearing what their type is good at (I know I do), because it's like tailored praise - it should incite pride in your own abilities. But, if a ISTJ doesn't think it's flattering to be described as organized and efficient, then we need to do better.

What makes you think Intuitives are any more drawn to their type descriptions? None of us like to listen to ourselves talk or see ourselves on video. It's a little analogous. Though it may in fact be true, I am not convinced there is a substantive difference in the quality of the type descriptions or functions for that matter in high quality materials. When I am talking about high quality, I am referring to books. I agree with Mal+ that the books are much better than what is online. It's how the publishing companies make money.

 

[TheStarchDefenders]

Don't know what that is.
Don't care.
Think your posts have been nonsensical and you're giving Ns/INTPs a bad name by representing them.

I only read a few of his/her posts, but I agree.

 

[TheStarchDefenders]

To be honest, my perspective is that N types (who end up writing many of these online descriptions) are generous with the subjects they know... iNtuition. They don't really grasp Sensing very well, so you don't really see a lot of great descriptions of it. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily purposeful diminishing of Sensing behavior and motivation, it's just a form of cluelessness about how such a thing works.

I know we tried to encourage more Sensors to write their own type descriptions, or maybe Sensors and Intuitives work together on this site to create descriptions for all the types and/or functions, but I'm not sure how much progress was really made in that area.

I wouldn't mind helping write one up on ISFP.

 

[highlander]

I also wonder sometimes how much culture plays a role. Maybe some countries or regions have more SJs (or otherwise) than others. I'd bet that cities have more Ns than small towns do.

I was actually thinking about the culture of the forum. Ha! But that's a good question too.

 

[Southern Kross]

What makes you think Intuitives are any more drawn to their type descriptions? None of us like to listen to ourselves talk or see ourselves on video. It's a little analogous. Though it may in fact be true, I am not convinced there is a substantive difference in the quality of the type descriptions or functions for that matter in high quality materials. When I am talking about high quality, I am referring to books. I agree with Mal+ that the books are much better than what is online. It's how the publishing companies make money.

Oh, I think you're right. I first discovered my type in a book and at the time I knew nothing of the negative portrayal of S, so it didn't influence me. Unfortunately most people won't read about it in a book, and some will learn about which types are more 'cool' before they decide on their type.

What I meant was, online a lot of the descriptions and general talk is slanted toward making N more appealing (and S look unappealling). And if there wasn't a substantial difference in the appeal of N and S descriptions, you wouldn't get people mistyping as N as regularly as I believe they do. I know what you're saying about seeing yourself on video, but I don't think it's always the case. There can be that pleasure in discovering your type, which gives you a sense of validation. If you asked most people here, they would tell you, that in spite of the downsides, they're happy and proud to be the type they are.

Ugh sorry, I feel like I'm not explaining myself well...

 

[highlander]

Oh, I think you're right. I first discovered my type in a book and at the time I knew nothing of the negative portrayal of S, so it didn't influence me. Unfortunately most people won't read about it in a book, and some will learn about which types are more 'cool' before they decide on their type.

What I meant was, online a lot of the descriptions and general talk is slanted toward making N more appealing (and S look unappealling). And if there wasn't a substantial difference in the appeal of N and S descriptions, you wouldn't get people mistyping as N as regularly as I believe they do. I know what you're saying about seeing yourself on video, but I don't think it's always the case. There can be that pleasure in discovering your type, which gives you a sense of validation. If you asked most people here, they would tell you, that in spite of the downsides, they're happy and proud to be the type they are.

That helps me to understand. You crystallized those points really well.

 

[Salomé]

Not sure why you would think that. It has certainly not been the case with me. I might not be a "weirdo" for being N, but I can be one for many other reasons. Even sticking purely to type, an ISTP woman is seen as far more "abnormal" by society overall than an ENFJ, and maybe even all the NF types.

I'm not trying to compete at "who has it worst", just pointing out that N is only one of MANY factors that influence how "at home" you feel in the world.

Sure, but since it IS a factor N+T >>> T alone in the weirdness stakes.

My "at home in the world" comment isn't just about % of population. Ss are also more in tune with their environments and "rooted" to concrete reality.

Personally, I don't believe that most people have SJ parents; Parents tend to gain traits stereotypical to SJs simply by virtue of being responsible parents. I probably would have typed my mom as ISFJ if she hadn't taken the test as INFJ, and then read both the INFJ and ISFJ descriptions, and said, and I quote, "I may relate to 75% of the ISFJ description, but I relate to 100% of the INFJ one."

This isn't to say that you specifically are mistyping your parents, because there's no way for me to know that, but I do know that half the time that people complain to me about their ESTJ relatives in the "Ask an ESTJ" thread, those relatives end up being another type, generally either ESTP or ENTJ.

I keep hearing things like this from Ns on the forum, and it always amazes and confuses me, because I am so utterly surrounded by Ns. .

It's not a question of belief, it's a simple case of statistical probability. The fact that you "keep hearing" it should tell you your experience is an unusual one.

I haven't mistyped my mum, she typed herself.

I do agree that we have a habit of projecting SJness onto people who do stuff that annoys us. Which is a flavour of prejudice.
I've even made the reverse error myself of using the following logic:

I like him
I like NF men
Therefore, he must be NF

Turns out he was ESTJ.

These are simply heuristics and the exceptions are just as important as the rules.

 

[Totenkindly]

Jesus God. Really. All one has to do to be commonly understood is.. you know, use words properly.

That's a rather naive statement, in my experience.

 

[Cellmold]

There's more of them, and frankly they're good at a lot of "management related" issues. That's why there seems to be a decent number of ESTJ administrator types.

Interesting.

You see im very likely an SJ type and often the premise I come across a lot is, (at least simplified), that offline it is a sensors world, it is catered towards them and they have an automatic advantage. Whereas N's are the ugly duckling, never seen for what they are and only judged for what they appear to be so they often retreat into the internet, even the extraverted ones.

Here they have a dominance and therefore, for once, they get to write the script on how things are done, (so to speak). Now im not saying this is how all intuitive types would present it, nor am I saying they would all believe in thise side of it, but ive heard and read so many anecdotal experiences that pertain to this side of the story.

Now this is where I find myself a little lost, because im not an N type and I still find what could roughly be called 'the outside' quite frustrating. Id much rather say home, play video games and paint warhammer models, (which ive got fairly good at over the years if I do say so myself).

I like getting lost in fiction and my track record at jobs and routine is less than satisfactory. I do wonder however if, because a lot of these theories were adapted in the United States, if there is not a cultural slant to many people's experiences. Im not saying you are american of course, but a majority of people here probably are and certainly were on places like Perc.

This isn't to say people of other countries would not relate, but ive noticed from observing from afar, from talking to people from the USA, from observing what people from the USA say on forums like these and from those of different countries visiting there; that there seems to be a seriously muddled amount of bureaucracy permeating the entire countries infrastructure and the general....'outgoing' nature of popular culture in the United States means that many things are often more upfront than in other countries, but once again this is an exaggeration.

But if I were to compare it with my own, America in general seems to be a very earnest country; it takes something, adopts it and then runs it to the extreme. I suppose the long winded point is that perhaps SJ-ness in America is more extreme than elsewhere, or at least than in some other countries.

I remember a topic on Perc that I found quite enjoyable, it was all about a countries entire MBTI...what they appeared to be and what they really were and the one for America was: Wants to appear ENP...as in innovative, new ideas, always growing pioneers. But the reality of it was that internally it was ESJ.

Of course it is a bit silly to apply this to an ENTIRE country, but it was fun to speculate on nonetheless. The interesting thing is that it was those that were from the United States that promoted this idea, rather than those from without. So to me this might explain, for example, how people like David Keirsey came to formulate their view on certain dichtomies of type. Afterall he grew up in the 1930/40's and you can tell that coloured a great deal of his views towards certain types, especially SJ's.

Because as a culture changes so too does the social environment and I have wondered if SJ's are more succeptible to the current environment so much so that SJ's now are far different than SJ's then. But this is probably incorrect.

However it was still fun to think about.

 

[Salomé]

Interesting.

You see im very likely an SJ type and often the premise I come across a lot is, (at least simplified), that offline it is a sensors world, it is catered towards them and they have an automatic advantage. Whereas N's are the ugly duckling, never seen for what they are and only judged for what they appear to be so they often retreat into the internet, even the extraverted ones.

Here they have a dominance and therefore, for once, they get to write the script on how things are done, (so to speak). Now im not saying this is how all intuitive types would present it, nor am I saying they would all believe in thise side of it, but ive heard and read so many anecdotal experiences that pertain to this side of the story.

Now this is where I find myself a little lost, because im not an N type and I still find what could roughly be called 'the outside' quite frustrating. Id much rather say home, play video games and paint warhammer models, (which ive got fairly good at over the years if I do say so myself).

I like getting lost in fiction and my track record at jobs and routine is less than satisfactory.

This is not on a par with what it is like to be iNtuitive in a Sensor world. I know you can't see that, but...that's kinda the point.

I do wonder however if, because a lot of these theories were adapted in the United States, if there is not a cultural slant to many people's experiences.

Multicultural Use of the MBTI® Instrument

Excerpted from MBTI® Manual (CPP, Inc. 1998). Used with permission.

While type has not been assessed in all cultural societies, it has been surveyed in about 30 countries on all continents, some with more than one culture. So far, the studies have suggested the following:

All type preferences (E-I, S-N, T-F, and J-P) appear in all cultures studied to date.
People in different cultures report that the descriptions of the individual preferences make sense to them. They find value and usefulness in using type concepts in various ways, for example, to improve interactions and communication between diverse individuals and within groups.

People in different cultures report that Isabel Myers’ original whole type descriptions, or more recent versions, are appropriate and applicable. They react with, “This is me!”

Distributions of the sixteen types differ across different cultures. However, distribution patterns are similar across all the cultures studied.
STJ types predominate in all cultures.

Males within each culture report a preference for Thinking that is 10 percent to 25 percent higher than that reported by females.

Business people in various cultures in North America, Asia, Africa, and Europe were grouped according to temperament pairs (SJ, SP, NF, and NT types). When asked to select an animal to represent their groups, they selected similar animals, as appropriate to their physical environment: The SJ types chose loyal hard-working animals, the SP types chose independent adaptable animals, the NF types chose companionable animals who engaged in teamwork, and the NT types selected animals of competence and vision.

People in the same profession often have similar types. For example, law enforcement officers in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States show preferences for ISTJ and ESTJ.

Structured interviews of the same types across different cultures produced similar reactions. For example, ESTJ men and ESFJ women found great support from their environment as they grow up. The opposite types, INFP men and INTP women, reported more difficulty in finding a satisfactory fit for themselves as they grew up.

In summary, studies to date provide clear support for the theory that psychological type is universal across cultures.

 

[Mal12345]

Oh, I think you're right. I first discovered my type in a book and at the time I knew nothing of the negative portrayal of S, so it didn't influence me. Unfortunately most people won't read about it in a book, and some will learn about which types are more 'cool' before they decide on their type.

What I meant was, online a lot of the descriptions and general talk is slanted toward making N more appealing (and S look unappealling). And if there wasn't a substantial difference in the appeal of N and S descriptions, you wouldn't get people mistyping as N as regularly as I believe they do. I know what you're saying about seeing yourself on video, but I don't think it's always the case. There can be that pleasure in discovering your type, which gives you a sense of validation. If you asked most people here, they would tell you, that in spite of the downsides, they're happy and proud to be the type they are.

Ugh sorry, I feel like I'm not explaining myself well...

Some examples of how N looks better in descriptions than S would help. I've already given the example of the ISTP description at personalitypages as positive (the ISTP is "rational and logical", or words to that effect) but then I'm told that personalitypages has bad descriptions. The point is, they aren't negative sounding, and the ISTP I was talking to simply finds it a boring description because he is an ISTP. I don't see how S is being picked on, and not because I am an N but because I am objective enough to see the formula used to create each of the descriptions, in that it's exactly the same (boring) formula used in each one.