Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[Shadow Play]

I thank you for making me laugh this hard so shortly after logging in.

I don't get it. What's so funny?

Do me.

Based on what little I've seen of you, I'd guess INFP, maybe?

Interesting. Why is it uncommon for sensors to be on typology forums? I always hear this but never understand why people hold this view. I've seen many sensors out there discussing their types and the types of others. And yes, there's probably a part to this argument I'm missing. Go ahead and correct me.

Here are the November 2014 member stats for Typology Central:

INFP: 2016 (18.2%)
INTP: 1958 (17.7%)
INFJ: 1782 (16.1%)
INTJ: 1437 (13.0%)
ENFP: 1156 (10.4%)
ENTP: 781 (7.0%)
ENFJ: 321 (2.9%)
ISTP: 304 (2.7%)
ENTJ: 298 (2.7%)
ISTJ: 278 (2.5%)
ISFP: 256 (2.3%)
ISFJ: 181 (1.6%)
ESTP: 100 (0.9%)
ESFP: 84 (0.8%)
ESTJ: 74 (0.7%)
ESFJ: 65 (0.6%)

Compare that with the November 2014 stats for Personality Café:

INFP: 11865 (20.4%)
INFJ: 9133 (15.7%)
INTP: 7825 (13.5%)
INTJ: 7307 (12.6%)
ENFP: 4915 (8.5%)
ENTP: 3709 (6.4%)
ISTJ: 2094 (3.6%)
ISFP: 1986 (3.4%)
ISTP: 1926 (3.3%)
ENFJ: 1904 (3.3%)
ENTJ: 1681 (2.9%)
ISFJ: 1374 (2.4%)
ESTP: 635 (1.1%)
ESFP: 620 (1.1%)
ESFJ: 573 (1.0%)
ESTJ: 542 (0.9%)

Only 12.1% and 16.8% of members here and at PerC, respectively, self-identitied as Sensors for the 2014 stats.

One could raise the following criticisms:

1. Those stats are nearly five years old, and thus are outdated.
2. Some members would've changed types since then.
3: Not all members are accurately typed.
4. The stats don't include those who are untyped.
5: The Typology Central stats don't take "x" labels into consideration.
6. Some of those accounts are dupes.

Although all of these points are true, I don't believe them to have enough of a mitigating effect on the self-type trends, because there is still a significant skew towards I and N and against E and S. Thus, I'd expect 2019 type stats to be comparable to the above 2014 stats.

Now, let's compare the percentage of IN and ES types here to the up-to-date type trends stats...

IN: 65% - 15.2%; self-selection ratio: 4.3 (1 dp)
ES: 3% - 32.1%; self-selection ratio: 0.1 (1 dp)

Based on the self-selection ratios above, an IN is approximately forty times more likely to join a typology forum than an ES.

I'm not saying Sensors don't ever take an interest in typology, and it's not my intention to invalidate your experiences. All I'm saying is that members are significantly less likely to identify as Sensors than they are to identify as Intuitives. Self-type probability wasn't even my main argument for Phobik not being an ESTJ.

Sure, one could argue that some Intuitives are mistyped Sensors. I'm not saying mistypes don't happen. However, in order for one to accuse others of being a particular thing - as opposed to only saying they're not something - it implies that there has to be a "one true type" for everyone. Many of those who argue internet Ns are mistyped believe the tests are superficial or prone to bias, but if the tests used to produce official stats are meaningless, that opens up another can of worms as to how to reach a consensus of what defines an S or an N. More importantly, arguing that there isn't a significant IN > ES skew because of bias would imply that too many people mistype for the MBTI to have any reliability. That 40:1 skew cannot be explained away by just a couple of hypothetical mistypes.

 

[Pionart]

[MENTION=38365]Shadow Play[/MENTION]

I suspect that you're an INFJ with a lot of Ti (posting style seems reminiscent of my own, and I think I can see the INFJ function order in some of your posts).

Though, since you model things according to dichotomies alone and not functions, you could be correct according to your own definitions with INTP.

 

[Shadow Play]

[MENTION=38365]Shadow Play[/MENTION]

I suspect that you're an INFJ with a lot of Ti (posting style seems reminiscent of my own, and I think I can see the INFJ function order in some of your posts).

Though, since you model things according to dichotomies alone and not functions, you could be correct according to your own definitions with INTP.

I don't think INFJ is impossible, but I'd probably rank it something like fourth place on my list of most likely types. Arguing for INFJ by dichotomies requires arguing for both F and J, whereas you'd only have to argue F for INFP, or J for INTJ. Sometimes I've tested as INTJ, but my N and T scores are consistently strong.

If I was to use the so-called "nu-MBTI", which consists of quasi-Jungian functions contained within the decidedly non-Jungian Harold Grant stack, I probably could argue for myself as an Ni-Ti looping INFJ if I wanted to. Hell, just changing Ni-Fe-Ti-Se to Ni-Ti would give you a far more Jungian function stack. The only problem is being an Ni-Ti type would imply I'm an Introverted Intuitive with auxiliary Thinking who prefers Perceiving... which is a roundabout way of saying INTP.

 

[Pionart]

The only problem is being an Ni-Ti type would imply I'm an Introverted Intuitive with auxiliary Thinking who prefers Perceiving... which is a roundabout way of saying INTP.

Yeah that's what I meant. Based on the definitions I use that's an INFJ, based on the definitions you use it's an INTP.

(except that I'm not calling Thinking the auxiliary. I'm still saying Fe is your second function and Ti the third, but the Ti is well-developed, strongly used and perhaps over-used)

 

[Shadow Play]

Yeah that's what I meant. Based on the definitions I use that's an INFJ, based on the definitions you use it's an INTP.

(except that I'm not calling Thinking the auxiliary. I'm still saying Fe is your second function and Ti the third, but the Ti is well-developed, strongly used and perhaps over-used)

I wouldn't say Ti is overused when I'm more at home doing Ti things than I am doing Fe things. Impersonal analysis comes as easily as breathing, whereas this so-called Fe is much more foreign to me. If you're going to argue Fe, you'd need to be clearer on what terms you're arguing from. If you mean Jung's Extraverted Feeling type, whose closest corresponding MBTI type is ESFJ, then Extraverted Feeling would be more like something I'd repress within the subconscious than something actively playing a role within the conscious. Jung's Extraverted Feeling type is a poor descriptor of an INFJ... let alone an INTP. If you mean Fe as the function jerry-rigged to FJ, then I'd be the opposite of that as a TP type (even if my preferences for T and P are more open for debate). TPs wouldn't have more in common with FJs than they would do with either TJs or FPs. If you have some other definition of Fe in mind - such as some home-brewed definition based on personal observations - I'm all ears.

I'll assume that Fe is how it's stereotypically defined on typology forums, which is the expression and mirroring of emotions, the objectivity of values, and the seeking of external harmony. I'm an introvert, and as is typical for introverts, I find the expression of emotions very difficult. To quote Jung, "what fills the extravert's heart flows out of his mouth, but the enthusiasm of the introvert is the very thing that seals his lips", and that very much applies to me. Nor do I feel others' emotions as my own, for that matter. Objectivity of values is something I find to be a philosophical issue with no clear answer. I seldom have gut responses to things where something is 'right' or 'wrong', and I'm not inclined to evaluate people in terms of good or evil. I'm more inclined to either deconstruct morality as a concept or to compare contrasting theories of morality. I really do not see there being universal values which are true for all, nor do I assume we all want the same things. If anything, the thought of losing myself in others or within a group would be loathsome. As for the seeking of external harmony, I relate to the bare minimum of wanting to avoid needless drama, but I couldn't stand by and let a falsehood go silenced. I call bullshit when I see it.

By the way, the MBTI Manual states that INFJs are the least argumentative type. I think 'argumentative' is one of the first adjectives those who know me would use were they to criticise me.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

[MENTION=38365]Shadow Play[/MENTION]

I suspect that you're an INFJ with a lot of Ti (posting style seems reminiscent of my own, and I think I can see the INFJ function order in some of your posts).

Though, since you model things according to dichotomies alone and not functions, you could be correct according to your own definitions with INTP.

You think everyone is an INFJ.

But also, Ni-Ti is a valid type and doesn't necessarily indicate "looping" or low health. It's just an extra introverted individual. It's best to look at how people use the functions in pairs. Think about all the obnoxious, super high energy extroverts you know. I work with a highly annoying Te-Se ENTJ. She looks ESTJ, but she's not. She's just a jumper, so to speak. Always on crack.

In other words, people you've identified as NF could be Ne-Fi, Ne-Fe, Ni-Fe, Ni-Fi, Fi-Ne, Fi-Ni, Fe-Ni, Fe-Ne.

To go one step further, an Fe-Ne ESFJ might easily be mistaken for an ENFP.

I strongly feel that this approach to functions is far more logical and better explains the vast differences among people of the "same" type.

 

[Pionart]

By the way, the MBTI Manual states that INFJs are the least argumentative type. I think 'argumentative' is one of the first adjectives those who know me would use were they to criticise me.

I don't have anything to say about the rest of your post right now, but that just sounds like something they got wrong. As an INFJ, I can be quite argumentative.

I don't know which type is the least argumentative on average but I don't think it's INFJ.

 

[Pionart]

You think everyone is an INFJ.

But also, Ni-Ti is a valid type and doesn't necessarily indicate "looping" or low health. It's just an extra introverted individual. It's best to look at how people use the functions in pairs. Think about all the obnoxious, super high energy extroverts you know. I work with a highly annoying Te-Se ENTJ. She looks ESTJ, but she's not. She's just a jumper, so to speak. Always on crack.

In other words, people you've identified as NF could be Ne-Fi, Ne-Fe, Ni-Fe, Ni-Fi, Fi-Ne, Fi-Ni, Fe-Ni, Fe-Ne.

To go one step further, an Fe-Ne ESFJ might easily be mistaken for an ENFP.

I strongly feel that this approach to functions is far more logical and better explains the vast differences among people of the "same" type.

I've considered that, but I can't accept it yet, because...

I'd be someone who would easily be "doubly introverted", yet I clearly show the Ni-Fe-Ti-Se-Ne-Fi-Te-Si function order. I occassionally jump from Ni to Ti, but that's the exception.

(oh, and I type plenty of people as ENFP, INFP, INTP, or various miscellaneous types)

 

[Peter Deadpan]

I've considered that, but I can't accept it yet, because...

I'd be someone who would easily be "doubly introverted", yet I clearly show the Ni-Fe-Ti-Se-Ne-Fi-Te-Si function order. I occassionally jump from Ni to Ti, but that's the exception.

(oh, and I type plenty of people as ENFP, INFP, INTP, or various miscellaneous types)

We see both what we want to see, and what we are capable of seeing.

 

[Shadow Play]

I don't have anything to say about the rest of your post right now, but that just sounds like something they got wrong. As an INFJ, I can be quite argumentative.

I don't know which type is the least argumentative on average but I don't think it's INFJ.

Here is a link to a study of argumentativeness. It finds that NTs are the most argumentative type, with ENTJ taking the lead. INFJ ranked lower than all four SFs, who were the runner-ups for least argumentative.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Here is a link to a study of argumentativeness. It finds that NTs are the most argumentative type, with ENTJ taking the lead. INFJ ranked lower than all four SFs, who were the runner-ups for least argumentative.

Yeah but it's it based on self-typing?

I'm pretty... inflammatory.

 

[Shadow Play]

Yeah but it's it based on self-typing?

I'm pretty... inflammatory.

Yes, it's based on self-typings. That's the standard method of comparing types with research correlating them with personality traits.

INFPs ranked higher than seven types and second highest among all F types, and if you're higher on Big 5 Neuroticism, that could also make you more volatile in your responses.

My main gripe is the lack of consistent symmetry in type rankings. Somehow, flipping T to F would turn an INJ from the second most argumentative type to the least argumentative of all types.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Yes, it's based on self-typings. That's the standard method of comparing types with research correlating them with personality traits.

INFPs ranked higher than seven types and second highest among all F types, and if you're higher on Big 5 Neuroticism, that could also make you more volatile in your responses.

My main gripe is the lack of consistent symmetry in type rankings. Somehow, flipping T to F would turn an INJ from the second most argumentative type to the least argumentative of all types.

Oh I'm high on neuroticism...

- - - Updated - - -

Not on life.

- - - Updated - - -

Or drugs.

- - - Updated - - -

Unfortunately.

 

[anticlimatic]

Yes, it's based on self-typings. That's the standard method of comparing types with research correlating them with personality traits. INFPs ranked higher than seven types and second highest among all F types, and if you're higher on Big 5 Neuroticism, that could also make you more volatile in your responses. My main gripe is the lack of consistent symmetry in type rankings. Somehow, flipping T to F would turn an INJ from the second most argumentative type to the least argumentative of all types.

Smells like bad data, or maybe data gathered with the wrong context accidentally- most of the INFJs I know have only a thin veneer of doormat over a pretty sturdy core of contention.

 

[Luminous]

Here is a link to a study of argumentativeness. It finds that NTs are the most argumentative type, with ENTJ taking the lead. INFJ ranked lower than all four SFs, who were the runner-ups for least argumentative.

If I argue about how argumentative I am, does that mean I'm not an INFJ?

 

[Shadow Play]

Smells like bad data, or maybe data gathered with the wrong context accidentally- most of the INFJs I know have only a thin veneer of doormat over a pretty sturdy core of contention.

What usually happens with such studies is that one or more dichotomies contribute more strongly to trends than others. In the case of this study, N-T and S-F were the strongest factors pulling in opposing directions. E and J contributed as well, but didn't lead to clear clusters like we saw with NTs on top and SFs at the bottom; the exact order of types for those dichotomies was more up to chance.

INFJ is a statistical outlier to the general trend. In that instance, F probably caused it to skewer further despite the N preference.

 

[SD45T-2]

If I argue about how argumentative I am, does that mean I'm not an INFJ?

 

[The Cat]

What if you don't like arguing with people, but you're constantly arguing with yourself?

 

[Jaguar]

What if you don't like arguing with people, but you're constantly arguing with yourself?

Can you demonstrate?

 

[The Cat]

Can you demonstrate?

I never stop.