Type talk rankings on MBTIc

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Not too long ago, I thought of ENTP having become some catch-all category for half the personality traits out there. I was starting to wonder if people lacked the imagination to think of the other types.

So I did a small search, with google searches like ISFJ site:www.typologycentral.com, times 16 for each of the types. This is what I found.

INTP 4420
INTJ 4100
INFJ 3580
ENTP 3380
INFP 3340
ENFP 2750
ISTJ 1780
ENTJ 1730
ENFJ 1730
ISTP 1700
ESTP 1010
ESFJ 973
ISFJ 956
ISFP 778
ESTJ 732
ESFP 685

If there's a trait or habit to be discussed, say, the habit of eating a whole birthday cake and feeling ill afterwards, what types would come up most often in the discussion? I predict those that are talked most often.

It's hard to de-bias this without knowing many of the rare types in here, especially the sensors who hold *7* places in the list of least-mentioned types in here.

 

[mippus]

I have no idea what conclusions to draw from this, but I sure like the stats
What does it imply? That MBTI is overcrowded with the ever self-centered INTP's? Or that they are the most fascinating and thus most discussed type? And do those questions answer the question?

 

[Ezra]

So what you're suggesting is that the more people talk about a given type, the more likely a lot of people who proclaim they are a different type to it are actually the type they talk a lot about. Or at least ISFJ is most on others' minds, much like Six is in the Enneagram at EIDB.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

So what you're suggesting is that the more people talk about a given type, the more likely a lot of people who proclaim they are a different type to it are actually the type they talk a lot about. Or at least ISFJ is most on others' minds, much like Six is in the Enneagram at EIDB.

I think that decision to proclaim oneself of certain type is a more serious one, something that is not that dependent on the amount of discussion on the subject.

Instead, I'm suggesting that people tend to suggest the much-spoken types for polls such as "who's the sexiest", "who eats most birthday cake" etc, more than they suggest the less-spoken types.

 

[Wolf]

Your results will be skewed by that section to the left and thread titles.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Your results will be skewed by that section to the left and thread titles.

Well, type titled threads include talk about the type in question. The left section gives a distortion in the form of user activity, tho.

I did another search: MBTIc's internal search for posts with keyword. Results:

intp 6888
intj 6699
infj 4656
infp 4400
enfp 3690
entp 3684
istj 2587
entj 2473
enfj 2434
istp 2364
isfj 1946
estp 1879
estj 1696
esfj 1696
esfp 1588
isfp 1337

Again the same 7 S at the bottom, with INTJ taking INTP's top position INTP at the top again.

 

[Wolf]

Entire post includes titles.

 

[Badlands]

Wait... Santtu... isn't 6,699 < 6,888?

Yeah, the Sensors are far more common than Intuitives (The Myers and Briggs estimated it was almost a 3-to-1 margin), it's just that Intuitives are more likely to show up here because Sensors don't tend to be interested in relatively abstract things such as personality type (especially Artisans). Part of it might also be that Guardians in particular are somewhat alienated by this community; you know, they're usually the people that respond to every nice comment made and make sure they add a smiley (especially the SFJs), and this forum just really isn't like that.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Wait... Santtu... isn't 6,699 < 6,888?

Oh good catch, sloppy me. Fixed

Yeah, the Sensors are far more common than Intuitives (The Myers and Briggs estimated it was almost a 3-to-1 margin), it's just that Intuitives are more likely to show up here because Sensors don't tend to be interested in relatively abstract things such as personality type (especially Artisans). Part of it might also be that Guardians in particular are somewhat alienated by this community;

Yeah the over-representation of IN on this forum is a background factor. But as seen from the types being talked about, people mostly talk about the types being present in here, other types being relatively forgotten

Knowledge about the qualities of ESFP isn't very widespread in here (collectively, we just know they like to dance or something ), so they don't often become the topic of a discussion.

 

[Ezra]

Well, type titled threads include talk about the type in question. The left section gives a distortion in the form of user activity, tho.

Not necessarily; it could indicate that an abnormally high proportion of people who have joined the forum and who don't post here or who once posted here thought themselves ISFJ, when they're clearly not.

 

[edel weiss]

Knowledge about the qualities of ESFP isn't very widespread in here (collectively, we just know they like to dance or something ), so they don't often become the topic of a discussion.

:yim_rolling_on_the_ I can imagine that!!

I think S's are less likely to be on forums, as said before. I's are more likely to be on, since I assume they'd prefer this kind of communication. And INT's do tend to be more misunderstood than F's, as far as I've seen in real life.

 

[proteanmix]

This is an interesting subject. This may be why certain types just aren't interesting to me anymore because they're all anyone ever talks about. No one's interested in learning about a type that they aren't. This contributes to why we're not able to build a significant amount of sensors on the forum. Not because the topics are too abstract rolli but because who wants to come to a place and find what little discussion about their type that is going on is mostly negative and condescending?