Takaisin Ajatusvarikolle - Back to  Thought Deposit
- Dinoglyphs - Esihistorialliset eläimet historiankirjoissa - Prehistoric Creatures Documented by  Ancient Man



MBTI - Myers-Briggs Type Indicator


ENTJ (Extraversion, iNtuition, Thinking, Judgment) is an abbreviation used in the publications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) to refer to one of sixteen personality types.[1] The MBTI assessment was developed from the work of prominent psychiatrist Carl G. Jung in his book Psychological Types, which proposed a psychological typology based on his theories of cognitive functions.

From Jung's work, others developed psychological typologies. Jungian personality assessments include the MBTI assessment, developed by Isabel Briggs Myers and Katharine Cook Briggs, and the Keirsey Temperament Sorter, developed by David Keirsey. Keirsey referred to ENTJs as Fieldmarshals, one of the four types belonging to the temperament he called the Rationals.

ENTJs are among the rarest of types, accounting for about 2–5% of those who are formally tested.[2][3] They tend to be self-driven, motivating, energetic, assertive, and competitive. They are often sought out as leaders due to an innate ability to direct or influence groups of people. Unusually influential and organized, they may sometimes judge others by their own tough standards, failing to take personal needs into account.[4]


The MBTI instrument

The MBTI preferences indicate the differences in people based on the following:[4]

By using their preference in each of these areas, people develop what Jung and Myers called psychological type. This underlying personality pattern results from the dynamic interaction of their four preferences, in conjunction with environmental influences and their own individual tendencies. People are likely to develop behaviors, skills, and attitudes based on their particular type. Each personality type has its own potential strengths as well as areas that offer opportunities for growth.

The MBTI tool consists of multiple choice questions that sort respondents on the basis of the four "dichotomies" (pairs of psychological opposites). Sixteen different outcomes are possible, each identified by its own four-letter code, referred to by initial letters. (N is used for iNtuition, to differentiate it from Introversion). The MBTI is approximately 75% accurate according to its own manual.[5]

ENTJ characteristics

ENTJs have a natural tendency to marshal and direct. This may be expressed with the charm and finesse of a world leader or with the insensitivity of a cult leader. The ENTJ requires little encouragement to make a plan. One ENTJ put it this way... "I make these little plans that really don't have any importance to anyone else, and then feel compelled to carry them out." While "compelled" may not describe ENTJs as a group, nevertheless the bent to plan creatively and to make those plans reality is a common theme for NJ types.[11]

ENTJs focus on the most efficient and organized means of performing a task. This quality, along with their goal orientation, often makes ENTJs superior leaders, both realistic and visionary in implementing a long-term plan. ENTJs tend to be fiercely independent in their decision making, having a strong will that insulates them against external influence. Generally highly competent, ENTJs analyze and structure the world around them in a logical and rational way. Due to this straightforward way of thinking, ENTJs tend to have the greatest difficulty of all the types in applying subjective considerations and emotional values into the decision-making process.

ENTJs often excel in business and other areas that require systems analysis, original thinking, and an economically savvy mind. They are dynamic and pragmatic problem solvers. They tend to have a high degree of confidence in their own abilities, making them assertive and outspoken. In their dealings with others, they are generally outgoing, charismatic, fair-minded, and unaffected by conflict or criticism. However, these qualities can make ENTJs appear arrogant, insensitive, and confrontational. They can overwhelm others with their energy, intelligence, and desire to order the world according to their own vision. As a result, they may seem intimidating, hasty, and controlling.

ENTJs tend to cultivate their personal power. They often end up taking charge of a situation that seems (to their mind, at least) to be out of control, or that can otherwise be improved upon and strengthened. They strive to learn new things, which helps them become resourceful problem-solvers. However, since ENTJs rely on provable facts, they may find subjective issues pointless. ENTJs appear to take a tough approach to emotional or personal issues, and so can be viewed as aloof and cold-hearted. In situations requiring feeling and value judgments, ENTJs are well served to seek the advice of a trusted Feeling type.

Notable ENTJs

According to David Keirsey, based on observations of behavior, notable ENTJs might include Napoleon Bonaparte, Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir,and Bill Gates.[2] For a more complete list, see Notable Fieldmarshals.

Correlation with Enneatype

According to Baron and Wagele, the most common Enneatypes for ENTJs are Achievers, Skeptics and Asserters.[12]

Cognitive functions

Drawing upon Jungian theory, Isabel Myers proposed that for each personality type, the cognitive functions—sensing, intuition, thinking, and feeling—form a hierarchy. This hierarchy represents the person's "default" pattern of behavior.

The Dominant function is the personality type's preferred role, the one they feel most comfortable with. The secondary Auxiliary function serves to support and expand on the Dominant function. If the Dominant is an information gathering function (sensing or intuition), the Auxiliary is a decision making function (thinking or feeling), and vice versa. The Tertiary function is less developed than the Dominant and Auxiliary, but it matures over time, rounding out the person's abilities. The Inferior function is the personality type's Achilles' heel. This is the function they are least comfortable with. Like the Tertiary, the Inferior function strengthens with maturity.[13]

Jung and Myers considered the attitude of the Auxiliary, Tertiary, and Inferior functions to be the opposite of the Dominant. In this interpretation, if the Dominant function is extraverted, then the other three are introverted, and vice versa. However, many modern practitioners hold that the attitude of the Tertiary function is the same as the Dominant.[5] (Neither view is backed by sufficient empirical evidence to be considered scientifically valid.[14])

Using the more modern interpretation, the cognitive functions of the ENTJ are as follows:[13]

Dominant: Extraverted thinking (Te)

Te organizes and schedules ideas and the environment to ensure the efficient, productive pursuit of objectives. Te seeks logical explanations for actions, events, and conclusions, looking for faulty reasoning and lapses in sequence. [15]

Te is the most developed function for ENTJs. Te involves ordering, structuring, specifying, and applying logic to situations. ENTJs tend to be endowed with strong organizational and coordination skills. Te is also focused on performing a task in the most efficient and productive manner, which generally gives ENTJs the ability to direct and marshal their environment according to work-specific needs. Further, Te contributes to the ENTJs' ability to accumulate relevant data while analyzing that data for factual accuracies and impersonal applications.

Auxiliary: Introverted intuition (Ni)

Attracted to symbolic actions or devices, Ni synthesizes seeming paradoxes to create the previously unimagined. These realizations come with a certainty that demands action to fulfill a new vision of the future, solutions that may include complex systems or universal truths. [16]

Ni allows ENTJs to process information and events through impressions, possibilities, and meanings, thereby helping provide ENTJs with a sense of the future. Ni contributes to the ability to grasp patterns and plans. Complex, generalized information is processed through Ni to add clarity and check for imperfections. Ni supports Te in ENTJs' pursuit of goals; ENTJs use Ni to improve a situation to make it more useful to themselves.

Tertiary: Extraverted sensing (Se)

Se focuses on the experiences and sensations of the immediate, physical world. With an acute awareness of the present surroundings, it brings relevant facts and details to the forefront and may lead to spontaneous action. [17]

In ENTJs, Se is a basic function, less developed than Te or Ni. Se helps ENTJs effectively act upon their immediate surroundings. ENTJs scan their physical environment to observe where improvements can be made, and Se is integral to the application of Te and Ni to meet those standards. Se gathers detailed data from the immediate experience to expand the ENTJs' knowledge base and heighten the ENTJs' sense of reality upon taking action.

Inferior: Introverted feeling (Fi)

Fi filters information based on interpretations of worth, forming judgments according to criteria that are often intangible. Fi constantly balances an internal set of values such as harmony and authenticity. Attuned to subtle distinctions, Fi innately senses what is true and what is false in a situation. [18]

Fi is the ENTJs' weakest function, but it does mature over time. ENTJs have difficulty applying subjective and emotional thoughts to their decision-making, since they believe Feeling obstructs decisiveness and impartiality. While this is applicable to objective criteria, ENTJs must learn to recognize the great importance of Feeling in relationships and personal contact, since it creates the close bonds vital to human beings. At worst, a failure to engage the Feeling function can make ENTJs appear overbearing, insensitive, and abrasive. Further, it can result in an underdeveloped system of morality and values, which can disengage ENTJs from the personal world of self-fulfillment.

Shadow functions

Later personality researchers (notably Linda V. Berens)[19] added four additional functions to the descending hierarchy, the so-called "shadow" functions to which the individual is not naturally inclined but which can be developed, or emerge when the person is under stress. The shadow processes "operate more on the boundaries of our awareness…We usually experience these processes in a negative way, yet when we are open to them, they can be quite positive."[20] For the ENTJ these shadow functions are (in order):

See also


  1. ^ "Myers-Briggs Foundation: The 16 MBTI Types". http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/the-16-mbti-types.asp. Retrieved 2009-05-07. 

  2. ^ a b Keirsey.com Portrait of the Field Marshal

  3. ^ "CAPT". http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/estimated-frequencies.htm. Retrieved 2008-10-13. 

  4. ^ a b Myers, Isabel Briggs with Peter B. Myers (1980, 1995). Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. pp. 85–88. ISBN 0-89106-074-X. 

  5. ^ a b Myers, Isabel Briggs; Mary H. McCaulley (1985) (in English). Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (2nd edition ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press. pp. 52. ISBN 0-89106-027-8. 

  6. ^ "Changing Minds: Extraversion vs. Introversion". http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/extravert_introvert.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-10. 

  7. ^ "Changing Minds: Sensing vs. Intuiting". http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/sensing_intuiting.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-10. 

  8. ^ a b "Changing Minds: Thinking vs. Feeling". http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/thinking_feeling.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-10. 

  9. ^ "Changing Minds: Judging vs. Perceiving". http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/judging_perceiving.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-10. 

  10. ^ "TypeLogic ENTJ". http://typelogic.com/entj.html. Retrieved 2009-06-01. 

  11. ^ Butt, Joe. "TypeLogic". http://typelogic.com/entj.html. Retrieved 2008-04-28. 

  12. ^ * Wagele, Elizabeth; and Renee Baron (1994). The Enneagram Made Easy. HarperOne. ISBN 0-06-251026-6. 

  13. ^ a b Barron-Tieger, Barbara; Tieger, Paul D. (1995). Do what you are: discover the perfect career for you through the secrets of personality type. Boston: Little, Brown. ISBN 0-316-84522-1. 

  14. ^ "The Personality Junkie: Personality Type Theory". http://personalityjunkie.com/personality-type-theory/. Retrieved 2009-11-22. 

  15. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Extraverted thinking". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedthinking.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  16. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Introverted intuition". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/introvertedintuiting.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  17. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Extraverted Sensing". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedsensing.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  18. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Introverted feeling". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/introvertedfeeling.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  19. ^ "CognitiveProcesses.com". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/index.html. Retrieved 2008-05-21. 

  20. ^ "CognitiveProcesses.com The 16 Type Patterns". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16types.html. Retrieved 2009-07-11. 

  21. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Introverted thinking". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/introvertedthinking.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  22. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Extraverted intuition". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedintuiting.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  23. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Introverted sensing". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/introvertedsensing.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

  24. ^ "Cognitive Processes: Extraverted Feeling". http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedfeeling.html. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 

External links

Of the four aspects of strategic analysis and definition it is marshaling or situational organizing role that reaches the highest development in the Fieldmarshal. As this kind of role is practiced some contingency organizing is necessary, so that the second suit of the Fieldmarshal's intellect is devising contingency plans. Structural and functional engineering, though practiced in some degree in the course of organizational operations, tend to be not nearly as well developed and are soon outstripped by the rapidly growing skills in organizing. But it must be said that any kind of strategic exercise tends to bring added strength to engineering as well as organizing skills.

Hardly more than two percent of the total population, Fieldmarshals are bound to lead others, and from an early age they can be observed taking command of groups. In some cases, they simply find themselves in charge of groups, and are mystified as to how this happened. But the reason is that they have a strong natural urge to give structure and direction wherever they are - to harness people in the field and to direct them to achieve distant goals. They resemble Supervisors in their tendency to establish plans for a task, enterprise, or organization, but Fieldmarshals search more for policy and goals than for regulations and procedures.

They cannot not build organizations, and cannot not push to implement their goals. When in charge of an organization, whether in the military, business, education, or government, Fieldmarshals more than any other type desire (and generally have the ability) to visualize where the organization is going, and they seem able to communicate that vision to others. Their organizational and coordinating skills tends to be highly developed, which means that they are likely to be good at systematizing, ordering priorities, generalizing, summarizing, at marshaling evidence, and at demonstrating their ideas. Their ability to organize, however, may be more highly developed than their ability to analyze, and the Fieldmarshal leader may need to turn to an Inventor or Architect to provide this kind of input.

Fieldmarshals will usually rise to positions of responsibility and enjoy being executives. They are tireless in their devotion to their jobs and can easily block out other areas of life for the sake of their work. Superb administrators in any field - medicine, law, business, education, government, the military - Fieldmarshals organize their units into smooth-functioning systems, planning in advance, keeping both short-term and long-range objectives well in mind. For the Fieldmarshal, there must always be a goal-directed reason for doing anything, and people's feelings usually are not sufficient reason. They prefer decisions to be based on impersonal data, want to work from well thought-out plans, like to use engineered operations - and they expect others to follow suit. They are ever intent on reducing bureaucratic red tape, task redundancy, and aimless confusion in the workplace, and they are willing to dismiss employees who cannot get with the program and increase their efficiency. Although Fieldmarshals are tolerant of established procedures, they can and will abandon any procedure when it can be shown to be ineffective in accomplishing its goal. Fieldmarshals root out and reject ineffectiveness and inefficiency, and are impatient with repetition of error.

Hillary Clinton, Napoleon, Margret Thatcher, Carl Sagan, Bill Gates, Golda Meir, Edward Teller, George Benard Shaw, and General George C. Marshall are examples of Rational Fieldmarshals.

A full description of the Fieldmarshal and Rational is in People Patterns or Please Understand Me II

More About Your Rational Fieldmarshal Personality:

Careers:  Best Job Fit for Rationals
  Dealing With Stress at Work: Rational Strategies
Relationships:  Women and Romance - Rational Women
  Men and Romance - The Rational Lover
  Love the One You're With - Tips for Rationals With Non-Rational Partners
School:  Rational Students: Maximizing Your Study Environment
  Rationals: Capitalizing on Your Strategic Intelligence Style

Receive Monthly Articles on Being A Rational Fieldmarshal: The Keirsey PersonalityZone Newsletter

All Rationals (NTs) share the following core characteristics:

Rationals are the problem solving temperament, particularly if the problem has to do with the many complex systems that make up the world around us. Rationals might tackle problems in organic systems such as plants and animals, or in mechanical systems such as railroads and computers, or in social systems such as families and companies and governments. But whatever systems fire their curiosity, Rationals will analyze them to understand how they work, so they can figure out how to make them work better.

In working with problems, Rationals try to find solutions that have application in the real world, but they are even more interested in the abstract concepts involved, the fundamental principles or natural laws that underlie the particular case. And they are completely pragmatic about their ways and means of achieving their ends. Rationals don't care about being politically correct. They are interested in the most efficient solutions possible, and will listen to anyone who has something useful to teach them, while disregarding any authority or customary procedure that wastes time and resources.

Rationals have an insatiable hunger to accomplish their goals and will work tirelessly on any project they have set their mind to. They are rigorously logical and fiercely independent in their thinking -- are indeed skeptical of all ideas, even their own -- and they believe they can overcome any obstacle with their will power. Often they are seen as cold and distant, but this is really the absorbed concentration they give to whatever problem they're working on. Whether designing a skyscraper or an experiment, developing a theory or a prototype technology, building an aircraft, a corporation, or a strategic alliance, Rationals value intelligence, in themselves and others, and they pride themselves on the ingenuity they bring to their problem solving.

Rationals are very scarce, comprising as little as 5 to 10 percent of the population. But because of their drive to unlock the secrets of nature, and to develop new technologies, they have done much to shape our world.

Albert Einstein, Marie Curie, Bill Gates, Margaret Thatcher, Walt Disney, Camille Paglia, Ayn Rand, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Feynman, and General Ulysses S. Grant and President Dwight D. Eisenhower are examples of Rationals.

A full description of the Rational is in People Patterns or Please Understand Me II

Albert Einstein is the iconic example of a Rational.

A List of Famous Rationals

Rational Quotes




Loikkaa: valikkoon, hakuun

Myers–Briggs-tyyppi-indikaattori (lyh. MBTI, engl. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) on psykologinen indikaattori, joka kuvaa ihmisen persoonallisuutta neljän ulottuvuuden avulla. Indikaattorin kehitti Katherine Briggs tyttärensä Isabel Myersin kanssa toisen maailmansodan jälkeen saadakseen ihmiset ymmärtämään erilaisuutta ja tulemaan paremmin toimeen keskenään.

MBTI perustuu Carl Jungin teorioihin, joskin Briggs ja Myers lisäsivät ulottuvuuden järjestelmällinen–spontaani, koska Jungin rationaalisuus-käsite oli varsin vaikeaselkoinen. Indikaattorin kysymysten perusteella selvitetään, kumpaa preferenssiä (I–E, S–N, T–F ja J–P) koehenkilö luontevammin jokaisessa neljässä ulottuvuudessa käyttää. Persoonallisuudella tarkoitetaan luonteenpiirteitä, ominaisuuksia ja suhteellisen pysyviä käyttäytymismuotoja, mutta persoonallisuuden dynamiikka otetaan huomioon. MBTI:n mukaan persoonalisuus ei siis ole "pysäytyskuva", kuten piirretesteissä.




Kirjainlyhenteet tulevat seuraavista englanninkielisistä sanoista:



Tyypit johtoasemassa

Ulottuvuuksien kuvaus

I–E-ulottuvuus kuvaa asennetta ympäristöön. S–N-ulottuvuus kuvaa tiedonhankintatottumuksia ja T–F-ulottuvuus päätöksenteon perusteita. J–P-ulottuvuus kuvaa elämäntyyliä.

Ekstravertti (E) tuntee todennäköisesti olonsa kotoisammaksi ihmisten ja asioiden kanssa ulkomaailmassa kuin ideoiden sisäisessä maailmassa, "ulospäinsuuntautunut".

Introvertti (I) tuntee todennäköisesti olonsa kotoisammaksi sisäisessä ideamaailmassa kuin ihmisten ja asioiden ulkomaailmassa, "sisäänpäinsuuntautunut".

Tosiasiallinen (S) työskentelee todennäköisesti mieluummin tunnettujen tosiasioiden parissa kuin etsii mahdollisuuksia ja keskinäisiä suhteita.

Intuitiivinen (N) etsii mieluummin mahdollisuuksia ja yhteyksiä kuin työstää tunnettuja faktoja, tulevaisuuteen suuntautunut.

Ajatteleva (T) tekee päätökset todennäköisemmin persoonattoman analyysin kuin henkilökohtaisten arvojen perusteella.

Tunteva (F) tekee päätökset todennäköisemmin henkilökohtaisten arvojen kuin persoonattoman logiikan avulla.

Järjestelmällinen (J) pitää todennäköisesti enemmän suunnitellusta, organisoidusta, selvästä ja täsmällisestä elämäntavasta kuin joustavasta ja spontaanista.

Spontaani (P) pitää todennäköisesti enemmän joustavasta ja spontaanista elämäntavasta kuin suunnitellusta ja järjestelmällisestä.

Huomattakoon, että piirretestien "ekstrovertti" kuvaa enemmänkin eräänlaista sosiaalisuutta, kun taas MBTI:n ekstravertti kuvaa suuntautumista ulkoiseen asioiden ja ihmisten maailmaan ottamatta varsinaisesti kantaa sosiaalisuuteen.[3]

Neljä ulottuvuutta ja kahdeksan preferenssiä muodostavat 16 persoonallisuustyyppiä, joihin liittyy paljon preferenssien mukaisia yhteisiä piirteitä ja käyttäytymistapoja, vaikka tyypin sisällä olevat henkilöt ovat kukin omia erilaisia yksilöitään. MBTI on ainoa dynaaminen persoonallisuusindikaattori, joka kuvaa henkilön persoonallisuuden preferenssijärjestyksen ja se mukaisen käyttäytymisen niin tiedostetussa "normaalitilassa" kuin syystä tai toisesta ajauduttaessa vähemmän tiedostettujen "varjopersoonien" tasolle.[4] MBTI:n ulottuvuuksia voidaan osittain kuvata myös "viiden suuren persoonallisuudenpiirteen" (engl. big five) ulottuvuuksilla.[5]

Teoria viidestä suuresta persoonallisuuden piirteestä on McCraen & Costan käsityksen mukaan saanut persoonallisuuden tutkimuksessa enemmän tukea kuin Jungin luokitukseen perustuva teoria (mm. persoonallisuuden piirteitä pidetään jatkuvina, ei dikotomisina ominaisuuksina; mukana on myös viides neuroottisuus-ulottuvuus). MBTI:n kehittämistä[6] tuntevat voivat kuitenkin havaita MBTI:n toimivuuden ja käyttökelpoisuuden verrattuna muihin persoonallisuuden tarkastelutapoihin. Vaikka esimerkiksi ulottuuvuuksia ilmaistaan dikotomialla kuvaamaan ihmisen luontaista taipumusta "kallistua" ulottuuvuuden jommankumman ääripään suuntaan, on MBTI ainut dynaaminen malli, joka selittää ihmisen persoonallisuuden kokonaisuuden, myös ulottuvuuksien "heikomman pään" käytön. Patologiset ja piirretestit eivät ilmennä persoonallisuuden dynamiikkaa. MBTI:n erinomainen toimivuus on osoitettu runsaassa suomalaisessa tutkimuksessa.[7]

Satunnaisesti valitussa amerikkalaista väestöä kuvaavassa otoksessa tyypit jakautuivat seuraavasti (jakauma eroaa melkoisesti suomalaisesta työelämässä toimivasta väestöstä; huomautus V. Routamaa):[8]

Katso myös



  1. www.personalitypage.com/portraits

  2. Vesa Routamaa, Sotatieteiden päivät 2008, Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulu

  3. Esimerkiksi Routamaa & Hautala 2009.

  4. Esimerkiksi Myers & McCalley & Quenk & Hammer 1998.

  5. McCrae & Costa, 1989.

  6. Esimerkiksi Myers & McCaulley 1990; Myers & McCalley & Quenk & Hammer 1998.

  7. Ks. esimerkiksi MBTI Finland.

  8. Statistics Based on the new Form M of the MBTI Viitattu 14. heinäkuuta 2007. (englanniksi)

Aiheesta muualla

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment is a psychometric questionnaire designed to measure psychological preferences in how people perceive  world and make decisions.[1]:1 se preferences were extrapolated from  typological ories originated by Carl Gustav Jung, as published in his 1921 book Psychological Types (English edition, 1923).[2]  original developers of  personality inventory were Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers. y began creating  indicator during World War II, believing that a knowledge of personality preferences would help women who were entering  industrial workforce for  first time to identify  sort of war-time jobs where y would be "most comfortable and effective."[1]:xiii  initial questionnaire grew into  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which was first published in 1962.  MBTI focuses on normal populations and emphasizes  value of naturally occurring differences.[3]

 MBTI instrument is called " best-known and most trusted personality assessment tool available today"[4] by its publisher, CPP (formerly Consulting Psychologists Press). CPP furr calls  MBTI tool " world’s most widely used personality assessment",[5] with as many as two million assessments administered annually. Some academic psychologists have criticized  MBTI instrument, claiming that it "lacks convincing validity data".[6][7][8][9] Proponents of  test, however, cite reports of individual behavior[10] and have also found that  indicator meets or exceeds  reliability of or psychological instruments.[11] For most adults (75–90%), though not for children,  MBTI is reported to give  same result for 3–4 preferences when  test is administered to  same person more than once (although  period between measurements is not stated).[12] Some studies have found strong support for construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability, although variation was observed.[13][14]

 definitive published source of reference for  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is  Manual produced by CPP,[15] from which much of  information in this article is drawn, along with training materials from CPP and ir European training partners, Oxford Psychologists Press. Also, a related model, with an original test, is published in David Keirsey's books Please Understand Me and Please Understand Me II.

 registered trademark rights to  terms Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI have been assigned from  publisher of  test, CPP, Inc., to  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust.[16]


As  MBTI Manual states,  MBTI "is designed to implement a ory; refore  ory must be understood to understand  MBTI."[17]:1

Fundamental to  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is  ory of psychological type as originally developed by Carl Jung.[1]:xiii Jung proposed  existence of two dichotomous pairs of cognitive functions:

Jung went on to suggest that se functions are expressed in eir an introverted or extraverted form.[1]:17 From Jung's original concepts, Briggs and Myers developed ir own ory of psychological type, described below, on which  MBTI is based.


 Myers-Briggs typology model regards personality type as similar to left or right handedness: individuals are eir born with, or develop, certain preferred ways of thinking and acting.  MBTI sorts some of se psychological differences into four opposite pairs, or dichotomies, with a resulting 16 possible psychological types. None of se types are "better" or "worse"; however, Briggs and Myers orized that individuals naturally prefer one overall combination of type differences.[1]:9 In  same way that writing with  left hand is hard work for a right-hander, so people tend to find using ir opposite psychological preferences more difficult, even if y can become more proficient (and refore behaviorally flexible) with practice and development.

 16 types are typically referred to by an abbreviation of four letters— initial letters of each of ir four type preferences (except in  case of iNtuition, which uses  abbreviation N to distinguish it from Introversion).

For instance:

And so on for all 16 possible type combinations.

Four dichotomies

 four pairs of preferences or dichotomies are shown in  table to  right.

Note that  terms used for each dichotomy have specific technical meanings relating to  MBTI which differ from ir everyday usage. For example, people who prefer judgment over perception are not necessarily more judgmental or less perceptive.

Nor does  MBTI instrument measure aptitude; it simply indicates for one preference over anor.[17]:3 Someone reporting a high score for extraversion over introversion cannot be correctly described as more extraverted: y simply have a clear preference.

Point scores on each of  dichotomies can vary considerably from person to person, even among those with  same type. However, Isabel Myers considered  direction of  preference (for example, E vs. I) to be more important than  degree of  preference (for example, very clear vs. slight).[15]

Attitudes: Extraversion (E) / Introversion (I)

 preferences for extraversion (thus spelled in Myers-Briggs jargon) and introversion are sometimes referred to as attitudes. Briggs and Myers recognized that each of  cognitive functions can operate in  external world of behavior, action, people, and things (extraverted attitude) or  internal world of ideas and reflection (introverted attitude).  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator sorts for an overall preference for one or  or of se.

 terms extravert and introvert are used in a special sense when discussing  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. People who prefer extraversion draw energy from action: y tend to act, n reflect, n act furr. If y are inactive, ir motivation tends to decline. To rebuild ir energy, extraverts need breaks from time spent in reflection. Conversely, those who prefer introversion expend energy through action: y prefer to reflect, n act, n reflect again. To rebuild ir energy, introverts need quiet time alone, away from activity.

 extravert's flow is directed outward toward people and objects, and  introvert's is directed inward toward concepts and ideas. Contrasting characteristics between extraverts and introverts include  following:

Functions: Sensing (S) / iNtuition (N) and Thinking (T) / Feeling (F)

Jung identified two pairs of psychological functions:

According to  Myers-Briggs typology model, each person uses one of se four functions more dominantly and proficiently than  or three; however, all four functions are used at different times depending on  circumstances.

Sensing and intuition are  information-garing (perceiving) functions. y describe how new information is understood and interpreted. Individuals who prefer sensing are more likely to trust information that is in  present, tangible and concrete: that is, information that can be understood by  five senses. y tend to distrust hunches, which seem to come "out of nowhere."[1]:2 y prefer to look for details and facts. For m,  meaning is in  data. On  or hand, those who prefer intuition tend to trust information that is more abstract or oretical, that can be associated with or information (eir remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or pattern). y may be more interested in future possibilities. y tend to trust those flashes of insight that seem to bubble up from  unconscious mind.  meaning is in how  data relates to  pattern or ory.

Thinking and feeling are  decision-making (judging) functions.  thinking and feeling functions are both used to make rational decisions, based on  data received from ir information-garing functions (sensing or intuition). Those who prefer thinking tend to decide things from a more detached standpoint, measuring  decision by what seems reasonable, logical, causal, consistent and matching a given set of rules. Those who prefer feeling tend to come to decisions by associating or empathizing with  situation, looking at it 'from  inside' and weighing  situation to achieve, on balance,  greatest harmony, consensus and fit, considering  needs of  people involved.

As noted already, people who prefer thinking do not necessarily, in  everyday sense, "think better" than ir feeling counterparts;  opposite preference is considered an equally rational way of coming to decisions (and, in any case,  MBTI assessment is a measure of preference, not ability). Similarly, those who prefer feeling do not necessarily have "better" emotional reactions than ir thinking counterparts.

Dominant Function

Although people use all four cognitive functions, one function is generally used in a more conscious and confident way. This dominant function is supported by  secondary (auxiliary) function, and to a lesser degree  tertiary function.  fourth and least conscious function is always  opposite of  dominant function. Myers called this inferior function  shadow.[1]:84

 four functions operate in conjunction with  attitudes (extraversion and introversion). Each function is used in eir an extraverted or introverted way. A person whose dominant function is extraverted intuition, for example, uses intuition very differently from someone whose dominant function is introverted intuition.

Lifestyle: Judgment (J) / Perception (P)

Myers and Briggs added anor dimension to Jung's typological model by identifying that people also have a preference for using eir  judging function (thinking or feeling) or ir perceiving function (sensing or intuition) when relating to  outside world (extraversion).

Myers and Briggs held that types with a preference for judgment show  world ir preferred judging function (thinking or feeling). So TJ types tend to appear to  world as logical, and FJ types as empatic. According to Myers,[1]:75 judging types like to "have matters settled." Those types who prefer perception show  world ir preferred perceiving function (sensing or intuition). So SP types tend to appear to  world as concrete and NP types as abstract. According to Myers,[1]:75 perceptive types prefer to "keep decisions open."

For extraverts,  J or P indicates ir dominant function; for introverts,  J or P indicates ir auxiliary function. Introverts tend to show ir dominant function outwardly only in matters "important to ir inner worlds."[1]:13 For example:

Because ENTJ types are extraverts,  J indicates that ir dominant function is ir preferred judging function (extraverted thinking). ENTJ types introvert ir auxiliary perceiving function (introverted intuition).  tertiary function is sensing and  inferior function is introverted feeling.

Because INTJ types are introverts,  J indicates that ir auxiliary function is ir preferred judging function (extraverted thinking). INTJ types introvert ir dominant perceiving function (introverted intuition).  tertiary function is feeling, and  inferior function is extraverted sensing.

Whole type

 expression of a person's psychological type is more than  sum of  four individual preferences, because of  way in which  preferences interact through type dynamics and type development. Descriptions of each type can be found on  Myers & Briggs Foundation website. In-depth descriptions of each type, including statistics, can be found in  MBTI Manual.[15]

Historical development

Katharine Cook Briggs began her research into personality in 1917. Upon meeting her future son-in-law, she observed marked differences between his personality and that of or family members. Briggs embarked on a project of reading biographies, and she developed a typology based on patterns she found. She proposed four temperaments: Meditative (or Thoughtful), Spontaneous, Executive, and Social.[19][20] n, after  English translation of Psychological Types was published in 1923 (having first been published in German in 1921), she recognized that Jung's ory was similar to, yet went far beyond, her own.[1]:22 Briggs's four types were later identified as corresponding to  Is, EPs, ETJs and EFJs.[19][20] Her first publications were two articles describing Jung's ory, in  journal New Republic in 1926 (Meet Yourself Using  Personality Paint Box) and 1928 (Up From Barbarism).

Briggs's daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, added to her mor's typological research, which she would progressively take over entirely. Myers graduated first in her class from Swarthmore College in 1919[1]:xx and wrote  prize-winning mystery novel Murder Yet to Come in 1929 using typological ideas. However, neir Myers nor Briggs were formally educated in psychology, and thus y lacked scientific credentials in  field of psychometric testing.[1]:xiii So Myers apprenticed herself to Edward N. Hay, who was n personnel manager for a large Philadelphia bank and went on to start one of  first successful personnel consulting firms in  U.S. From Hay, Myers learned test construction, scoring, validation, and statistics.[1]:xiii, xx In 1942,  "Briggs-Myers Type Indicator" was created, and  Briggs Myers Type Indicator Handbook was published in 1944.  indicator changed its name to  modern form (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) in 1956.[21][22]

Myers' work attracted  attention of Henry Chauncey, head of  Educational Testing Service, and under se auspices,  first MBTI Manual was published in 1962.  MBTI received furr support from Donald T. McKinnon, head of  Institute of Personality Research at  University of California; Harold Grant, professor at Michigan State and Auburn Universities; and Mary H. McCaulley of  University of Florida.  publication of  MBTI was transferred to Consulting Psychologists Press in 1975, and  Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) was founded as a research laboratory.[1]:xxi After Myers' death in May 1980, Mary McCaulley updated  MBTI Manual, and  second edition was published in 1985.[15]  third edition appeared in 1998.

Differences from Jung

Judgment vs. Perception

 most notable addition of Myers and Briggs to Jung's original thought is ir concept that a given type's fourth letter (J or P) is determined by how that type interacts with  external world, rar than by  type's dominant function.  difference becomes evident when assessing  cognitive functions of introverts.[1]:21-22

To Jung, a type with dominant introverted thinking, for example, would be considered rational (judging) because  decision-making function is dominant. To Myers, however, that same type would be irrational (perceiving) because  individual uses an information-garing function (eir extraverted intuition or extraverted sensing) when interacting with  outer world.

Orientation of  tertiary function
Jung orized that  dominant function acts alone in its preferred world: exterior for  extraverts, and interior for  introverts.  remaining three functions, he suggested, operate toger in  opposite world. If  dominant cognitive function is introverted,  or functions are extraverted, and vice versa.  MBTI Manual summarizes references in Jung's work to  balance in psychological type as follows:

re are several references in Jung's writing to  three remaining functions having an opposite attitudinal character. For example, in writing about introverts with thinking dominant...Jung commented that  counterbalancing functions have an extraverted character.[15]:29

However, many MBTI practitioners hold that  tertiary function is oriented in  same direction as  dominant function.[23] Using  INTP type as an example,  orientation would be as follows:

From a oretical perspective, noted psychologist H.J. Eysenck calls  MBTI a moderately successful quantification of Jung's original principles as outlined in Psychological Types.[24] However, both models remain ory, with no controlled scientific studies supporting eir Jung's original concept of type or  Myers-Briggs variation.[25]


 indicator is frequently used in  areas of pedagogy, career counseling, team building, group dynamics, professional development, marketing, leadership training, executive coaching, life coaching, personal development, marriage counseling, and workers' compensation claims.

Format and administration

 current North American English version of  MBTI Step I includes 93 forced-choice questions (re are 88 in  European English version). Forced-choice means that  individual has to choose only one of two possible answers to each question.  choices are a mixture of word pairs and short statements. Choices are not literal opposites but chosen to reflect opposite preferences on  same dichotomy. Participants may skip questions if y feel y are unable to choose.

Using psychometric techniques, such as item response ory,  MBTI will n be scored and will attempt to identify  preference, and clarity of preference, in each dichotomy. After taking  MBTI, participants are usually asked to complete a Best Fit exercise (see above) and n given a readout of ir Reported Type, which will usually include a bar graph and number to show how clear y were about each preference when y completed  questionnaire.

During  early development of  MBTI thousands of items were used. Most were eventually discarded because y did not have high midpoint discrimination, meaning  results of that one item did not, on average, move an individual score away from  midpoint. Using only items with high midpoint discrimination allows  MBTI to have fewer items on it but still provide as much statistical information as or instruments with many more items with lower midpoint discrimination.  MBTI requires five points one way or anor to indicate a clear preference.

Additional formats

Isabel Myers had noted that people of any given type shared differences as well as similarities. At  time of her death, she was developing a more in-depth method of measuring how people express and experience ir individual type pattern. This tool is called  MBTI Step II.

A Step III is also being developed in a joint project involving  following organizations: CPP,  publisher of  whole family of MBTI works; CAPT (Center for Applications of Psychological Type), which holds all of Myers' and McCaulley's original work; and  MBTI Trust, headed by Katharine and Peter Myers. Step III will furr address  use of perception and judgment by respondents.[26]

In addition,  Type Differentiation Indicator (TDI) (Saunders, 1989) is a scoring system for  longer MBTI, Form J,[27] which includes  20 subscales above, plus a Comfort-Discomfort factor (which purportedly corresponds to  missing factor of Neuroticism). This factor includes seven additional scales to indicate a sense of overall comfort and confidence versus discomfort and anxiety: guarded-optimistic, defiant-compliant, carefree-worried, decisive-ambivalent, intrepid-inhibited, leader-follower, and proactive-distractible. Also included is a composite of se called "strain." Each of se comfort-discomfort subscales also loads onto one of  four type dimensions, for example, proactive-distractible is also a judging-perceiving subscale. re are also scales for type-scale consistency and comfort-scale consistency. Reliability of 23 of  27 TDI subscales is greater than .50, "an acceptable result given  brevity of  subscales" (Saunders, 1989).

Precepts and ethics

 following precepts are generally used in  ethical administration of  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator:

Type not trait

 MBTI sorts for type; it does not indicate  strength of ability.  questionnaire allows  clarity of a preference to be ascertained (Bill clearly prefers introversion), but not  strength of preference (Jane strongly prefers extraversion) or degree of aptitude (Harry is good at thinking). In this sense, it differs from trait-based tools such as 16PF. Type preferences are polar opposites: a precept of MBTI is that people fundamentally prefer one thing over  or, not a bit of both.

Own best judge

Individuals are considered  best judge of ir own type. While  MBTI questionnaire provides a Reported Type, this is considered only an indication of ir probable overall Type. A Best Fit Process is usually used to allow respondents to develop ir understanding of  four dichotomies, to form ir own hyposis as to ir overall Type, and to compare this against  Reported Type. In more than 20% of cases,  hyposis and  Reported Type differ in one or more dichotomies. Using  clarity of each preference, any potential for bias in  report, and often, a comparison of two or more whole Types may n help respondents determine ir own Best Fit.

No right or wrong

No preference or total type is considered "better" or "worse" than anor. y are all Gifts Differing, as emphasized by  title of Isabel Briggs Myers' book on this subject.


It is considered unethical to compel anyone to take  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It should always be taken voluntarily.[28]


 result of  MBTI Reported and Best Fit type are confidential between  individual and administrator and, ethically, not for disclosure without permission.

Not for selection

 results of  assessment should not be used to "label, evaluate, or limit  respondent in any way."[28] Since all types are valuable, and  MBTI measures preferences rar than aptitude,  MBTI is not considered a proper instrument for purposes of employment selection. Many professions contain highly competent individuals of different types with complementary preferences.

Importance of proper feedback

Individuals should always be given detailed feedback from a trained administrator and an opportunity to undertake a Best Fit exercise to check against ir Reported Type. This feedback can be given in person or, where this is not practical, by telephone or electronically.

Type dynamics and development

 interaction of two, three, or four preferences is known as type dynamics. Although type dynamics has garnered little or no empirical support to substantiate its viability as a scientific ory,[30] Myers and Briggs asserted that for each of  16 four-preference types, one function is  most dominant and is likely to be evident earliest in life. A secondary or auxiliary function typically becomes more evident (differentiated) during teenage years and provides balance to  dominant. In normal development individuals tend to become more fluent with a third, tertiary function during mid life, while  fourth, inferior function remains least consciously developed.  inferior function is often considered to be more associated with  unconscious, being most evident in situations such as high stress (sometimes referred to as being in  grip of  inferior function).

 sequence of differentiation of dominant, auxiliary, and tertiary functions through life is termed type development. Note that this is an idealized sequence that may be disrupted by major life events.

 dynamic sequence of functions and ir attitudes can be determined in  following way:

Note that for extraverts,  dominant function is  one most evident in  external world. For introverts, however, it is  auxiliary function that is most evident externally, as ir dominant function relates to  interior world.

Some examples of whole types may clarify this furr. Taking  ESTJ example above:

 dynamics of  ESTJ are found in  primary combination of extraverted thinking as ir dominant function and introverted sensing as ir auxiliary function:  dominant tendency of ESTJs to order ir environment, to set clear boundaries, to clarify roles and timetables, and to direct  activities around m is supported by ir facility for using past experience in an ordered and systematic way to help organize mselves and ors. For instance, ESTJs may enjoy planning trips for groups of people to achieve some goal or to perform some culturally uplifting function. Because of ir ease in directing ors and ir facility in managing ir own time, y engage all  resources at ir disposal to achieve ir goals. However, under prolonged stress or sudden trauma, ESTJs may overuse ir extraverted thinking function and fall into  grip of ir inferior function, introverted feeling. Although  ESTJ can seem insensitive to  feelings of ors in ir normal activities, under tremendous stress, y can suddenly express feelings of being unappreciated or wounded by insensitivity.

Looking at  diametrically opposite four-letter type, INFP:

 dynamics of  INFP rest on  fundamental correspondence of introverted feeling and extraverted intuition.  dominant tendency of  INFP is toward building a rich internal framework of values and toward championing human rights. y often devote mselves behind  scenes to causes such as civil rights or saving  environment. Since y tend to avoid  limelight, postpone decisions, and maintain a reserved posture, y are rarely found in executive-director type positions of  organizations that serve those causes. Normally,  INFP dislikes being "in charge" of things. When not under stress,  INFP radiates a pleasant and sympatic demeanor; but under extreme stress, y can suddenly become rigid and directive, exerting ir extraverted thinking erratically.

Every type—and its opposite—is  expression of se interactions, which give each type its unique, recognizable signature.

Expansion of  ory

Related instruments

Or personality type instruments based on  Myers-Briggs ory include  Golden Personality Type Profile and  Majors Personality Type Indicator.

Brain halves

Some have orized that  cognitive functions may correlate to  Lateralization of brain function.[31] Ors claim, however, that this proposed correlation has no scientific basis.[citation needed]

Correlations to or instruments

Keirsey Temperaments

David W. Keirsey mapped four 'temperaments' to  existing Myers-Briggs system groupings SP, SJ, NF and NT; this often results in confusion of  two ories. However,  Keirsey Temperament Sorter is not directly associated with  official Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.






Inspector Protector Counselor Mastermind





Crafter Composer Healer Architect





Promoter Performer Champion Inventor





Supervisor Provider Teacher Fieldmarshal

Big Five

McCrae and Costa[7] present correlations between  MBTI scales and  Big Five personality construct, which is a conglomeration of characteristics found in nearly all personality and psychological tests.  five personality characteristics are extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability (or neuroticism).  following study is based on  results from 267 men followed as part of a longitudinal study of aging. (Similar results were obtained with 201 women.)

se data suggest that four of  MBTI scales are related to  Big Five personality traits. se correlations show that E-I and S-N are strongly related to extraversion and openness respectively, while T-F and J-P are moderately related to agreeableness and conscientiousness respectively.  emotional stability dimension of  Big Five is largely absent from  original MBTI (though  TDI, discussed above, has addressed that dimension).

se findings led McCrae and Costa,  formulators of  Five Factor ory,[32] to conclude, "correlational analyses showed that  four MBTI indices did measure aspects of four of  five major dimensions of normal personality.  five-factor model provides an alternative basis for interpreting MBTI findings within a broader, more commonly shared conceptual framework." However, "re was no support for  view that  MBTI measures truly dichotomous preferences or qualitatively distinct types, instead,  instrument measures four relatively independent dimensions."


Origins of  ory

Jung's ory of psychological type, as published in his 1921 book, was not tested through controlled scientific studies.[25] Jung's methods primarily included clinical observation, introspection and anecdote—methods that are largely regarded as inconclusive by  modern field of psychology.[25]

Jung's type ory introduced a sequence of four cognitive functions (thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuition), each having one of two orientations (extraverted or introverted), for a total of eight functions.  Myers-Briggs ory is based on se eight functions, although with some differences in expression (see Differences from Jung above). However, neir  Myers-Briggs nor  Jungian models offer any scientific, experimental proof to support  existencesequenceorientation, or  manifestation of se functions.[25]


 statistical validity of  MBTI as a psychometric instrument has been  subject of criticism. It has been estimated that between a third and a half of  published material on  MBTI has been produced for conferences of  Center for  Application of Psychological Type (which provides training in  MBTI) or as papers in  Journal of Psychological Type (which is edited by Myers-Briggs advocates).[33] It has been argued that this reflects a lack of critical scrutiny.[33][34]

 accuracy of  MBTI depends on honest self-reporting by  person tested.[17]:52-53 Unlike some personality measures, such as  Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory or  Personality Assessment Inventory,  MBTI does not use validity scales to assess exaggerated or socially desirable responses.[35] As a result, individuals motivated to do so can fake ir responses,[36] and one study found that  MBTI judgment/perception dimension correlates with  Eysenck Personality Questionnaire lie scale.[37] If respondents "fear y have something to lose, y may answer as y assume y should."[17]:53

With regard to factor analysis, one study of 1291 college-aged students found six different factors instead of  four used in  MBTI.[38] In or studies, researchers found that  JP and  SN scales correlate with one anor.[7]


Some researchers have interpreted  reliability of  test as being low. Studies have found that between 39% and 76% of those tested fall into different types upon retesting some weeks or years later.[9][34]

One study reports that  MBTI dichotomies exhibit good split-half reliability; however,  dichotomy scores are distributed in a bell curve, and  overall type allocations are less reliable. Also, test-retest reliability is sensitive to  time between tests. Within each dichotomy scale, as measured on Form G, about 83% of categorizations remain  same when individuals are retested within nine months, and around 75% when individuals are retested after nine months. About 50% of people tested within nine months remain  same overall type, and 36% remain  same type after more than nine months.[39] For Form M ( most current form of  MBTI instrument), se scores are higher (see MBTI Manual, p. 163, Table 8.6).

In one study, when people were asked to compare ir preferred type to that assigned by  MBTI, only half of people picked  same profile.[40] Critics also argue that  MBTI lacks falsifiability, which can cause confirmation bias in  interpretation of results.

Statistical structure

 instrument's dichotomous scoring of dimensions has also been subject to criticism. For example, some researchers expected that scores would show a bimodal distribution with peaks near  ends of  scales, but found that scores on  individual subscales were actually distributed in a centrally peaked manner similar to a normal distribution. A cut-off exists at  center of  subscale such that a score on one side is classified as one type, and a score on  or side as  opposite type. This fails to support  concept of type:  norm is for people to lie near  middle of  subscale.[7][8][9][34][41] Neverless, " absence of bimodal score distributions does not necessarily prove that  'type'-based approach is incorrect."[41]


 relevance of  MBTI for career planning has been questioned, with reservations about  relevance of type to job performance or satisfaction, and concerns about  potential misuse of  instrument in labeling individuals.[34][42] In her original research, Isabel Myers found that  proportion of different personality types varied by choice of career or course of study.[1]:40-51[15] However, some or researchers examining  proportions of each type within varying professions report that  proportion of MBTI types within each occupation is close to that within a random sample of  population.[34]

Also,  efficiency of MBTI in an organizational setting has been subject to scrutiny. In 1991 three scholars at  University of Western Ontario analyzed  results of 97 independent studies that evaluated  effectiveness of personality tests in predicting job success and job satisfaction ("Personnel Psychology," winter 1991).  results of  nationwide study challenged  effectiveness of  MBTI when related to individual performance and satisfaction in a corporate setting.

“ validity coefficient for personality tests in predicting job success was found to average 0.29 (on a scale of 0 to 1).  corresponding average validity for  MBTI, however, was a weak 0.12. In fact, each study that examined  MBTI found its validity to be below acceptable levels of statistical significance.”[43]

However, as noted above under Precepts and ethics,  MBTI measures preference, not ability.  use of  MBTI as a predictor of job success is expressly discouraged in  Manual.[17]:78 It is not designed to be used for this purpose.


Skeptics criticize  terminology of  MBTI as being so "vague and general"[44] as to allow any kind of behavior to fit any personality type. y claim that this results in  Forer effect, where individuals give a high rating to a positive description that supposedly applies specifically to m.[25][34] Ors argue that while  MBTI type descriptions are brief, y are also distinctive and precise.[45]:14-15 Some orists, such as David Keirsey, have expanded on  MBTI descriptions, providing even greater detail. For instance, Keirsey's descriptions of his four temperaments, which he correlated with  sixteen MBTI personality types, show how  temperaments differ in terms of language use, intellectual orientation, educational and vocational interests, social orientation, self image, personal values, social roles, and characteristic hand gestures.[45]:32-207

See also


  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Myers, Isabel Briggs with Peter B. Myers (1980, 1995). Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. ISBN 0-89106-074-X. 

  2. ^ Jung, Carl Gustav (August 1, 1971). "Psychological Types". Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-09774. 

  3. ^ Pearman, Roger R.; Sarah C. Albritton (1997). I'm Not Crazy, I'm Just Not You (First ed.). Palo Alto, California: Davies-Black Publishing. xiii. ISBN 0891060960. 

  4. ^ "CPP MBTI Information". https://www.cpp.com/Products/mbti/mbti_info.aspx. Retrieved 2009-06-20. 

  5. ^ "CPP Products". https://www.cpp.com/products/index.aspx. Retrieved 2009-06-20. 

  6. ^ Hunsley J, Lee CM, Wood JM (2004). "Controversial and questionable assessment techniques". Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Lilienfeld SO, Lohr JM, Lynn SJ (eds.). Guilford. ISBN 1-59385-070-0. , p. 65

  7. ^ a b c d McCrae, R R; Costa, P T (1989). "Reinterpreting  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator From  Perspective of  Five-Factor Model of Personality". Journal of Personality 57 (1): 17–40. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1989.tb00759.x. PMID 2709300. 

  8. ^ a b Stricker, L J; Ross, J (1964). "An Assessment of Some Structural Properties of  Jungian Personality Typology". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 68: 62–71. doi:10.1037/h0043580. 

  9. ^ a b c Matws, P (2004-05-21). " MBTI is a flawed measure of personality". Bmj.com Rapid Responses. http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/328/7450/1244.  But see also Clack & Allen's response to Matws.

  10. ^ Barron-Tieger, Barbara; Tieger, Paul D. (1995). Do what you are: discover  perfect career for you through  secrets of personality type. Boston: Little, Brown. ISBN 0-316-84522-1. 

  11. ^ Clack, Gillian; Judy Allen. "Response to Paul Matws' criticism". http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/328/7450/1244. Retrieved 2008-05-14. 

  12. ^ Lawrence, Gordon; Charles Martin. "CAPT (Center for Applications of Psychological Type)". http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/reliability-validity.htm. Retrieved 2008-04-20. 

  13. ^ Thompson, Bruce; Gloria M. Borrello (1986). "Educational and Psychological Measurement". Construct Validity of  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. SAGE Publications. http://epm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/46/3/745. Retrieved 2008-04-20. 

  14. ^ Capraro, Robert M.; Mary Margaret Capraro (2002). "Educational and Psychological Measurement". Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Score Reliability Across: Studies a Meta-Analytic Reliability Generalization Study. SAGE Publications. http://epm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/62/4/590. Retrieved 2008-04-20. 

  15. ^ a b c d e f Myers, Isabel Briggs; McCaulley Mary H.; Quenk, Naomi L.; Hammer, Allen L. (1998). MBTI Manual (A guide to  development and use of  Myers Briggs type indicator). Consulting Psychologists Press; 3rd ed edition. ISBN 0-89106-130-4. 

  16. ^ "Trademark Guidelines" (PDF). Consulting Psychologists Press. https://online.cpp-db.com/Inc/Trademark_Guidelines.pdf. Retrieved December 20, 2004. 

  17. ^ a b c d e Myers, Isabel Briggs; Mary H. McCaulley (1985). Manual: A Guide to  Development and Use of  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. ISBN 0-89106-027-8. 

  18. ^ Tieger, Paul D.; Barbara Barron-Tieger (1999).  Art of SpeedReading People. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company. pp. 66. ISBN 978-0-316-84518-2. 

  19. ^ a b "CAPT: " Story of Isabel Briggs Myers"". http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/isabel-myers.htm. Retrieved 2009-07-29. 

  20. ^ a b " TYPE Writer: "It Happened In 1943:  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Turns 60 Years Old"". https://www.cpp.com/pr/Fall03TYPEwriter.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-29. 

  21. ^ Geyer, Peter (1998) Some Significant Dates. Retrieved December 5, 2005.

  22. ^ "Guide to  Isabel Briggs Myers Papers 1885-1992". University of Florida George A. Smars Libraries, Department of Special and Area Studies Collections, Gainesville, FL.. 2003. http://web.uflib.ufl.edu/spec/manuscript/guides/Myers.htm. Retrieved December 5, 2005. 

  23. ^ "TypeLogic". http://www.typelogic.com/fa.html. Retrieved 2008-09-14. 

  24. ^ Eysenck, H.J.. Genius:  Natural History of Creativity (1995 ed.). pp. 110. 

  25. ^ a b c d e Carroll, Robert Todd (January 9, 2004). "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator- Skeptic's Dictionary". http://skepdic.com/myersb.html. Retrieved January 8, 2004. 

  26. ^ "CAPT Step III". https://www.capt.org/research/mbti-step3.htm. Retrieved 2008-09-14. 

  27. ^ [http://harvey.psyc.vt.edu/Documents/BessHarveySwartzSIOP2003.pdf ""Hierarchical Confirmatory Factor Analysis of  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator""] (PDF). http://harvey.psyc.vt.edu/Documents/BessHarveySwartzSIOP2003.pdf. Retrieved 2008-09-14. 

  28. ^ a b "Ethics for Administering  MBTI Instrument". http://www.myersbriggs.org/myers-and-briggs-foundation/ethical-use-of--mbti-instrument/ethics-for-administering.asp. Retrieved 2009-02-15. 

  29. ^ "Dolphin Cove". http://www.infj.org/archive/typestats.html. Retrieved 2008-06-25. 

  30. ^ " Personality Junkie: Personality Type ory". http://personalityjunkie.com/personality-type-ory/. Retrieved 2009-11-22. 

  31. ^ Bentz Thomson, Lenore (October 1998). Personality Type: An Owner's Manual. Jung on  Hudson Books. Shambhala Publications, Inc.. pp. 415. ISBN 9780877739876. 

  32. ^ "University of Oregon: "Measuring  Big Five Personality Factors"". http://www.uoregon.edu/~sanjay/bigfive.html#b5vffm. Retrieved 2008-08-08. 

  33. ^ a b Coffield F, Moseley D, Hall E, Ecclestone K (2004). "Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review" (PDF). Learning and Skills Research Centre. http://www.lsda.org.uk/files/PDF/1543.pdf. 

  34. ^ a b c d e f Pittenger, David J. (November 1993). "Measuring  MBTI...And Coming Up Short." (PDF). Journal of Career Planning and Employment 54 (1): 48–52. http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/HRMWebsite/hrm/articles/develop/mbti.pdf. 

  35. ^ Boyle, G J (1995). "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some psychometric limitations". Australian Psychologist 30: 71–74. 

  36. ^ Furnham, A (1990). "Faking personality questionnaires: Fabricating different profiles for different purposes". Current Psychology 9: 46–55. doi:10.1007/BF02686767. 

  37. ^ Francis, L J; Jones, S H (2000). " Relationship Between  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and  Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Among Adult Churchgoers". Pastoral Psychology 48. 

  38. ^ Sipps, G.J., R.A. Alexander, and L. Friedt. "Item Analysis of  Myers-Briggs Type Indicator." Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 45, No. 4 (1985), pp. 789-796.

  39. ^ Harvey, R J (1996). Reliability and Validity, in MBTI Applications A.L. Hammer, Editor. Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, CA.  p. 5- 29.

  40. ^ Carskadon, TG & Cook, DD (1982). "Validity of MBTI descriptions as perceived by recipients unfamiliar with type". Research in Psychological Type 5: 89–94. 

  41. ^ a b Bess, T.L. & Harvey, R.J. (2001). " Annual Conference of  Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego 2001" (PDF). http://harvey.psyc.vt.edu/Documents/SIOPhandoutBess-HarveyMBTI2001.pdf. 

  42. ^ Druckman, D. and R. A. Bjork, Eds. (1992). In  Mind’s Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. ISBN 0-309-04747-1. 

  43. ^ Letters to  Editor: It's Not You, It's Your Personality. (1992, February 3). Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), p. PAGE A13. Retrieved November 8, 2008, from Wall Street Journal database. (Document ID: 27836749).

  44. ^ "Forer effect from  Skeptic's Dictionary". http://www.skepdic.com/forer.html. 

  45. ^ a b Keirsey, David (1998). Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar, CA: Promeus Nemesis Book Company. ISBN 1-885705-02-6. 

References and furr reading


Official websites

Assessing type in children

Criticism of  MBTI

Type profiles

Free online Jungian typology assessments
(note that some or assessments offered on se sites may not be free)



Enneagrammi on tapa hahmottaa ihmisen tyypillistä käyttäytymistä. Se perustuu jo lapsuudessa omaksuttuihin käyttäytymismuotoihin, joiden avulla lapsi on saanut turvallisuutta ja selviytymiskokemuksia. Tätä selviytymisstrategiaa hän helposti soveltaa myös aikuisiässä. Fransiskaanipappi Richard Rohr osiutti, että jo erämaaisät tunsivat ennagrammin sen alkumodossaan (mm. Evagrios Pontoslainen 300-luvulla). Enneagrammi ennustaa siis käyttäytymistyyliä. Näitä tyylejä ajatellaan yleensä olevan yhdeksän:

1. Perfektionisti

2. Auttaja

3. Suorittaja

4. Romantikko

5. Tarkkailija

6. Kyselijä

7. Seikkailija

8. Varma

9. Sovittelija




Pelasta elämä - lahjoita verta!



Safe a Life - Donate Blood!