The actual paper does conflate the personality type with the culture (i.e. intergroup conflict), at least in the first section, "The psychological dimensions of

The actual paper does conflate the personality type with the culture (i.e. intergroup conflict), at least in the first section, "The psychological dimensions of TIV: an integrative literature". See https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110134 https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.11013... I think that's what the reporting is picking up on. It actually made me curious what evidence there is, if any, in the domain of psychology showing a meaningful connection between individual personalities and cultural analogs, beyond a cultural phenomenon that is superficially similar simply making for a more hospital environment for the personality type, or vice-versa. In other words, by studying one (personality type or cultural phenomenon) can we draw substantive conclusions about the other in terms of genesis or remediation? We (as humans) love making such equivocations, but absent strong evidence they're mostly just exercises in, e.g., the composition fallacy.