3 ms·

I have done the real Myers-Briggs process a few times. It takes a day for a small team, and includes several interviews, the test, and meetings. The test on i

I have done the real Myers-Briggs process a few times. It takes a day for a small team, and includes several interviews, the test, and meetings. The test on its own is pretty pseudoscientific (and gameable), but if you know someone well you can usually guess their MBTI type without a test. However, the whole process is not a bad medium for introspecting on whether your process works for the individuals on the team, using the "scientific personality profiles" you just developed to talk about your style. For example, one team I was on adopted a meeting agenda before our weekly meetings (the Amazon "6-pager" idea), ostensibly because of the prevalence of IxxJ personality types on the team, and it helped several people become more open. As I understand it, there are now better personality inventories and processes for this, but Myers-Briggs was the OG.

jackmott42 4y ago
The idea that you know something is nonsense, but you make some excuse in your mind for how it is useful nonetheless is such a common, human thing. You see the same "logic" with lie detector tests. "Oh we know it is useless but its still useful because of nonsense games we play with it" Just stop, accept that it is bogus and don't do it.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  I'm not saying it's useless at all. I'm saying that the online bullshit that everyone thinks when you talk about "the MBTI" is useless. The actual MBTI is useful when used in its intended context, and no more. When people take the test out of context, it becomes no more than a horoscope. For most personality inventories, that context is in terms of determining what makes people comfortable in interpersonal relations. It doesn't predict the kinds of jobs you like (even though people online say it does). It doesn't predict your income earnings potential. It doesn't predict how you will act in any given circumstance. It doesn't predict how you will feel in any given circumstance. Its only value is in helping to determine what kinds of interactions you are most comfortable with. This is the same as other psychology tests, like those online autism, ADD, or psychopathy tests that people are also obsessed with. The paper test literally means nothing on its own. It is used to follow up on a clinical observation. Also, by the way, the Myers-Briggs test itself has had a hard time standing up to scrutiny because the test is very transparent about what it's testing for, so any test-taker can manipulate their answers to get the result they want very easily. Modern personality tests are usually some variant of the "big five" (which is kind of like Myers-Briggs plus one). The tests have gotten better at not convincing you to manipulate the result. A lot of people who are engineers are uncomfortable with this kind of arrangement, but it's how a lot of psychology (and medicine, for that matter) works due to the uncertainty in the testing vehicles, which is substantial.
  - runarberg 4y ago
    What do you believe is the intended purpose of the actual MBTI? It is my understanding that it has its roots in Jungian psychoanalysis, which is thoroughly debunked pseudoscience at this point. The only utility of Jungian psychoanalysis today is in media and literature, particularly in Hollywood movies (and even then it is a bit outdated). I am aware that the MBTI has outlived Jungian psychoanalysis so we should assess it on its own merits (and not by its intended context) and as such it is at best useless fun (like the horoscope, online autism test, etc[1]) but at worst an industry based around provably false benefits. On its own merits MBTI is no different from modern personality tests in its lack of utility. It only set is self apart by being exceptionally poor at it, and explicitly basing it self on non-sensical statistical methods. Modern personality tests use cromulent statistics but fail to demonstrate any merit outside of which personality they’ve “discovered”. In other words, they’ve “discovered” epicycle and use that to describe planetary motions, all the while cognitive psychologists, behavior psychologists, neuro-pshychologists, sociologists, etc. have discovered general relativity and are using that to describe the same phenomena. 1: Although online autism tests often serve as a first step for autistic adults to go and get an actual diagnostic, or even just self-diagnose, and become a part of the autistic or neuro-diversity community which often has quite positive effects on their lives (if only by educating and being around other people in the community). I fail to see how MBTI has even this tiny foot-in-the-door benefit.
    - pclmulqdq 4y ago
      The intended purpose is to serve as a discussion point for how to best interact with you. Same with the other big 5 tests. It turns out people are not good at articulating that absent a weird context like a personality testing process. The typical use of big 5 and MBTI is to help teams work together and understand each others' working styles. That's it. The Jungean crap is just crap. Like literally everything else in psychology, it's a discussion point that gets the conversation started. So is Big 5. So is CBT (arguably the most "evidence-based" form of psychology, which still turns out to be scientifically debatable). It turns out that psychology is just about having structured conversations about your feelings. Personality tests are a framework for that, and they work for that purpose (and basically that purpose alone).
runarberg 4y ago
Think about it this way. You can find new methods to measure fluid imbalance in your body. Or you can create better statistical models to more accurately assess the weigh each planetary body has on you horoscope, or you pinpoint which negative ions has positive health benefits. It doesn’t mean anything about whether or not these effects are real, just that you measured your non-effects more accurately. Personality psychology is there. They have been creating better measurements for over 50 years now, but they are still failing to demonstrate that personality effects in the real world are nothing more then something they believe exists.

jackmott42 4y ago

The idea that you know something is nonsense, but you make some excuse in your mind for how it is useful nonetheless is such a common, human thing. You see the same "logic" with lie detector tests. "Oh we know it is useless but its still useful because of nonsense games we play with it" Just stop, accept that it is bogus and don't do it.

pclmulqdq 4y ago
I'm not saying it's useless at all. I'm saying that the online bullshit that everyone thinks when you talk about "the MBTI" is useless. The actual MBTI is useful when used in its intended context, and no more. When people take the test out of context, it becomes no more than a horoscope. For most personality inventories, that context is in terms of determining what makes people comfortable in interpersonal relations. It doesn't predict the kinds of jobs you like (even though people online say it does). It doesn't predict your income earnings potential. It doesn't predict how you will act in any given circumstance. It doesn't predict how you will feel in any given circumstance. Its only value is in helping to determine what kinds of interactions you are most comfortable with. This is the same as other psychology tests, like those online autism, ADD, or psychopathy tests that people are also obsessed with. The paper test literally means nothing on its own. It is used to follow up on a clinical observation. Also, by the way, the Myers-Briggs test itself has had a hard time standing up to scrutiny because the test is very transparent about what it's testing for, so any test-taker can manipulate their answers to get the result they want very easily. Modern personality tests are usually some variant of the "big five" (which is kind of like Myers-Briggs plus one). The tests have gotten better at not convincing you to manipulate the result. A lot of people who are engineers are uncomfortable with this kind of arrangement, but it's how a lot of psychology (and medicine, for that matter) works due to the uncertainty in the testing vehicles, which is substantial.
- runarberg 4y ago
  What do you believe is the intended purpose of the actual MBTI? It is my understanding that it has its roots in Jungian psychoanalysis, which is thoroughly debunked pseudoscience at this point. The only utility of Jungian psychoanalysis today is in media and literature, particularly in Hollywood movies (and even then it is a bit outdated). I am aware that the MBTI has outlived Jungian psychoanalysis so we should assess it on its own merits (and not by its intended context) and as such it is at best useless fun (like the horoscope, online autism test, etc[1]) but at worst an industry based around provably false benefits. On its own merits MBTI is no different from modern personality tests in its lack of utility. It only set is self apart by being exceptionally poor at it, and explicitly basing it self on non-sensical statistical methods. Modern personality tests use cromulent statistics but fail to demonstrate any merit outside of which personality they’ve “discovered”. In other words, they’ve “discovered” epicycle and use that to describe planetary motions, all the while cognitive psychologists, behavior psychologists, neuro-pshychologists, sociologists, etc. have discovered general relativity and are using that to describe the same phenomena. 1: Although online autism tests often serve as a first step for autistic adults to go and get an actual diagnostic, or even just self-diagnose, and become a part of the autistic or neuro-diversity community which often has quite positive effects on their lives (if only by educating and being around other people in the community). I fail to see how MBTI has even this tiny foot-in-the-door benefit.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    The intended purpose is to serve as a discussion point for how to best interact with you. Same with the other big 5 tests. It turns out people are not good at articulating that absent a weird context like a personality testing process. The typical use of big 5 and MBTI is to help teams work together and understand each others' working styles. That's it. The Jungean crap is just crap. Like literally everything else in psychology, it's a discussion point that gets the conversation started. So is Big 5. So is CBT (arguably the most "evidence-based" form of psychology, which still turns out to be scientifically debatable). It turns out that psychology is just about having structured conversations about your feelings. Personality tests are a framework for that, and they work for that purpose (and basically that purpose alone).

runarberg 4y ago

Think about it this way. You can find new methods to measure fluid imbalance in your body. Or you can create better statistical models to more accurately assess the weigh each planetary body has on you horoscope, or you pinpoint which negative ions has positive health benefits. It doesn’t mean anything about whether or not these effects are real, just that you measured your non-effects more accurately. Personality psychology is there. They have been creating better measurements for over 50 years now, but they are still failing to demonstrate that personality effects in the real world are nothing more then something they believe exists.