Tests & Questionnaires
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
is a personality questionnaire designed to identify certain
psychological differences according to the typological theories of Carl Gustav Jung as published in his 1921 book Psychological Types (English edition, 1923).[1] The original developers of the indicator were Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, who initially created the indicator during World War II,
believing that a knowledge of personality preferences would help women
who were entering the industrial workforce for the first time identify
the sort of war-time jobs where they would be "most comfortable and
effective."[2]
While many academic psychologists have criticized the indicator in
research literature, claiming that it "lacks convincing validity data,"
[3][4][5] proponents and sellers of the test cite unblinded anecdotal predictions of individual behavior.[6]
The registered trademark
rights in the phrase and its abbreviation have been assigned from the
publisher of the test, CPP, Inc., to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust.[7]
The definitive published source of reference on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is The Manual produced by CPP,[8]
from which much of the information in this article is drawn, along with
training materials from CPP and their European training partners,
Oxford Psychologists Press. However, a popularized source of the system
(with test) is published in the Please Understand Me book.
Concepts
Type
Fundamental to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is the concept of Psychological Type.
In a similar way to left- or right-handedness, the principle is that
individuals also find certain ways of thinking and acting easier than
others. The MBTI endeavours to sort some of these psychological
opposites into four opposite pairs, or dichotomies, with a
resulting 16 possible combinations. None of these combinations is
'better' or 'worse', however Briggs and Myers recognised that everyone
has an overall combination that is most comfortable for them: in the
same way as writing with the left hand is hard work for a right-hander,
so people tend to find using their opposite psychological preference
more difficult, even if they can become more proficient (and therefore
behaviourally flexible) with practice and development.
The preferences are normally abbreviated with the initial letters of each of their four preferences (except in the case of Intuitive), for instance:
- ESTJ - Extraverted, Sensing, Thinking, Judging
- INFP - Introverted, Intuitive, Feeling, Perceiving
And so on for all 16 possible combinations.
The four dichotomies
| Dichotomies |
| Extraversion |
Introversion |
| Sensing |
iNtuition |
| Thinking |
Feeling |
| Judging |
Perceiving |
The four pairs of preferences or dichotomies are shown in the table to the right.
Note that the terms used for each dichotomy
have specific technical meanings relating to the MBTI, which differ
from their everyday usage. For example, people with a preference for
Judging over Perceiving are not necessarily more 'judgmental' or less
'perceptive'.
The MBTI does not measure aptitude, either; it simply sorts for one
preference over another. So someone reporting a high score for
Extraversion over Introversion on the MBTI cannot be correctly
described as 'more' or 'strongly' Extraverted: they simply have a clear preference.
Attitudes (E-I)
The preferences for Extraversion (thus spelled in Myers-Briggs language) and Introversion are sometimes referred to as attitudes. Briggs and Myers recognized that each of the functions can show in the external world of behavior, action, people and things (extraverted attitude) or the internal world of ideas and reflection (introverted attitude). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator sorts for an overall preference for one or the other of these.
People with a preference for Extraversion draw energy from action:
they tend to act, then reflect, then act further. If they are inactive,
their level of energy and motivation tends to decline. Conversely,
those whose preference is Introversion become less energized as they
act: they prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again. People with
Introversion preferences need time out to reflect in order to rebuild
energy. The Introvert's flow is directed inward toward concepts and
ideas and the Extravert's is directed outward towards people and
objects. There are several contrasting characteristics between
Extraverts and Introverts: Extraverts desire breadth and are
action-oriented, while introverts seek depth and are self-oriented.
The terms Extravert and Introvert are used in a special sense when discussing the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
Functions (S-N and T-F)
The Sensing-Intuition and Thinking-Feeling dichotomies are often called the MBTI Functions.
Individuals tend to trust one preference over the other, although
balanced individuals have the ability to use both. Indeed, the
flexibility to sense-check information and decisions using the
less-preferred function can be valuable in many situations, such as in
groups that have preferences in common among a number of members (and
therefore a potential blind spot, that is, a tendency to
underuse the opposite functions). However, since people use their
preferred function more, they tend to be much more practiced and
comfortable with its use, much like athletes who enjoy their sport and
therefore practice constantly.
Sensing and Intuition
are the information-gathering (perceiving) functions. They describe how
new information is understood and interpreted. Individuals with a
preference for sensing prefer to trust information that is in the
present, tangible and concrete: that is, information that can be
understood by the five senses. They tend to distrust hunches that seem
to come out of nowhere. They prefer to look for detail and facts. For
them, the meaning is in the data. On the other hand, those with a
preference for intuition tend to trust information that is more
abstract or theoretical, that can be associated with other information
(either remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or
pattern). They may be more interested in future possibilities. They
tend to trust those flashes of insight that seem to bubble up from the
unconscious mind. The meaning is in how the data relates to the pattern
or theory.
Thinking and Feeling are the decision-making
(judging) functions. Both Thinking and Feeling types strive to make
rational choices, based on the data received from their
information-gathering functions (S or N). Those with a preference for Feeling
prefer to come to decisions by associating or empathizing with the
situation, looking at it 'from the inside' and weighing the situation
to achieve, on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit,
considering the needs of the people involved. Those with a preference
for Thinking prefer to decide things from a more detached
standpoint, measuring the decision by what seems reasonable, logical,
causal, consistent and matching a given set of rules.
As noted already, people with a Thinking preference do not
necessarily, in the everyday sense, 'think better' than their Feeling
counterparts; the opposite preference is considered an equally rational
way of coming to decisions (and in any case, the MBTI is a measure of
preference, not ability). Similarly, those with a Feeling preference do
not necessarily have 'better' emotional reactions than their Thinking
peers.
Lifestyle (J-P)
In addition to the two Function pairs and Attitudes, Myers and
Briggs identified that individuals also had a preference to show either
their Judging function (T or F) or their Perceiving
function (S or N) when relating to the outside world. Myers and Briggs
called this a person's "ambassador," that is, the one sent forth to
deal with the world.
Myers and Briggs taught that types ending in J show the world their
Judging function - either T or F. So TJ types tend to appear to the
world as logical, and FJ types as empathetic. According to Myers[2], Judging types prefer to have matters settled.
Those types ending in P show the world their Perceiving function -
either S or N. So SP types tend to appear to the world as concrete, and
NP types as abstract. According to Myers[2], Perceiving types prefer to keep matters open.
For Extraverted types, the ambassador is the dominant function; for
Introverted types, the ambassador is the auxiliary function. Introverts
tend to show their dominant function outwardly only in matters
"important to their inner worlds."[2]
Whole Type
The expression of MBTI type is more than the sum of the four
individual preferences, because of the way in which the preferences
interact through type dynamics and type development (see below).
Descriptions of each type can be found on the typelogic website. In-depth descriptions of each type, including statistics, can be found in The MBTI Manual (op cit).
The descriptions offered for the Myers-Briggs types are often quite
detailed and specific, unlike the "vague and general personality
descriptions"[9] that characterize the Forer effect. For example, David Keirsey[10]
examined how the four temperaments differ in terms of language use,
intellectual orientation, educational and vocational interests, social
orientation, self image, personal values, social roles, and even
characteristic hand gestures. Keirsey went on to describe the hierarchy
of intellectual roles played by each of the four types within each
temperament, resulting in sixteen unique descriptions which, unlike the
Forer effect, rely not on the universal traits that make human beings
the same, but on the specific traits that make human beings different
from one another.
Historical development
C. G. Jung first spoke about typology at the Munich Psychological
Congress in 1913. Katharine Cook Briggs began her research into
personality in 1917, developing a four-type framework: Social,
Thoughtful, Executive, and Spontaneous. In 1923 Jung's Psychological Types
was published in English translation (having first been published in
German in 1921). Katharine Briggs's first publications are two articles
describing Jung's theory, in the journal New Republic in 1926 (Meet Yourself Using the Personality Paint Box) and 1928 (Up From Barbarism). Katharine Briggs' daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, wrote a prize-winning mystery novel Murder Yet to Come
in 1929, using typological ideas. She added to her mother's typological
research, which she would progressively take over entirely. In 1942,
the "Briggs-Myers Type Indicator" was created, and the Briggs Myers Type Indicator Handbook was published in 1944. The indicator changed its name to the modern form (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) in 1956.[11][12]
Format and administration of the MBTI
The current North American English version of the MBTI Step I
includes 93 forced-choice questions (there are 88 in the European
English version). Forced-choice means that the individual has
to choose only one of two possible answers to each question. The
choices are a mixture of word pairs and short statements. Choices are
not literal opposites but chosen to reflect opposite preferences on the
same dichotomy. Participants may skip questions if they feel they are
unable to choose.
Using psychometric techniques, such as item response theory,
the MBTI will then be scored and will attempt to identify the
preference, and clarity of preference, in each dichotomy. After taking
the MBTI, participants are usually asked to complete a Best Fit
exercise (see above) and then given a readout of their Reported Type,
which will usually include a bar graph and number to show how clear
they were about each preference when they completed the questionnaire.
During construction of the MBTI, thousands of items were used, and most were thrown out because they did not have high midpoint discrimination, meaning the results of that one item did not, on average, move an individual score away
from the midpoint. Using only items with high midpoint discrimination
allows the MBTI to have fewer items on it but still provide as much
statistical information as other instruments with many more items with
lower midpoint discrimination. The MBTI requires five points one way or
another to indicate a clear preference.
Additional formats
Isabel Myers had noted that people of any given type shared
differences as well as similarities, and at the time of her death was
developing a more in depth method to offer clues about how each person
expresses and experiences their type pattern, which is called MBTI Step II.
In addition to this, the Type Differentiation Indicator (TDI) (Saunders, 1989) is a scoring system for the longer MBTI, Form J [1], that includes the 20 subscales above, plus an additional factor of Comfort-Discomfort
(which purportedly corresponds to the missing factor of Neuroticism),
with seven additional scales indicating a sense of overall comfort and
confidence versus discomfort and anxiety (guarded-optimistic,
defiant-compliant, carefree-worried, decisive-ambivalent,
intrepid-inhibited, leader-follower, proactive-distractible), plus a
composite of these called "strain". Each of these comfort-discomfort
subscales also loads on one of the four type dimensions, e.g.,
proactive-distractible is also a judging-perceiving subscale. There are
also scales for type-scale consistency and comfort-scale consistency.
Reliability of 23 of the 27 TDI subscales is greater than .50; "an
acceptable result given the brevity of the subscales" (Saunders, 1989).
A "Step III" is also being developed in a joint project
involving CPP, publisher of the whole family of MBTI works; CAPT
(Center for Applications of Psychological Type), which holds all of
Myers' and McCaulley's original work; and the MBTI Trust, headed by
Katharine and Peter Myers. Step III will further address the use of
perception and judgment by respondents.[2]
Precepts and ethics
The following precepts are generally used in the ethical administration of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator:
Type not trait—The MBTI sorts for type; it does not indicate
the strength of ability. The questionnaire allows the clarity of a
preference to be ascertained (Bill clearly prefers introversion), but not the 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 you
fundamentally prefer one thing over the other, not a bit of both.
Own best judge—Individuals are considered the best judge of their own type. While the MBTI questionnaire provides a Reported Type, this is considered only an indication of their probable overall Type. A Best Fit Process
is usually used to allow the individual to develop their understanding
of the four dichotomies, form their own hypothesis as to their overall
Type and compare this against the Reported Type. In more than 20% of
cases, the hypothesis and the reported type differ in one or more
dichotomies: the clarity of each preference, any potential for bias in
the report and, often, a comparison of two or more whole Types may then
be used to help the subject determine his or her own Best Fit.
No right or wrong—No preference or total type is considered
'better' or 'worse' than another - they are all, as in the title of the
book on this subject by Isabel Briggs Myers, Gifts Differing.
Voluntary—It is considered unethical to compel anyone to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It should always be taken voluntarily.
Confidentiality—The result of the MBTI Reported and Best Fit
type are confidential between the individual and administrator and,
ethically, not for disclosure without permission.
Not for selection—Because MBTI is a measure of preference,
not aptitude, and because there are no right or wrong types, the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator 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 their Reported Type.
Feedback can be given in person or, where this is not practical, by
telephone or electronically.
Applications of the MBTI
The indicator is frequently used in the areas of career counseling, pedagogy, group dynamics, employee training, leadership training, life coaching, executive coaching, marriage counseling, Workers' compensation claims and personal development.
Type dynamics and development
The interaction of two, three, or four preferences is known as type dynamics. For each of the sixteen four-preference MBTI Types, one function will be the most dominant and is likely to be evident earliest in life. A secondary or auxiliary function typically becomes more evident (differentiates)
during teenage years and provides balance to the dominant. In normal
development, individuals tend to become more fluent with a third, tertiary function during mid life, whilst the fourth inferior
function remains least consciously developed and is often considered to
be more associated with the unconscious, being most evident in
situations such as high stress (sometimes referred to as being in the grip of the inferior function).
The sequence of differentiation of dominant, auxiliary and tertiary functions through life is termed type development.
This is an idealized sequence, which may be disrupted by major life
events (for example, the death or serious illness of a parent during
one's childhood is considered commonly to halt full development of the
auxiliary function).
The dynamic sequence of functions and their attitudes can be determined in the following way:
- The overall lifestyle preference (J-P) determines whether
the judging (T-F) or perceiving (S-N) preference is most evident in the
outside world, i.e. which function has an extraverted attitude
- For those with an overall preference for Extraversion, the function with the extraverted attitude
will be the dominant function - for example, for someone with an ESTJ
type, the dominant function is the judging function, Thinking, and this
is experienced with an extraverted attitude (this is notated as a
dominant Te); the same would be true of an ENTJ; whilst for an ESTP,
the dominant function will be the perceiving function, Sensing, notated
as a dominant Se.
- The Auxiliary function for Extravert types is the less preferred
of the Judging or Perceiving functions and it is experienced with an
introverted attitude: for example, the auxiliary function for ESTJ is
introverted sensing (Si) and the auxiliary for ENFP would be
introverted feeling (Fi).
- For those with an overall preference for Introversion, the function with the extraverted attitude is the auxiliary;
the dominant is the other function in the main 4-letter preference. So
the dominant function for ISTJ is introverted Sensing (Si) with the
auxiliary (supporting) function being extraverted Thinking (Te).
- The Tertiary function is the opposite preference from the
Auxiliary, for example if the Auxiliary is Thinking then the Tertiary
would be Feeling. The attitude of the Tertiary is the subject of some
debate and therefore is not normally indicated, i.e. if the Auxiliary
was Te then the Tertiary would be F (not Fe or Fi)
- The Inferior function is the opposite preference and attitude from the dominant, so for an ESTJ with dominant Te, the Inferior would be Fi.
Note that for those with an overall Extraversion preference, the dominant function is the one most evident in the external world: whilst it is the auxiliary function that is most evident externally for Introverts, as their dominant function relates to the interior world.
A couple of examples of whole types will help to clarify this further.
Taking the ESTJ example above:
- Extraverted function is a Judging function (T-F) because of the overall J preference
- Extraverted function is dominant because of overall E preference
- Dominant function is therefore extraverted Thinking (Te)
- Auxiliary function will be the less dominant Perceiving function - intraverted Sensing (Si)
- Tertiary function is the opposite preference to the Auxiliary - Intuition (N)
- Inferior function is the opposite preference and attitude to the Dominant - intraverted Feeling (Fi)
The dynamics of the ESTJ then, are founded in the primary tension
between the extraverted Thinking dominant and introverted Feeling
inferior: The dominant tendency to order the ESTJ's environment, to set
clear boundaries, to clarify roles and timetables, and to direct the
activities around them, is underscored by an attraction to the
sentimental, the heartwarming, and the precious. ESTJs, for instance,
may enjoy making memory scrapbooks or other such personal crafts.
Though the ESTJ can seem insensitive to the feelings of others in their
normal activities, under tremendous stress, they can suddenly express
feelings of being unappreciated or wounded by insensitivity.
Looking at the diametrically opposite four-letter Type, INFP:
- Extraverted function is a Perceiving function because of the overall P preference
- Introverted function is dominant because of the overall I preference
- Dominant function is therefore introverted Feeling (Fi)
- Auxiliary function is extraverted Intuition (Ne)
- Tertiary function is the opposite of the Auxiliary, Sensing (S)
- Inferior function is the opposite of the Dominant, extraverted Thinking (Te)
The dynamics of the INFP rest on exactly the same fundamental
tension of introverted Feeling and extraverted Thinking, though in
reverse. The dominant tendency of the INFP is toward building a rich
internal framework of values and toward championing human rights, often
devoting themselves to causes such as saving the environment or civil
rights. However, because of their tendency to avoid the limelight,
their inclination to not rush into decisions, and to maintain a
reserved posture, they rarely are found in executive director type
positions of the organizations that serve those causes. Normally, the
INFP dislikes being "in charge" of things. When not under stress, the
INFP exudes a personal warmth that is unspoken and sympathetic, but
under extreme stress, they can suddenly become rigid and directive,
exerting their extraverted Thinking erratically.
Every type--and its opposite--is the expression of these
interactions, which give each type its unique "signature" that can be
recognized. It is through this dynamic pattern and signature that
devotees to the MBTI can recognize others' type soon after meeting them.
Correlations to other instruments
Keirsey Temperaments
David W. Keirsey
mapped four 'Temperaments' to the existing Myers-Briggs system
groupings SP, SJ, NF and NT; often resulting in confusion of the two
theories. However, the Keirsey Temperament Sorter is not directly associated with the official Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
Big Five McCrae & Costa [4] present correlations between the MBTI scales and the Big Five
personality construct, which is a conglomeration of characteristics
found in nearly all personality and psychological tests. The five
personality characteristics are extraversion, openness, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, and emotional stability (or neuroticism). The
following study is based on the results from 267 men followed as part
of a longitudinal study of aging. (Similar results were obtained with
201 women.)
| |
Extraversion |
Openness |
Agreeableness |
Conscientiousness |
Neuroticism |
| E-I |
-.74 |
.03 |
-.03 |
.08 |
.16 |
| S-N |
.10 |
.72 |
.04 |
-.15 |
-.06 |
| T-F |
.19 |
.02 |
.44 |
-.15 |
.06 |
| J-P |
.15 |
.30 |
-.06 |
-.49 |
.11 |
| The closer the number is to 1.0 or -1.0, the higher the degree of correlation. |
These data suggest that four of the MBTI scales are related to the Big Five
personality traits. These 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. The emotional stability dimension of the Big Five is
largely absent from the MBTI.
These findings led McCrae and Costa to conclude "There was no
support for the view that the MBTI measures truly dichotomous
preferences or qualitatively distinct types... Jung's theory is either
incorrect or inadequately operationalized by the MBTI and cannot
provide a sound basis for interpreting it."
Study of scoring consistency
Split-half reliability of the MBTI scales is good, although test-retest reliability is sensitive to the time between tests. However, because the MBTI dichotomies
scores in the middle of the distribution, type allocations are less
reliable. Within each scale, as measured on Form G, about 83% of
categorisations remain the same when retested within nine months, and
around 75% when retested after nine months. About 50% of people tested
within nine months remain the same overall type and 36% remain the same
after nine months. [13]
Criticism
Validity
The scientific basis of the MBTI has been questioned. Neither
Katharine Cook Briggs nor Isabel Briggs Myers had any scientific
qualifications in the field of psychometric testing. Furthermore, Carl Jung's
theory of psychological type, which the MBTI attempts to
operationalise, is not based on any scientific studies. Jung's methods
primarily included introspection and anecdote, methods largely rejected by the modern field of psychology. [14]
The statistical validity of the MBTI as a psychometric
instrument has also been subject to criticism, in particular, the
dichotomous scoring of dimensions. For example, it was expected that
scores would show a bimodal distribution
with peaks near the ends of the scales. However, scores on the
individual subscales are actually distributed in a centrally peaked
manner similar to a normal distribution.
A cut-off exists at the centre of the subscale such that a score on one
side is classified as one type, and a score on the other side as the
opposite type. This fails to support the concept of type--the norm is for people to lie near the middle of the subscale. [4][5][15][16][17]
It has been estimated that between a third and a half of the
published material on the MBTI has been produced for conferences of the
Center for the Application of Psychological Type (which provides
training in the MBTI) or as papers in the Journal of Psychological Type
(which is edited by Myers-Briggs advocates) [18] and it has been argued that this reflects a lack of critical scrutiny. [15][18]
Estimations on the research related to the most utilized tool published
in fifty years (e.g. 40 million administrations) is affected by the
popularity of the instrument.
Reliability
The reliability
of the test has been interpreted as being low, with test takers who
retake the test often being assigned a different type. According to
surveys performed by the proponents of Myers-Briggs, the highest
percentage of people who fell into the same category on the second test
is only 47%. Furthermore, a wide range of 39% - 76% of those tested
fall into different types upon retesting weeks or years later, and many
people's types were also found to vary according to the time of the day.[15][17] Skeptics argue that the MBTI lacks falsifiability, which can cause confirmation bias
in the interpretation of results. They criticize the terminology of the
MBTI as being so vague as to allow any kind of behavior to fit any
personality type, resulting in the Forer effect, where an individual gives a high rating to a positive description that supposedly applies specifically to them [15][14].
As a result, when people are asked to compare their preferred type to
that assigned by the MBTI, only half of people pick the same profile. [19]
Utility
Although the proportion of different personality types varies between different careers [6]
the relevance of the MBTI for career planning has been questioned, with
reservations about the relevance of type to job performance or
satisfaction, and concerns about the potential misuse of the instrument
in labelling individuals. [15][20]
See also
Notes
- ^ Jung, Carl Gustav (August 1, 1971). Psychological Types (Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-09774.
- ^ a b c d 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ a b c
McCrae, R R; Costa, P T (1989) Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator From the Perspective of the Five-Factor Model of Personality.
Journal of Personality, 57(1):17-40.
- ^ a b Stricker, L J; Ross, J (1964) An Assessment of Some Structural Properties of the Jungian Personality Typology. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68(1):62-71.
- ^ 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.
- ^ Consulting Psychologists Press (2004). Trademark Guidelines. Retrieved December 20, 2004.
- ^ Myers, Isabel Briggs; McCaulley Mary H.; Quenk, Naomi L.; Hammer, Allen L. (1998). MBTI Manual (A guide to the development and use of the Myers Briggs type indicator). Consulting Psychologists Press; 3rd ed edition. ISBN 0-89106-130-4
- ^ Forer effect from the Skeptic's Dictionary
- ^ Keirsey, David (1998). Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company. ISBN 1-885705-02-6.
- ^ Geyer, Peter (1998) Some Significant Dates. Retrieved December 5, 2005.
- ^ University of Florida (2003) Guide to the Isabel Briggs Myers Papers 1885-1992, George A. Smathers Libraries, Department of Special and Area Studies Collections, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved December 5, 2005.
- ^ Harvey, R J (1996) Reliability and Validity, in MBTI Applications. A.L. Hammer, Editor. Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, CA. p. 5- 29.
- ^ a b Carroll, Robert Todd (January 9, 2004). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®. The Skeptic's Dictionary. Retrieved January 8, 2004.
- ^ a b c d e Pittenger, David J. (Nov 1993). "Measuring the MBTI. . .And Coming Up Short." (PDF). Journal of Career Planning and Employment 54 (1): 48-52.
- ^ Bess, T.L. & Harvey, R.J. (2001, April). Bimodal score distributions and the MBTI: Fact or artifact? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego.
- ^ a b Matthews, P (2004) The MBTI is a flawed measure of personality. bmj.com Rapid Responses. But see also Clack & Allen's response to Matthews.
- ^ a b Coffield F, Moseley D, Hall E, Ecclestone K (2004) Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. Learning and Skills Research Centre.
- ^ Carskadon, TG & Cook, DD (1982). Validity of MBTI descriptions as perceived by recipients unfamiliar with type. Research in Psychological Type 5: 89-94.
- ^ Druckman, D. and R. A. Bjork, Eds. (1992). In the Mind’s Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. ISBN 0-309-04747-1.
References and further reading
- 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*Bess, T.L. & Harvey, R.J. (2001, April). Bimodal score distributions and the MBTI: Fact or artifact? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego.
- Bourne, Dana (2005); Personality Types and the Transgender Community. Retrieved November 14, 2005
- Falt, Jack; Bibliography of MBTI/Temperament Books by Author. Retrieved December 20, 2004
- Georgia State University; GSU Master Teacher Program: On Learning Styles. Retrieved December 20, 2004.
- Jung, Carl Gustav (1965); Memories, Dreams, Reflections. Vintage Books: New York, 1965. p. 207
- Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (Collected works of C. G. Jung, volume 6). (3rd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. First appeared in German in 1921. ISBN 0-691-09770-4
- Killian,Shaun (2007); More About the MBTI, personality and its impact on your effectiveness, MBTI Online.
- Matthews, Paul (2004); The MBTI is a flawed measure of personality. bmj.com Rapid Responses. Retrieved February 9, 2005
- Myers, Isabel Briggs (1980); Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Davies-Black Publishing; Reprint edition (May 1, 1995). ISBN 0-89106-074-X
- Pearman, R., Lombardo, M. Eichinger, R.;(2005); "YOU: Being More
Effective In Your MBTI(R) Type." Minn.:Lominger International, Inc.
- Pearman, R., Albritton, S.; (1996); "I'm Not Crazy, I'm Just Not You." Mountain View, Ca: Davies-Black Publishing.
- Personality Plus; Employers love personality tests. But what do they really reveal?
- Saunders, D. (1989). Type Differentiation Indicator Manual: A scoring system for Form J of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
- Skeptics Dictionary "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" [3]
- Virginia Tech; The Relationship Between Psychological Type and Professional Orientation Among Technology Education Teachers. Retrieved December 20, 2004
- Thomas G. Long (October 1992). "Myers-Briggs and other Modern Astrologies". Theology Today 49 (3): 291-95.
External links
Practitioner Information
Criticism of MBTI
16 Personality Type Comparison
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from Wikipedia Encyclopedia article "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator"
|