MBTI Myths
It’s not a “Test”
The MBTI is not a test — it’s not measuring anything — it’s an “Indicator” (hence the “I” at the end). It indicates which of the Jungian cognitive processes we prefer. It’s like determining whether someone is left- or right-handed. It’s a preference, and that’s all we’re interested in. We don’t want to quantify how much a person uses one hand over the other — that would be contextual. For example, while typing this text, I’m using them both about equally; when playing tennis, I’ll be exclusively right-handed; when removing my air-conditioning filter, I’ll be exclusively left-handed (due to the awkward angle I have to maneuver into in order to reach it).
It’s not a “Model”
Sometimes people talk about the MBTI as though it were a personality model or a theory in itself. This is not the case. In reality, the MBTI is merely an assessment tool, designed to indicate which cognitive processes we prefer, based on C. G. Jung’s Theory of Psychological Types.
The 4-letter codes are meaningless
Well, maybe that’s a bit strong, but it is true to say that Isabel Briggs Myers developed her 4-letter code as a shorthand way of identifying which of Jung’s 8 cognitive processes were preferred. These letters in themselves are merely an indicator or a “license plate” pointing at the underlying model.
Unfortunately, over the years, many have latched onto those 4 letters as having a “life of their own” and have gone to the trouble of (erroneously) developing descriptions for each. There are many books and websites that go to great length talking about I/E, S/N, T/F, and J/P as though they mean something.
The Myers Briggs Foundation and the Association for Psychological Type (APT) are trying to rectify this situation, but the weight of past literature is against them. It’s like when a popular diet book becomes all the rage — even if it’s repudiated by some scientific study, people will still continue to buy it, use it, quote from it, regard it as gospel…
At the APT conference in July 2008, all the sessions were presented using Jung’s original model of cognitive processes. The 4-letter MBTI code was only ever used as a handy, familiar way to reference whole types. Assuming your type code preference is INTJ, all these letters mean is that your top two preferred cognitive processes are Introverted iNtuiting (Ni) and Extraverted Thinking (Te) in that order. The rest of the 8 can be inferred just from this information.
In fact, many type professionals are discarding the MBTI code and instead using the first 2 cognitive process abbreviations to represent whole types. Thus, INTJ becomes NiTe; ENFP becomes NeFi; etc.
The scores are not strengths
The scores produced by the MBTI are an indication of how sure you are of your preference — they do not indicate how “good” or “strong” your preference is. These numbers are a statistical artifact primarily intended to be used by the psychometricians who develop these instrument. In fact, the most recent release of the MBTI manual recommends that these scores never be revealed to the client, as they cause confusion.
A function preference does not preclude its opposite
Some people say “I’m a T and I don’t do F” which is another common misconception. Since personality type is a preference, it is possible for a person to become proficient at using more than their favored cognitive processes. Consider handedness as an analogy — I can say I’m right-handed, but as mentioned in the example above, in some situations, I use only my left hand.
As one who favors the INTJ code, I have a preference for Ni and Te, but I can also draw upon the hidden talents of my Fi, Se, Ne, Fe, Ti, and Si as needed. Over time, and with practice, I find I’m becoming better at using some of these less-preferred functions. That’s the ultimate goal of the human psyche, according to Jung (he called it “individuation”). But it doesn’t mean you’ve changed your type — that’s innate — it just means you’re becoming a more complete human being.
February 22nd, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Yeah, I agree with you. Some people take the test too seriously. Some even think having certain types means they have a higher I.Q.
February 22nd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Yeah, I agree with you. Some people take the test too seriously. Some even think having certain types means they have a higher I.Q.
March 18th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Pretty sure there is a factual test for that one.
March 18th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
The problem with IQ tests is that all they’re measuring is how well someone answers questions on IQ tests. And what is “intelligence” anyway? Dario Nardi wrote a book called “Multiple Intelligences and Personality Type : Tools and Strategies for Developing Human Potential” which looks at the “IQ” possessed by ALL 16 types.
March 22nd, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Excellent. This article is much needed, as I find myself frustrated at having to battle these misconceptions frequently on INTJf.
May 24th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Excellent explanation. I figured my INTJ type out by working out which functions I seemed to use the most naturally and I think it’s a more accurate way of understanding types. The J and the P in the code seems to create the biggest confusion out there about what they mean. Typing by NiTe etc… seems like a more sensible option.