true education mbti

Learning styles of the 16 Myers-Briggs personality types

Kickstart your self-improvement by understanding your mbti learning style.

5 min. read

The way we learn can affect how successful and confident we become. When an environment isn’t conducive to our natural learning style, it can feel confusing, daunting, or even embarrassing.

Think about a college student who learns best in a practical, hands-on way. If that student has to sit in back-to-back lectures where information is only presented in “big picture” concepts, it may not bode well for their grades or persistence in school. In fact, we learned just how common (and dire) this kind of situation is in a previous post about the four personality types least likely to graduate college.

The good news is that we can always improve. And one of the ways to kickstart self-improvement is by learning something new. In this way, we can all benefit when we understand differences in individual learning styles.

And knowing about MBTI personality type can help us with that.

In fact, educators who vary their teaching styles can motivate and reach a wider range of students. The same goes for employee training, parent-child relationships, and so much more. Here’s how each of the 16 MBTI personality types learn best:

Learning Styles of Introverted Personality Types

INTJ personality types typically question things before they decide whether to accept or reject them. They thrive in learning environments that empower them to:

• Ask “why?” as much as they need to
• Engage in strategic, complex projects
• Find opportunities to learn independently
• Set broad, integrative, and challenging learning goals
• Validate and confirm credibility of the learning material
• Take time to analyze and integrate concepts before discussing them

INTP personality types like to work with abstract and complex ideas. They prefer learning environments that enable them to:

• Work on in-depth, independent projects
• Avoid memorization or repetition of details
• Logically organize various concepts and ideas
• Look for long-term applications of what’s being learned
• Find logical connections between a wide variety of topics
• Take uninterrupted “alone time” to process complex information

ISTJ personality types are sometimes referred to as the “logical assimilators.” They need learning environments that allow them to:

• Question and scrutinize what’s being learned
• Organize information logically and sequentially
• Develop some patience with rapport-building exercises
• Learn any implications or consequences of the information
• Seek instructors who are competent subject-matter experts
• Break complex concepts into logical components or categories

ISTP personality types seek immediate results and practical applications. They are motivated by learning environments that help them:

• Have fun and take action
• Troubleshoot and solve problems
• Set short-term, realistic learning goals
• Organize information sequentially and logically
• Memorize facts and rely on trial-and-error strategies
• Look for immediate consequences, implications, and results

INFJ personality types like to learn about ideas that help them create or implement projects that benefit people. They need learning environments that enable them to:

• Work on cooperative team projects
• Exchange ideas in a collaborative setting
• Give and receive positive feedback and support
• Organize activities to meet the needs of everyone involved
• Identify how what they’re learning will help others develop and grow
• Seek instructors who are genuinely interested in the success of each learner

INFP personality types are drawn to concepts and big picture possibilities. They enjoy learning environments that give them freedom to:

• Set broad, long-term learning goals
• Map out related concepts to organize a topic
• Create a framework before learning facts or details
• Look for inferences, patterns, or trends in information
• Aid their memory through metaphors, analogies, or mnemonic devices
• Determine the scope and detail required of what’s supposed to be learned

ISFJ personality types are compassionate and collaborative. They thrive in learning environments that empower them to:

• Experience one-on-one coaching
• Seek support and encouragement for their efforts
• Take time to link learning to experiences and/or values
• Avoid highly critical instructors or competitive learning situations
• Find ways to objectively listen and incorporate corrective feedback
• Develop patience for fellow learners who prefer to question and critique

ISFP personality types are natural observers. They prefer learning environments that enable them to:

• Take clear, concise notes
• Summarize information sequentially
• Record facts and concrete examples in bullet-list format
• Use color or other visual aids (i.e., diagrams, charts, videos)
• Learn practical information that’s useful in the present situation
• Take frequent breaks if they have to read highly theoretical material

Learning Styles of Extraverted Personality Types

ENTJ personality types are all about precision. They enjoy learning environments that enable them to:

• Question ideas, theories, and models
• Refer back to steps in sequences
• Discuss and/or debate strategies with others
• Evaluate and integrate concepts from multiple sources
• Survey all available information before learning specifics
• Map out concepts or use flowcharts to summarize complex ideas

ENTP personality types are logical and assertive. They like learning environments that give them freedom to:

• Access credible resources
• Clarify terms and definitions of the material
• Get clear feedback to course correct if needed
• Summarize information into tables or flowcharts
• Use learning to change or improve systems or processes
• Find competent instruction from a knowledgeable expert

ESTJ personality types prefer to learn in practical, step-by-step ways. They thrive in learning environments that empower them to:

• Focus on data and facts
• Link any theories to real-life situations
• Engage in practical, hands-on activities
• Ask for clear, specific criteria for evaluation
• Organize materials logically and sequentially
• Set and accomplish short-term, realistic goals

ESTP personality types are logical, critical, and responsive. They prefer learning environments that enable them to:

• Organize information logically
• Seek frank and direct feedback
• Find competent instructors and credible resources
• Find the most efficient way to process information
• Ask “why?” and “what if?” questions as frequently as needed
• Create contests, challenges, or competitions with other willing learners

ENFJ personality types are interested in how big picture concepts can impact personal development. They like learning environments that enable them to:

• Set long-term learning goals
• Connect with a wide range of people
• Determine the value of what they’re learning
• Create a framework before learning facts/details
• Collaborate with others to learn ideas and concepts
• Create metaphors or mnemonic devices to help memorization

ENFP personality types tend to be supportive and compassionate learners. They thrive in learning environments that give them freedom to:

• Share ideas in a collaborative setting
• Link learning to what is personally important
• Use the information to change or improve things for people
• Make personal connections with ideas, instructors, and other learners
• Find stories or examples to support the idea that the learning material is meaningful

ESFJ personality types like to learn about things that are useful and relevant to their current situation. They are motivated by learning environments that help them:

• Discuss others’ experiences
• Learn “on the job” when possible
• Ask for specific and clear instructions
• Relate theoretical concepts to real-life examples
• Create a comfortable and welcoming learning space
• Learn practical information that they (and others) can use now

ESFP personality types tend to be social and collaborative. They need learning environments that enable them to:

• Feel comfortable and welcome
• Learn on the job from a supportive leader
• Ask questions and discuss material in a supportive setting
• Use new skills or information to enhance future experiences
• Find opportunities to apply the material to personal situations
• Listen for personal stories and real-life examples to help make the material stand out

Want to learn more? (pun intended)

Check out these other articles about learning style:

Which MBTI Personality Types Are Least Likely to Graduate College?  

How to Use Your Personality Type to Enable a Growth Mindset

Personality Type and Learning

Many of the pioneering studies for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® (MBTI ® ) instrument were done with high school and college students. These original studies, plus the ongoing data collected by colleges and universities worldwide, have resulted in a wealth of information about how personality affects learning and teaching styles.

Think of a "learning style" more as a "learning preference." The word "style" gives the impression that it can be easily changed. For example, today I like this style, tomorrow I may like another. Learning preference, as denoted by personality type, recognizes an innate, natural way of learning. Your learning style does not limit you to one way of learning. What it can do is bring awareness to your natural strengths so that you may utilize them to give your best results.

We all have a preferred way of learning—our natural way that makes the most sense to us. Now, that does not mean that you never use the other preferences for learning, we all do; however, rather than feel a lack of intellect, we can recognize when we are using a stretch and ask for help and guidance, as needed.

Type can tell us many things about the way people prefer to learn. An understanding of type leads to the appreciation that there are many different and equally valuable ways to learn. Type can also help you identify some of your strengths and challenges as you approach studying and learning.

How might type preferences show up in learning?

• Young people who prefer Extraversion might like projects that involve talking with others and being physically engaged with their environment, whereas someone with an Introversion preference might like projects that offer private or quiet time for reflection, where they can process their thoughts internally until they are more developed.
• A person who prefers Sensing typically likes clear, detailed instructions, whereas someone who prefers Intuition tends to like a framework so they can do their own original, innovative work.
• For students who prefer Thinking, classrooms organized in logical systems help them do better work, whereas one with a Feeling preference tends to do their best learning in a classroom that is warm and friendly with teachers who tune into emotional needs and deal with personal relationship issues.
• For those who prefer Judging, clear plans and an organized classroom are necessary for them to do their best work, whereas a person with a Perceiving preference likes the flexibility to follow their curiosity and explore a variety of interests and experiences.

Sensing and Intuition: Key Processes in Learning

All type preferences influence how a young person naturally learns, however Sensing and Intuition preferences seem to play a key role. Sensing and Intuition reflect the ways we pay attention to experiences and perceive what is being learned. Students benefit from teachers who conduct their classrooms to serve the learning processes of both Sensing and Intuition.

Learning Styles vs Teaching Styles

Students have preferred ways of learning, but so do teachers. And teachers often teach from that vantage point. When teachers and students understand the differences in their teaching and learning styles, communication and learning is enhanced.

A student's interests and ways of learning directly affect how he or she takes in information. This calls on educators to consider different teaching approaches, based on the needs of students.

For example, teachers who prefer Intuition may give open-ended directions that provide a basic framework for the assignment but young people who prefer Sensing do better with clear instructions presented in sequential order. Issues can arise, as well, with teachers who give too many details and step-by-step directions to a child who prefers Intuition who just wants to do it their own way and build upon their many innovative ideas. When taking personality type into consideration, teachers can design lessons that meet the needs on both sides.

Students whose preferences are different from those of a teacher may find it difficult to adjust to the classroom atmosphere and the teaching methods of that teacher. Teachers who vary their teaching styles after learning about personality type often find they can motivate and teach a wider range of students because they are developing diverse approaches that better meet the needs of all students.

When students and teachers disagree, type knowledge can help both to recognize the validity of the other person's approach and needs. Instead of labeling the student as "misbehaving" or the teacher as "unreasonable," differences are better understood and respected.

When the common language of personality type is understood, lesson plans can be tailored to meet the needs of all students. Teachers who know type can then approach the same lesson in multiple ways, appealing to the preferences of all their students.

You can read about the insights teachers had in a study where personality type was assessed for third grade teachers and students and applied in the classroom at peoplestripes.org .

Parents, Teachers, and Type Awareness

Parents also have type preferences and when these differ from the preferences of the teacher, without type awareness, misunderstanding on what is considered acceptable behavior of a child can ensue. For example, a student's preference for Extraversion can appear as a positive attitude and social adjustment to a parent who shares the same preference, while appearing as disruptive and unproductive to a teacher who prefers Introversion.

A teacher who understands personality type can give feedback to parents in ways that respect the child's preferences. And parents who understand type can appreciate that a teacher's point of view may only reflect his or her own preferences, not a rejection of their child.

Type Awareness Supports School Counselors

School counselors are tasked with a heavy load of managing all students in a school. Their main role is to help maximize student success. Type awareness can help them do this by promoting:

• A better understanding of oneself and others
• Academic achievement strategies
• Emotion management
• Interpersonal Skills
• Postsecondary career planning
• Social Emotional Learning (SEL)

More can be learned about how type supports school counselors at peoplestripes.org .

Myers-Briggs

Reviewed by Psychology Today Staff

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an assessment of personality based on questions about a person’s preferences in four domains: focusing outward or inward; attending to sensory information or adding interpretation; deciding by logic or by situation; and making judgments or remaining open to information. The MBTI was initially developed in the 1940s by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabell Briggs Myers, loosely based on a personality typology created by psychoanalyst Carl Jung.

When responses are scored, the assessment yields a psychological “type” summarized in four letters, one for each preference: Extraversion (E) or Introversion (I); Sensing (S) or Intuiting (N); Thinking (T) or Feeling (F); and Judging (J) or Perceiving (P). The results combined into one of 16 possible type descriptions, such as ENTJ or ISFP.

While the MBTI is used by many organizations to select new personnel and has been taken millions of times, personality psychologists and other scientists report that it has relatively little scientific validity. Psychologists who investigate personality typically rely on scientifically developed assessments of traits clustered into five (the Big Five ) or six ( HEXACO ) domains.

• Is the Myers-Briggs Legitimate?
• Why People Love Personality Tests

Why do experts take issue with the MBTI? One reason is that while the Myers-Briggs assigns people distinct types, scientific evidence indicates that personalities do not fit neatly into 16 boxes.

Traits are more accurately viewed not as categorical dichotomies—extrovert or introvert, thinker or feeler—but as continuous dimensions: For each trait, an individual can rate relatively high, low, or somewhere in the middle, and most people fall in the middle. Personality tests favored by scientists, such as the Big Five Inventory, describe each personality not in categorical terms, but rather based on how high or low a person scores on each of five (or six) non-overlapping traits.

The MBTI’s type-based feedback is also not especially consistent; a person who takes the test twice may well receive two different type designations. Moreover, the MBTI omits genuine aspects of personality that have negative connotations, such as neuroticism (emotional instability) or facets of low conscientiousness . It is untrue that the MBTI measures nothing at all, however. Research suggests that when MBTI preferences are evaluated as continuous dimensions, rather than split into categories, there is some correlation with scores on the Big Five traits.

The MBTI’s type for any one individual is often not consistent over time: People may take the test on multiple occasions and receive different personality types, even if they have not changed drastically in real life. Research has found that over a period of only a few weeks, up to half of participants received two different type scores.

Developers of the MBTI even acknowledged that in their sample, 35 percent received a different type after a four-week period. And despite the use of the MBTI in work settings, research does not suggest that the MBTI types are especially good predictors of job outcomes.

Forced choice fails to capture the dimensional nature of personality. The MBTI’s scoring format places individuals into one of each pair of categories regardless of how extreme their scores are. A person who scores a 53 percent on the introversion - extraversion dimension receives the same result as someone who scores 95 percent: Both are labelled “extravert.” The person who scores 53 percent, however, is probably much more similar to the “introvert” who scored just below the 50 percent mark.

Personality “types,” therefore, miss a lot of information; characterizing everyone as either an introvert or an extravert glosses over the reality that most people actually land somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

The notion that personality is completely fixed from birth isn’t accurate, and it can be valuable to possess flexibility in how people view themselves and their ability to evolve. But when people take a personality test, they may adopt that label and incorporate it into their identity and life narrative. Labels can be limiting, which is why it’s important to acknowledge the limited nature of the Myers-Briggs itself .

The MBTI has been used in an array of domains. Companies have used it to hire and organize employees. Career advisors have used it to recommend which professions individuals should explore. Premarital counselors have used it to gauge the “compatibility” of couples. However, there is little evidence to support the connection between the Myers-Briggs and outcomes such as job performance or relationship success.

Despite its limits as a valid personality assessment, the Myers-Briggs can be a valuable tool for self-reflection. Taking a fun personality test can serve as a starting point for people to consider how they view their personality, how human behavior can vary, and how they relate to others in their life. The MBTI can provide an initial vocabulary from which to expand.

Personality tests have almost become ubiquitous. A high school guidance counselor may assign students to take a personality test to determine which colleges to apply to. Corporations may administer tests for hiring decisions or team-building activities. Personality tests may lead friends to bond over a shared “ personality type ,” find others like them, or put words to different dimensions of character.

The desire to understand ourselves better and categorize the world around us helps drive the popularity of the Myers-Briggs and others like it.

People are endlessly fascinated by personality tests. This may be because people seek hidden information about themselves, wanting to understand and access their true nature. People also have an inherent desire to belong; identifying with a “type” can help people feel normal and understood—there are similar people out there. People also appreciate simple ways to categorize and interact with other people.

The Myers-Briggs often delivers results that aren’t entirely reliable—so why do people trust them? One reason for this illusion of accuracy is confirmation bias : When people believe something is true, they begin to filter information based on that belief. People may also love the feeling of being recognized, like the test “gets” them. The results are fairly general which makes them widely applicable, and they skew positive so people are often happy to accept them.

The MBTI is perhaps the most well-known, but other popular personality tests include the Enneagram, which assigns personality descriptions based on nine primary types and often secondary types called “wings,” and the DISC, assessments that assign individuals one of four types, or a blend of the types: Dominance (D), Influence (I), Steadiness (S), and Conscientiousness (C).

Psychologists generally agree that tests of the Big Five personality traits are most valid. The current version of this assessment is the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2).

Most personality psychologists use tests that measure the Big Five personality traits: extraversion, agreeableness , conscientiousness, emotional stability , and openness to experience . These five traits represent five categories of individual characteristics that tend to cluster together in people.

This framework has the benefit of 1) being developed with the scientific method 2) using continuums rather than categories 3) showing how people change over time 4) predicting outcomes that personality should predict, such as life satisfaction, education and academic performance, job performance and satisfaction, relationship satisfaction and divorce , physical health, how long people live, and more.

Introverts often face biases at work. Research examines specific beliefs about and responses to introversion that can create challenges for quiet professionals.

A nine-part animated series about the Enneagram.

Do you have ADHD and feel like you are always swimming upstream? Understanding yourself, prioritizing self-care, and focusing on your strengths can bring you more ease.

Thinking of using a personality test to help you sort out important career decisions? You may want to think again.

It is not unusual for the last pair of chatters in a room to include one introvert who secretly has been attempting to escape the conversation for some time.

A new assessment divides decision-making into four styles. Which works best for you?

Juliette Swann discusses her company's unique approach to online dating.

Would Santa Claus be an outgoing introvert or reclusive extravert? Is he energized by the smiling faces, or is a feeling that people drain him the reason he sneaks in the dark?

Have you ever taken a personality test? A new book reviews the scientific evidence showing how your personality actually changes, and then shows you how to change it deliberately.

Stereotyping and ignorance can often be a case of unchecked heuristics.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• The MBTI® Assessment and Alternative Personality Tests

When considering a personality test, it is important to look at validity and reliability. A valid test has been proven to measure the traits it is claiming to measure and a reliable test produces consistent results. In addition to the MBTI®, there are several other quality personality assessments that were developed by professionals, researched thoroughly, and that incorporate Myers and Briggs’ type theory: the TypeFinder®, the Keirsey Temperament Sorter®, The Majors Personality Type Indicator™, and the NERIS Type Explorer®.

Myers and Briggs' system of 16 personality types is extremely popular, with over 2 million people completing the official MBTI® assessment each year—and probably millions more taking tests and quizzes based on their theory. The most common way to figure out your own personality type is by taking a personality test , but there are some things you should know before getting started.

Why Take the MBTI® Personality Assessment?

Although there are challenges to Myers & Briggs' theory of personality types, the major advantage of this system is its high profile. Especially in the corporate sector, it is one of the most well known and used personality tools in the world. The Myers Briggs Type Indicator® assessment, which was developed by Isabel Briggs Myers, has been translated into more than 30 languages. It is used widely in team building, decision making, personal development, career coaching, and leadership development.

In many organizations, Myers and Briggs' personality type theory has become a common language to discuss differences in work style, communication, and conflict negotiation. Learning about your personality type can help you to articulate your strengths and weaknesses, preferred tasks and projects, and how you relate to others in the workplace. During the job search process, having such self awareness can help you to both identify a company culture that is a good fit for you, and "sell yourself" accurately to interviewers.

MBTI assessment can also be helpful in the career planning process. One of the major benefits of using Myers and Briggs' typing when you are searching for the right career is that extensive research has been done on the careers that are typically chosen by each of the sixteen types. Although your personality type can't predict exactly which career will suit you, it can serve to help you narrow down your options and validate your hunches.

More broadly, learning about your personality type helps you understand how you perceive the world and interact with it, giving you insights into your motives and a understanding of your natural behaviors. Learning more about all sixteen of the personality types will help you to better understand your colleagues and your loved ones, better anticipate their reactions and adapt your behavior accordingly. Finding your personality type provides a solid basis for working on personal development, which often results in more effectiveness in work and in life.

How to Find Your Personality Type

The most common way to figure out your personality type is by taking a personality test. There are many personality assessments based on the theories of Myers and Briggs, including the original MBTI® assessment developed by Isabel Myers herself.

Many people try to find their type by taking a free online quiz. Unfortunately, most free tests have not been properly researched and validated, and may give inaccurate results. Do not depend on free online quizzes to accurately determine your type. To get accurate results from a personality type assessment, ensure you are taking one that has been developed in a professional manner.

It is also possible to discover your personality type simply by reading about the different types. Often, you will find that some type descriptions resonate deeply with you, while others sound nothing like you. Reading about different types can also help to clarify confusing or conflicting personality test results.

Which Personality Test is Best?

A good personality assessment should be developed by professionals with expertise in the field, and researched thoroughly to ensure it is accurate. High quality personality assessments should pass tests of reliability (does the test produce consistent results?) and validity (does the test measure what it is supposed to?).

There is an enormous range of free personality tests available online, but unfortunately most of them are unreliable. Most free tests are created by writers with no special expertise in psychology who just want to make a fun quiz to attract visitors and keep people entertained. These sorts of tests may be interesting but are unlikely to provide useful or reliable feedback.

The best personality test to accurately determine your type is one that has been extensively researched and tested to ensure it is both reliable and valid. For instance, the official MBTI® instrument was thoroughly researched by both its creators, Briggs and Myers, as well as the psychologists employed by its publisher. There are also well-researched alternative assessments available.

Following are some options for learning about your personality type . 

The Myers Briggs Type Indicator® Assessment

The official Myers Briggs Type Indicator is the original assessment developed by Isabel Briggs Myers. The publisher of the assessment, The Myers Briggs Company , offers a variety of assessments and reports based on Briggs Myers' work. The most basic and easiest to access is the MBTI® Online . More in-depth reports are sold only through qualified consultants, meaning that you must find a coach or counselor who is certified in MBTI® administration in order to take them.

The MBTI® assessment is one of the more costly ways to explore your personality type. The MBTI® Online is typically the most affordable option, at $49. Taking an MBTI® assessment through a qualified consultant typically costs a few hundred dollars or more.

The TypeFinder® Personality Test

The TypeFinder personality test was developed independently by California-based online test publisher Truity Psychometrics and has been thoroughly researched for reliability and validity . It is primarily based on the theories of Myers and Briggs, along with study of other personality frameworks, including the Big Five. It is designed as an electronic assessment and is only available online. In contrast with the MBTI assessment, the TypeFinder is available directly to the public through the Truity website and does not require any special skill to use or interpret.

There is no cost to take the TypeFinder and view a summary report of your results. For users who require more depth, a premium report is available for purchase for a small fee.

The Keirsey Temperament Sorter®

Developed by venerable type expert and author David Keirsey, the KTS builds on Myers and Briggs' theory with a focus on temperaments , broader categories of types that point to fundamental themes in thinking and behavior. The KTS can be taken online by the general public, however, registration is required to view a basic overview of your temperament type. More detailed reports are available for purchase for $25-60, and can be tailored to the user's needs.

The Majors PTI™

The Majors Personality Type Indicator was developed by Dr. Mark Majors and is published by the Breckenridge Institute. It is based more heavily on Jungian personality psychology rather than Myers and Briggs' theory, however it reports results in the same format of a four-letter personality type code. The Majors PTI requires a training course to use, and can only be taken through coaches and counselors who have completed the course or equivalent education.

The NERIS Type Explorer®

The NERIS Type Explorer is available for free through the website 16Personalities.com . It is based primarily on the theories of Myers and Briggs, however it uses new terminology for the four preferences and adds a fifth letter to the type code, signifying an individual's response to stress. Because the framework for the NERIS Type Explorer has been somewhat reinvented, it is not clear to what extent the type results are consistent with those from the MBTI® assessment or other tests based on the theory. 

The NERIS Type Explorer does not offer a detailed technical report like some of the more established assessments above, but it does claim basic reliability and validity . 

Jung Typology Test™

Offered for free through the popular website Humanmetrics.com, the Jung Typology Test is reportedly based on both Jung's theories and those of Myers and Briggs. Although this assessment is available at no cost, the information about its reliability and validity is very limited, and we do not recommend relying on the accuracy of the results. 

Truity Truity was founded in 2012 to bring you helpful information and assessments to help you understand yourself and use your strengths. We are based in San Francisco, CA.

• Myers & Briggs' Personality Typing, Explained
• Key Principles of Myers & Briggs' Personality Typing
• How the MBTI® Assessment Was Created
• The 4 Letters of Myers & Briggs' Personality Types
• Extraversion vs. Introversion
• Sensing vs. Intuition
• Thinking vs. Feeling
• Judging vs. Perceiving
• How Myers & Briggs' Personality Typing is Used
• Validity of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator®: is the MBTI® Scientific?
• Other Challenges to the MBTI®
• Compatibility and Myers & Briggs' Personality Types
• What is an Introvert?
• The History of Katharine Briggs, Isabel Myers, and the MBTI®

MBTI Of The Big Bang Theory Characters

• MBTI simplifies personality types into categories like introverted/extroverted, making it easier to understand and apply to TV characters.
• Characters like Sheldon, Leonard, and Bernadette from The Big Bang Theory can be categorized based on their MBTI codes.
• Finding a character's MBTI type can help viewers analyze their behavior and understand their motivations and interactions better.

The Myers-Briggs® Type Indicator is a fascinating tool to examine characters like those of The Big Bang Theory . While the sitcom features many characters who are big thinkers, not all of their personalities are exactly the same. The series follows Sheldon (Jim Parsons) and Leonard (Johnny Galecki) who are colleagues and roommates as they navigate adulthood, their careers, and their love lives with their friends. For anyone who loves to people-watch, analyze others, and look into the characters in TV shows, they can spend hours on end sorting people like Sheldon and Leonard into their MBTI®s.

The essence of the theory is in making Jung’s idea of personality types more digestible, easier to apply and understand. To determine somebody’s MBTI®, bite-sized chunks of their personality (whether they’re introverted or extroverted, ‘thinkers’ or ‘feelers’) are considered in a simple one-or-the-other fashion, each corresponding to a different code. There’s no hard-and-fast category that each individual falls into, and there’ll always be some debate about a specific person’s placement.

Where Are Penny And The Rest Of The Big Bang Theory Cast In The Young Sheldon Finale?

The Young Sheldon finale features a flashforward featuring Sheldon and Amy, making the rest of The Big Bang Theory cast's whereabouts curious.

Barry Kripke: ENTP

The debater.

As far as the scientists of Caltech go, Barry Kripke is a bit of a wild card. The show is sometimes criticized for its stereotypical and clichéd take on scientists, and true enough, a lot of them don’t have much in the way of social skills. There are a whole lot of introverts in the series, but Kripke is arguably one of the few extroverts among them. Barry didn't always make sense as a character but he was always a comical addition to the show.

One possible result for him is ENTP, or Extraversion + Intuition + Thinking + Perceiving. Rather than being set in his ways and following strictly logical causes of action, Barry is quite unpredictable and has been seen completely vexing Sheldon with an unexpected prank. Or a "Don’t Go Breaking My Heart" karaoke duet with Zack.

Bernadette Rostenkowski-Wolowitz: ENTJ

The commander.

ENTJs are not to be messed with. They’re called Commanders for a reason: they’re born leaders. ENTJs are charismatic and confident, with an incredible drive to accomplish whatever their goals may be. Long-time fans of The Big Bang Theory will probably see a lot of Bernadette in this: extraverted, intuitive, thinking, and judging.

When she's first introduced in the show, she's working as a waitress alongside Penny, but she's doing it while pursuing a degree in the field of microbiology. She never lets her interests or goals slip away and eventually ends up having a well-paying job at a pharmaceutical company. Bernadette is a rather petite lady, but inside that small package dwells a real fireball. She even had the authority to send an overtired Sheldon Cooper to bed, and that’s not an easy task.

Stuart Bloom: INFP

The mediator.

There was no doubt that Stuart Bloom was going to be an introvert from his first introduction. As an INFP, he is introverted, intuitive, feeling, and perceiving. The quiet and humble comic book store proprietor is often beset by bad luck and tough breaks. Stuart made a few mistakes throughout The Big Bang Theory but he always learned from them. He’s the Hans Moleman of the show in that sense.

Nevertheless, like a true Mediator, he’s determined to push forward and strive to make an impression on, a connection with, the people in his social circle, even if he is more at home with his comic books than he is with other people. That positive outlook may not always shine through, but in the end, all Stuart really wants is to be appreciated and accepted.

Which The Big Bang Theory Character Are You Based On Your Zodiac?

The characters from The Big Bang Theory had very interesting and differing traits. Which one are you, according to your zodiac sign?

Amy Farrah Fowler: INTP

The logician.

Amy Farrah Fowler has been through quite a whirlwind of character development in The Big Bang Theory . When viewers first meet her in the season three finale, she’s very much a female version of Sheldon: rigid, distant, inscrutable. Over time, however, the audience gets to see that there is more to her than that. Her friendship with Penny and Bernadette changes her quite a bit as well, which is why her result is similar to, yet ultimately, fundamentally different to Sheldon’s.

The Logician is a combination of Introversion + Intuition + Thinking + Perceiving, and that essentially defines Amy’s character. The important difference with Perceiving (P), as opposed to Judging (J), is that it indicates a person is more open to outside influences and opinions, a quality of Amy’s that Sheldon does not share. It's why Amy is able to bond with Penny so quickly despite the two being so different, and why she is able to understand aspects of friendship that Sheldon does not.

Sheldon Cooper: ISTJ

The logistician.

Sheldon Cooper's personality type shows that he shares a lot in common with his future wife Amy. They share the introversion and thinking aspects of an MBTI® categorization. They would both rather be left to their own devices to sort out a puzzle most of the time. The aggressive intellect, the cuttingly analytical mind… this is one brilliant couple. His brain is a big reason why fans love Sheldon .

Nevertheless, the Logician and the Logistician are not one and the same. The latter is marked by a desire to draw their own conclusions, rejecting outside influences and criticisms along the way. While Amy is willing to take input from others to better form her own conclusions, Sheldon prefers to reject them so that he can do the work himself. That’s a perfect description of everyone’s favorite persnickety, utterly rigid theoretical physicist.

Penny Hofstadter: ESFP

The entertainer.

If Sheldon Cooper is a textbook ISTJ, then Penny has ESFP written all over her. The Entertainer is an obvious choice for the aspiring actress when the show begins, but as fans get to know her better, they see how well this analysis fits her. ESFPs are defined by their extroverted nature, but there’s more to it than that. Penny is a very social person (and has certainly had a lot of relationships throughout the show’s run), but The Entertainer is also marked by their desire to encourage and support others.

In her eventual marriage to the insecure Leonard, as well as Penny's friendship with the group at large, fans see her in this role a lot. Penny is often the person helping the others understand social dynamics. She helps Amy understand her feelings for Sheldon. Penny also is more than willing to learn about the activities the group likes to better understand them and allow herself to have a good time with them, even when she can't be at the center of attention.

Leonard Hofstadter: ISFJ

The defender.

When it comes to this system, there’s always some debate as to where specific people fit, but sometimes, it looks a little more natural. Leonard is an excellent example of the Defender MBTI® in The Big Bang Theory . While ISFJs can be every bit as talented and accomplished as everybody else, they can struggle with their self-confidence in expressing that. They're dedicated to their work, their relationships, and other aspects of their lives, but often tend to downplay their successes and accomplishments.

ISFJs are a humble group and need to defend themselves from those who would steal their credit and their thunder. Leonard's love for nerd culture , Penny, and his job are reflected here. He is very good at what he doesn't, but his own accomplishments tend to get put on the back burner for Sheldon. Likewise, he always sees Penny's other partners as somehow better than him at the start of the series. It takes Leonard a while to become more confident.

15 Best Big Bang Theory Episodes, Ranked

The Big Bang Theory has 12 seasons worth of great episodes, but the best ones feature hilarious jokes and emotional moments that leave a mark.

Howard Wolowitz: ESTP

The entrepreneur.

There’s little doubt that Howard Wolowitz is the most social of the core male foursome. To hear him tell it, he’s spent most of his life in bars, amazing and delighting women with all kinds of brilliant stories. Very little of this is probably true, but he has been out there telling it, and that’s what matters here, making him an ESTP.

While he’s certainly happy to stay in and play video games with the others on Halo Night™, he’s also usually the first to suggest more social activities (especially early in the show’s run). As with Amy, he balances his academic interests with an openness to new possibilities and opportunities. He’s the first in the group to become a father, he was an astronaut (however much of a toll that took on him), and it’s his personality type that helped him to achieve these things.

Zack Johnson: ENFP

The campaigner.

Zack Johnson is one of the Big Bang Theory characters who didn't have much screen time and is a little difficult to place. Because he makes comparatively few appearances on the show, it's hard to have a deep understanding of him. It seems that he’d fit quite well in the ESFP (Entertainer) category with his old love interest Penny, but perhaps he’s more suited as an ENFP. He is, after all, enthusiastic and sociable and something of an optimist, all traits that fall under the Campaigner umbrella.

The difference between the Entertainer and the Campaigner personality types is their way of taking in information (S for Sensing and N for Intuition). Zack Johnson’s main shtick lies in his social leanings (contrasted with the group at large), underpinned by his lovable naivety and good nature. All this makes the Campaigner a good pick for him.

Rajesh Koothrappali: INFP

Much like his close friend (not as close as the rest of the gang, perhaps, but definitely on the B List) Stuart Bloom, Rajesh could be considered an INFP . Of the characters on the show, there are a lot of parallels in the way they interact with others in social situations.

There are a lot of crucial similarities between the two characters. They’ve both been beset by romantic misfortunes and other disasters, but they find the positives where they can and press on. They both also seek harmony and a place where they belong, which has led them to become totally overbearing at times (just ask the Wolowitz family). Nevertheless, their hearts are in the right place and their intentions are good, even if they don’t always have the confidence to act on them. Of The Big Bang Theory MBTI® classifications, Raj best fits INFP.

• Anime Search
• Seasonal Anime
• Recommendations
• 2024 Challenge
• Fantasy Anime League
• Manga Search
• Manga Store

Interest Stacks

• Featured Articles
• Episode Videos
• Anime Trailers
• Advertising
• MAL Supporter

Get Schooled Edit What would you like to edit? Synopsis Background Alternative Titles Picture Chapters/Volumes Publishing Dates Relations Type External Links  

Alternative titles, information, available at.

More recommendations Recommendations

More news Recent News

More discussions recent forum discussion, more top anime.

• 1 Sousou no Frieren
• 2 Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood
• 3 Steins;Gate
• 5 Shingeki no Kyojin Season 3 Part 2

More Top Airing Anime

• 1 One Piece
• 2 Hibike! Euphonium 3
• 3 Kono Subarashii Sekai ni Shukufuku wo! 3
• 4 Doupo Cangqiong: Nian Fan
• 5 Mushoku Tensei II: Isekai Ittara Honki Dasu Part 2

More Most Popular Characters

• 1 Lamperouge, Lelouch
• 3 Monkey D., Luffy
• 4 Lawliet, L
• 5 Roronoa, Zoro

HonorsGradU

Curating resources & sharing stories to empower teacher & student ownership, wonder, and daring.

Teaching BLUE: Using the True Colors Personality Test in the Classroom

This post is part of a series of posts on teaching to different personality types as found in the True Colors Personality Test. To see more, head here .

The color blue has often been used to represent sadness but that is not the case with a blue personality. Those with a blue personality often take on the roles of peacemaker and caretaker. These are the students who are enthusiastic, compassionate, and idealistic. Consequently, they are also the students who are easily stressed out by conflict and negative criticism. They want their peers to look up to them, but not for their academic achievements–blues want to be recognized for their authenticity and ability to make friends.

Don’t be surprised if these students also score as ENFJ and ESFJ personality types. They are eager to learn and help others and they are constantly asking how their actions can benefit others. They dream big dreams and are comfortable going with the flow but they still like to plan for things–mostly because they are always thinking of how they can use their time to benefit others.

They prefer to let their emotions guide them. As someone with a blue personality, I find it difficult to dedicate myself to any material that I’m not passionate about and the second something makes me feel anxious or uncomfortable, I tend to abandon it completely. (I was also once exiled to the back of the classroom with nothing but a chair and a clipboard because I was too chatty. My teacher quickly realized that wouldn’t stop me from talking, it just meant I had to talk louder so people could hear me). Instead of trying to restrict these students even further, allow them to have free time and explore the subject in a way they can get excited about.

Blue personalities thrive on validation and it resonates most when praise is manifested in a physical way; a touch on the shoulder, high fives, and gold stars are good places to start. If you are vocalizing your appreciation it is best to be honest and sincere as well as enthusiastic. Because they rely so much on their emotions, they don’t handle criticism well and can become very withdrawn in situations where they’ve been chastised. If you do need to correct them, you can’t be too quick to also remind them that you still care about them.

Like McKenzie mentioned in her posts about Sensing and Intuitive students, it’s important to utilize both methods of learning. Blues are often already able to switch between the two pretty seamlessly and can use them simultaneously. They love hands-on activities and they absorb information more effectively when they can experience it. They learn by “connecting the dots” and using what they already know to bridge the gap from familiar concepts to new material. Blues are very intuitive and use that skill to make connections and apply what they are learning to their personal lives.

Your blue students might come across as overly-emotional, passive, and a bit of a pushover. If you want to help them grow, teach them the importance of boundaries and how to express their opinions. They have a tendency to avoid conflict and will try and stay away from competitive activities–start them out with small-scale classroom competitions where they won’t have to stress about the whole class watching. Keep an eye on the other students to make sure they aren’t taking advantage of a blue’s generosity and keep an eye on the blues to make sure they take a break from taking care of those around them and take care of themselves.

It is critical to foster their desire to help others. Let them help and influence others as often as possible. For those teaching high school students, present them with extra-curricular opportunities to volunteer. Provide them information on tutoring programs and service projects. Like gold personalities, blue students also do well in leadership roles because it allows them to make decisions that will help others.

What experiences have you had teaching students with a blue personality? How do you help them balance their social side with the structure of the classroom?

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

One Reply to “Teaching BLUE: Using the True Colors Personality Test in the Classroom”

This is good.I am the creator of True Colors

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Lessons of freedom, self-determination in June; Pols show true colors on OPRA; 80th anniversary of D-Day; Education key to ending opioid scourge | Letters

• Updated: May. 30, 2024, 9:32 a.m. |
• Published: May. 30, 2024, 9:30 a.m.

During a flag raising ceremony at City Hall marking the 157th Juneteenth Independence Day or Emancipation Day, Monday, June 6, 2022, Mofalc Olei Meinga, President of Frederick Douglass Juneteenth Celebration, shows a picture of the original General Orders, No. 3, which was posted on the door of the Reedy Chapel in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865, that stated "The people of Texas are informed that, in accordance with a proclamation from the executive of the United States, all slaves are free." (Reena Rose Sibayan | The Jersey Journal)

• Letters To The Editor | The Jersey Journal

Lessons of freedom in June

There are three holidays in June that, although seemingly different, are stitched together by a common, universal thread, specifically, freedom and self-determination.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

MBTI® Facts

1. who created the myers-briggs type indicator ® (mbti ® ) assessment, 2. what is the history of the mbti ® assessment, 3. who uses the mbti ® assessment, 4. what can the mbti ® assessment be used for, 5. can the mbti ® assessment be used for selection or hiring, 6. does the mbti ® assessment describe my whole personality, 7. what is a personality preference, 8. how is the mbti ® assessment related to jung’s theory, 9. is the mbti ® assessment available for free online, 10. i took the mbti ® assessment years ago. is there any reason to take it again, 11. can anyone interpret mbti ® results, 12. how should i interpret the results of my mbti ® assessment, 13. i’ve heard the mbti ® assessment is a personality type questionnaire, not a trait questionnaire. what does this mean, 14. i have heard the mbti ® assessment “puts people into a box.” does it, 15. does the mbti ® assessment have a scientific basis, 16. is the mbti ® assessment reliable, 17. is the mbti ® assessment valid, 18. what are the ethical use guidelines for the mbti ® assessment, 19. how do i find out more about the mbti ® assessment.

The MBTI ® assessment was developed by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. Both were highly educated college graduates who employed the scientific method in creating the assessment. Although neither were psychologists, they spent years studying Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung’s theory of psychological types and join the ranks of people like Steve Jobs, Thomas Edison, and Jane Goodall, who made lasting contributions to their fields despite a lack of formal training.

Myers worked with the Educational Testing Service in Princeton, New Jersey, a major assessment publisher, who helped develop the MBTI assessment and publish it in 1962.

Since then, the MBTI assessment has been updated regularly based on continuing research by trained psychologists.

Were Briggs and Myers qualified psychologists?

Briggs earned a bachelor’s degree with honors in agriculture from the Michigan Agricultural College (now Michigan State University) and Myers achieved a bachelor’s degree with honors in political science from Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania. During the time period when the MBTI ® assessment was initially being developed (mid 1940s to 1950), only 3 to 5 percent of women and only 5 to 7 percent of men held a bachelor’s degree in the United States.

While neither Myers nor Briggs were psychologists, they based the MBTI assessment on the work of Carl Jung, Swiss psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and founder of analytical psychology. Both Briggs and Myers spent many years studying Jung’s theory of psychological types in order to create the assessment.

In later years, Myers also worked closely on MBTI research projects with Dr. Mary McCaulley, a clinical psychologist at the University of Florida.

After the death of Myers, her work was continued by a variety of experts, among whom most are doctoral level psychologists. As an example, the most recent commercial forms of the MBTI assessment were developed by a core team of five PhD level psychologists and researchers. There were two additional PhD level psychologists to support statistical analysis, and a larger team of psychologists in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, South Africa, and Japan as consultants to the project.

1 https://www.statista.com/statistics/184272/educational-attainment-of-college-diploma-or-higher-by-gender/

The history of the MBTI ® assessment spans many years, from its inception by Katharine Briggs, based on Carl Jung’s theory, development by Isabel Myers until her death, and to the ongoing development today by teams of psychologists including the research team at The Myers-Briggs Company (formerly CPP, Inc.).

• 1943: The first version of the MBTI assessment is developed
• 1962: Educational Testing Service (ETS) publishes an updated form of the MBTI assessment
• 1977: CPP releases Form G, the original commercial version of the MBTI assessment
• 1997: OPP Ltd (UK distributor of the MBTI assessment) releases the European English Step I™ assessment after extensive national data collection
• 1998: CPP releases Form M of the MBTI Step I™ assessment after extensive national data collection
• 2001: CPP releases Form Q of the MBTI Step II™ assessment
• 2003–2007: OPP and CPP research and release new version of the MBTI Step II™ assessment in European English and 8 other European languages
• 2018: The Myers-Briggs Company (formerly CPP, Inc.) releases an international revision, the Global Step I™ and Global Step II™ assessments

The MBTI global assessments more accurately measure personality type across different countries and cultures and provide a consistent assessment and reporting experience for all respondents, with no reduction in the accuracy of the resulting type preferences.

The MBTI ® assessment is most often used by organizational development professionals, coaches, and consultants, as well as by career counselors and educators. A fundamental step in any change process is to develop and improve self-awareness. For the MBTI assessment, this awareness is about one’s own and others’ predilections to behave in specific ways. This information can then be used to improve interpersonal skills, manage conflict, improve relationships, and inform career choices. Researchers in a variety of domains make use of the MBTI assessment and type concepts when examining normal personality and related attributes. The MBTI assessment is not used to a great extent by clinical psychologists because it assesses normal personality, not mental health and disorders. The MBTI assessment is also used by human resource professionals for a variety of purposes. However, the MBTI assessment is not intended for use as part of a hiring process, nor to assign people to specific teams, roles, or functions within an organization.

More about who uses the MBTI assessment

The MBTI ® assessment was designed to help people understand personality differences in the general population. While there are no “better” or “worse” personality preferences, the MBTI assessment can help people understand their strengths and blind spots and how they might differ from others. Organizational experts have drawn on these insights for many years to help individuals and teams be more effective at work. It is most often used by organizations to help individuals develop and build self-awareness and to help teams work better together. For example, the MBTI assessment can help in conflict resolution, leadership development, career coaching, team development, managing change, improving communication, and decision making. Similarly, other professionals use insights from the MBTI assessment to advise students about educational decisions, to counsel couples, and to help people in various nonwork settings.

Businesses, government agencies, colleges, universities, schools, charities, and sports teams use the MBTI assessment. For examples, read these European case studies and US case studies .

The MBTI assessment should not be used to identify personality “disorders” or mental illness. Therefore, it is not used in clinical psychology settings or to diagnose conditions such as depression, narcissism, or anxiety. The lack of use in clinical populations has, on occasion, been taken out of context as a way of denigrating the MBTI assessment. For example, critics sometimes cite a 2012 article in the Washington Post in which Carl Thoreson, PhD, psychologist, Stanford Emeritus and former Chairman of CPP, Inc. (now The Myers-Briggs Company), is quoted as saying he didn’t use the MBTI assessment in his research at Stanford because “it would be questioned by my academic colleagues” (Cunningham, 2012). What was missing from the article, however, was the fact that the focus of Dr. Thoreson’s work at Stanford was on altering “type A” behaviors to reduce heart attack mortality (Friedman et al., 1986). Since the MBTI assessment is not designed to measure type A personalities, it simply isn’t an appropriate tool for the topic—so naturally, its use in his work would have been questioned had he used it. When an assessment isn’t used because it’s not the appropriate assessment for the intended purpose, that just means it’s not the right tool for the job—but that doesn’t invalidate the assessment.

Cunningham, L. (2012, December 14). Myers-Briggs: Does it pay to know your type? The Washington Post .

Friedman, M., Thoresen, C. E., Gill, J. J., Ulmer, D., Powell, L. H., Price, V. A., Brown, B., Thompson, L., Rabin, D. D., Breall, W. S., Bourg, E., Levy, R., & Dixon, T. (1986). Alteration of type a behavior and its effect on cardiac recurrences in post myocardial infarction patients: Summary results of the recurrent coronary prevention project. American Heart Journal , 112(4), 653–665. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(86)90458-8

The MBTI ® assessment builds an understanding of strengths and blind spots. It also helps people understand how they might differ from one another. It is valuable for individuals and teams as they tackle such challenges as communication, handling conflict, managing change, making decisions, being a leader, or changing careers.

The Myers-Briggs ® assessment is far more than just a personality questionnaire. Its benefits include:

• A common language for understanding and describing the interpersonal differences that define us as individuals
• An easy-to-understand but sophisticated way of understanding how people are similar and how they are different
• Memorable and inspiring insights that help people understand challenging relationships
• A positive view of all personalities, which avoids defensiveness and invites people to make genuine and lasting changes to their behavior
• The MBTI framework is designed specifically for individual growth and development. As such, the assessment and interpretation process provide an opportunity for personal exploration that is difficult to achieve with other assessments.

More about uses of the MBTI assessment

There is a great deal more to the MBTI ® assessment than simply knowing your “four letters.” In fact, when people stop at this point, the MBTI ® assessment can be wrongly used as a label and people can become disillusioned rather than inspired. The verification, or best-fit, process is a steppingstone on a journey of self-exploration and awareness, enabling people to build awareness, widen their choices, and develop in directions they determine. If used appropriately the MBTI ® assessment becomes part of their everyday lives and not a “one-off” experience.

Some of the most common applications of MBTI knowledge follow.

The MBTI assessment can give coaching clients the information and insights they need to increase their self-awareness and their understanding of other people. It helps them recognize their natural preferences, while also learning to operate outside them when necessary. For both clients and coaches, MBTI feedback can help identify typical behaviors, blind spots, strengths that can be leveraged, areas for growth, and tips for action planning. Find out more from The Delta Associates and the Royal Air Force case studies.

We each have a preferred communication style, a way in which we like to be communicated to, and which we are more likely to find persuasive. We tend to use this same preferred approach when communicating to others. The MBTI assessment can help us identify our preferred style, giving us the ability to flex and change our approach in order to communicate more effectively (and more persuasively) with those of a different personality type. Find out more by reading case studies from Pixio Corporation and TDC Group.

The MBTI assessment shows what we tend to focus on and how we respond to conflict. By understanding how people of the 16 different personality types (including ourselves) typically behave in these situations, we can approach conflict in a more productive way and resolve conflict more effectively. Case studies from the San Francisco Child Abuse Prevention Center and the Church of England show how the MBTI assessment has been used in conflict management.

The MBTI assessment provides a framework that can be used by individuals and teams for making well-rounded decisions. For individuals, understanding their decision-making preferences can help them see both the positives and the possible drawbacks in the way they normally do things and see the advantages of alternative processes. For teams, using the MBTI assessment in this way helps prevent “groupthink.” Case studies from Macmillan Cancer Support and Pension Insurance Corporation offer examples of using MBTI insights to aid decision making.

Leaders need a broad range of abilities and skills, but a good level of self-awareness is essential if a manager is to make good use of these capabilities, as is a framework for understanding other people. The MBTI assessment is an extremely useful tool in helping leaders achieve this awareness and is widely used by organizations and independent coaches in leadership development. Find out more about leadership development by reading these case studies from JetBlue and Deichmann-Obuv .

Organizations merge or are taken over, government policies change, IT systems and communication methods morph into new configurations; the rules of the game keep changing. The MBTI assessment provides an explanation of why different people can react very differently to change, and it offers a way of helping people work together effectively. To learn more, read these case studies from Launchpad and Waitrose.

The basic MBTI model is simple and easy to understand, which makes it an ideal tool for understanding other people. This understanding is the foundation of successful team development. The MBTI assessment can help team members effectively communicate, handle conflict, manage change, and make decisions. Case studies from Molson and Diageo offer more information.

The MBTI assessment can help individuals understand how their personality preferences relate to their chosen career, how development as an individual may inform career development, and how best to apply one’s natural gifts to career choices. Learn more from case studies from Nokia and the University of Surrey .

For those leaving school or college, and those considering a change of career, many factors need to be considered, such as one’s abilities, qualification, interests, and personal and family needs. Personality also plays a role. The MBTI assessment can help individuals see what jobs people with their personality type typically gravitate to, and what aspects of their personality would be more or less useful in their chosen career. Case studies from Colorado College and HEC offer more detail about using MBTI type during career exploration.

The MBTI assessment can help people see what their stress triggers are and show them how to avoid or ameliorate the effects of these triggers. It also describes one's likely reaction to everyday stress and to more extreme situations in which individuals may behave in atypical ways. Knowing this information allows them to recognize this reaction and take action to prevent things escalating further. The Canadian Police College and the England and Wales Cricket Board have used the MBTI assessment to address stress.

No. The MBTI® assessment is not intended for use in selection of job candidates, nor for making internal decisions regarding job placement, selection for teams or task forces, or other similar activities. The Myers & Briggs Foundation is clear regarding the ethical use of the MBTI assessment: It is unethical to require job applicants to take the assessment if the results will be used to screen out applicants.

The design of the MBTI assessment is for development, not for selection:

• Items in the MBTI assessment are “clear-purpose,” meaning that no attempt is made to disguise which preference pair an item is designed to measure. Consequently, by simply doing some background research about what the MBTI assessment measures, job candidates could easily fake their responses to generate what they might see as an “ideal” profile for the job to which they are applying.
• Similarly, the MBTI assessment does not incorporate any sort of “lie scale” to serve as an alert that a candidate may not be responding honestly.
• The assessment is focused on an individual’s personality preferences, rather than a person’s skill or competence. No preference is seen as “bad” or as something that should be screened out during the hiring process. Instead, a person’s preference indicates their natural way of doing things, but individuals can learn to be flexible and engage in behaviors outside of their preference when a particular situation calls for it. For example, someone with a preference for Introversion might be very good at public speaking or networking, it might just take that person more energy.
• Finally, the ethos of the MBTI assessment is that the questionnaire is used in conjunction with interactive feedback, where the individual works out what type best fits him or her; this approach is not suited to selection as the individual could, essentially, choose whichever type the hiring managers want to see.

Given that it is not appropriate for selection, there have (appropriately) been no meaningful studies evaluating the MBTI’s ability to predict job performance. Established researchers in the field of predicting job performance would not use the MBTI assessment for this purpose. On the other hand, numerous meaningful studies have examined the value of the MBTI assessment in the context of individual development.

The MBTI ® assessment was not designed to describe every aspect of personality. It focuses on four preference pairs:

• Extraversion–Introversion (E–I): From where you get your energy
• Sensing–Intuition (S–N): What information you prefer to gather and trust
• Thinking–Feeling (T–F): The process you prefer to use in making decisions
• Judging–Perceiving (J–P): How you deal with the world around you

This isn’t to say that everyone who has a preference for Sensing, for example, is alike in every aspect. Personality is more complex than that! However, sorting people into the 16 types based on certain aspects of personality can illustrate how people are alike and how they are different. Looking at personality in this way is useful for certain purposes.

No personality assessment measures all aspects of personality or completely describes an individual. All personality assessments are using a model (some based on theory, some lacking a theory) to summarize large groups of individuals in a relatively small number of useful descriptors.

The MBTI ® assessment looks at our personality preferences. We all have preferences for all sorts of things; most of use prefer to use one hand rather than the other when we write something, for example. Having a preference doesn’t mean that you can’t do things in a different way; if you are left-handed, you can probably write with your right hand if you need to. In the same way, we all have preferences when it comes to our personality. The Jung-Myers approach focuses on four pairs of preferences:

• Extraversion–Introversion (E–I): Do you prefer to get your energy from, and focus your attention on, the outside world of people and things (E) or your inner world of thoughts, feelings, and reflections (I)?
• Sensing–Intuition (S–N): Do you prefer to gather and trust information that is realistic, concrete, practical, and gathered by your five senses (S) or information based on connections, possibilities, ideas, and what could be (N)?
• Thinking–Feeling (T–F): Do you prefer to make decisions on the basis of objective logic (T) or on how the decision will affect people and whether it agrees with your values (F)?
• Judging–Perceiving (J–P): Do you prefer to live your life in an ordered, structured way, seeking closure (J) or in an emergent, spontaneous way, keeping your options open (P)?

According to Jung-Myers theory, you will have a preference for E or for I, for S or for N, for T or for F, and for J or for P.

More on personality preference theory

• Preferences do not indicate skill or ability. For example, if your preferred hand were injured, you would still be able to use your nonpreferred hand but doing so may take more effort.
• Types are made up of preferences and there are no “right” or “wrong” types; each has its strengths and blind spots.
• Everyone uses all eight preferences, but we prefer to use those that are in our four-letter or whole type.
• It is not always possible to know what another person’s type is because she or he may be acting “out of preference.” For example, an inspirational public speaker may prefer Introversion, but may use Extraversion to do the job.

In his seminal work, Psychological Types , Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Carl Jung discussed in detail three of the four preference pairs measured by the MBTI ® assessment. The fourth preference pair was implied but not fully developed in his work. Isabel Myers and Katharine Briggs included this fourth preference pair (Judging–Perceiving) in their model of personality, leading to the 16 types measured by the MBTI assessment. When Myers and Briggs developed the MBTI assessment, their mission was to make Jung’s theory of personality types accessible to the general population

Quotes from Jung

• This quote is also often used to argue that Jung’s theory isn’t valid and that people can’t be reduced to 16 personality types. However, taken in context Jung was explaining that although personality preferences exist, it is important to avoid making quick assumptions about a person’s personality type based on what one sees.
• When taking the MBTI assessment, it is therefore important to receive competent interactive feedback in order to confirm the type that fits best.
• Two people with the same underlying type may have had very different life experiences, such as the way they were brought up, the culture that they were raised in and the culture they currently live in, and the people they have met, had relationships with, and lost. While they will have many things in common, they will not be identical people; they will both be “exceptions to the rule.”
• Jung advises us to remember that no one personality type description can explain all aspects of a person’s entire being or psyche. This notion is reflected in the statement, “An ENFP is like every other ENFP, like some other ENFPs, and like no other ENFP” (Myers, 2015). So in his quote, Jung likely was not refuting his own theory of psychological types but rather was trying to ensure its proper use. He was also likely acknowledging that any model or theory for describing or explaining human behavior, including his theory, will be imperfect in some way.
• Jung is again emphasizing that no theory of human personality and behavior is perfect, as each person is unique. Yet, understanding basic personality differences is useful in interacting with other people!

What these quotes show is that most models or theories in psychology are useful for helping to understand human behavior but are not intended to describe every minutia of personality or behavior. A model or theory has value to the extent that it provides insights, people find it useful, and it leads to improvements in daily life.

Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types. In H. Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler, & W. McGuire (Eds.), The collected works of C. G. Jung (R. F. C. Hull, Trans.) (2nd ed., Vol. 6, p. 541, CW 6, para. 958]). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1921)

Jung, C. G. (1977). C. G. Jung speaking: Interviews and encounters (W. McGuire, Ed., & R. F. C. Hull, Trans.) (p. 304). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1937)

Myers, I. B. (2015). Introduction to Myers-Briggs ® Type (7th ed., p. 52). Sunnyvale, CA: The Myers Briggs Company.

No. The genuine MBTI ® assessment is copyrighted and only accessible by individuals who are MBTI certified and available through MBTIonline.com , which allows you to complete the assessment and provides a self-directed interpretation.

The MBTI assessment is backed up by 75 years of research and continues to be refined and updated. The assessment also has considerable evidence for its reliability and validity , much of which is reported in its manual. You may find free questionnaires that are based on Jung and Myers and Briggs' theory and that talk about the four preference pairs. But free personality assessments typically lack evidence showing they are reliable and valid measures.

If the initial MBTI assessment experience followed the recommended process, included a structured best-fit feedback process, and if you are certain of your type, then it is not necessary to take the indicator again. But if you are uncertain of your type and it is possible that life events at the time of the first administration may have affected the outcome of the assessment, then it might be worthwhile to retake the MBTI assessment and have a quality interpretation with a certified practitioner.

Even when individuals are very sure of their four-letter type, it may be useful for them to take the MBTI Step II assessment. This instrument looks at the behavioral facets within a person’s four-letter type, revealing what makes them different to others of the same Step I type. Typically, completing the Step II assessment will add much more to an individual’s understanding of personality than simply completing the Step I assessment again.

The Myers-Briggs Company and The Myers & Briggs Foundation allow the Myers-Briggs ® instrument to be administered by certified practitioners. The ethical guidelines for the MBTI ® assessment require that administration of the assessment includes either an interpretative session in which participants discuss the results with a certified professional, or an online interactive feedback session. The Myers-Briggs Company provides a comprehensive body of information via a manual, guides, other written materials, and workshops and seminars designed to aid in effective administration of the instrument. There is a self-directed version of the MBTI assessment, called MBTI ® Online , that includes an online interpretation and best-fit process.

If you complete the MBTI ® assessment you should never just be given the four letters of your personality type. Instead, to be ethically compliant, an interpretation either from an MBTI certified practitioner or through the MBTI ® Online system should be provided. You will have the opportunity to reflect on what you think your MBTI type is, read a description of the MBTI type that resulted from scoring your answers, and decide on your best-fit type. Your practitioner can give you a detailed description of your best-fit type and explain how to use your type knowledge in work and life. Personalized reports with your MBTI results are available that cover many topics, such as career choice, communication, decision making, conflict, etc.

“Type” and “trait” are two different approaches to personality.

The MBTI ® assessment is based on type theory, which states that personality has qualitatively different attributes. Qualitatively different means that one category differs from the other in a manner that is more than the amount of an attribute. For example, we either have a preference for Thinking or for Feeling, which are two qualitatively different ways of making decisions. In MBTI theory we can and do use both preferences , but one is more natural.

A different model of understanding personality is “trait” theory. Trait theory states that there are underlying characteristics that everyone has, and people have different “amounts” of these characteristics. For example, everyone has some degree of self-acceptance, but some people have a lot of self-acceptance, others have little self-acceptance, and still others fall anywhere in between “a lot” and “a little.”

Each approach has advantages and disadvantages, and both can be useful in different contexts. Alternatively, the two different types of assessments can be used together to gain a more in-depth picture of someone’s personality.

More on the differences between type and trait

Very often, we will see and describe the world around us in terms of “amounts of” something, or traits. For example, we might describe how many feet (or meters) tall we are and we might talk about whether we are taller or shorter than others. This trait approach is used by many personality questionnaires. Each person possesses a number of what are assumed to be “universal” personality traits, and the questionnaire measures along a spectrum how much of each of the traits the person has. People can score from low to high on each trait. For example, empathy is something we all have, just in varying amounts. When people are using a trait-based approach in describing personality, they might say “I work with someone who is much more empathetic than most people” or “that person is not very empathetic.” Trait tools are used for selection or hiring people in part because they can be used to compare people and predict how people are likely to behave.

This is very different from the type approach. The MBTI assessment is based on type theory and the underlying assumption that people belong to distinct, qualitatively different preference categories. For example, we either have a preference for Thinking or for Feeling, one or the other. Our preference is the side that is more natural and tends to be more automatic and easier. Although we have a preference for one side, we can and do use both our preferred and nonpreferred sides when needed. This is one reason why type tools are not useful for selection or hiring, but are helpful in development, as we can understand how to “flex” our behavior as the situation requires.

Some supporters of type questionnaires feel that trait-based questionnaires are prescriptive or inhuman, as having “too much” or “too little” of a trait can sometimes be seen as problematic or negative. Some supporters of trait questionnaires see type questionnaires as simplistic and unscientific, as they are not intended to make comparisons between individuals. In fact, many people use both type and trait assessments, separately and together. The different approaches can give subtly different information about an individual, which can be extremely useful in gaining a more sophisticated understanding of the person.

The intention behind the MBTI® assessment is not to stereotype or “put people into a box,” but to help people understand themselves and others in a simple, easy-to-remember way.

People are complex. It often takes time to really get to know someone and understand how that person does things and why. However, there are patterns in how people behave and their motivations. With time, as we get to know our friends and colleagues, we often build up an idea of how we are similar and how we differ.

The MBTI assessment is simply another way of building up that picture and understanding others better. Every person is a unique individual, but we share certain characteristics. Your MBTI preferences show you that you have certain things in common with others of the same MBTI type. They also highlight how you might be different from others with a different type than yours.

What the MBTI assessment does not do is describe your whole personality or identity. It certainly does not define you! Instead, it focuses on four core aspects of personality . It is also worth remembering that personality is not the only thing that influences how we behave. For example, we all have different motivations, experiences, values, hobbies, skills, and cultures that shape us.

Some people do say they feel “put into a box” and this can be the case with any personality questionnaire, not just the MBTI assessment. People with an unsatisfactory MBTI experience are often those who did not participate in a skilled interpretation session with an MBTI certified practitioner, and they may not have had the chance to discover their best-fit type. Therefore, a feedback session with an MBTI certified practitioner or completing MBTIonline , which includes an interactive feedback session, is recommended.

Yes. Four editions (1962, 1985, 1998, 2018) of its manual have been published, providing a wealth of research-based evidence on its reliability and validity. The manual also explains the theory behind the assessment, its construction, and the data collection and analysis of the scales.

It is well established that the Myers-Briggs ® assessment meets all requirements for educational and psychological tests, and you can access information on its validity and reliability . Scientists have been scrutinizing it for more than 50 years, and it has been cited and reviewed thousands of times (a Google Scholar search for “MBTI” found over 31,000 records). The Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) also publishes helpful information on the reliability and validity of the Myers-Briggs assessment .

For more information, take a look at this webinar and whitepaper that deconstruct common criticisms of the MBTI assessment .

Sources of scientific research on the MBTI ® assessment

When psychologists or practitioners evaluate a psychometric test or questionnaire, they usually ask two main questions: “ Is it reliable ? ” and “ Is it valid ? ” On both of these criteria, the MBTI assessment performs well. Reputable psychometric tools have been developed through years of rigorous research, and The Myers-Briggs Company makes these research findings available via the MBTI ® Manual for the Global Step I™ and Step II™ Assessments (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 2018). This manual is provided to all certified practitioners as part of their certification materials. Major findings are also published in data supplements that can be downloaded from The Myers-Briggs Company website for the current commercial version and prior commercial versions .

In addition, there are many articles by independent researchers in established journals. Interested parties can find hundreds of these on a free searchable database published by the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT), called Mary and Isabel’s Library Online (MILO), at www.capt.org/MILO .

Finally, the MBTI assessment meets the stringent requirements for psychological assessments in psychology societies around the world (e.g., the British Psychological Society, The Health Professions Council of South Africa, and Sistema de Avaliação de Testes Psicológicos in Brazil). Furthermore, the MBTI assessment has been voluntarily submitted to organizations in the United States for independent review such as those provided in Buros Mental Measurements Yearbook , in Psyctests by the American Psychological Association , and in the Comprehensive Guide to Career Assessment (7th ed.) published by the National Career Development Association (NCDA). Note that the American Psychological Association (APA) does not approve or disapprove the use of assessments in the United States. Instead, the APA provides ethical guidelines that put the onus on the users of assessments to evaluate their reliability, validity, and appropriateness.

Myers, I. B. (1962). Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® . Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Myers, I. B., & McCaulley, M. H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (1998). MBTI ® manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® Instrument (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (2018). MBTI ® manual for the Global Step I™ and Step II™ assessments (4th ed.). Sunnyvale, CA: The Myers-Briggs Company.

Psyctests. (n.d.). Retrieved October 2, 2019, from https://www.apa.org/pubs/databases/psyctests/.

Stoltz, K. B., & Barclay, S. R. (2019). A Comprehensive Guide to Career Assessment . Broken Arrow, OK: National Career Development Association.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln. (n.d.). Mental Measurements Yearbook . Retrieved October 2, 2019, from https://buros.org/mental-measurements-yearbook .

Reliability looks at whether the questions that comprise each measure are consistent with each other ( internal consistency reliability ) and whether the results of a test are consistent over time ( test-retest reliability ). The general standard for a scale on any psychometric assessment is to have an internal consistency reliability of .70 or above. The four preference scales on the MBTI ® assessment have internal consistency reliabilities of around .90, and test-retest correlations are over .80 for periods up to 15 weeks. In brief, the MBTI assessment is reliable.

It is common to find quotes indicating that 50 percent of participants received a different classification on one or more of the MBTI scales when they take the MBTI assessment again This is because it is not simply a matter of having one preference pair result matching. All four preference pairs need to match. Details can be found under " What is the test-retest reliability of the MBTI ® assessment? "

What is the internal consistency reliability of the MBTI ® assessment?

By convention, an internal consistency estimate of .70 is a minimum acceptable value for psychometric measures, and the preference scales that comprise the MBTI assessment clearly exceed this threshold. This is true for people of different ages, ethnicities, and employment statuses.

Reliability is not a property that is inherent to an assessment or a test. Instead, reliability must be considered for a specific sample and for a particular purpose. Generally, studies report on the internal consistency reliability of the sample used in a specific study. As such, the question "is the MBTI assessment reliable" is not an accurate question and communicates a misunderstanding of psychological assessment. Instead, the correct question to ask is if the MBTI assessment demonstrates internal consistency reliability for a sample comprised of some identifiable group.

Details on internal consistency reliability are provided in the manual and in other portions of this document. Note, in many cases reliability estimates from prior commercial forms are reported. Because the current and prior forms of the assessment are highly correlated, the results can be generalized to the current forms. As further data accumulate, they will be reported by The Myers-Briggs Company in downloadable supplements.

The Myers-Briggs Company (formerly CPP, Inc.) examined the internal consistency reliability of its commercial archive on MBTI Form M. In a sample of over 5 million people who completed the MBTI assessment, the internal consistency reliability measures of the four preference scales exceeded the value of acceptable reliability of .70. The following figure summarizes the level of internal consistency reliability for the four preference scales by age groups for this sample.

The MBTI ® Global Step I ™ assessment has similar internal consistency reliability estimates. Some of the key samples are reported in the following table. Additional detail can be found in the MBTI ® Manual for the Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ Assessments (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 2018) or the manual supplements or technical briefs for the MBTI global assessments.

Internal consistency of the MBTI ® Global Step I ™ preference scales

*Cronbach’s alpha is a standard way of reporting internal consistency.

In summary, the MBTI assessment exceeds the guidelines for internal consistency reliability in samples of people who are likely to make use of the MBTI assessment in a variety of countries and across a wide range of age groups. Information on other samples and populations can be found by searching for published studies focused on the sample or population of interest.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (2018). MBTI ® manual for the Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ assessments (4th ed.). Sunnyvale, CA: The Myers-Briggs Company.

What is the test-retest reliability of the MBTI ® assessment?

Test-retest reliability is typically reported for a sample by correlating the results for a specific measure on two separate occasions. Test-retest correlations have no firm standards but in general stronger correlations or higher levels of test-retest reliability are more likely over shorter time intervals. The MBTI Form M manual supplement (Schaubhut, Herk, & Thompson, 2009) shows 1-month test-retest reliabilities for the preference scales range from .94 to .97 and 4-year test-retest reliabilities range from .57 to .81. The current commercial MBTI ® Global Step I assessment had test-retest reliabilities that ranged from .81 to .86 for intervals from 1 to 6 weeks and from 7 to 15 weeks, respectively, as reported in the table that follows and in the MBTI ® Manual for the Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ Assessments (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 2018).

Test-retest correlations of the MBTI ® Global Step I ™ preference scales

Schaubhut, N. A., Herk, N. A., & Thompson, R. C. (2009). MBTI ® Form M manual supplement . Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc., 11-13.

Test-retest reliability for whole type

The MBTI assessment is unique in that rather than focusing on the test-retest reliability of a single scale, critics argue that it is the whole type or four-letter type that should be considered when looking at test-retest reliability. About 50 percent of people get the same four-letter or whole type on retest. Note, other personality assessments do not report test-retest reliability for a configuration of results. For example, no one reports the consistency of the configuration of the Big Five categories provided as part of the reporting of results across administrations.

Nonetheless, whole type or four-letter type consistency has traditionally been reported for the MBTI assessment. However, the typical rules for test-retest correlations cannot be used in this case. Instead, it is necessary to consider if the MBTI assessment does better than chance in placing a respondent into the same whole type, which is accomplished by having the same four preferences on two administrations of the assessment.

One way to consider this is to examine what would be expected on retest if the MBTI assessment yielded random or nearly random placement into the 16 types as suggested by some critics. To that end, consider that if the MBTI assessment yielded random placement into the four preference pairs on retest, then because there are 16 types, the probability of getting any 1 of the 16 whole types is 6.25 percent (1/16 = 6.25). Further, because whole types are made up of four sets of two preferences, the probability matching on one, two, three, or four letters differs based on the 6.25 base rate. For example, again assuming the MBTI assessment is unreliable and invalid, the probability of getting ISTJ on one administration and ENFP (the opposite) on second administration is 6.25. Similarly, if unreliable and invalid, the likelihood of getting ISTJ on both administrations would also be 6.25. matching two letters (ISTJ and ISFP) would be more likely, and add to a 37.5 percent chance. These probabilities for the different combinations of preferences are summarized in the following figure, along with results found in the global sample and summarized in the MBTI ® Manual for the Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ Assessments (Myers et al., 2018). As can be seen, the consistency of all four preferences being the same on retest are closer to 50 percent, meaning just over half of all cases have the same whole or four-letter type results on retest. This is eight (8) times what is expected by chance. What we observe in actual data is that the most common outcome is for people to match on all four letters. The second most common outcome is matching on three out of four letters. The least common outcome are four different letters.

In summary, the MBTI preference scales demonstrate more than adequate test-retest reliability in the global sample for the global forms of the assessment. Moreover, the MBTI assessment, when considered as a configuration of all four preference scales, exceeds what would be expected by chance by eight times, with 90 percent of people getting the same results for three or four of the preference scales. Note too that for most people who have a change of a single preference, the preference that changed was the one that was least clear. It is very rare (without intentionally responding in an inaccurate way) for preferences that are clear to change on retest (Myers et al., 2018).

Validity looks at whether an assessment measures what it is supposed to measure. The MBTI ® assessment is supposed to measure personality type and then to be used as a tool for individual development and self-awareness. Much evidence has accumulated supporting the validity of the MBTI assessment, and this evidence has been published in four manuals (1962, 1985, 1998, 2018) and a variety of technical supplements. The latest and exhaustive summary of validity evidence for the MBTI Step I ™ and Step II ™ assessments can be found in chapters 9 and 10 of the MBTI ® Manual for the Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ Assessments (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 2018).

The MBTI assessment has been found to be valid in a number of ways, with studies that evaluate the following:

• Relationships with behavior
• Relationships with other questionnaires
• Internal measurement structure
• Predictive validity
• Perceived value
• Practical validity

A wealth of research-based evidence on MBTI validity can be found in the manuals, technical briefs, and supplements, and more is also available in this document.

What else can you tell me about the validity of the MBTI ® assessment?

There are several ways to demonstrate validity of a personality assessment. The United States manual supplement (and other country/language supplements) for the MBTI ® Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ assessments focuses on convergent and divergent validity. This approach to validity examines whether the assessment is related to other measures in a manner that is consistent with what would be expected based on the theory or approach underlying both assessments. For example, if two scales on two assessments measure a similar characteristic, then a person who scores high on the scale on the one assessment should also score high on the scale on the other assessment (convergent validity). If the scales are measuring very different, even contradictory, characteristics, then one would expect a high score on one scale and a low score on the other scale (divergent validity). The supplements and the MBTI global manual report on correlations among the MBTI preference scales and the Adjective Check List (Gough & Heilbrun, 1980) and the California Psychological Inventory ™ (Gough & Bradley, 2005). Prior studies on the various forms of the MBTI assessment (Form M and the European Step I; Form Q and the European Step II) remain relevant due to high correlations between those forms and MBTI Global Step I and Step II, respectively. Supplements to the original manuals 2 have also been published showing additional validity evidence. In addition to the manuals, supplements have been published for these assessments as well, and are freely available online; for both proponents and critics to evaluate: Form M and Form Q , European Step I . Summaries of such studies can be found in the manual.

Note that the MBTI assessment is not intended to predict job performance and should not be used in selection . Therefore, validity data related to the application of the MBTI assessment in recruitment are not available. Moyle and Hackston (2018) summarize some of the differences between what is important for the validity of questionnaires used in selection and questionnaires, like the MBTI assessment, used in development.

Gough, H. G., & Bradley, P. (2005). CPI 260 ® manual . Sunnyvale, CA: The Myers-Briggs Company.

Gough, H. G., & Heilbrun, A. B. (1983). The Adjective Check List manual . Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Moyle, P., & Hackston, J. (2018). Personality assessment for employee development: Ivory tower or real world? Journal of Personality Assessment, 100 , 507-517. doi: 10.1080/00223891

Myers, I. B. (1962). Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® . Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Myers, I. B., & McCaulley, M. H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (1998). MBTI ® manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® Instrument (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (2018). MBTI ® manual for the Global Step I ™ and Step II ™ assessments (4th ed.). Sunnyvale, CA: The Myers-Briggs Company.

2 In addition to the manuals, supplements have been published for these assessments as well, and are freely available online; for both proponents and critics to evaluate Form M and Form Q , European Step I , European Step II

Is there validity evidence regarding behavior and MBTI ® type?

Anderson, Kulas, and Thompson (2018) explored links between MBTI types and managerial behaviors. First, an independent sample of 160 students rated 1 of 16 hypothetical managers (10 students for each corresponding MBTI type) on Benchmarks ® 360 items, an instrument from the Center for Creative Leadership ® (CCL ® ). Second, a sample of 4,450 managers for whom MBTI type was known and who had Benchmarks ratings provided by others (not self-ratings) was examined. The average hypothetical and actual manager ratings were then correlated for each of the whole type combinations. It was expected that as the actual and hypothetical ratings shared more MBTI preferences, the correlations would increase, and as they shared fewer preferences, the correlations would decrease. The results of this analysis are presented in the figure below. For the expected and actual MBTI types, the behavior of managers converged, meaning that managers behaved as expected. When the MBTI type is opposite, behaviors diverged, meaning that opposite MBTI types had dissimilar behaviors. Thus the study shows there are observable differences between personality types.

McPeek et al. (2013) administered the Form M and the Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children ® (MMTIC ® ; Murphy & Meisgeier, 2008) assessments to a sample of 123 teenagers. As part of the feedback session, the participants were given two type descriptions composed of 12 adjectives and short phrases drawn from the 16 type descriptions found in Lawrence (1998) and in Myers’ Introduction to Type ® booklet (1998). When the MBTI and MMTIC results disagreed, participants were given two type descriptions that corresponded to the results from the two assessments. When the results of the two assessments agreed (i.e., yielded the same four-letter type), participants received one description that matched their type and one that did not. The mismatched type description was randomly selected to be either a description of the opposite type (i.e., all four preferences were different from the reported type) or a description that differed from the reported type by only one preference. Participants were asked to rate the accuracy of each of the type descriptions they received. The mismatched descriptions were rated much less descriptive than the matched ones, even when the mismatch involved only a single preference, although the difference was much greater when all four preferences differed from the reported type.

A second study of type and self (Schaubhut, 2013) used a sample of 1,886 individuals who had completed the MBTI Step I assessment and volunteered to take part in a study in which they were asked to read type descriptions taken from the Introduction to Type ® booklet (Myers, 1998) and rate each one on a five-point scale as to how well it described them, from “very little” to “very much.” Participants read a type description that matched their reported type on all four preferences; descriptions that differed by one, two, and three preferences from their reported type; and a description that was the opposite of their reported type (i.e., differed on all four preferences). The data were analyzed separately for each of the 16 types. For all 16 types, the type description that matched the participants’ reported type was rated higher on average than any other description, even the description that differed from their reported type by only one preference. For 13 of the 16 types, the average ratings increased incrementally from the description that was opposite the reported type to the description that matched the reported type. Sixteen analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were run using the number of matches as the independent variable and the ratings as the dependent variable. All the ANOVAs were significant. For 2 types, INTJ and INFJ, the effect sizes were small; for 9 types there was a medium effect size; and for 5 types (ISTJ, ESFP, ENFP, ENTP, and ESTJ) there were large effect sizes.

It is worth noting that these studies directly contradict claims such as “the MBTI assessment is like a horoscope - all the type descriptions are positive, and you could agree with any of them.” Individuals are much more likely to agree with descriptions that match their type and much less likely to agree with descriptions that do not.

Anderson, M. G., Kulas, J., & Thompson, R. C. (2018, July). Observing Predicted Behaviors in Others: A validation study. In J. Hackston (Chair) Assessment for employee development: Alternative approaches to validation. Symposium conducted at the 11th conference of The International Testing Commission, Montreal, Quebec.

Lawrence, G. (1998). Descriptions of the sixteen types . Gainesville, FL: CAPT.

McPeek, R. W., Breiner, J., Murphy, E., Brock, C., Grossman, L., Loeb, M., & Tallevi, L. (2013). Student type, teacher type, and type training: CAPT Type and Education Research 2008-2011 Project Summary. Journal of Psychological Type, 73(3 ), 21-54.

Murphy, E., & Meisgeier, C. (2008). MMTIC ® Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children ® . Gainesville, FL: CAPT.

Myers, I. B., with Kirby, L. K., & Myers, K. D. (1998). Introduction to Type ® (6th ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Schaubhut, N. A. (2013, September). Self-awareness of type. In R. C. Thompson (Chair), Seeing MBTI ® type: Awareness, expression, and cross-cultural evaluations. Presented at Global MBTI ® Users Conference, Shanghai, China.

Is there validity evidence for the MBTI ® assessment based on how it relates to other measures of personality?

If the MBTI assessment is measuring what it is supposed to, then when people take the questionnaire alongside other assessments that measure the same or similar concepts, there should be a high degree of correlation between the two sets of results. Similarly, there should be low or no correlations among measures that are measuring different concepts. These concepts are referred to as convergent and divergent validity, respectively. The global manual and the country/language supplements provide evidence for these forms of validity. Here, the focus is on the relationships of the MBTI assessment with the five-factor model (FFM, or Big Five) approach to personality.

Several studies have examined the relationships among Big Five personality measures (a personality model favored by many academics) and the MBTI assessment (Furnham, Moutafi, & Crump, 2003; McCrae & Costa, 1989). Drawing on these prior studies, Arneson (2016) conducted a meta-analysis 3 of the correlations among the measures of the MBTI assessment (Form G) and the Big Five (NEO-PI-R ™ ). The results of this meta-analysis are summarized in the table below with key relationships highlighted in red. The meta-analysis, and the studies upon which it is based, demonstrate that the

• MBTI Extraversion-Introversion scale is correlated with the Big Five measure of Extraversion
• MBTI Sensing-Intuition scale is correlated with the Big Five measure of Openness
• MBTI Thinking-Feeling scale is correlated with the Big Five measure of Agreeableness
• MBTI Judging-Perceiving scale is correlated with the Big Five measure of Conscientiousness

Similar results were found by Renner, Menschik-Bendele, Alexandrovicz, and Deakin (2014) using a German translation of the MBTI European assessment and NEO-FFI ™ assessment.

The Big Five concept of Neuroticism is not included in the MBTI model. While this concept may be of interest to some personality psychologists, it was not a part of Jung’s or Myers’ theorizing, and is therefore not included in the MBTI assessment. Note, however, that there is a modest correlation between the Big Five measure of Neuroticism and the E-I preference in the direction of Introversion. It is likely that this correlation is largely driven by the confound between measures of psychosocial adjustment and more extreme levels of introversion, along with a bias against introverts in Western culture.

Note: Number of studies = 7, total number of individuals in the combined studies = 2,243. A negative sign indicates correlation toward MBTI preference of E, S, T, or J, and a positive number indicates correlation toward I, N, F, or P.

From Arneson 2016

The various studies of the MBTI assessment and the Big Five suggest that the MBTI preferences are related to conceptually similar Big Five measures. The relationships are sufficiently high to suggest that the two models tap elements of personality that are similar, but not so high as to make the two approaches to personality redundant. Further, the relationships are sufficiently high to indicate that if critics of the MBTI assessment suggest it has no validity, then they may also be obligated to apply the same criticism to the five-factor model.

Other studies have examined the relationships between the MBTI assessment and Big Five approaches and have found that the two can enhance rather than contradict each other. Therefore, studies that show the five-factor model demonstrates incremental validity over the MBTI assessment in predicting performance (e.g. Furnham, Jensen, & Crump, 2008) should be considered alongside situations in which the MBTI assessment has shown incremental validity over the five-factor model or other questionnaires. Examples include:

• Incremental validity of the MBTI assessment over the NEO-PI-R in predicting attributional adjustment (Edwards, Lanning, & Hooke, 2002)
• Incremental validity over the Big Five in predicting trust (Insko et al., 2001)
• Added predictive power when the MBTI assessment was used with the Strong Interest Inventory ® assessment to predict students’ selection of academic majors (Pulver & Kelly, 2008)
• Added unique explanatory variance over and above the NEO-FFI in a confirmatory factor analysis (Renner, Menschik-Bendele, Alexandrovicz, & Deakin, 2014)

Arneson, J. J. (2016). Comparing the MBTI ® assessment and the five-factor model [White paper]. Sunnyvale, CA: CPP, Inc.

Edwards, J. A., Lanning, K., & Hooke, K. (2002). The MBTI and social information processing: An incremental validity study. Journal of Personality Assessment , 78(3), 432-450. doi: 10.1207/S15327752JPA7803_04

* Furnham, A. (1996). The big five versus the big four: The relationship between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and NEO-PI five factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences , 21, 303-307. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(96)00033-5

Furnham, A., Jensen, T., & Crump, J. (2008). Personality, intelligence and assessment centre expert ratings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment , 16(4), 356-365. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00441.x

Furnham, A., Moutafi, J., & Crump, J. (2003). The relationship between the revised NEO-Personality Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Social Behavior and Personality 31(6), 577-584. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2003.31.6.577

Insko, C. A., Schopler, J., Gaertner, L., Wildschut, T., Kozar, R., Pinter, B., Finkel, E. J., Brazil, D. M., Cecil, C. L., & Montoya, M. R. (2001). Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 80(1), 95-111.

* 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), 17-39. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(96)00033-5

* Parker, W. D., & Stumpf, H. (1998). A validation of the five-factor model of personality in academically talented youth across observers and instruments. Personality and Individual Differences , 25, 1005-1025. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00016-6

* Piedmont, R. L., & Chae, J. (1997). Cross-cultural generalizability of the five-factor model of personality: Development and validation of the NEO PI-R for Koreans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 28(2). doi: 10.1177/0022022197282001

Pulver, C.A., & Kelly, K. R. (2008). Incremental validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in predicting academic major selection of undecided university students. Journal of Career Assessment , 16(4), 441-455. doi: 10.1177/1069072708318902

Renner, W., Menschik-Bendele, J. M., Alexandrovicz, R., & Deakin, P. (2014). Does the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator measure anything beyond the NEO Five Factor Inventory? Journal of Psychological Type , 74(1), 1-10.

* Tobacyk, J. J., Livingston, M. M., & Robbins, J. E. (2008). Relationships between Myers-Briggs Type Indicator measure of psychological type and NEO ™ measure of big five personality factors in Polish university students: A preliminary cross-cultural comparison. Psychological Reports , 103, 588-590. doi: 10.2466/pr0.103.2.588-590

* Study included in the meta-analysis

3 We were only able to locate a small number of samples (7) for inclusion in this analysis. Note that two studies reported results separately for males and females, so these gendered samples were added separately to the analysis. The study samples tended to be small and extremely varied with respect to demographics. Other studies identified reported scores separately for the preference scales. This approach to scoring was used prior to the introduction of Form M and European Step I assessments. Such studies were excluded from the analysis. Unfortunately, due to the small number of studies, meaningful moderator analyses could not be conducted. Correlations were weighted based on sample size and then corrected for unreliability in both variables. Since few studies reported sample reliabilities, this correction was based on those reported in the test manuals. Since multiple versions of the NEO ™ assessment were included, an average of the manual reliabilities served as the attenuation correction. The table shows the results of these analyses.

Is there validity evidence based on the measurement structure of the MBTI ® assessment?

Bess, Harvey, and Swartz (2003) conducted a hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis of the 94 items used on MBTI ® Form G. Their results clearly supported the view that the 94-item pool for Form G was dominated by the predicted four-factor structure. In discussing their results, they wrote:

The fact that this a priori factor structure was yet again recovered via exploratory means and found to fit reasonably well using confirmatory analysis, in a sample of “real world” managerial employees that is arguably quite different from the college student based samples that have been seen in earlier confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses, speaks directly to the robustness and generalizability of past claims of support for the predicted 4-factor MBTI latent structure.... The criticisms [of the MBTI assessment] that have been offered by its vocal detractors (e.g., Pittenger, 1993) have led some psychologists to view it as being of lower psychometric quality in comparison to more recent tests based on the FFM (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1987). In contrast, [our findings]—especially when viewed in the context of previous confirmatory factor analytic research on the MBTI, and meta-analytic reviews of MBTI reliability and validity studies (Harvey, 1996)—provide a very firm empirical foundation that can be used to justify the use of the MBTI as a personality assessment device in applied organizational settings. (p. 4)

Bess, T. L., Harvey, R. J., & Swartz, D. (2003). Hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator . Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.

Harvey, R. J. (1996). Reliability and validity. In A. L. Hammer (Ed.), MBTI ® applications: A decade of research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® (pp. 5-29). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 52(1), 81-90. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81

Pittenger, D. J. (1993). Measuring the MBTI… And coming up short. Journal of Career Planning and Placement , 54(1), 48-52.

Is there evidence of predictive validity of the MBTI ® assessment?

For a psychometric tool used in development, arguably the most importance evidence of predictive validity is whether it has demonstrated effective outcomes (Rogers, 2017; Scoular, 2011). One area where the MBTI ® assessment has been used to demonstrate such validation is in the area of careers and occupational choice. When occupational tasks are compatible with the preferences or inclinations of the individual performing them, higher satisfaction is likely to result than when the fit is less congruent (Dawis, 1996). Hammer (1996) summarized studies of job satisfaction in the MBTI ® Career Report Manual (Hammer & Macdaid, 1992) and included a synopsis of more than a dozen studies on the subject. Among the occupations studied for job satisfaction were bank officers/financial managers, computer professionals, dietitians, elementary and secondary school teachers, intensive care nurses, healthcare managers and executives, lawyers, managers, occupational therapists, parish pastors, pediatric nurse practitioners, pharmacists, marketing teachers, secretaries, teachers, and vocational education administrators. Hammer pointed out some of the difficulties in conducting research on satisfaction, such as a restriction in the range of data on job satisfaction (most people tend to say they are satisfied with their job). He summarized the literature as follows:

When satisfaction is measured globally, its relationship with psychological type is equivocal. However, among those studies that do show a relationship, a pattern seems to emerge. Overall, Introverts and Perceiving types seem less satisfied with their work than do Extraverts and Judging types, although the one study that examined men and women separately suggested that overall results may be misleading if gender is not accounted for. When specific facets or aspects of job satisfaction are employed instead of global measures, the picture becomes clearer. For example, the T-F scale seems to be important in identifying satisfaction with co-workers. Type theory would predict that different types will have different criteria for satisfaction, and this seems to be at least partially supported by the research.

Studies of person-environment fit suggest that those who are dissatisfied in an occupation tend to be those types who are opposite from the modal type in the occupation. A number of studies have also suggested that those types who are less frequent or underrepresented in an occupation tend to be less satisfied or have higher intention to leave the occupation than do those types who are more frequent or whose fit with the occupation is judged to be better. (pp. 40-41)

Subsequent studies support Hammer’s 1996 summary. Hopkins (1997) surveyed 133 members of an association of type practitioners (the sample was highly educated, high in job tenure, middle-aged, and Caucasian) and concluded that people who felt their job matched their personality were more satisfied with their job than were those who did not. SFs were the least satisfied group. In personal telephone calls with some participants, Hopkins (personal communication) also noted that, of the four process pair groups, SFs seemed the most grateful that someone was listening to them and their concerns. In his study, co-workers, the work itself, and supervision were far more important to job satisfaction than were pay and promotions.

Sitzmann, Ployhart, and Kim (2019) went further in investigating the link between personality type, behavior, and occupation. Using a large sample of 178,087 individuals drawn from 315 different occupations, they found that occupations with a high degree of task significance (decisions have a large effect on other people, mistakes have a large impact, there is responsibility for the health and safety of others and for their work outcomes) show less diversity of personality amongst job incumbents and that this in turn predicts longer job tenure. Other researchers have demonstrated links between the MBTI assessment and homogeneity within organizations, as predicted by Schneider’s (1987) attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) theory (Quintero, Segal, King, & Black, 2009; Thomas, Benne, Marr, Thomas, & Hume, 2000; Wallick, Cambre, & McClugage, 2000).

In reviewing the literature on type and turnover, the focus has been on the relationship between job fit and job dissatisfaction. Hammer (1996) reviewed research from the 1985 MBTI ® Manual (Myers & McCaulley, 1985) and other studies and concluded,

Although few studies have been conducted on turnover, those that are available provide some support for the proposition that types working in environments or jobs that are not a good match for their preferences are more likely to leave or to say they are going to leave than are those whose type provides a better fit for either the tasks or the environment. Future studies examining the relationship of type and turnover should heed Garden’s (1989) finding that organizational size may be a mediating variable. (p. 47)

The MBTI assessment has been shown to predict useful outcomes in several other areas, including:

• Improving school grades (McPeek et al., 2013)
• Broadening career goals (Katz, Joiner, & Seaman, 1999)
• Confirming career choice (Leong, Hardin, & Gaylor, 2005)
• Improving communication (Ang, 2002)
• Improving problem-solving style in teams (Sedlock, 2005)
• Delivering return on investment from training and development workshops (Stockill, 2014)
• Designing residential environments (Schroeder, Warner, & Malone, 1980)

Ang, M. (2002). Advanced communication skills: Conflict management and persuasion. Academic Medicine , 77(11), 1166. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200211000-00034

Dawis, R. V. (1996). Vocational psychology, vocational adjustment, and the workforce: Some familiar and unanticipated consequences. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law , 2(2), 229.

Garden, A. M. (1989). Organizational size as a variable in type analysis and employee turnover. Journal of Psychological Type , 17, 3-13.

Hammer, A. L. (Ed.). (1996). MBTI ® applications: A decade of research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® . Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Hammer, A. L. (1996). Career management and counseling. In A. L. Hammer (Ed.), MBTI ® applications: A decade of research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® (pp. 81–104). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Hammer, A. L., & Macdaid, G. P. (1992). MBTI ® career report manual . Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Hopkins, L. G. (1997). Relationships between dimensions of personality and job satisfaction. Proceedings of APT XII, pp. 83-86.

Katz, L., Joyner, J. W., & Seaman, N. (1999). Effects of joint interpretation of the Strong Interest Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in career choice. Journal of Career Assessment , 7(3), 281-297. doi: 10.1177/106907279900700306

Leong, F. T. L., Hardin, E. E., & Gaylor, M. (2005). Career specialty choice: A combined research-intervention project. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 67, 69-86. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2004.07.004

McPeek, R. W., Breiner, J., Murphy, E., Brock, C., Grossman, L., Loeb, M., & Tallevi, L. (2013). Student type, teacher type, and type training: CAPT Type and Education Research 2008-2011 Project Summary. Journal of Psychological Type , 73(3), 21-54.

Quintero, A. J., Segal, L. S., King, T. S., & Black, K. P. (2009). The personal interview: Assessing the potential for personality similarity to bias the selection of orthopaedic residents. Academic Medicine , 84(10), 1364-1372. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b6a9af

Rogers, J. (2017). Coaching with personality type: What works . London, UK: Open University Press.

Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40(3). 437-453. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x

Schroeder, C., Warner, R., & Malone, D. (1980). Effects of assignment in living units by personality types on environmental perceptions and student development. Journal of College Student Personnel , 21(15), 443-449.

Scoular, A. (2011). The Financial Times guide to business coaching . London, UK: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Sedlock, J. R. (2005). An exploratory study of the validity of the MBTI ® team report. Journal of Psychological Type , 65(1), 1-8.

Sitzmann, T., Ployhart, R. E., & Kim, Y. (2019). A process model linking occupational strength to attitudes and behaviors: The explanatory role of occupational personality heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Psychology , 104(2), 247-269.

Stockill, R. (2014). Measuring the impact of training and development workshops: an action orientated approach . Paper presented at the British Psychological Society Division of Occupational Psychology Annual Conference, Brighton.

Thomas, A., Benne, M. R., Marr, M. J., Thomas, E. W., & Hume, R. M. (2000). The evidence remains stable: The MBTI predicts attraction and attrition in an engineering program. Journal of Psychological Type , 55, 35-42.

Wallick, M. M., Cambre, K. M., & McClugage, S. G. (2000). Does the admissions committee select medical students in its own image? Journal of the Louisiana State Medical Society , 152(8), 393-397.

Is there validity evidence for the perceived value of the MBTI ® assessment?

For any assessment used in development, one of the most important questions is, has it demonstrated effective outcomes and made a difference to people? The MBTI assessment has been shown to be useful for a range of real-life personal and organizational outcomes, including, for example, improved grades in students whose teachers had received MBTI-based training (McPeek et al., 2013), 4 better communication (Ang, 2002), greater certainty in career choice (Leong, Hardin, & Gaylor, 2005), and improvements in team functioning (Sedlock, 2005; Stockhill, 2014).

In a study carried out by OPP Ltd, the European distributor of the MBTI assessment (now part of The Myers-Briggs Company), 927 people were asked what benefits they had experienced since they became aware of their MBTI type. Eighty-eight percent agreed or strongly agreed that they capitalized on their strengths more, 73 percent that they felt more confident in their personal life, 72 percent that they felt more confident in their contributions at work, and 65 percent that they made better decisions.

Other research conducted by CPP, Inc. (now part of The Myers-Briggs Company), using a third-party marketing firm to obtain participants investigated the utility of the MBTI assessment with a random sample of 944 adults that matched the age, gender, ethnic, educational, and employment status distribution of the United States. 5 Participants were asked whether they could recall ever completing any personality assessment, and if so, which one they completed. Then, for each assessment the participant recalled completing, she or he was asked how useful the information provided by the assessment was. In this sample, obtained independently of the publisher of the MBTI assessment, 82 percent of people who recalled taking the MBTI assessment reported they found it “useful,” and their responses fell into these categories: useful “to a moderate extent” (42 percent), “to a great extent” (24 percent), or “to a very great extent” (16 percent).

In a second sample of about 1,500 people who had completed the MBTI assessment and who obtained a quality interpretation of the results, rather than just being provided a four-letter type, the participants were asked if they would recommend the MBTI assessment to a friend or colleague. Of these 1,500 people 96 percent indicated they would recommend it. They were further asked about a variety of possible benefits from learning about their MBTI type. As can be seen in the next figure, which summarizes results, most participants reported experiencing several benefits.

5 Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 88 years, with an average of 45.6 years (SD = 16.76), and 49% were men. Race of the participants consisted of 75% Caucasian, 12.5% African American, 5% other, 4% Asian, 2% multiple ethnicities, 0.7% Native American, and 0.3% Native Hawaiian. Of the participants, 8% had completed some high school, 32% held a high school diploma, 22% had some college (no degree), 9% held an associate’s degree, 19% held a bachelor’s, 7% held a master’s, and 3% held a doctorate or professional degree. The largest industries represented included sales (11%), education (6%), and business/financial operations (5%). Fifty-two percent were employed full-time, 19% part-time, 6% not working for income, 12% retired, 5% enrolled as full-time student, and 6% none of the above.

Is there evidence for the validity of using the MBTI ® assessment to address practical concerns?

Many studies have shown the validity of the MBTI assessment when used for a variety of purposes:

• Career search (Tinsley, Tinsley, & Rushing, 2002)
• Dealing with conflict (Kilmann & Thomas, 1975; Insko et al., 2001; Mills, Robey, & Smith, 1985)
• Decision making (Gallen, 2006; Haley & Stumpf, 1989; Hough & Ogilvie, 2005)
• Interplay of occupational and organizational membership (Bradley-Geist & Landis, 2012)
• Health, well-being, coping, and stress (Allread & Marras, 2006; Buckworth, Granello, & Belmore, 2002; Du Toit, Coetzee, & Visser, 2005; Horacek & Betts, 1998; Short & Grasha, 1995)
• Relationship with occupational interests (Briggs, Copeland, & Haynes, 2007; Fleenor, 1997; Garden, 1997)
• Ratings of transformational leadership (Brown & Reilly, 2009; Hautala, 2005, 2006; Sundstrom & Busby, 1997)
• Use of technology, email, and social media (Bishop-Clark, Dietz-Uhler, & Fisher, 2006-2007; Bowen, Ferguson, Lehmann, & Rohde, 2003; Hackston & Dost, 2016; Weber, Schaubhut, & Thompson, 2011)
• Working in teams (Amato & Amato, 2005; Choi, Deek, & Im, 2008; Glaman, Jones, & Rozelle, 1996; Hammer & Huszczo, 1996; Schullery & Schullery, 2006)

Allread, W. G., & Marras, W. S. (2006). Does personality affect the risk of developing musculoskeletal discomfort? Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 7(2), 149-167. doi: 10.1080/14639220500076504

Amato, C. H., & Amato, L. H. (2005). Enhancing student team effectiveness: Application of Myers-Briggs personality assessment in business courses. Journal of Marketing Education , 27, 41-51. doi: 10.1177/0273475304273350

Bishop-Clark, C., Dietz-Uhler, B., & Fisher, A. (2006-2007). The effects of personality type on web-based distance learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 35(4), 491-506. doi: 10.2190/DG67-4287-PR11-37K6

Bowen, P. L., Ferguson, C. B., Lehmann, T. H., & Rohde, F. H. (2003). Cognitive style factors affecting database query performance. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems , 4, 251-273. doi: 10.1016/j.accinf.2003.05.002

Bradley-Geist, J. C., & Landis, R. S. (2012). Homogeneity of personality in occupations and organizations: A comparison of alternative statistical tests. Journal of Business Psychology , 27, 149-159. doi: 10.100/s10869-011-9233-6

Briggs, S. P., Copeland, S., & Haynes, D. (2007). Accountants for the 21st century, where are you? A five-year study of accounting students’ personality preferences. Critical Perspectives on Accounting , 18, 511-537. doi: 10.1016/j.cpa.2006.01.013

Brown, F. W., & Reilly, M. D. (2009). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and transformational leadership. Journal of Management Development , 28(10), 916-932. doi: 10.1108/02621710911000677

Buckworth, J., Granello, D. H., & Belmore, J. (2002). Incorporating personality assessment into counseling to help students adopt and maintain exercise behaviors. Journal of College Counseling , 5, 15-25. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1882.2002.tb00203.x

Choi, K. S, Deek, F. P., & Im, I. (2008). Exploring the underlying aspects of pair programming: The impact of personality. Information and Software Technology , 50, 1114-1126. doi: 10.1177/0013164402062004004

Du Toit, F., Coetzee, S. C., & Visser, D. (2005). The relation between personality type and sense of coherence among technical workers. South African Business Review , 9(1), 51-65.

Fleenor, J. W. (1997). The relationship between the MBTI ® and measures of personality and performance in management groups. In C. Fitzgerald & L. K. Kirby (Eds.), Developing leaders: Research and applications in psychological type and leadership development (pp. 115-138). Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey.

Gallen, T. (2006). Managers and strategic decisions: Does the cognitive style matter? Journal of Management Development , 25(2), 118-133. doi: 10.1108/02621710610645117

Garden, A. M. (1997). Relationships between MBTI ® profiles, motivation profiles and career paths. Journal of Psychological Type , 41, 3-16.

Glaman, J. M., Jones, A. P., & Rozelle, R. M. (1996). The effects of co-worker similarity on the emergence of affect in work teams. Group & Organizational Management , 21(2), 192-215.

Hackston, J., & Dost, N. (2016). Type and email communication: A research study from OPP . Oxford, UK: OPP Ltd.

Haley, U. C. V., & Stumpf, S. A. (1989). Cognitive trails in strategic decision-making: Linking theories of personalities and cognitions. Journal of Management Studies , 26(5), 477-497. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1989.tb00740.x

Hammer, A. L., & Huszczo, G. E. (1996). Teams. In A. L. Hammer, (Ed.), MBTI ® applications: A decade of research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® (pp. 81-104). Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

Hautala, T. M. (2005). The effects of subordinates' personality on appraisals of transformational leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies , 11(4), 84-92. doi: 10.1177/107179190501100407

Hautala, T. M. (2006). The relationship between personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Management Development , 25(8), 777-794. doi: 10.1108/02621710610684259

Horacek, T. M., & Betts, N. M. (1998). College students’ dietary intake and quality according to their Myers Briggs Type Indicator personality preferences. Journal of Nutrition Education , 30(6), 387-395. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3182(98)70361-9

Hough, J. R., & Ogilvie, D. T. (2005, March). An empirical test of cognitive style and strategic decision outcomes. Journal of Management Studies , 42(2), 417-448. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00502.x

Insko, C. A., Schopler, J., Gaertner, L., Wildschut, T., Kozar, R., Pinter, B., Finkel, E. J., Brazil, D. M., Cecil, C. L., & Montoya, M. R. (2001). Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 80(1), 95-111. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.80.1.95

Kilmann, R. H., & Thomas, K. W. (1975). Interpersonal conflict-handling behavior as reflections of Jungian personality dimensions. Psychological Reports , 37(3), 971-980. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1975.37.3.971

Mills, J., Robey, D., & Smith, L. (1985). Conflict-handling and personality dimensions of project-management personnel. Psychological Reports , 57(3), 1135-1143. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1985.57.3f.1135

Schullery, N. M., & Schullery, S. E. (2006). Are heterogeneous or homogeneous groups more beneficial to students? Journal of Management Education , 30(4), 542-556.

Short, G. J., & Grasha, A. F. (1995). The relationship of MBTI ® dimensions to perceptions of stress and coping strategies in managers. Journal of Psychological Type , 32, 13-22.

Sundstrom, E., & Busby, P. L. (1997). Co-workers’ perceptions of eight MBTI ® leader types: Comparative analysis of managers’ SYMLOG ® profiles. In C. Fitzgerald & L. K. Kirby (Eds.), Developing leaders: Research and applications in psychological type and leadership development (pp. 225-265). Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey.

Tinsley, H. E. A., Tinsley, D. J., & Rushing, J. (2002). Psychological type, decision-making style, and reactions to structured career interventions. Journal of Career Assessment , 10(2), 258-280. doi: 10.1177/1069072702010002008

Weber, A. J., Schaubhut, N. A., & Thompson, R. (2011). The influence of personality on social media usage . CPP research paper, Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.

You can find the ethical use guidelines here . For further information visit the Myers & Briggs Foundation .

To find out more, read the MBTI manual or supplements , attend a training or certification session , watch the TED talk from Jean Kummerow or Michael Segovia or webinar , check out a sample report on a topic of interest to you or order an Introduction to Myers-Briggs ® Type booklet.

Also check out the Myers & Briggs Foundation website and the library page at the Center for Applications of Psychological Type , which maintains an extensive database of MBTI research.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Myers-Briggs, MBTI, Step I, Step II, Introduction to Type, the MBTI logo, and The Myers-Briggs Company logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Myers & Briggs Foundation in the United States and other countries. California Psychological Inventory, CPI, CPI 260, and Strong Interest Inventory are trademarks or registered trademarks of The Myers-Briggs Company in the United States and other countries.

Benchmarks, Center for Creative Leadership, and CCL are registered trademarks owned by the Center for Creative Leadership.

Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children and MMTIC are trademarks or registered trademarks of the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc., in the United States and other countries.

The NEO Personality Inventory, NEO, NEO-PI, and NEO™ Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) are trademarks of Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

SYMLOG is a trademark registered to SYMLOG Consulting Group.

Republican state school board nominee refuses debate, accuses organizers of ‘bullying’

In an email to the utah education debate coalition, kris kimball claimed organizers tried to “bully” her into participating. coalition members say that’s not true..

(Rick Egan | The Salt Lake Tribune) Kris Kimball speaks at the Utah State Capitol on Monday, December 19, 2016. Kimball, the Utah Republican Party’s nominee for State School Board District 7, refused to participate in a debate last week, calling her GOP primary opponent an “illegitimate” Republican candidate and claiming that organizers tried to “bully” her into participating.

The Utah Republican Party’s nominee for the District 7 state school board seat refused to participate in a debate hosted by Utah Education Debate Coalition last week, calling her GOP primary opponent incumbent Molly Hart an “illegitimate” Republican candidate and claiming that organizers tried to “bully” her into participating.

“I refuse to be coerced or manipulated into participating in an event that goes against the principles of ethics and integrity,” Utah State Board of Education candidate Kris Kimball wrote in an email May 23, hours before the debate was scheduled to begin.

The email was addressed to Royce Van Tassell of the Utah Education Debate Coalition. Van Tassell also emceed the debate that evening, which was livestreamed through the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics.

Explaining her stance, Kimball wrote in the email that she conveyed her decision not to participate in the planned debate to organizers “on many occasions.”

“Despite these clear and unequivocal refusals of your invitation, my boundaries have been ignored, disregarded and dismissed,” she wrote. “It is disconcerting to witness such blatant disregard for my autonomy as a candidate, a woman and as a representative of the Republican Party.”

She concluded the email by calling on organizers to “cease and desist any further gaslighting of the public and refrain from your continued attempts to bully me into participating.”

Debate organizers said they were “surprised” at Kimball’s email and refuted her claims about being bullied.

“We have been respectful, as we are with all [candidates],” said Van Tassell. “Inviting [them], indicating that, ‘These are the plans; these are the rules — we hope you will participate.’ ... I don’t think any of us would have understood our interactions the way Kris Kimball described them.”

Kimball did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Salt Lake Tribune.

‘We wanted to keep her apprised’

The Utah Education Debate Coalition has sponsored debates between Utah State Board of Education candidates since 2016. Participating organizations include the Sutherland Institute, United Way of Salt Lake, the Utah Parent Teacher Association, the Hinckley Institute of Politics, and the Utah Association of Public Charter Schools.

Kimball’s “cease and desist” message came days after Van Tassell had sent her and Hart an email on May 20 expressing gratitude for their candidacy and explaining details about the planned primary debate.

“I and the members of the Utah Education Debate Coalition have spoken to both of you about the debate series we sponsor every election season,” Van Tassell wrote. “Our only goal is to provide a platform for the public and State Board candidates to talk with each other.”

Van Tassell said that Kimball had declined the invitation prior to his May 20 email, but he had sent the message as a courtesy to keep her informed.

“We wanted to keep her apprised,” Van Tassell said. “We had said from the beginning, ‘We’re going to do this, regardless.’”

That was the last correspondence Van Tassell sent to Kimball before receiving her message on May 23 accusing organizers of “bullying and manipulation.”

Van Tassell said he’d consulted with other members of the coalition who had interacted with Kimball, including Elizabeth Garbe with United Way of Salt Lake City (whom Kimball had mistakenly referred to in her email as “Elizabeth Kirby”) and Stan Rasmussen with the Sutherland Institute. Both affirmed that they had maintained a “respectful” demeanor in all communications, he said.

Jason Perry, director of the Hinckley Institute, said he was unaware of Kimball’s email until The Salt Lake Tribune inquired. Perry said that while the Hinckley Institute is part of the debate coalition, its primary responsibility is to provide a streaming platform for the debates.

However, Nick Cockrell, managing director of community engagement for the Hinckley Institute, told The Tribune that he had been cc’d on all communications between the debate coalition and candidates. He said none of the emails contained any “bullying.”

“That’s not at all what those emails were,” Cockrell said. “They were details about upcoming debates.”

Hart accuses Kimball of ‘political gamesmanship’

In her email, Kimball accused incumbent Hart of being an illegitimate GOP primary candidate because Kimball, not Hart, secured the Utah Republican Party’s nomination for the District 7 school board seat, she argued, giving Kimball “credibility and authenticity.”

“To suggest otherwise is to diminish the significance of our republican processes and the values we hold dear,” Kimball wrote.

While Kimball clinched the state GOP’s Republican nomination, Hart gathered enough signatures to make it on the Republican primary ballot. In an interview with The Tribune, Hart accused Kimball of “political gamesmanship.”

“It just doesn’t belong in education,” Hart said. “This has nothing to do with student’s education, and the future of education in Utah. It is so not pertinent to the topic at hand. And that’s what makes me a little disappointed.”

Hart said she had been looking forward to debating Kimball.

“I’ve been on the board and have had to make hard decisions and hard votes,” Hart said. “So, I was looking forward to the opportunity to talk about those things.”

Hart added that she collected over 2,000 signatures to secure her spot on the primary ballot, a process that is legal under state law.

“I just think it’s important that everybody, as many people as possible, participate in the primary,” Hart said. “And by limiting the information to the convention-goers, it just goes against what I stand for.”

The Utah Republican Party did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Kimball’s allegations against the Utah Education Debate Coalition.

In a May 2 news release about the party’s 2024 nominating convention, Utah GOP chair Robert Axson said the party believes “Utah Republican voters have a duty to continue learning about candidates” and invited “voters to get to know the candidates.”

Kimball has previously run for public office twice, vying for a seat in the Utah House of Representatives in 2010 and 2016, but she was unsuccessful on both occasions.

Whoever wins the GOP primary next month for the District 7 state school board seat will face off against Democrat John Arthur in November’s general election.

Donate to the newsroom now. The Salt Lake Tribune, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible

RELATED STORIES

Natalie cline to lose utah school board seat after salt lake gop nominates amanda bollinger, phil lyman’s gop lieutenant governor pick not eligible to run in utah, elections office rules, celeste maloy challenged by gop opponent to 13 primary debates — just as she dared republicans last year, innovative learning at utah state: how the asc is shaping future tech leaders, looking for balance in utah’s redrock country: the motorized vehicle dilemma, mike lee won’t ‘aid and abet’ white house after new yorkers convict donald trump of felonies, west jordan officers not at fault in od death of handcuffed man, prosecutors say, bagley cartoon: trump toadies, featured local savings.

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Slovenščina
• Science & Tech
• Russian Kitchen

The bourgeois charm of Siberia's oil capital

If you’re driving west across Russia from the Pacific Ocean, the first thing that you notice upon entering the city of Tyumen is the McDonalds. Tyumen has long been one of the only Siberian cities with a McDonalds restaurant. Although the fast-food giant has plans to open locations in nearby Novosibirsk and other regional cities, Siberia still contains one of the longest distances on earth outside of Africa where you can remain on a major highway and not see a McDonalds. Until you reach Tyumen, that is.

A stop in Tyumen provides an interesting glimpse into how modern Russia’s oil revenue has influenced Siberia’s oldest Russian city. Tyumen is a great stopover point on the Trans-Siberian Railroad and a short ride from Yekaterinburg (five hours) or Tobolsk (four hours).

In the 16th century, Russia started expanding eastward into parts of Central Asia ruled by the Tatars, an Islamic people who still live thoughout Russia. A band of Cossacks wrested control of Tyumen from the Tatars in 1580. Six years later, Russians established a fort in Tyumen on the Tura River.

For centuries, Tyumen vied with the nearby city of Tobolsk—once the official capital of Siberia—for the prestige of the region’s most important city. Tyumen won in the end, when the Trans-Siberian Railroad bypassed Tobolsk and was routed through this now oil-rich city.

Tyumen played an important role in Russian history during times of war. At the beginning of the Russian Civil War, the Bolshevik Red Army slowly pushed the White Army, commanded by Admiral Alexander Kolchak, into Siberia. Kolchak and his anti-Bolshevik forces holed up in Tyumen until the Red Army overtook them in January of 1918.

During the Second World War, many Russian industries were moved away from the front to Siberian cities. Tyumen had already become an industrial capital during the early Soviet era, and the city became an ideal spot to relocate Russia’s western factories. As Nazi forces approached Russia in 1941, the embalmed body of Vladimir Lenin was sent from the Lenin Mausoleum in Moscow’s Red Square by train to the Tyumen State Agricultural Academy for safekeeping. In 1945, Lenin’s body was shipped back to Moscow.

Some of the factories relocated to Tyumen during wartime remained in the city. The discovery of oil in the region catapulted Siberia’s oldest Russian settlement to further prosperity. Modern Tyumen is a vibrant city with a number of universities and a revamped center well-suited for exploration by foot.

Start your walking tour around central Tyumen on Ulitsa Respubliki. The city’s main drag has fine pedestrian walkways and leads wanderers past an impressive collection of tsarist-era buildings that recall Tyumen’s importance in the beginning of Russia’s colonization of Siberia.

From the southeastern end of Ul. Respubliki, head north toward the Tura River and take a brief side trip onto Ul. Ordzhonikidze to visit the Fine Arts Museum (47 Ul. Ordzhonikidze) which houses exhibits of classical Russian and Soviet art as well as traditional bone carving and works produced by the native people who live in the far north of Tyumen Oblast.

Back on Ul. Respubliki, you’ll soon see the city’s requisite Lenin statue by the local government buildings. A block away, opposite Lenin, is Tyumen’s city park, a delightful place to walk or hop on one of its amusement rides.

Most Siberian cities developed under the watchful eyes of the atheist Soviet regime and churches are usually not Siberia’s strongpoint. But this isn’t true in four-centuries-old Tyumen. Strolling up Ul. Respubliki, you’ll soon come to the Church of the Saviour (41 Ul. Lenina) and the Znamensky Cathedral (13 Ul. Semakova). Each of these stunning Baroque-influenced churches are located right off Ul. Respubliki and were built in the late 18th century.

Tyumen is also famous for its historic wooden houses. Heading further up Ul. Respubliki, stop to wander around some of the side streets and snap photos of these ornate wooden structures which provide a glimpse back in time. Near the Tura River, you’ll pass a civil war monument in remembrance of the Tyumen natives who died fighting the White Army and the Tyumen State Agricultural Academy (7 Ul. Respubliki) an impressive building in its own right where Lenin was stored during the Second World War.

Near the end of Ul. Respubliki, take a walk over the Tura River on the Lover’s Bridge, a suspension bridge open to foot traffic only that has become one of Tyumen’s iconic sights. The other side of the river is a great place to see more of Tyumen’s signature wooden houses as well as take in the churches scattered around the city center.

Save the best for last and visit the Trinity Monastery (10 Ul. Kommunisticheskaya) at the end of Ul. Respubliki. A white wall surrounds the monastery, giving it the appearance of a mini-kremlin, and the golden onion domes of the 18th century churches within should not be missed.

Although navigating Tyumen is straightforward enough, the St. Petersburg-based travel company OSTWEST can arrange a city tour in Tyumen and the surrounding countryside.

All rights reserved by Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

to our newsletter!

Get the week's best stories straight to your inbox

This website uses cookies. Click here to find out more.

myers briggs tip göstergesi a.k.a MBTI 101 içedönükler ve dışadönükler duyusallar ve sezgiseller düşünseller ve duygusallar yargısallar ve algısallar

Myers-Briggs ~ MBTI 101 radiks podcast

• APR 29, 2024

bölüm 8: yargısal & algısal ÜNLÜLER

ve karşınızda celebrity dünyasının yargısalları ve algısalları!.. kaynaklar: https://www.personality-database.com https://www.milliyet.com.tr https://www.goodreads.com bölüm sonu sözü 1: https://www.pinterest.com'dan alınmıştır (pinterest'in yönlendirdiği site: http://nlpglossary.blogspot.com) bölüm sonu sözü 2: https://www.goodreads.com - c.g. jung quotes Bağlantı kopukluklarından ötürü özür diler, bizi dinlediğiniz için çok teşekkür ederiz! 3

• APR 25, 2024

bölüm 7: yargısallar ve algısallar

myers-briggs kişilik tipi göstergesinin (MBTI) dördüncü -son- çifti olan yargısallar ve algısallar (judgers vs. perceivers) ile tanışıyoruz. kaynaklar: https://www.choosingtherapy.com/judging-vs-perceiving/ https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/judging-vs-perceiving https://www.wikihow.com https://personalityunleashed.com/judging-vs-perceiving/ gifts differing: understanding personality type - isabel briggs myers & peter b. myers (kitap) my true type: clarifying your personality type, preferences & functions - dr. a.j. drenth (kitap)

• APR 21, 2024

bölüm 6: düşünsel & duygusal ÜNLÜLER

ve karşınızda celebrity dünyasının düşünselleri ve duygusalları!.. kaynaklar: https://www.personality-database.com https://www.freud.org.uk/ bölüm sonu sözü 1: https://allauthor.com/page/lukeedison/ bölüm sonu sözü 2: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/john_churton_collins_377092

• APR 17, 2024

bölüm 5: düşünseller ve duygusallar

myers-briggs kişilik tipi göstergesinin (MBTI) üçüncü çifti olan düşünseller ve duygusallar (thinkers vs. feelers) ile tanışıyoruz. kaynaklar: https://www.rehberlikakademisi.com/ https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/thinking-vs-feeling https://extension.unr.edu/publication.aspx?PubID=4873 https://www.truity.com/ https://www.wikihow.com https://personalityunleashed.com/ gifts differing: understanding personality type - isabel briggs myers & peter b. myers (kitap)

• APR 13, 2024

bölüm 4: duyusal & sezgisel ÜNLÜLER

ve karşınızda celebrity dünyasının duyusalları ve sezgiselleri!.. kaynaklar: https://www.personality-database.com bölüm sonu sözü: sabrina matheny https://smokymountainnews.com'dan alınmıştır.

• APR 9, 2024

bölüm 3: duyusallar ve sezgiseller

myers-briggs kişilik tipi göstergesinin (MBTI) ikinci çifti olan duyusallar ve sezgiseller (sensors vs. intuitives) ile tanışıyoruz. kaynaklar: https://www.wikihow.com https://personalityunleashed.com/ gifts differing: understanding personality type - isabel briggs myers & peter b. myers (kitap)

• © radiks podcast

Top Podcasts In Education