Personality Test
I am an INFJ. Now you know everything you could possibly want to know about me. If I encountered you in the work environment you would know exactly how to engage me to result in a productive and happy work experience. Don’t believe it? Neither do I. In the past, I have taken various personality tests such as the one I just completed, and I have never found them to be of any real value.
The Jung typology test provides approximately seventy statements which require a yes or no answer. The idea that most of these statements can be meaningfully responded to in a yes or no manner seems absurd. I like parties, but I don’t love parties. Parties can be boring, but I don’t hate parties. So, do I say yes or no to the statement that “I enjoy social parties”? Typology tests would seem to be far more reliable if they provided respondents with some sort of sliding scale of responses.
The second problem with the typology test taken was the ambiguity of the statements. For instance, I was given the statement “You consider the scientific approach to be the best”. The scientific approach is the best what? The best way to do science? The best way to deal with obstacles I face on a daily basis? The best Halloween character? No, that is the Great Pumpkin.
So far we have a bunch of ambiguous statements that require a response chosen from a false dichotomy.
The third problem I see with typology tests is the fact that respondents rarely if ever take the test seriously. The test is usually administered as a required part of some sort of team building program, and my guess is that most respondents are thinking of nothing other than getting the test done so that they can get to the lunch break. The result is that respondents respond with an answer that lacks any true self-reflection.
My final problem with typology tests arises in the way the results are used. The last time I took a typology test, the individual administering the test proudly told us how she fired a subordinate for getting lost while transporting several students. With a smile on her face, she told us how she knew this employee would be problematic from the employee’s typology test. It is amazing how problematic people can be when you go into the situation expecting them to be problematic. When used in this way, typology results render an organization of biased individuals.
INFJ means that I am introverted, intuitive, feeling, and judging. (I used to think I was also emotional, forgiving, social, and adventurous.) Of these four categories, the Jung typology test says I am most strongly judging. Unfortunately, the ambiguity of the test persists into the results. The INFJ description does not speak to what the term “judging” is supposed to mean in this context. If the term is to be understood to have negative connotations of one who constantly seeks out the faults of others then I do not believe this term applies to me. If “judging” is understood to mean that the individual rationally reflects on the evidence present and comes to a logical conclusion, then the term describes me perfectly. In fact, I am exercising this type of judging at the moment in my critique of Jung’s typology test.
According to the Jung typology test, my second highest quality is that of being introverted. This is a quality which again has many potentially negative connotations. Fortunately, the description of INFJ elaborated on this portion of the categorization. The description describes an INFJ as someone who is happy working by themselves but also enjoys working with and helping others. This is a fair description of me. I crave both social time and alone time. For me, the worst situation is a lack of either social interactions or individual time.
My third highest quality was intuitive. Again, this is a rather ambiguous term, but the description implies that “intuitive” is meant to describe an ability to read others’ feelings. While I sometimes feel like I pick up on the emotions of others, I would hesitate to say that I am consistently in tune to others’ emotions. If you ask my girlfriend, she would likely tell you that I am rather consistent about being oblivious to emotions. I think I am intuitive in the sense that I have a good grasp on what is reasonable and logical. Being a Philosophy major, this type of intuition was constantly employed.
Did the Jung typology test correctly describe me? Well it did not incorrectly describe me. Neither did it nail my personality on the head. I think the correct answer is that individuals are sufficiently made of enough personality traits and the typology test is sufficiently ambiguous that the test will always come close to describing some aspect of the respondent’s personality. Unfortunately there is no where to mark that answer on my sheet. After all, I can only choose Yes or No.
Comments
How long was your "typing" session? When the Myers-Briggs typing is done correctly and thoroughly, and the participants are given enough time to work through the process, it can be amazingly accurate and useful.
My final problem with typology tests arises in the way the results are used.
Exactly. This is the most dangerous part of any personality testing. Once a person reveals (or has revealed) what her "type" is, it may allow her to behave badly while blaming her type tendencies, or it may allow him to be critical of another with no evidence. The process, when done right, enforces the idea that it should never be used to label others or pigeonhole them.
For the record, when I took the Meyers-Briggs with a university counselor, I scored as an INFJ/P. I believe at the time, it was on the Perceptive side (scoring the lowest), and the counselor interpreted that as meaning I can go either way, which is a fair assertion. Of course, this means the test cannot be interpeted too strictly.
I read a great deal of online articles on introversion this morning. One of them I linked to in my VOX earlier. Simply speaking, extraverts (yes, that is the formal spelling) are stimulated by things that are externally directed-- interacting with people, risk taking, outward expressions of emotion, etc. Introverts are stimulated by things that are more internally directed-- solitude, meditation, reflection, reading, etc. Western society, particularly U.S. society, takes a relatively dim view towards introversion generally, and so it is not as valued and appreciated sometimes.
I took note of the articles that said human personality is a complex and variable thing. Just yesterday talking to my baby sister, we noted that extraversion/introversion is not an all-or-nothing thing; while persons may primarily lean to one or the other, it can be dependent on the context and specific circumstances.
I find value in the Meyers-Briggs, under MY considerations; I freely admit to introversion, so that should be evident. Oh, and I grew up with control freaks-- those attempting to wrest the results to their own agendas, or to force me to their perceptions/worldviews-- I will tune out and avoid, simple as that.
As far as I know, "judging" in this context doesn't mean either of the possibilities you outlined, and it isn't meant to be negative. I'm no expert but I used to find these kinds of things amusing, so I know a little about it, and as far as I know, "judging" (as opposed to "perceptive") means that you would tend to prefer more order in your life and have a set of rules and/or routines that you generally prefer to follow, rather than, say, let the spirit move you or fly by the seat of your pants. Perceptives tend to be less rule and routine oriented and more willing to change their plans and change their minds. For judgers, the order of life tends to come from within; for perceptives, the order of life, such as it is, tends to come from outside. It's just tendencies, and according to the theory, this would interact with your other 3 features in ways that I don't really know much about, so "judging" for you as an INFJ would be something different than judging for an ESTJ. I hope that helps. Again, it's not like I'm some kind of expert, so I may not have this totally right, but I think that's about right.
Congrats on making the Culture page!
We did an exercise in Psych 101 where we took a personality quiz, and were then given a paragraph describing our personality. You than had to rate whether the paragraph was just like you, somewhat like you, or not like you at all. 80% of people chose either just like or somewhat like, and we all got the exact same paragraph. To me, that's the lesson of all kinds of personality tests. Of course, that doesn't stop me from taking them for fun, I just don't take the results all that seriously.
One other thing about these tests: your results can change over time, as your personality develops and grows. Not taking that into account could cause problems over time as well.
I'm going to have to both agree with you but also disagree on some of your points.
The test really only works well when the one taking it is truely seeking out their personal traits. It also takes a person that knows themselves well enough to be honest about who they really are and not write the answers down as to who they think they should be also I agree that people who are made to take the test may come out with false results.
None of these traits are meant to be negative. While the social world and working world seems to think that Extroversion is the best way to be, a "go getter", "charming", "outgoing" then the social world also then belileves that Introversion is the exact opposite and is undesirable, "not motivated" "not happy, lacks drive and energy" and this is not tue. Both Extroversion and Introversion are great, there are less introverts in the world because the world doesn't require as many introverts to be part of it.
If you want to dispell the test that is fine but the first and what I consider the key element of the personality is the I or E .
There have been nuerological test done on the brain to see if Introverts and Extroverts actually do think differently, the result was that introverts have a longer passage through which information gets passed and stored Extroverts shortage passage allows them to "think on their feet". I for one just call extroverts those who do not think before they speak. Am I biased, of course I am because I am an introvert.
I also wanted to point out that everyone who has commented about what there personality is has said they are Introverted. If extroversion in humans is so much greater than why are there so many I's here? You might wonder. Well look at the medium. Introverts love writing, they feel free to have the time to think about what they write, introverts are usually well versed and long winded at times, put an introvert on stage in a debate and they won't have enough time to think about their points and how to pursuade people, but if that forum was a written forum on a computer then they would do far better than the extrovert.
For the longest time I thought there was something wrong with me, I was labled as shy, even though introverts are not shy, shy is a social disorder being introverted is not. Once I found out I was an introvert I started reading books on it, and looking up other introverted people. Turns out nothing was wrong with me I was just introverted.
The test has a good way of trying to catch those who may be lying to themselves after all most introverts are taught they SHOULD be extroverts and that they just need to learn those desirable traits. Some of the questions are very similar and what the test is trying to do is to catch those who want to be what society may deem as right, instead of going with what they really are.
Usually I can spot an introvert, we can smell our own. I think it's easier to ask someone how they recharge their batteries. Are you fueled by social interaction, do you get bored, cabin fever if left alone or in your house for too long? What makes you more anxious being at home alone, or being at a party with friends. After a busy day do you feel refreshed or drained? These can be clues as to what you are.
Being introverted does not mean you are shy, aloof, unhappy hermits its just the way your brain deals with situations and how you react to diferent stimuli.
I am an INFP I have taken the test multiple times at different stages in my life and always had the same results, after being fed up with my then boyfriend now husband who never understood my personality because he was an ESTJ, I made him read some things in a book that I had highlighted, although he will never understand my introversion he came to understand that it is my innate personality and he now gives me the time to be introverted and I also give him the time to be extroverted.
As I learned about my introversion I came across the Yahoo Myers Briggs Temperment sorter groups. The INFP group was very active, so many people with so many Ah Ha moments. I felt at home, finally someone that gets it. I never knew that extroverts didn't have that much if any inner dialog, I never knew just how different we were and why we can never seem to image the others perceptive. I also found it funny that there wasn't one single new post in the ESTJ group. Some curious ESTJers would come in and exclaim, hey I'm an ESTJ. but that was really the extent of it.
Estj people don't really care to find their "inner self" they are too busy doing and talking and being social. To me that seems pretty empty and shallow but to them it's what they do and to them it's the best way to be.
Sometimes I have to remind myself that "that guy giving the speech to us in corporate land" is probably not the overly talkative, pompus asshole with with a breif case full of douche-baggery. He's just a fast talking extrovert who thinks he's right 100 percent of the time. hah.
I think this is by far the strongest personality trait and if you don't believe in the test itself you should get behind this.
The others are secondary to me but it can help if the test is taken correctly to understand yourself and the way your brain works and why your personality is this way and also why other people are the way they are.
My husband is a logical social creature who loves doing things, give him a list and he'll mark it off one by one in order. He feels accomplished when he does things. He likes order, "don't clean my desk" he says, "I have everything where I want it." He likes logical left brained activities and rationalizes everything and gets bored easily when at home for more than a day. He looks at the facts and bases his decisions on them. He is most happy and energized when he is out, doing and conquering. He finishes one task at a time and his feet are planted perfectly on the ground.
Me on the other hand am an abstact righ brained person, who makes my desicions with my gut. If I feel it is right I go with it. Order and lists mean nothing to me and I have a hard tmie abiding by list. I go with what inspires me, I'm in love with the creative processes that go into a project or task but rarely finish one thing before I start another. I liken myself to a "go with the flow" attitude when it comes to things like ideas. If someone puts a dish in the wrong cabinent I look to see if maybe that is a better place for it. I'm open to suggestions nothing is set in stone. I need a lot of alone time to recharge and get inspired, I'm not good at thinking on my feet but I love to write how I feel or what I think later after I digest the information. I'm very sensitive to people and I wear my heart on my sleeve. My head is always in the clouds.
This sort of gives you and idea between the differences ESTJ and INFP
but I also love these jokes.
How many extroverts does it take to change a lightbulb?
One. They hold the bulb up to the socket and the world revolves around them
How many INFP's does it take to change a lightbulb?
none, because it's not burnt out, it's exploring it's shadowy side.
Like I've said I think this test can be a great asset to those who really want to know there innate personality. I for one think that is something you are born with and can not change. It's part of your plumbing.
I wish I had know when I was in highschool, Every summer I'd say to myself "I'm going to be different this year in school, I'm going to be outgoing and popular, people are going to know me, I am going to be a social butterfly!"
.. but year after year without fail I was still the same old introvert without a clue.
I took the test in an online form. I would be curious to know the following from someone who has taken it in a different setting:
How long did you spend on the test?
Did you feel the questions were worded in a less ambiguous manner?
What sort of preface did the those administering the test provide?
With the online form of the test, I was able to knock out the 70 or so questions in under 15 minutes. Did I think about the answers as much as I should have? Maybe not. Again, I think such apathy on the part of those taking the test contributes to the test's failure.
I would imagine the biggest benefit of taking the test in a controlled setting would be the face to face explanation that could be provided after the test. Having someone available to explain the results and answer questions about the results would probably do wonders for eliminating unintended stigmas attached to such types as introverts.