Random google sources (but I've seen a ton more over the years) http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/5/j5j/papers/HP1997.pdf … https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318986068_THE_RELATIONSHIP_OF_MBTI_AND_STUDENT_GPA_SCORE_IN_BINUS_MANAGEMENT_CLASS_2015 …https://www.businessinsider.com/people-with-these-personality-types-are-happiest-at-work-2015-4 …
-
Show this thread
-
How useful is this? Not incredibly useful - I don't know how much this is 'carving reality at the joints' - but this does mean that if someone has tested as X type, you can actually make some predictions about them that will turn out more right than if you just knew their sign.
1 reply 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
Also: Did you know MBTI types (e.g., ESFP) is just shorthand for a *function stack*? The function stack of ESFP is Se, Fi, Te, Ni. There's a whole complicated world underneath here, which comes from a symmetrical system with pretty basic, stacking rules.
1 reply 1 retweet 18 likesShow this thread -
Here's a description of the individual functions: http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/ And a chart of how they stack for each type: https://66.media.tumblr.com/3480bd5a39e0c95e7b32dc10bc674f7c/tumblr_mylpzhueMf1to7t7yo1_1280.jpg …
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
The theory is something like, everyone has to engage with different parts - the world outside and the world inside. There are different spectrums in how people do this, and people can be more focused outside or inside individually on different spectrums.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
this is like infinitely better than Enneagram, by the way, which as far as I can tell is basically some guy stumbled on some mystic traditions and was like, "I'M GOING TO SHOVE PERSONALITIES INTO THESE ARBITRARILY CHOSEN BINS". I sorta hate Enneagram.
1 reply 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Anyway. So actually understanding Jung's ideas and how they relate to function stacks takes a while to do, and involves a theory of mind that focuses a lot on modes on internal and external sliding scales. This is why advanced MBTI stuff says you can't figure out your type based
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
on internet tests - ideally you'd interview with a trained professional. So - you took an internet test and it 'kinda fits'? But other descriptions fit too? MBTI steelman says you took a shit test and the descriptions are overly simplified, and the reality is a granular system.
1 reply 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
Now, all of this being said, and even though I've read way too fucking much about MBTI, I still think it's got some weaknesses. For example, there's a rule that one type of function must be followed by a certain type of other function (e.g., no "Ni-Fi-Se-Ne"). I don't understand.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Something like this sounds kinda right, but it doesn't always feel *descriptive*. MBTI states that if you're Ti, your next strongest function is Ne - and if you clearly seem to be doing Si stuff instead, MBTI will be like, "Nope, error, you must be misinterpreting"
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.