Personality Typing-reccomended resolution 1024x768
As we look at the people around us, we observe the great variety of personality traits among them. As examples, some people are very outgoing and fun-oriented, while others are more quiet and introspective; some people are highly analytical in decision making, while others use their feelings for deciding; some people feel more comfortable living a planned, orderly life, while others prefer to live spontaneously. Though the number of observed traits appears finite (albeit large), the subtle and unique interaction between these traits confidently leads us to the conclusion that every individual on this planet is gifted with a truly unique personality.
Despite this conclusion, the question naturally arises: "Can we model, at least approximately, human personality?" A related and even more important question is: "If we can model human personality, does such a model have any value or interest?"
To help answer these questions, let me cite an analogy. Physical scientists are continually striving to improve the models (better known as theories) of nature. It is by these theories, and only by these theories, that human beings can attempt to understand and make sense of what is observed. For example, physicists have developed several theories (e.g., relativity, quantum mechanics, electromagnetics, etc.) to explain particular phenomena. Because a common link between all these theories has not yet been found despite great effort (the elusive, almost quixotic Grand Unified Theory), many physicists consider it probable these individual theories are incomplete, being subsets of more complete, but as of yet undiscovered, theories that can be linked together. Yet, despite their probable incompleteness, physicists and engineers confidently apply these theories to real world problems, with usually great success.
Though the above analogy of modeling the physical world does not exactly apply to personality modeling, some of the underlying principles do hold true. Many personality models have been developed from the beginning of recorded history, each of them having their strengths and shortcomings. No "true" model of human personality has yet been developed, and it can be argued that human personality is just too complex to ever be able to model perfectly. However, many of the models that have been developed do seem to approximately and reasonably model human personality, or at least some aspects of it, to an accuracy that makes them useful and predictive. This last point, admittedly, is one of current debate by psychologists and non-psychologist alike (e.g., what is "reasonable accuracy?"; what is "predictive"?; what is "useful"?).
So, assuming that we can model human personality with "reasonable accuracy", what value would such a model have? I can see two values: 1) giving an individual a better understanding of themselves and thus helping them to personally grow and to build self-esteem, and 2) helping an individual understand and thus relate more effectively with others -- not only for their personal relationships such as with a spouse and with close friends, but for other relationships as well, such as coworkers.
Some people have personal, even emotional, difficulties with any kind of personality modeling. As an example, one common and recurring argument used against personality modeling is that it "puts people in boxes" (this exact phrase, or a variant of it, is heard quite often). On the surface this argument sounds good, but as you explore that argument further, you generally find that it is really a statement expressing either a fear that personality modeling can be misused or abused (which it can, just like everything else in the world), or, a feeling that personality modeling somehow devalues people, or, for a few people, their ignorance combined with a neurotic level of skepticism.
I would counter these underlying reasons by saying that personality models do not put people in boxes, people put people in boxes -- all developers of modern personality models do acknowledge the imperfections and limitations of their models and associated metrics, and reasonably intelligent and responsible users heed these warnings. Also, personality models do not devalue people. In reality they show us the diversity of normal human personality which helps us to better understand and appreciate others who are different from ourselves, and to understand and accept people is to value them. This in itself is sufficient reason to develop practical models of normal human personality that can be used by all people, not only by psychologists.
INTRODUCTION TO PERSONALITY TYPING
As stated in the General Introduction, many personality models have been developed. The personality model/system presented in this Summary is the most well-known one in the world-at-large, generically called "Personality Typing". Personality typing was first developed by Carl Jung in the early 1920's. In its purest form, Jungian personality typing is arguably the most complex view of human nature ever described, and even today it is quite a task to attempt to understand Jung's writings on personality (refer to the Resource Materials on Personality Typing section for references to Jung's works).
Fortunately, in the 1950's, Myers and Briggs resurrected Jungian personality typing, modified it somewhat by adding a fourth scale, simplified its description, and developed a psychometric called the MBTI, the "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" for measuring their revised system of personality typing. The MBTI test and associated model has become so famous that today many people refer to personality typing as the "MBTI", but in a rigorous sense this is not true; the MBTI is only one test instrument among several for determining personality types, though it is by far the most widely used. Hereafter, unless qualified, 'personality typing' refers to the personality model developed by Myers and Briggs, and adopted by others such as Keirsey and Bates, while the MBTI refers to their test.
In a somewhat oversimplified nutshell, personality typing as defined by Myers and Briggs, and more recently by Keirsey and Bates and others (I will not even attempt to explain Jung's view of personality typing), essentially assumes that much of our personality can be defined by dividing it into four orthogonal (or independent) preference areas or scales: energizing, attending, deciding, and living (defined in detail below). Within each scale we have a preference for one of two opposites that define the scale (also described below). This makes for a total of 16 different combinations (2x2x2x2), each of which defines one particular and unique personality archetype.(special footnote)
It is a curious and interesting observation that personality typing is not used nor studied much within the research/academic psychological and psychiatric communities, at least compared to other models/metrics, nor is it universally accepted. Some reasons for this are that, first of all, personality typing is automatically rejected by some schools of thought on purely philosophical grounds (e.g., cognitive psychology, social psychology); it would not matter to many of the proponents of these schools of thought whether or not personality typing was shown to work in the real world! These people tend to focus more on scientific purity/orthodoxy than on "engineering" practicality. (Both of these "world views" of science and its application are equally valid and important.)
The second reason is more pragmatic: personality typing does not measure mental health since it assumes that all preferences and types are equally normal and healthy. Thus, many therapists who are treating mental illness do not usually find it useful for their purposes since they almost always need to understand the mental health of their patient and so they tend to use other psychometrics, such as the MMPI, which are specifically designed for this purpose. However, this doesn't mean that practicing psychologists totally eschew personality typing -- some do use this system for their patients/clients, particularly for helping people to "find themselves" and for other non-mental health related purposes such as marriage and career counseling. In addition, counselors find that their clients can quickly understand this model, and the many lay-oriented books on the subject of personality typing are a great aid to understanding, thus augmenting the efforts of the counselor.
Outside of the psychological community, however, personality typing (with the MBTI being the most used metric) is by far the most widely-used model of human personality. It is used extensively in career counseling and development, business and education. Its penetration into these areas stems partly from the fact cited above that it does not touch upon the tricky aspect of mental health, which is better dealt with by trained counseling psychologists and psychiatrists.
Personality typing also assumes that all types, preferences, and temperaments are equally valid and good, which fosters an appreciation rather than a mistrust of diversity. This, combined with its "intuitive" credibility, makes personality typing very popular.
SOME SLIGHTLY MORE TECHNICAL COMMENTS
NEXT SECTION
DESCRIPTION OF THE FOUR PREFERENCE SCALES
For each of the following four preference scales which underlie personality typing, every person usually has a preference for one of the two opposite, and equally good, choices (designated by a single letter as shown). This does not mean that they only do one at the exclusion of the other -- most people will go either way depending on circumstances outside their control. But most people usually do have an overall, clear-cut preference for circumstances where they do have control.
How these scales are put together to form a personality "picture" or type for an individual will be dealt with later.(special footnote)
The four preference scales are:
Energizing How a person is energized
Attending What a person pays attention to
Deciding How a person decides
Living Lifestyle a person prefers
Following are the preferences for each of the four scales:
Energizing How a person is energized:
Extroversion (E) Preference for drawing energy from the outside world of people, activities or things.
Introversion (I) Preference for drawing energy from one's internal world of ideas, emotions, or impressions.
(special note)
Attending What a person pays attention to:
Sensing (S) Preference for using the senses to notice what is real.
Intuition (N) Preference for using the imagination to envision what is possible -- to look beyond the five senses. Jung calls this "unconscious perceiving".
Deciding How a person decides:
Thinking (T) Preference for organizing and structuring information to decide in a logical, objective way.
Feeling (F) Preference for organizing and structuring information to decide in a personal, value-oriented way.
Living Life style a person prefers:
Judgment (J) Preference for living a planned and organized life.
Perception (P) Preference for living a spontaneous and flexible life.
(special note)
It is interesting to observe the distribution of these preferences in the actual population. Keirsey and Bates give the following distribution from a 1964 study:
E (75%) I (25%)
S (75%) N (25%)
T (50%) F (50%)
J (50%) P (50%)
It is obvious that these percentages are only approximate, and more recent studies appear to give somewhat different percentages. The general trend, however, of the I and N preferences significantly being in the minority seems to hold true from all studies of general populations.
Once statistics are gathered, it is possible to test the original Myers-Briggs theory that these four preference scales are orthogonal (independent) of one another. Some studies indicate they are indeed orthogonal, while other studies seem to indicate that they are orthogonal with the exception of some observed minor correlation between the S-N and the J-P scales.
There is also a small gender shift in the T-F scale, with approximately 60% of all females being F, and 60% of the males being T.
VOCABULARY FOR EACH PREFERENCE SCALE
There are several approaches to determine a person's preference for each of the four preference scales. One approach is to take a test such as the MBTI or the Keirsey-Bates (which is found in their book Please Understand Me). Another excellent approach is to study the preferred vocabulary for the four scales.
Summarized below are word lists associated with each preference for the four scales. By reading and comparing the two word lists for each scale, and determining which list you better relate and/or prefer, will be a very strong indicator of your preference for that scale. Consider these word lists to comprise a mini-test on personality typing!
The preferred vocabulary lists also further explain what the four scales actually measure or denote.
Extroversion ....................................... Introversion sociability ....................territoriality breadth ........................depth external ...................... internal extensive ......................intensive interaction .....................concentration expenditure of energy ......... conservation of energy interest in external events. . interest in internal reaction multiplicity of relationships. .......limited relationships | Sensing ..... Intuition experience....... hunches past .......... future realistic .... speculative perspiration . inspiration actual ...... possible down-to-earth head-in-clouds utility ........ fantasy fact .......... fiction practicality....... ingenuity sensible ...... imaginative |
THINKING-FEELING PREFERRED VOCABULARY Thinking ................. Feeling objective ................. subjective principles ................... values policy ................ social values laws .............. extenuating circumstances criterion ................... intimacy firmness .................. persuasion impersonal................... personal justice ................... humane categories................... harmony standards ................ good or bad critique ................. appreciate analysis .................. sympathy allocation .................. devotion | JUDGMENT-PERCEPTION PREFERRED VOCABULARY settled ........ pending decided .. gather more data fixed............. flexible plan ahead ... adapt as you go run one's life let life happen closure .... open options decision-making treasurehunting planned ...... open ended completed ....... emergent decisive ....... tentative wrap it up somethingwillturn up urgency there's plenty of time deadline!.... what deadline? get on the road ..wait and see |
(To directly access the summary profiles for each of the 16 types, click here)
The two preferences for each of the four independent scales give 16 unique combinations (2x2x2x2), each combination being designated a personality type. The commonly accepted order for describing each combination is given as:
Energizing : Attending : Deciding : Living
For each of the these 16 types, quite detailed personality profiles have been assembled from many years of application and analysis on large populations of normal people, as well as theoretical analysis of how the preference scales interact with each other. It is VERY important to realize that these personality profile descriptions (which could also be referred to as archetypes) are derived from large populations, and some variation from the archetype is expected to occur from individual to individual. One major source of variation, but not the only one, is the possible presence of mental illness/trauma (most often low self-image), which is not measured nor even considered by the personality typing model. It is plausible that the observable behavior from some forms of mental illness may be strongly influenced by innate personality type (assuming there is such a thing as an innate personality type).
There seems to be widespread agreement among those who study personality typing that these personality profiles closely describe the real personality of MOST people once their four-scale preferences have been determined, either by taking a test such as the MBTI and/or by a qualitative assessment such as studying the previous sections of this Summary and the materials listed in the Resource Materials section at the end of this Summary.
Anecdotal statements such as "the description was so right on the money that I fell out of my chair", and "the profile was so much like me it was eerie!", and similar anecdotes, are commonly expressed by many people after reading their personality profile for the first time. I myself had a similar reaction when I first read the profile for the INFJ personality type; subsequent study of the other 15 types confirmed that indeed the personality described in the INFJ profile fits me much, much better than any of the others.
Though anecdotes do not form proper scientific "proof", nor should they, the sheer number of such anecdotes have alone led many personality typing researchers to privately conclude that personality typing is a sufficiently accurate and useful model of normal human personality.
Following is a very brief overview of the summary profiles for each of the 16 types. Included for each type is the approximate percentage of the general population being that type, using the 1964 Keirsey-Bates percentages and assuming scale orthogonality.
ENFJ "Pedagogue" Outstanding leader of groups. Can be aggressive at "helping others to be the best that they can be".5% of the total population.
ENFP "Journalist" Uncanny sense of the motivations of others. Life is an exciting drama; emotionally warm; empathic.5% of the total population.
ENTJ "Field Marshall" The basic driving force and need is to lead. Tends to seek a position of responsibility and enjoys being an executive.5% of the total population.
ENTP "Inventor" Enthusiastic interest in everything and always sensitive to possibilities. Non-conformist and innovative.5% of the total population.
ESFJ "Seller" Most sociable of all types. Nurturer of harmony. Outstanding host or hostesses.13% of the total population.
ESFP "Entertainer" Radiates attractive warmth and optimism. Smooth, witty, charming, clever. Fun to be with. Very generous.13% of the total population.
ESTJ "Administrator" Much in touch with the external environment. Very responsible. Pillar of strength.13% of the total population.
ESTP "Promoter" Action! When present, things begin to happen. Fiercely competitive. Entrepreneur. Often uses shock effect to get attention. Negotiator par excellence.13% of the total population.
INFJ "Author" Motivated and fulfilled by helping others. Complex personality.1% of the total population.
INFP "Questor" High capacity for caring. Calm and pleasant face to the world. High sense of honor derived from internal values.1% of the total population.
INTJ "Scientist" Most self-confident and pragmatic of all the types. Decisions come very easily. A builder of systems and the applier of theoretical models.1% of the total population.
INTP "Architect" Greatest precision in thought and language. Can readily discern contradictions and inconsistencies. The world exists primarily to be understood.1% of the total population.
ISFJ "Conservator" Desires to be of service and to minister to individual needs -- very loyal.6% of the total population.
ISFP "Artist" Interested in the fine arts. Expression primarily through action or art form. The senses are keener than in other types.5% of the total population.
ISTJ "Trustee" Decisiveness in practical affairs. Guardian of time-honored institutions. Dependable.6% of the total population.
ISTP "Artisan" Impulsive action. Life should be of impulse rather than of purpose. Action is an end to itself. Fearless, craves excitement, master of tools.5% of the total population.
THE FOUR KEIRSEY-BATES TEMPERAMENTS
There are other systems that have been developed to model human personality. The most well-known and oft-used ones are those that divide human personality into four major groups or temperaments. Hippocrates in ancient Greece described the first four temperament system, also known as the "Four Humors": Sanguine, Melancholic, Choleric, and Phlegmatic.
More recently, Keirsey and Bates took the sixteen personality types and categorized them into four recognizable temperaments based on certain combinations of three of the four scales: SJ, SP, NT, and NF. In addition, they named each temperament after the Greek mythological figure who best exemplifies the world-view attributes of that temperament:
NF Apollo "Reach for the Sky"
NT Prometheus "Foresight"
SJ Epimetheus "Hindsight"
SP Dionysius "Let's Drink wine"
The four Keirsey-Bates temperaments appear to represent a person's "Key Focus and/or Fundamental Emotional Need", while the 16 types appear to represent a person's complete, day-to-day personality. The Keirsey-Bates temperaments could also be described as the "bottom line", the "motivation", or the "world-view" of one's personality.
There is some correlation and overlap between the Hippocratic Humors and the Keirsey-Bates temperaments, but the fit is nowhere near perfect. The main differences lie mostly in focus: the Hippocratic Humors focus more on the neurotic aspects seen in some people, and so have an overall negative connotation, while the Keirsey-Bates temperaments focus strictly on normal, healthy personality and so are much more universal and positive.
The four Keirsey-Bates temperaments are summarized as follows: (Note: The lists of focus/needs/beliefs/behaviors for each temperament is an aggregate list, meaning any one person of that temperament will probably exhibit or have only some of these attributes. The other two preference scales play a role in this variation.)
NF SPIRIT/ETHICS (Apollo)
Key Focus/Emotional Need: Search for Self, and/or Peace and Harmony
Beliefs/Behaviors: "How do I become the person I really am?"
Value relationships
Harmony with others -- can be very amiable
Desire to inspire and persuade
Need to live a life of significance
Search for unique identity
Tend to focus on the good in others
Especially abhors "evil", which is anything that violates cherished values
Management Style: Catalyst, Spokesperson, Energizer
Spiritual Style: St. Augustine
NT SCIENCE/THEORETICAL (Prometheus)
Key Focus/Emotional Need: Competence, Knowledge, and/or To Lead and Control
Beliefs/Behaviors: Tries to understand "whys" of the universe (especially if a 'P')
Very demanding of selves and others
Goal setter
A driver (especially if a 'J')
"Should have known" and "Should have done better" (especially if a 'P') (special footnote)
Coolly objective; straightforward and logical in dealing with others
Reluctance to state obvious; little redundancy in communications
Work is for improvement, perfection, proof of skills
Love of knowledge
Management Style: Visionary, Architect of Systems, Builder
Spiritual Style: St. Thomas Aquinas
SJ DUTY/COMMERCE/ECONOMIC (Epimetheus)
Key Focus/Emotional Need: Responsibility, Tradition and/or To Maintain Order
Beliefs/Behaviors: Conserves heritage and tradition, or establishes new ones
Very attentive to details
Belief in hierarchy: subordination and super ordination
Rules: compelled to be bound and obligated
My duty is to serve, give, care, save, share
"Shoulds" & "oughts"; "be prepared" (special footnote)
Fosters and creates social units: clubs, church groups
Management Style: Traditionalist, Stabilizer, Consolidator
Spiritual Style: St. Ignatius
SP JOY/ARTISTRY/AESTHETIC (Dionysus)
Key Focus/Emotional Need: Freedom, Independence, Spontaneity and/or To Have Fun
Beliefs/Behaviors: Impulsive
Can be very expressive (especially if an 'E')
To do what I want, when I want
Action to fulfill my current needs, impulses, not as investment for longer term need
Works dramatically and quickly in crisis
Hungers for action without constraints
Tremendous stamina
Management Style: Troubleshooter, Negotiator, Fire Fighter
Spiritual Style: St. Francis of Assisi
Please Understand Me, An Essay on Temperament Styles, by David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates. Prometheus Nemesis Book Company, P.O. Box 2748, Del Mar, CA 92014, phone (619) 632-1575. One of the more widely known books describing the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It includes a self-test (many do not consider it to be as good as the MBTI test).
Portraits of Temperament, David Keirsey. Prometheus Nemesis Book Company, P.O. Box 2748, Del Mar, CA 92014, phone (619) 632-1575, 1987.
Gifts Differing, Isabel Briggs-Myers (with Peter Myers). Consulting Psychologists Press, 1980 ISBN 0-89106-011-1 (pb) 0-89106-015-4 (hb). The real Please Understand Me, from the horse's mouth (i.e., the daughter in the original mother/daughter pair). A good bridge between Jung and PUM, but no self-test included.
Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator, by Isabel Briggs-Myers and Mary H. McCaulley. Consulting Psychologists Press, 1985.
LifeTypes, by Sandra Hirsh and Jean Kummerow, ISBN 0-446-38823-8 USA and ISBN 0-446-38824-6 Canada. Warner Books, Inc., 1989.
Facing Your Type, George J. Schemel and James A. Borbely. Published by Typofile Press, Church Road, Box 223, Wernersville, PA 19565.
Type Talk, Otto Kroeger and Janet M. Thuesen. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc. (Tilden Press also mentioned.) ISBN 0-385-29828-59. An easy-to-read book that gives profiles for all sixteen personality types.
Type Talk at Work, Otto Kroeger and Janet M. Thuesen. ISBN 0-385-30174-X.
Type Watch, Otto Kroeger and Janet M. Thuesen.
The Leadership Equation, Lee Barr and Norma Barr. Eaking Press, Austin, Texas. 1989.
Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in Organizations, Sandra Krebs Hirsh. Consulting Psychological Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA. 1985.
People Types and Tiger Stripes, Gordon Lawrence. Available from Center for Application of Psychological Type, Gainesville, Florida. ISBN 0-935652-08-6. This book is written primarily to help teachers counsel students, but it applicable for other related uses.
Working Together, Olaf Isachsen and Linda Berens. New World Management Press, Coronado, CA. 1988.
From Image to Likeness -- A Jungian Path in the Gospel Journey, W. Harold Grant, Magdala Thompson and Thomas E. Clarke. Paulist Press, 545 Island Road, Ramsey, NJ 07446. ISBN: 0-8091-2552-8, 1983. This book deals with people's spiritual growth vis-à-vis personality types.
Prayer and Temperament, by Michael and Norrisey. Other bibliographic information not known at present.
Personality Types and Religious Leadership, by Oswald and Kroeger. Available from the Alban Institute, 4125 Nebraska Ave NW, Washington, D.C., 20016. Phone (800) 457-2674. Other bibliographic information not known at present.
Psychological Types, C.G. Jung, H.G. Baynes (translator). Bollingen Series, Princeton U.P., 1971 ISBN 0-691-01813-8 (pb) 0-691-09770-4 (hb). This book (originally written in the early 1920's) inspired Myers and Briggs to create the MBTI test. If you've only read Please Understand Me, then you'll have some trouble making the correlation.
An Introduction To Theories of Personality, B.R. Hergenhahn. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1990.
"An Empirical Investigation of the Jungian Typology", by Leon Gorlow, Norman R. Simonson, and Herbert Krauss. In Theories of Personality, Primary Sources and Research, editors: Gardner Lindzey, Calvin S. Hall, Martin Manosevitz, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, Florida, 1988.
The Measurement of Learning Style: A Critique of Four Assessment Tools, Timothy J. Sewall, University of Wisconsin, 1986.
Dichotomies of the Mind: A System Science Model of the Mind and Personality, Walter Lowen (with Lawrence Miike). John Wiley, 1982 ISBN 0-471-08331-3. A bizarre, but intriguing attempt to "correct" the MBTI's inherently 'F' focus to a 'hyper-T' perspective.
The Type Reporter. Susan Scanlon, Editor. For Subscription information, mail to: 524 North Paxton Street, Alexandria, VA 22304. (703) 823-3730. It comes out roughly 8 times a year, and costs $16 for a year's subscription; I've found it worth the money. Recent topics include "Mistakes When Teaching Type", "Spending and Saving", and "Making Love".
Journal of Psychological Type. The official research journal of the Association for Psychological Type, 9140 Ward Parkway, Kansas City, MO 64114. One of the few outlets for research on the MBTI as most 'real' personality psychologists usually do not publish on it.
Mental Measurements Yearbook (MMY). Has lists of references to articles in peer-reviewed journals in which the MBTI test is used. An excellent review of MBTI is given by Anthony DeVito in the 9th MMY, and two additional reviews in the 10th MMY. The recently published 11th MMY does not include these. The MMY are available in the reference section of most college and university libraries.
Consulting Psychologists Press is the publishing arm of the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT). It distributes the official MBTI tests and official interpretation guides, a thick Atlas of Types which gives empirical type distributions for a wide range of population categories (e.g., policemen, system analysts, high school students), and many studies. CAPT puts out a catalog of available resources. CAPT can be reached at:
CAPT
2815 NW 13th Street
Suite 401
Gainesville, FL 32609
(800) 777-CAPT
Madness and Temperament: A Systems View of Psychopathology and Treatment. An audiocassette package consisting of verbatim, unedited presentations from a seminar at the Holiday Inn, March 4&5, 1989, by Dr. Eve Delunas. Ordering information: InfoMedix, Garden Grove, CA 92643, phone (714) 530-3454.
No comments:
Post a Comment