Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 114 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I want to propose an addition to the traditional four letter MBTI type. While this has been good for what it has been used, we need a more precise tool if we want to use the type as a research tool in other disciplines. Allow me to produce some background as to how I discovered the need for such an improvement.

I started a thread in the Myers Briggs Forum called New Information on Type and Politics. This was an analysis of data which has been available for a couple of decades as a Type table. Within each type are the percentages of that type which responded as being either Democrat, Republican or Independent. This is a 16x3 matrix and presents the data so as to illuminated each type. I was interested in what type could tell me about political affiliation so I rearranged the information into a 3x16 matrix with each political position being at the head of a column and the 16 types arranged beneath, with the type most likely to choose that political party being first on down to the type whose members were least likely to choose that party. The information was exactly the same in both the original type table and my new arrangement of three columns. But because of the new arrangement new information immediately emerged by simple inspection.

Let me mention something about this information. It was collected in the late 90s by the people who put out the MBTI inventory and was taken from a sample of over 3,000 respondents. People familiar with type studies know that the populations involved are rarely more than a few hundred. This sample is an order of magnitude larger than those. The larger the sample the higher the validity of any conclusions drawn from that sample. I think the size of this sample is unique and makes a detailed examination of the data contained important.

Some of this “popup” information by simple inspection is that four of the first five types most likely to choose Democrat are Ns, as type lore has stated from the beginning. These are all NFs. Where are the NTs? They are at the very bottom, in fact they are the four types least likely to be Democrats. In addition four of the first five types to select Independent are also Ns. Simple logic says that the same factor cannot be the most likely and lease likely at the same time, or fail to discriminate between two parties, and be valid. The assertion that the discriminating factor for Democrats is Intuition is simply wrong. The situation among the Democrats can, however, be quickly straighten out, again by simple inspection. EVERY F type is more likely to choose to be Democratic than ANY T type. Here is a clear political dimension. Fs tend to be Liberals and Ts tend not to be, in spades.

Another totally unexpected observation is that the type most likely to choose one party is also the type least likely to choose one of the others! Again, just by simple observation of the rearranged data. Thinking outside the Type Table. This is amazing to me, but granted that it is there, we can see it without any manipulation of the data, no esoteric reasoning or Kabbalistic mathematics for any of this. It all right there for anyone to SEE. To me this means that Independents should have full status with the left and right in political theory. They interlock with the other two, all three in exactly the same way without distinction. Political theory based on just left and right must always be incomplete if not downright wrong. Amazing what emerges from just thinking out side of the box.

Now, finally, we get to why I am suggesting an additional set of Types. For us INTPs, almost half choose Independents at 49% ,Conservatives being 34% (we share T function with them) and only 17% choosing to be Democrats. INTPs are the least likely of all the 16 types to be Democrats. These three groups of INTPs cannot be the same, so we need additional discrimination to make a finer analysis. There is a simple way to do that, what I call 2nd Order Types.

These Types are made by using both capital and lower case letters. If your score in a particular dimension is less the 50% of the total available, then you receive a lower case letter. If it is 50% or greater then you receive a capital letter for that dimension. To distinguish these types from the regular types, a “.2” suffix is added to the new type. I am an INTP.2 in this designation. These types would not require any new theory. The beauty of this is that standard tests can continue to be used. All existing types studies remain as valid as ever as they lack the .2 suffix and are therefore not 2nd Order Types. The new types can be retrofitted to older studies if you have the original test data. The new types give you 256 possibilities over the 16 from current types, a much higher degree of discrimination.

Those INTPs who choose Democrat would probably have lower case t's as T tends to draw you away from that choice. Those INTPs with capital Ns and Ps would probably be Independents. I would love to see the data from the original study recalculated using the 256 types of 2nd Order Types. Empirical answers would replace what can only be speculation using only 16 types. Today's personal computer would make working with this new amount of information easy and displaying it in a variety of different ways would put new information before us from which could emerge just as the information emerged from the original type table when it was reconfigured. A basic spreadsheet would work fine.

I would appreciate any comments on any of this and suggest you read my thread on the Myers Briggs forum if you find any of this interesting. Thank you for your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,549 Posts
I like the idea of added nuance. I think it'd also help if we had our types in bold for those of us who are ass people, and italics for those of us who prefer breasts or pectoral definition.

I also think having an asterisk next to your type if you like plain tea would be very helpful as well, as I could then dismiss those who don't have it as sad degenerates devoid of good sense and save myself whatever time I'd waste trying to engage them in civilized speech.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I like the idea of added nuance. I think it'd also help if we had our types in bold for those of us who are ass people, and italics for those of us who prefer breasts or pectoral definition..
Great! All this to get you to notice me and it worked! I definitely like the direction your are going. What do you think of being able to right-click a person's user name and getting a nude selfie of that person? That would also suggest just how much time they would be worth wasting with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,549 Posts
Great! All this to get you to notice me and it worked! I definitely like the direction your are going. What do you think of being able to right-click a person's user name and getting a nude selfie of that person? That would also suggest just how much time they would be worth wasting with.
Does it really? I think it's kind of useless. Just like an extra dimension for an already constraining "universal" system that only further constrains it based on local politics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,566 Posts
Amazing what emerges from just thinking out side of the box.
Limiting choices to Democrat, Republican, and Independent still seems very much inside the box to me. I don't know whether the original study intended to report people's actual political beliefs or simply which party they'd registered/voted for, but I doubt that these three party choices give us enough information about the former for a finer type distinction to make much of a difference, and the latter, party affiliation, doesn't tell us much about people regardless of how fine the type distinctions are. It just seems like a lot of work for very coarse, uninformative results.

These types would not require any new theory. The beauty of this is that standard tests can continue to be used.
The MBTI results include percentages? I didn't know that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Does it really? I think it's kind of useless.
Admittedly, it is not as relevant as knowing if someone likes tits or ass or plain, Jane tea, but it does let you see them as they are.

QUOTE=Nell;41299633]Just like an extra dimension for an already constraining "universal" system that only further constrains it based on local politics.[/QUOTE]

If you think the extra dimension is based on local politics then you read less well than you think. I think that Type can be more useful than just a replacement for "What's you sign/" What if we knew how the various types performed during experiments like the Stanford Prisoner Study or Milgram's Obedience experiment. We could see that those people with a high chance to run a muck could not be placed in positions to do harm. Maybe Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo would not have occurred. Of course Liberals would raise Hell about stereotyping or profiling people, ideological purity always outweighing the suffering of others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Limiting choices to Democrat, Republican, and Independent still seems very much inside the box to me. I don't know whether the original study intended to report people's actual political beliefs or simply which party they'd registered/voted for, but I doubt that these three party choices give us enough information about the former for a finer type distinction to make much of a difference, and the latter, party affiliation, doesn't tell us much about people regardless of how fine the type distinctions are. It just seems like a lot of work for very coarse, uninformative results.


The MBTI results include percentages? I didn't know that.
The box that I was referring to was the Type Table in which the original data appears. Outside the box refers to being rearranged into three columns, one for each choice of political position. The percentages refer to the percentage of each Type which selected the given political choice. Apparently you don't read too good either, or maybe it's just comprehension. I'm an INTP, I don't care about people. I am trying to get a handle on political behavior and the real, world data in the Type table made some very interesting information available just by inspection when it was rearranged. Even more information could be extracted using 2nd Order Types if the original data could be reworked into the 256 categories they would provide. Apparently you read my post loaded for bear and you found one. I don't think the content of my post got in the way at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,566 Posts
I'm an INTP, I don't care about people. I am trying to get a handle on political behavior and the real, world data
There is no political behavior without people, genius. Can't care about one without caring about the other. Have fun with your stereotyping and thanks for letting me know so soon not to waste any more time on your threads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,350 Posts
Another totally unexpected observation is that the type most likely to choose one party is also the type least likely to choose one of the others! Again, just by simple observation of the rearranged data. Thinking outside the Type Table. This is amazing to me, but granted that it is there, we can see it without any manipulation of the data, no esoteric reasoning or Kabbalistic mathematics for any of this. It all right there for anyone to SEE. To me this means that Independents should have full status with the left and right in political theory. They interlock with the other two, all three in exactly the same way without distinction. Political theory based on just left and right must always be incomplete if not downright wrong. Amazing what emerges from just thinking out side of the box.
Except that, from what I understand, SJs make up the majority of the population and all SJs are least likely to choose independents.

Also, location has a strong influence on what party someone votes for, so the results can be skewed depending on how the test subjects were chosen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,549 Posts
Admittedly, it is not as relevant as knowing if someone likes tits or ass or plain, Jane tea, but it does let you see them as they are.
Nah, you can't tell if someone will be an utter imbecile, boring, incompetent sexually or a red piller by looking at their nudes.
Women usually don't care about dick pics for this reason, full nudes wouldn't be much better.


If you think the extra dimension is based on local politics then you read less well than you think.
Oh my bad, my bad. You certainly wouldn't introduce a dichotomy that involves terms with definitions and nuances that change depending on time and location creating additional confusion and inaccuracies in a system that already has idiosyncratic definitions not everyone actually agrees on to a T. Especially not when the existing system already shows issues with misuse, otherizing and tribalistic thinking due to being based on polarizing, false dichotomies. Not you, you're a smart and bad enough dude who can read good after all and that'd be a dumb idea.

I think that Type can be more useful than just a replacement for "What's you sign/" What if we knew how the various types performed during experiments like the Stanford Prisoner Study or Milgram's Obedience experiment. We could see that those people with a high chance to run a muck could not be placed in positions to do harm.
So, MBTI based screening of officials? And you're suggesting a political element added to it. Am I understanding correctly?

Maybe Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo would not have occurred.
Are you really that confident MBTI can predict behaviour with that level of granularity?

Of course Liberals would raise Hell about stereotyping or profiling people, ideological purity always
Just wondering, why do you think the original creators didn't bother with this trichotomy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
There is no political behavior without people, genius. Can't care about one without caring about the other. Have fun with your stereotyping and thanks for letting me know so soon not to waste any more time on your threads.
Sarcasm is always dangerous. And you are right about my threads, if you can't comprehend them and better that you seem to, then they are a total waste of your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Except that, from what I understand, SJs make up the majority of the population and all SJs are least likely to choose independents.

Also, location has a strong influence on what party someone votes for, so the results can be skewed depending on how the test subjects were chosen.
You will need to explain to me what you are excepting from because I don't understand. I think what you say is true, and the data shows that ESTJs are the least likely to be Independents. I will speculate here in that I think the problem lies that Independents are able to "think" as well as the Republicans (in that they are more interested in the actual world rather than an ideological construct), but they rarely agree with them. Conservatives can just write off Liberals as being angry bundles of feelings unable to think, but not Independents. They don't hate Democrats the way Democrats hate them, because they see Democrats, not as evil, but as having their heads so far up their ass that all they can see is their own heart. It's no wonder Democrats see hate everywhere, they are filled with it. The media and popular culture do everything they can to fan the flames. If their main characteristic is feeling then that would explain why they are so susceptible to emotional programming and react so strongly. Emotion increases motivation. I agree with your second point but this is the data I have and I find it agrees with what I see around me. Of course, I would like better data.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Nah, you can't tell if someone will be an utter imbecile, boring, incompetent sexually or a red piller by looking at their nudes.
Women usually don't care about dick pics for this reason, full nudes wouldn't be much better.[\QUOTE]

Actually I was playing with the phrase "see them as they are" which frequently means getting a correct assessment of their character. As for dick pics I have never had to deal with those, but as I have my own personal dick I can assure you that most males will look at any necked wimin for a least a moment. They like informed choice before refusing (rarely).

Oh my bad, my bad. You certainly wouldn't introduce a dichotomy that involves terms with definitions and nuances that change depending on time and location creating additional confusion and inaccuracies in a system that already has idiosyncratic definitions not everyone actually agrees on to a T. Especially not when the existing system already shows issues with misuse, otherizing and tribalistic thinking due to being based on polarizing, false dichotomies. Not you, you're a smart and bad enough dude who can read good after all and that'd be a dumb idea.[\QUOTE]

WOW! You must be French to come up with that! It's something I would expect in a Lit class at one of the Seven Sisters. Wow! You are good. The scary part is that you may have actually have thought that you were conveying something or other. Please tell me it isn't so. I couldn't come up with a single referent from what i have written.

So, MBTI based screening of officials? And you're suggesting a political element added to it. Am I understanding correctly?[\QUOTE]

I was thinking more of screening guards. We are going to be stuck with the officials. I think the guards had some fun of their own. We think nothing of getting references which are just words, when knowing that, say ENTP are inclined to mistreat prisoners, they they could be excluded from the employment pool as guards, but would be available for other jobs.


Are you really that confident MBTI can predict behaviour with that level of granularity?[\QUOTE]

I don't know. We need to rerun the experiments with a knowledge of the type of each guard. What we find will give us empirical data to make decisions on just how fine tuned we can be. I would rather have factual knowledge on which to base a decision on put people in charge of other people. If it doesn't work out, then so be it.


Just wondering, why do you think the original creators didn't bother with this trichotomy?
I'm not sure what you mean by trichotomy. If you mean the three political groups then they did because the data is available. The table says it was complied from other data so maybe originally it was grouped politically.

This is an aside. The original ladies who came up with the MBTI were looking for an instrument which would allow them to use Jung's type theory in their counseling work. It was not conceived as an instrument for doing general research with other areas. It's like they had an iPad and thought it made a great paper weight. This is not a criticism of them as they did what they set out to do, but just there is so much that can be accomplished through the use of Types. When Pavlov was doing his work on digestion in dogs, he discovered that his results varied widely. He was able to classify his dogs later as being one of four types of nervous system at which point his results became much more predictable. He said that he was unable to interpret the results of any given trial unless he knew the temperament of the dog involved. I think that humans also have predictable variations and the MBTI gives us an approximation. I think most social science experiments are nearly worthless if we do not know the type of the subject involved in each trial. Using type would give much clearer results. I think that the information learned could be used to make things better, but it also could be abused like everything else. I would like to see us make the attempt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Nah, you can't tell if someone will be an utter imbecile, boring, incompetent sexually or a red piller by looking at their nudes.
Women usually don't care about dick pics for this reason, full nudes wouldn't be much better.



Oh my bad, my bad. You certainly wouldn't introduce a dichotomy that involves terms with definitions and nuances that change depending on time and location creating additional confusion and inaccuracies in a system that already has idiosyncratic definitions not everyone actually agrees on to a T. Especially not when the existing system already shows issues with misuse, otherizing and tribalistic thinking due to being based on polarizing, false dichotomies. Not you, you're a smart and bad enough dude who can read good after all and that'd be a dumb idea.


So, MBTI based screening of officials? And you're suggesting a political element added to it. Am I understanding correctly?


Are you really that confident MBTI can predict behaviour with that level of granularity?


Just wondering, why do you think the original creators didn't bother with this trichotomy?
Hi. I need a personal favor. Will you please show me how to make quotes of individual parts of a post, because I have it all screwed up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,549 Posts
[ Stuff you thought was worth mentioning for some reason]
k

WOW! You must be French to come up with that!
Le sigh...

It's something I would expect in a Lit class at one of the Seven Sisters. Wow! You are good. The scary part is that you may have actually have thought that you were conveying something or other. Please tell me it isn't so. I couldn't come up with a single referent from what i have written.
Oh, you just joined. When did you learn about MBTI if you don't mind me asking?
Do you understand cognitive functions? Have you looked at socionics at all?

I was thinking more of screening guards. We are going to be stuck with the officials. I think the guards had some fun of their own. We think nothing of getting references which are just words, when knowing that, say ENTP are inclined to mistreat prisoners, they they could be excluded from the employment pool as guards, but would be available for other jobs.
You do understand that there's nothing in the MBTI framework (i.e. cognitive functions) that specifically accounts for integrity or competency, so your suggestion is as good as screening based on astrological sign, right?

I don't know. We need to rerun the experiments with a knowledge of the type of each guard. What we find will give us empirical data to make decisions on just how fine tuned we can be. I would rather have factual knowledge on which to base a decision on put people in charge of other people. If it doesn't work out, then so be it.
What benefit do you achieve by screening people based on political alignment?

I'm not sure what you mean by trichotomy. If you mean the three political groups then they did because the data is available. The table says it was complied from other data so maybe originally it was grouped politically.

This is an aside. The original ladies who came up with the MBTI were looking for an instrument which would allow them to use Jung's type theory in their counseling work. It was not conceived as an instrument for doing general research with other areas. It's like they had an iPad and thought it made a great paper weight. This is not a criticism of them as they did what they set out to do, but just there is so much that can be accomplished through the use of Types. When Pavlov was doing his work on digestion in dogs, he discovered that his results varied widely. He was able to classify his dogs later as being one of four types of nervous system at which point his results became much more predictable. He said that he was unable to interpret the results of any given trial unless he knew the temperament of the dog involved. I think that humans also have predictable variations and the MBTI gives us an approximation. I think most social science experiments are nearly worthless if we do not know the type of the subject involved in each trial. Using type would give much clearer results. I think that the information learned could be used to make things better, but it also could be abused like everything else. I would like to see us make the attempt.
I am asking why political affiliation was not taken into account when designing MBTI. You're not allowed to talk shit about other people's reading comprehension by the way.

Define "making things better", also define "abuse"

Also, what would happen if you found incidents of gross negligence and misbehaviour from all types in a particular job?

Why wouldn't you use the Big 5, which is actually used in research, instead of MBTI?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,444 Posts
1, Many people's politics shift over their lifetime. It isn't likely because their testing percentages change, though that is possible. It's probably because their accumulated data changes. Situations turn out to be more complicated than analytic types knew when they had less experience, so they change their judgment accordingly. Less analytic people might encounter life events that cause them to oversimplify in a new direction. But in neither case would their percentages change.

2. I have it on good authority ENTPs would only abuse prisoners who wanted to be abused, in which case they'd be delighted to accommodate.

3. @BlueFrog Your quotations are not functioning because you're using backslashes instead of forward slashes. FYI, you're also using aggression where you initially seemed to be wanting to use friendly engagement, and it's being returned in kind.

4. I find making friends on all sides of the aisles to be the best protection against the coming culture war. For example, because I'm a sheltered optimist, I don't have a gun, but @DarkBarlow does, and he's going to let me live in his basement bunker when the dark days arrive. If I ruled him out because he was betting on Trump, I'd be toast. And if he ruled me out, it would be a long end to the age without access to enough smart people to play complicated board games with while the world burns. We're both INTP, and therefore we can talk about politics without getting mad. So why would we need separate labels, and given the aforementioned plans, why would we want them?

So, sorry, there's no shortcut to finding people you can talk to. You just start with a modicum of civility, hold yourself to a high standard of reasonableness, and hope for the best. 98 percent of these encounters will be fruitless, but 100 percent will if you start off as a prig. Even if that helped you find other prigs, prigs dont like other prigs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,332 Posts
Bad idea. Most of the reasons already covered.

The main issue I find in all of this is how you're assuming that T-F lies on a polarity spectrum, like "hot" vs. "cold". Fact is that people who are smarter at logical assessments (T) generally also have higher emotional intelligence (F) than average, and vice versa. The table chart you get after completing a personality test is completely misguiding in that way. Someone who's "60 % T, 40 % F" doesn't necessarily have "less" T than someone who scores 90-10. In fact, it's more likely that the 60-40 wins both contests

So even if statistics somehow had shown correlation between F types and Democrats, it wouldn't have made any sense. Another problem with your assessment is taking statistics and other objective criterias seriously when discussing a psuedo-science like MBTI, which is largely subjective-based if you can take it any serious at all. The "studies" or "statistics" performed by MBTI doesn't even undergo important scientific rules, like the double-blind principle, to be classified as "objective" in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
Bad idea. Most of the reasons already covered.
I'm not sure which idea you are considering bad as this thread was about the usefulness of an extended MBTI, although you would not know it from the replies I have received. I don't think that's the idea you are referring to either.

The main issue I find in all of this is how you're assuming that T-F lies on a polarity spectrum,
It's even worse than that, I also consider E-I, N-S and J-P to be on polarity spectrums. I even consider polarity spectrums to be a basic part of the mechanics of determining MBTI types.

So even if statistics somehow had shown correlation between F types and Democrats, it wouldn't have made any sense.
I didn't use any statistics, I just arranged the various types in a column in order of decreasing choice of Democrat as a political position. I then looked at the result and saw that the first eight types in the list were all F types, and the last eight types were all T.

I looks to me like a certainty that all the F types were more likely to choose to be Democrats than any T type. On the basis of that I find an association of F with Democrats. This may not make any sense to you, but it convinces me.

It seems like you have considerable problems with the MBTI itself, but I don't see what I can do about that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
FYI, you're also using aggression where you initially seemed to be wanting to use friendly engagement, and it's being returned in kind. So, sorry, there's no shortcut to finding people you can talk to. You just start with a modicum of civility, hold yourself to a high standard of reasonableness, and hope for the best. 98 percent of these encounters will be fruitless, but 100 percent will if you start off as a prig. Even if that helped you find other prigs, prigs dont like other prigs.
Thank you very much for this post. I actually means a lot to me, even if you call me a prig. :))

My political position for most of my life was Liberal Democrat, but reading David Horowitz's Radical Son and The Black Book of Communism cured me of that, but I still remain liberal on most social issues except Identity Politics which can lead to very bloody consequences. i own several guns and have on two occasions had to use one to convince unwanted guests that they should not continue to try to enter my house. Fortunately they saw the light of reason and left. As for my getting aggressive, you are right. Unfortunately for me I tend meet what I perceive coming at me. As it's my perception I realize that I can be wrong. i also think I tend back off as soon as I believe the other person has. My sarcasm can be a little nasty, but it is actually the lesser of two evils. Now you have to explain, in detail please why you think I am a prig. Asshole I will accept as I have actually caught myself in that role but immediately stopped. But prig? I believe that you have my best interests at heart so this may be a chance to see myself as others ...
 
1 - 20 of 114 Posts
Top