Personality Cafe banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

107 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

I have been recently doing the big 5 personality tests online and I was wondering would certain big five results correlate with being an INFP (probably yes...).

Here's two as an example that I found that actually give an overall description of your behavior, not just how much you scored on each big five scale:

Personality test - take this free personality test online at

Big Five Personality Test

On the 123 test my personality type can be described as libertine, emotional, unorganized, hesitant and vigilant.

I scored in the big five scale as the following:
Emotional stability: very low (sensitive)
Extroversion: below average (introverted)
Conscientiousness: extremely low (flexible)
Agreeableness: more than average (people oriented)
Openess: extremely high (original)

On the similarminds test I got the following:

Extroversion |||||| 26%
Orderliness |||||||||| 38%
Emotional Stability |||||||||||| 44%
Accommodation |||||||||||||||| 66%
Inquisitiveness |||||||||||||||||| 72%

which would result in the RLUAI personality type or "introverted intellectual", that also sounds a lot like the INFP description on the similarminds site (too negative though in my opinion).

I'd like to hear your results on these tests!

13,780 Posts
I is RLUAI for me as well, has been in my signature for months.

MOTM Dec 2011
8,651 Posts
I always score RLUEI.

1,102 Posts
Global 5: sloan RCUEI; sloan+ r|C|uei; primary Calm; R(64%)C(70%)U(62%)E(58%)I(58%)

Jeez, I sounds like a pretty selfish dunce according to the description.

Edit: Some other key points from the other test.

Your scores for Conscientiousness and Agreeableness can result in an attitude that can best be typified as individualistic. This personality goes with people who others perceive as not always equally tactful or attentive to the situation. This can make these people appear to be uninterested.
Your scores for Extraversion and Agreeableness can result in an attitude that can be typified as strict.Other characteristic of this type of personality can be a preference for being alone and a rational approach towards people. As a result, these people may seem to be stiff or gruff in the perception of specific others.

Your scores for Extraversion and Conscientiousness can result in a personality that can be typified as distracted or hesitant. This is characteristic for people who are the opposite of energetic and decisive. To certain others, people with this type of personality may appear to be uncaring or passive. When in a group, these people will often leave taking the initiative to others.

284 Posts
I always come out as RLUEI with either Reserved or Inquisitive as primary. Even though I'm always close to RLUAI.

|R|luxI or Rlux|I|

So far I have seen most INFP's test as RLUAI.

@Muumi: similarminds is rather negative as a whole. It's not only the INFP profile :')

68 Posts

Extroversion 22%
Orderliness 32%
Emotional Stability 60%
Accommodation 68%
Inquisitiveness 70%

Not that surprised there's slight differences between INFP's though as I imagine this test groups characteristics in slightly different ways.

Premium Member
15,150 Posts
From this thread, 5-30-2009, SLOAN personality typing I came up Global 5: sloan RCUEN; sloan+ |R|cuEx; primary Reserved; R(76%)C(66%)U(60%)E(68%)X(50%)

Global 5 Primary Type Descriptions

outsider, does not fit in most places, does not mind going days without speaking to people, does not like night life and crowds, not self expressive, spends more time in solitary activity than group activity, does not compete for the spotlight, fears getting involved with others, not seductive, dresses to avoid standing out, not impulsive, loner, female introverts tend not to like wearing makeup, does not enjoy leadership, not very sexual, more likely to be nerdy, prefers loose fitting clothing, inhibited, suspicious, tattoo averse, unmotivated, can't do anything when they don't fee good, has trouble speaking when emotional, dislikes compliments, desires security and support, does not like accepting help, more visual than verbal, does not want to be famous, likes science fiction, prefers to stick with things they know, not traditional

not easily hurt, does not need things to add up perfectly, keeps emotions under control, spends more time in solitary activities than group activities, when ending an association - tends to stop all communication without explanation, does not readily admit mistakes, underachiever, not known for generosity, level emotions, does not care what people think, does not fit in, more logical than abstract, does not value tradition, uninterested in leadership, not impressionable, not prone to envy, values money over acceptance, not open about feelings, unproductive, values solitude, not very happy, pessimistic, plain appearance, inflexible, won't do much to avoid rejection, not afraid of doing the wrong thing, underachiever, does not accept people as they are, unable to stand up for self, slow to forgive, not that interested in others, does not care about image, not prone to giving compliments, rarely prepared, quiet around strangers, does not like touchy feely people, avoids responsibilities, avoids difficult reading material, rarely reinvents self, does not like to lead, not prone to worrying

Semi-Correlating Descriptions
Jung/MBTI/Kiersey Global 5


1,648 Posts
I did take the Big 5 when it was on that BBC website but here are the results from this topic's test:



Emotional Stability||||14%



Extroversion results were moderately low which suggests you are reclusive, quiet, unassertive, and private.

Orderliness results were moderately low which suggests you are, at times, overly flexible, random, scattered, and fun seeking at the expense of structure, reliability, work ethic, and long term accomplishment.

Emotional Stability results were very low which suggests you are extremely worrying, insecure, emotional, and anxious.

Accommodation results were moderately low which suggests you are, at times, overly selfish, uncooperative, and difficult at the expense of the well being of others.

Inquisitiveness results were moderately high which suggests you are intellectual, curious, imaginative but possibly not very practical.

2,282 Posts
'Emotional stability'

Your score on this trait is low. You responses are usually relatively alert and involved. However, you may sometimes get overwhelmed by negative feelings, such as fear, shame or anger. It is relatively more difficult for you to get past such feelings. Sometimes your thinking is too negative and you probably worry more than actually necessary. As a result, others may sometimes perceive you to be troubled or tense. The advantage of this is that you will not be easily considered to be cold. Sometimes you devote extra effort to doing things right. As a result, you can be appreciated for your enthusiasm and caring. You prefer being with people who, like you, can be sensitive and empathetic. It is relatively more difficult for you to deal with people who show little enthusiasm or sensitivity. For the record, Emotional stability is the specific scale that fluctuates based on your actual state of mind. Depending on your particular mood or meaningful events in your life, the description given here may apply to a greater or lesser extent.


Your score on this trait is extremely low. With others, your attitude is relatively reserved or formal in comparison with other people. In general, you have little need for external stimuli and you like being alone. This does not mean that you are anti-social, however. You simply do not feel the need to be heard or to voice your opinion unasked. You appear to be reserved and you are less talkative with others. You like to take one thing at a time. You enjoy being alone. You can be typified as a person who tests the waters. Others may consider you to be quiet and closed. You prefer to be with people who, like yourself, like staying in the background. You feel less at ease with people who are highly spontaneous and enthusiastic.

Your score on this trait is below average. You are capable of taking whatever life brings. Sometimes you seem to be careless. You can be relaxed and spontaneous. However, you are sometimes less organized than others as a result. You may tend to avoid obligations. Your actions are sometimes more intuitive: based on feelings rather than on what has been agreed or is considered appropriate. As a result, sometimes you may appear to be somewhat disorganized and therefore easily distracted. Thus sometimes you need to be careful of forgetting things or losing understanding of the big picture. Specific others will sometimes even consider you to be lazy or uncaring. However, this also means that you can be flexible. In general, you prefer to be with people who take life as it comes. You generally have more difficulty dealing with people who are very cautious, exact or somewhat prudent. You do not always feel at ease in a more structured, extremely orderly environment.

Your score on this trait is average. You can be very friendly but also relatively direct. In general, you are interested in people and their motives, but can also be business-like. When you do things, you are guided by rationale on the one hand and the circumstances on the other. This means that you can take the feelings of others into account, but can also be relatively direct and less diplomatic. As a result, people will consider you to be both friendly and direct. In other words: a person who is not afraid to say what needs saying, but who is also able to do so in a friendly manner. You get along well with people who are nice but also capable of standing up for themselves. As long as they are not arrogant or individualistic.


Your score on this trait is average. Part of you is practical. Why make things difficult? But every now and then, with due cause, you will break away from routines or fixed patterns and be open to new ideas, or want to discuss things. You do like challenges and enjoy exchanging views at time. However, finding new ideas and experiences does not always have central focus in your life. In general, you focus on the here and now, but are willing to try something new if necessary or intriguing. Thus your approach is pragmatic. Many people appreciate the fact that you are not constantly wondering whether things can be done differently or better. By nature, you get along well with people who are original without simply refusing to maintain the status quo.

Why there are so many contraditctions? See bolded.

Big Five Test Results

Extroversion||||15%Orderliness||||||||||35%Emotional Stability||||||21%Accommodation||||||||||||||||70%Inquisitiveness||||||||||||||58%
The Big Five is currently the most accepted personality model in the scientific community. The Big Five emerged from the work of multiple independent scientists/researchers starting in the 1950s who using different techniques obtained similar results. Those results were that there are five distinct personality traits/dimensions. Here are your results on each dimension:

Extroversion results were very low which suggests you are extremely reclusive, quiet, unassertive, and secretive.
Orderliness results were moderately low which suggests you are, at times, overly flexible, random, improvised, and fun seeking at the expense of structure, reliability, work ethic, and long term accomplishment.
Emotional Stability results were low which suggests you are very worrying, insecure, emotional, and anxious.
Accommodation results were high which suggests you are overly kind natured, trusting, and helpful at the expense too often of your own individual development (martyr complex).
Inquisitiveness results were moderately high which suggests you are intellectual, curious, imaginative but possibly not very practical.
Your Global5/SLOAN type is RLUAI
Your Primary type is Accommodating
(the hyperlinks above contain more thorough descriptions including preferred/dispreferred careers)

509 Posts
I score |R|CuaI or |R|CueI depending on my mood... but reading the description on similarminds, I identify more with |R|CuaI.

48 Posts
Awhile ago I read a study on the correlation between the Big 5 and MBTI. The only straight up correlation between them was the introversion/extraversion scales; the others had stuff going on like having one MBTI letter tied to two Big 5 scales and whatnot. There *is* a correlation, but for the most part it's not a simple one to one thing.

I don't really like the Big 5 model. First of all, it doesn't recognize the difference between rareness and mental disease. MBTI recognizes that certain types which constitute only 1-2% of the population are normal and should be expected as part of the human spectrum. By contrast, the Big 5 model considers these people to be part of the "lunatic fringe" on the bell curve. Well, one might as well say, "Gold is wrong because it's not a *normal* metal like copper or iron or tin." No, gold may not be common or normal, but it's not wrong either. But because the Big 5 relies on the majority to give it the norm, anything uncommon is pathologized. In fact, to a Big 5 psychologist, lions may be considered the ideal cat (because they are common, hence normal) and tigers may simply be considered failed lions that need to be cured of stripe disease.
Did you know that INTP females are perceived the most negatively of any type, male or female? In fact, when MBTI-ignorant observers were told to describe female INTPs using a set of adjectives, the ones they chose were *all* negative. Psychology heavily reflects these sorts of cultural biases and deems less-liked or less-"normal" types as being wrong or deficient while failing to appeciate their strengths. By contrast, MBTI recognizes that INTPs are healthy and normal, and should not be judged on the basis of our cultural biases.

Then there's the 5th factor that the Big 5 adds, which basically amounts to measuring how healthy or unhealthy a personality is. This is the equivalent to categorizing healthy tigers and diseased tigers as two different species. Psychologists like having this exactitude because it allows them to make very small discriminations between individuals, i.e. "This large cat weighs #, its height is Y inches, its length is X inches, its fur color is dark orange, it has X number of markings." And the Big 5 will allow you do these sorts of measurements on a personality while MBTI does not. But because of its sensitivity to these factors, the Big 5 cannot serve as a classification scheme--it is too exact. One can't have different species for "big tigers" "small tigers" "dark-furred tigers" "tigers who are heavy" "tigers who are light" etc. etc. etc. we don't have twenty species of tigers, each with a different weight, size, fur color and average number of stripes. Rather, we have one species that includes all this variation. This simplified species categorization does not account for all the variation within the tiger species, but it certainly is darned useful. In the same way, MBTI draws logical but artificial lines across the continuum of human personality and demarcates them as INFP, INTP, INFJ, etc, producing a palette of 16 colors to reflect the million color spectrum of humanity. Oversimplified? Certainly. Useful? Very much so! It allows MBTI to enjoy all the benefits of a good classification scheme: it can successfully predict rare and unusual types (the designer of the periodic table was able to predict elements that had not been discovered yet in much the same way), it allows for the distinction of clear supergroups with common features, i.e. Rationals, Idealists, etc. (for example, one can say that tigers and housecats belong to the same group, and that whales and sharks do not despite surface similarities), and it creates a healthy pattern for a personality by which real rather than fictional diseases can be measured (marsupials are not mammals, but they aren't a disease either).
I think that the Big 5 model is responsible for much of the medicalization of the rare types that goes on today.
1 - 11 of 11 Posts