Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
950 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just wondering, because I could imagine knowing types very well could help you get to know people better and know their functions. I know that some people I meet now I can easily type and I can say certain things to appease them or peeve them :cool: any psychologists on this forum maybe want to chime in?? :)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
I don't think so, if they do use personality tests they usually use the BIG 5.
Pretty much this. They also have much more powerful tools to their assets. MBTI isn't reliable enough (people typing different types depending on mood) to be used through such a close and professional environment.

This doesn't discredit the MBTI though. This system is actually incredibly powerful for personal development and how to understand others.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,403 Posts
As a matter of fact, some psychologists do use MBTI.

FYI many do not even use Big Five. :p

It all depends. Many psychologists don't even use personality assessments at all. Every psychologist is different, every doctor/client context is different. This question seems too broad.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,155 Posts
Some psychologist find personality assessments, such as MBTI, as useful and others find them as total bunk. I've seen and read both ends of the spectrum and everything in between.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Goetterdaemmerung

· Registered
Joined
·
3,025 Posts
Just wondering, because I could imagine knowing types very well could help you get to know people better and know their functions. I know that some people I meet now I can easily type and I can say certain things to appease them or peeve them :cool: any psychologists on this forum maybe want to chime in?? :)
I've seen two psychologists this year. It's just art psychology, so psychologists don't even recognize it. They may have learned about the 16 types and Jung in the first year of university, as I've heard from someone who did first year psychology. Then again, it's not given any real value during that year.

The first when I asked about MBTI, replied with the most confused face as to such a thing even existing. She mentioned some thing called MPPA or something like that, but as it turns out MBTI is definitely not something that psychologists want to use. It's less about development and more about setting yourself aside from other types ; development comes when you can challenge core beliefs and you can't do that if you try to use external descriptions like MBTI to justify who you are. Core beliefs are ingrained and very specific to who you are, and tend to make a lot of sense when you review past experiences, and when identified can overturn repetitive and intrusive thoughts that even the mentally ill have. MBTI cannot do that and cannot be applied to everyone (eg: schizophrenics or people with split personality disorder), so they never use it.

Other than that, a psychologist who is helping me identify these core beliefs totally doesn't mention MBTI at all.

Even Big Five is not very reliable to them, studies have found that a certain tribe with different cultures don't even have qualities that can be discerned by extroversion/introversion as stated in the Big Five : http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/03/big-five.aspx

Core beliefs is the way to go now, and if you have 16 types people tend to have anxiety over whether they're being that type rather than being themselves, and why these people have that anxiety is more important to psychologists.
 

· PerC Waiter
Joined
·
27,833 Posts
I'd imagine that (most) psychologists would rather get to know the patient better on a more individual level so as to treat said patient in a way specifically designed to help them, instead of using any sort of "type" to identify the patient, as that would come closer to stereotyping.
 

· Over 300 Confirmed Kills
Joined
·
17,815 Posts
l was shocked to learn a social worker/therapist friend of mine had never heard of it.

Had her take the test, she's a total INFJ but got INTJ. l'm working on her.


l knew another therapist years ago (actually was my therapist at one point) who seemed like she would have been interested, but never mentioned it.

She was a little obsessed with the way l processed information because l think she knew it was similar to her, she was always looking for ways for us to be the same ''____'', but she didn't know what to call it.

l think she's either ENFP or ENFJ.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
950 Posts
Pretty much this. They also have much more powerful tools to their assets. MBTI isn't reliable enough (people typing different types depending on mood) to be used through such a close and professional environment.
Where do you get such great respect for psychologists? Have you ever dealt with any of them? I've had experience with several therapists (psychologists) and two psychiatrists. They were all ignorant, stupid (compared to me anyway), and totally useless and worthless. They have no ability to help anyone. They didn't help me at all but I fixed myself with the help of some good books. There are a few smart psychologists (very few) but I have contempt for all the rest of them. I don't think most therapists are interested in learning anything they could use to actually help people and solve their problems. The reason is that solving problems is less profitable. If you solve someone's problems they don't need to pay you anymore.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
MBTI is definitely not something that psychologists want to use. It's less about development and more about setting yourself aside from other types ; development comes when you can challenge core beliefs and you can't do that if you try to use external descriptions like MBTI to justify who you are. Core beliefs are ingrained and very specific to who you are, and tend to make a lot of sense when you review past experiences, and when identified can overturn repetitive and intrusive thoughts that even the mentally ill have. MBTI cannot do that and cannot be applied to everyone (eg: schizophrenics or people with split personality disorder), so they never use it.

Other than that, a psychologist who is helping me identify these core beliefs totally doesn't mention MBTI at all.

Even Big Five is not very reliable to them, studies have found that a certain tribe with different cultures don't even have qualities that can be discerned by extroversion/introversion as stated in the Big Five : New study throws into doubt the universality of the

Core beliefs is the way to go now, and if you have 16 types people tend to have anxiety over whether they're being that type rather than being themselves, and why these people have that anxiety is more important to psychologists.
"Core beliefs," eh?

There's now over 50 years of data — from hundreds of studies in peer-reviewed journals and so on — that strongly suggests that there are a handful of human personality dimensions that (1) are multifaceted (i.e., that involve multiple characteristics that tend to co-vary in a statistically meaningful way), (2) tend to be relatively stable through life, and (3) are substantially genetic. The "Big Five" is an umbrella term for several somewhat independently-developed typologies with respect to which respectable amounts of data have been gathered and that seem to basically involve the same five underlying dimensions (notwithstanding some theoretical variations from typology to typology and from typologist to typologist), and the four MBTI dichotomies appear to be tapping into four of the Big Five factors — albeit, again, with various theoretical variations both between the MBTI and Big Five and among different MBTI theorists.

In the modern world of personality typology, the relevant scientific standards include judging typologies in terms of two broad criteria known as reliability and validity. Reliability basically has to do with internal consistency, while validity relates to the extent to which the theoretical constructs actually relate to reality. Going all the way back to 1985, the second edition of the MBTI Manual devoted two chapters to the issues of reliability and validity, and there's been substantial additional confirmation in the years since.

McCrae and Costa are probably the most prominent Big Five scientists, and they long ago concluded (see this article) that the four MBTI dichotomies were essentially tapping into four of the Big Five factors, and that there was respectable scientific data in support of the MBTI dichotomies.

Over twenty years ago now, John B. Murray ("Review of Research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator," Perceptual & Motor Skills, 70, 1187, 1990) summed up the MBTI's status this way:

Murray said:
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has become the most widely used personality instrument for nonpsychiatric populations. ... Approximately 300 studies of the MBTI are cited by Buros (1965, 1978) and over 1500 studies are included in the [1985] edition of the [MBTI Manual]. ... The research on the MBTI as a psychometric instrument and as an application of Jung's typology was reviewed and some of its modern applications considered. ...

The reliability of the M-B Indicator has been improved in recent years. ... Studies reviewed by Carlyn (1977) as well as later studies have shown generally satisfactory split-half and test-retest reliabilities. ...

Group differences and correlations are broadly supportive of the construct validity of the M-B Indicator scales, indicating that the four scales measure important dimensions of personality that approximate those of Jung's typology theories [citing multiple studies]. ...

DISCUSSION
...
[The MBTI's] indices of reliability and validity have been extensively investigated and have been judged acceptable. The constructs underlying the Myer-Briggs Indicator have been supported by correlations with other tests of personality, Extraversion-Introversion, and Emotionality as well as with behavioral correlates of the four scales in many professions and business organizations. ...

The inventory has served as a practical assessment instrument by virtue of its known construct validity. ... It has been extensively investigated and has met successfully most challenges to its rationale, test procedures, and results.
Here are three more sources, if you're interested. Each of the last two includes a roundup of multiple studies.

Hierarchical Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the MBTI
MBTI Form M Manual Supplement
MBTI Step II Manual Supplement

Particularly noteworthy (to me, anyway) is the fact that twin studies have established that identical twins raised in different households are substantially more alike with respect to the Big Five and MBTI dimensions than more genetically dissimilar pairs, which strongly suggests that these typologies are tapping into personality dimensions that are relatively hard-wired — however imperfectly and/or incompletely grasped and defined they may be at this stage.

I should probably also note, though, that the data support for the MBTI relates almost exclusively to the four MBTI dichotomies — which correlate with four of the Big Five dimensions — rather than the eight "cognitive functions." As I understand it, and as further discussed in this long INTJforum post, the few attempts to test/validate the functions — and, in particular, the functions model most often discussed on internet forums (where INTJ = Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTP = Ti-Ne-Si-Fe) — have not led to a respectable body of supporting results.

As for "core beliefs"... I'll confess I'd never even heard of them. So I tried to check out the Wikipedia article, but dang, there isn't one! So then I Googled "core beliefs," and danged if I've been able to find any reference to any psychological theory that goes by that name and has any respectable body of studies behind it.

But OK, I'll admit I didn't spend that long searching. Hopefully you can steer me to two or three respectable sources that will explain to me what the "core beliefs" system is all about and help convince me and any other deluded forumites that "core beliefs" have left extraversion/introversion and the rest of the Big Five and MBTI dimensions in the dust.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,263 Posts
"Core beliefs," eh?
This is just my interpretation of the term, but it does make sense.

Taking MBTI/Big5 or any typology system for instance you're likely to find overlappings within a type's worldview, outlook, opinions and values. They may not be 1:1 overlaps but principally seem to show a clear path where it's headed. An inter-type underlying principle/consensus so to speak. Chances are that this "consensus" is the result of the conscious attitude, which within MBTI, or by Jung, would be solely/mostly defined by a person's dominant function.

If you now moved away from typology and its technical construct, you'd still be able to estimate these principles and consensus without a technical framework built around them. You could then say these ingrained tendencies are one's "core values". Fostering growth or change for that matter as result of challenging said core value in translation would mean no more than questioning and challenging the conscious attitude of a person. Challenging the ego. Ideally, if the battle would be won or had a positive effect challenging a person's 'core values' would result in a person mellowing out by scaling down their conscious attitude - to not be caught up solely in their narrow-mindedness when their dominant reigns supreme to the point of blindly dismissing all else but what it sees fit.

In a Jungian sense this would close the gap between the dominant and inferior and as such diminish shadow activity of the unconscious as the pair moves closer together. The less tight your conscious attitudes reigns the less need for your inferior/shadow to compensate resulting in overall more balance.

So the very bottom line: 'core values' in my mind basically fits within the technical framework Jung/MBTI has established, except that these frameworks may not be actively used. Then again, that's merely my interpretation of the term; I doubt anything official in that regard exists.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,025 Posts
"Core beliefs," eh?

There's now over 50 years of data — from hundreds of studies in peer-reviewed journals and so on — that strongly suggests that there are a handful of human personality dimensions that (1) are multifaceted (i.e., that involve multiple characteristics that tend to co-vary in a statistically meaningful way), (2) tend to be relatively stable through life, and (3) are substantially genetic. The "Big Five" is an umbrella term for several somewhat independently-developed typologies with respect to which respectable amounts of data have been gathered and that seem to basically involve the same five underlying dimensions (notwithstanding some theoretical variations from typology to typology and from typologist to typologist), and the four MBTI dichotomies appear to be tapping into four of the Big Five factors — albeit, again, with various theoretical variations both between the MBTI and Big Five and among different MBTI theorists.

In the modern world of personality typology, the relevant scientific standards include judging typologies in terms of two broad criteria known as reliability and validity. Reliability basically has to do with internal consistency, while validity relates to the extent to which the theoretical constructs actually relate to reality. Going all the way back to 1985, the second edition of the MBTI Manual devoted two chapters to the issues of reliability and validity, and there's been substantial additional confirmation in the years since.

McCrae and Costa are probably the most prominent Big Five scientists, and they long ago concluded (see this article) that the four MBTI dichotomies were essentially tapping into four of the Big Five factors, and that there was respectable scientific data in support of the MBTI dichotomies.

Over twenty years ago now, John B. Murray ("Review of Research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator," Perceptual & Motor Skills, 70, 1187, 1990) summed up the MBTI's status this way:
Here are three more sources, if you're interested. Each of the last two includes a roundup of multiple studies.

Hierarchical Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the MBTI
MBTI Form M Manual Supplement
MBTI Step II Manual Supplement

Particularly noteworthy (to me, anyway) is the fact that twin studies have established that identical twins raised in different households are substantially more alike with respect to the Big Five and MBTI dimensions than more genetically dissimilar pairs, which strongly suggests that these typologies are tapping into personality dimensions that are relatively hard-wired — however imperfectly and/or incompletely grasped and defined they may be at this stage.

I should probably also note, though, that the data support for the MBTI relates almost exclusively to the four MBTI dichotomies — which correlate with four of the Big Five dimensions — rather than the eight "cognitive functions." As I understand it, and as further discussed in this long INTJforum post, the few attempts to test/validate the functions — and, in particular, the functions model most often discussed on internet forums (where INTJ = Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTP = Ti-Ne-Si-Fe) — have not led to a respectable body of supporting results.

As for "core beliefs"... I'll confess I'd never even heard of them. So I tried to check out the Wikipedia article, but dang, there isn't one! So then I Googled "core beliefs," and danged if I've been able to find any reference to any psychological theory that goes by that name and has any respectable body of studies behind it.

But OK, I'll admit I didn't spend that long searching. Hopefully you can steer me to two or three respectable sources that will explain to me what the "core beliefs" system is all about and help convince me and any other deluded forumites that "core beliefs" have left extraversion/introversion and the rest of the Big Five and MBTI dimensions in the dust.
I'm not going to go with the 'this is the right and only possible alternative' approach, mainly because I'm basing this off personal experience with qualified psychologists while you're basing your conceptions off of theory.

The method of identifying and challenging core beliefs is a method they use to fight off 'unhelpful thoughts' or 'intrusive thoughts', however the thing is the core belief is generally pertinent to yourself. I never said it was a replacement for MBTI or Typology, I meant that since psychologists (in the case of what the OP meant) generally help the people around them, they can't do this with MBTI, and therefore, do not use it.

I'm sure there aren't any articles on Core Beliefs, because that's pretty weird if there was. You totally missed the point I was making throughout your post. That was only a personal suggestion, as to what psychologists I have known have applied to help people with mental illness, etc. In other words, they had not touched any of what you are recording.

I know nothing about Big Five (haha?), it's not related to the point I was making.I was just replying to the others who were so definite psychologists use these things in their handling of patients. If you use potentially impractical theories with patients, (that have not worked helping the mentally ill) patients won't be happy with that sort of treatment. If anything my post was an opinion piece and I'm not going to back it up with empirical facts to show you how much its worth compared to your points on Big Five. However, challenging core beliefs is an aspect of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy which I meant, when I said that Core Beliefs can help challenge mental illnesses.

I googled 'Core Beliefs' and I found one of the sheets that psychologists like the one I knew give to patients : http://www.cci.health.wa.gov.au/docs/ACF3B8A.pdf

From your stance, I can already tell you are going to take this Big Five frontier to the very end, so I'm not going to contradict you on anything and this is solely my perspective. Mainly for the fear of conflict. Conflict should be avoided. Good day.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,014 Posts
The counselor I see has heard of the MBTI. When I first met her, she seemed more interested in it than she does now. She let me borrow the book she had about MBTI in children and copied a couple pages from some other book. But recently it came up and I had to remind her of the dichotomies, which was slightly disappointing. Doesn't really bother me much though, as I'm more of a CF fan and she didn't have a desire to go that far into the theory.

While I think there could potentially be a use for MBTI in counseling, it shouldn't be used as a shortcut for "knowing" a person. There's a ton of variation, so just because you know their type doesn't mean you know what they're like.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
Where do you get such great respect for psychologists? Have you ever dealt with any of them? I've had experience with several therapists (psychologists) and two psychiatrists. They were all ignorant, stupid (compared to me anyway), and totally useless and worthless. They have no ability to help anyone. They didn't help me at all but I fixed myself with the help of some good books. There are a few smart psychologists (very few) but I have contempt for all the rest of them. I don't think most therapists are interested in learning anything they could use to actually help people and solve their problems. The reason is that solving problems is less profitable. If you solve someone's problems they don't need to pay you anymore.
I had a very positive experience with two different psychologists. Of course, they were from the public domain and not paid per each 'meeting', so their motivation wasn't about trying to suck the money out of me as it was basically free. Also, since it was a public service, they tried to fix the problems as many more students would need the services - To this end, they didn't have the choice but to actively try to fix the problems I had.

I heard a lot of horror stories about psychologists. I never experienced it, though.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
2,876 Posts
I have seen the MBTI used by psychologist as a personal evaluation more useful by the client in broad terms, with the advice to not take it serious - and the test were done in very controlled conditions. I have seen it used by personnel managers who, regardless of outcome, cannot be challenged and that "type" controls job placement.
The MBTI does not consider variability and someone in the market for a job, desperate and stressed out, will not be fairly treated.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
2,876 Posts
Where do you get such great respect for psychologists? Have you ever dealt with any of them? I've had experience with several therapists (psychologists) and two psychiatrists. They were all ignorant, stupid (compared to me anyway), and totally useless and worthless. They have no ability to help anyone. They didn't help me at all but I fixed myself with the help of some good books. There are a few smart psychologists (very few) but I have contempt for all the rest of them. I don't think most therapists are interested in learning anything they could use to actually help people and solve their problems. The reason is that solving problems is less profitable. If you solve someone's problems they don't need to pay you anymore.
I think that is a reasonable appraisal, but understandably colored by your personal experience. Any therapy that is not client centered is, in my opinion, bogus. An auto mechanic finds what is broken and fixes it: people are not machines and cannot be simply diagnosed and fixed. The client should by into the program and have ownership of the problem. Worked for me as therapist - and in a way, that worked for you.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
I never said it was a replacement for MBTI or Typology, I meant that since psychologists (in the case of what the OP meant) generally help the people around them, they can't do this with MBTI, and therefore, do not use it. ...

I'm sure there aren't any articles on Core Beliefs, because that's pretty weird if there was. ...

If anything my post was an opinion piece and I'm not going to back it up with empirical facts to show you how much its worth compared to your points on Big Five.
Well, just as a reminder, your initial post said that "Big Five is not very reliable to [psychologists]", and that "studies have found" that "a certain tribe" didn't have introverts and extraverts, whereas "core beliefs" can be "applied to everyone," leading to your conclusion that "core beliefs is the way to go now."

By contrast, as further explained here (at the same website you linked to), "core beliefs" is a specific therapeutic technique (part of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy) that some therapists use in connection with certain specific psychological disorders that appear to be responsive to that approach.

So, in other words, comparing "core beliefs" to the MBTI or Big Five is a classic apples/oranges thing — and your latest post makes it sound like maybe you understand that now. "Core beliefs" have nothing to do with personality types and are certainly not the "way to go now" for someone who's interested in the kinds of insights that the MBTI and Big Five can offer.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top