[The Great One]

If a new Myers-Briggs system were to be created what other factors do you think should be taken into consideration when typing a personality. I think that Neuroticism and anxiety should be added for one. Help me think of more things to add.

 

[ENTrePenuer]

um.. those are already baked in.

The underpinnings of the MBTI was originally cooked up under a mental illness model.

It's all there to be found, don't be lazy.

 

[Vaka]

My only problem with MBTI alone is that it's extremely simplified...
If I'm correct, it's based off of Jung's studies, but it's so simplified that I can only look at it as a starting tool for people trying to find their types. MBTI descriptions are typically just descriptions of behavior to be associated with certain types. Reasons for behavior should be taken into account.
To elaborate on how simplified it is, it seems to give people the wrong impression of J/P and I/E as well as making them look at things in black and white terms.

 

[The Great One]

um.. those are already baked in.

The underpinnings of the MBTI was originally cooked up under a mental illness model.

It's all there to be found, don't be lazy.

Where can I find this information?

 

[ThoughtProcess]

Where can I find this information?

http://personalitycafe.com/articles/25205-dominant-tertiary-loops-common-personality-disorders.html

:happy:

 

[Mutatio NOmenis]

I'd have a fifth dichotomy (spelling?) of aggressive (a) versus passive (v). Aggressive would be a leadership and taking charge attribute and passive would be the meekness and following orders attribute.

 

[zephryi]

um.. those are already baked in.

The underpinnings of the MBTI was originally cooked up under a mental illness model.

It's all there to be found, don't be lazy.

I think you're confusing this with the MMPI, which was basically a huge amount of questions given to a control "sane" group, and a group with some sort of mental illness. No matter how stupid the question, if it gave a statistically relevant difference between the two groups, it was kept. The resulting questions were made into the MMPI and is currently the most widely used test to determine if someone has a mental illness, since its origins adhered the most to scientific procedure and it has the largest amount of studies behind it. (I believe this is accurate. Either way, very widely used.)

MBTI was originally created into order to create more efficiency in job distribution during war time- the idea was that if the job fit your personality, you'd be happier and work more efficiently and the work force overall would be a better place. The two women who created the inventory, just to give you an idea, both self-identified as INFJs.

This information can be found in "Gifts Differing" and "Cult of Personality"- the first is by Isabel Briggs-Meyers, while the second is a critical look at various personality typing systems, including MBTI and the MMPI.

Also, comparisons to the Big 5 typing systems show that while there are correlations between most of the traits and MBTI axis, neuroticism is the one trait that doesn't significantly correlate to an MBTI axis.



As for changes in MBTI, the complaint I've run into a lot at a INTP forum was the order of functions didn't accurately describe many people. The way the function order is determined is very elegant, and makes intuitive sense, but at the same time, elegance means little if it doesn't accurately describe reality. I'd really love more flexibility with function order and perhaps some studies to see what sort of function order is most likely.

Also, yes, better descriptions. I'm not sure if introverted/extroverted functions are a part of the original MBTI (please correct me if I'm wrong), but they are a major part in Socionics, and it's a terrific way to get a better sense of how the E/I axis can influence the expression of different functions. Also, better descriptions in general, since I always see people asking, "So what exactly is sensing/intuition/practically everything?" Right now, it's easy to get a completely different view of an axis/function from someone else because most descriptions are so open. While the MBTI leans very heavily on self-identification, it's not very helpful when everything is very generalized and can very easily lead to a 'Forer effect' situation.

 

[The Great One]

I'd have a fifth dichotomy (spelling?) of aggressive (a) versus passive (v). Aggressive would be a leadership and taking charge attribute and passive would be the meekness and following orders attribute.

Isn't that pretty much already there? Isn't that pretty much already T vs. F?

 

[zephryi]

Isn't that pretty much already there? Isn't that pretty much already T vs. F?

It depends... T can be passive if the thinker thinks through something and decides the logic is sound for his own reasoning and allows the other person to keep being illogical, or can be aggressive if they decide to try and impose their logical reasoning on others. F can be passive in trying to maintain harmony and not speaking conflicting viewpoints, or can be more aggressive in trying to impose their ethical reasoning on others and trying to make the world a more 'fair' place to live in.

I think if anything in MBTI determined passiveness/aggressiveness, it'd be the J/P axis- while perceiving functions simply gather information, judging evaluates, and could be seen as the "doing" functions. However, I'm not sure how relevant the axis really is- I know as an INTP, I tend to be very passive until someone is being illogical, then I beat them over the head with my knowledge. My friend as an ENFP tends to be passive until there is a need for someone to step up and lead our group of friends to do something. We are both passive and aggressive, but in very different arenas due to the fact that different things are important to us. While it is true that some people are simply more aggressive or passive overall, I don't think it's as basic of a trait as the ones already in MBTI.

...Just a thought. : D

 

[The Great One]

It depends... T can be passive if the thinker thinks through something and decides the logic is sound for his own reasoning and allows the other person to keep being illogical, or can be aggressive if they decide to try and impose their logical reasoning on others. F can be passive in trying to maintain harmony and not speaking conflicting viewpoints, or can be more aggressive in trying to impose their ethical reasoning on others and trying to make the world a more 'fair' place to live in.

I think if anything in MBTI determined passiveness/aggressiveness, it'd be the J/P axis- while perceiving functions simply gather information, judging evaluates, and could be seen as the "doing" functions. However, I'm not sure how relevant the axis really is- I know as an INTP, I tend to be very passive until someone is being illogical, then I beat them over the head with my knowledge. My friend as an ENFP tends to be passive until there is a need for someone to step up and lead our group of friends to do something. We are both passive and aggressive, but in very different arenas due to the fact that different things are important to us. While it is true that some people are simply more aggressive or passive overall, I don't think it's as basic of a trait as the ones already in MBTI.

...Just a thought. : D

However, I find that dominant Fi users tend to be passive, and dominant Te users tend to almost always be aggressive.

 

[Nomenclature]

:S Isn't MBTI with a calm/limbic scale pretty much the global 5 SLOAN/RCUEI model?

 

[zephryi]

However, I find that dominant Fi users tend to be passive, and dominant Te users tend to almost always be aggressive.

Probably because Fi tends to deal with an inner set of ethical rules, as well as the social atmosphere around them- it's more important to maintain harmony than argue a point. My friend has an auxiliary Fi function, and I know the area we go head to head in is in keeping harmony and accepting the way things are versus debating out points and striving for something better. While she may be relatively passive, I know she can get very irritated and more aggressive when I try to debate something and she just wants to 'live and let live'. So basically, I would suppose that the function lends itself to being more passive, but it doesn't necessarily have to be passive.

Also, an Fi dominant person would be introverted, and would be interacting more with their perceiving functions. Since that isn't an evaluating function, they probably don't directly oppose people as much, I'd think.

But, I don't think that would extend to Fe, which is more social rules oriented, rather than feeling/emotions oriented as I understand it. Unfortunately, i don't know any Fe dominant people, so I can't really go into specifics.

As for thinking, Te dominant people I can see as being more aggressive because they deal with impersonal information, and don't have a real strong pull to 'play nice'. Plus, they must be extroverted and are interacting through a function that is evaluating, so they are more likely to proclaim their opinion. Unfortunately, I don't know any Te dominant people...

But Ti... Ti can be passive since it focuses on mental system creating. Often, I know I will decide on a way to think about a topic and ignore what other people say because my way happens to present the information in a more cohesive way for me, regardless of what works better for others. However, when someone is being completely illogical in relation to the information in front of us, I'll be more aggressive.


...This wasn't really a good argument again T/F being aggressive/passive, since I only have information for both passive and aggressive for Ti, but maybe you can see where I was trying to go with this. : D

 

[The Great One]

Probably because Fi tends to deal with an inner set of ethical rules, as well as the social atmosphere around them- it's more important to maintain harmony than argue a point. My friend has an auxiliary Fi function, and I know the area we go head to head in is in keeping harmony and accepting the way things are versus debating out points and striving for something better. While she may be relatively passive, I know she can get very irritated and more aggressive when I try to debate something and she just wants to 'live and let live'. So basically, I would suppose that the function lends itself to being more passive, but it doesn't necessarily have to be passive.

Also, an Fi dominant person would be introverted, and would be interacting more with their perceiving functions. Since that isn't an evaluating function, they probably don't directly oppose people as much, I'd think.

But, I don't think that would extend to Fe, which is more social rules oriented, rather than feeling/emotions oriented as I understand it. Unfortunately, i don't know any Fe dominant people, so I can't really go into specifics.

As for thinking, Te dominant people I can see as being more aggressive because they deal with impersonal information, and don't have a real strong pull to 'play nice'. Plus, they must be extroverted and are interacting through a function that is evaluating, so they are more likely to proclaim their opinion. Unfortunately, I don't know any Te dominant people...

But Ti... Ti can be passive since it focuses on mental system creating. Often, I know I will decide on a way to think about a topic and ignore what other people say because my way happens to present the information in a more cohesive way for me, regardless of what works better for others. However, when someone is being completely illogical in relation to the information in front of us, I'll be more aggressive.


...This wasn't really a good argument again T/F being aggressive/passive, since I only have information for both passive and aggressive for Ti, but maybe you can see where I was trying to go with this. : D

Yes, I've noticed that most people who use Fe are much more aggressive than those who use Fi. Also, Te users seem like the most aggressive type of all. Ti users can be like that too, but I find the most aggressive Ti user to be the ESTP in general.

 

[madhatter]

Yes, I've noticed that most people who use Fe are much more aggressive than those who use Fi. Also, Te users seem like the most aggressive type of all. Ti users can be like that too, but I find the most aggressive Ti user to be the ESTP in general.

I tend to be more passive aggressive. Depends on my mood and the situation whether I'm more aggressive.

 

[Frannyy]

However, I find that dominant Fi users tend to be passive, and dominant Te users tend to almost always be aggressive.

It's not aggression, it's assertion. :laughing:

 

[tangential]

Impulsivity!!!

 

[Introspiritual]

:S Isn't MBTI with a calm/limbic scale pretty much the global 5 SLOAN/RCUEI model?

Yep - but MBTI already has that in the Form J version of the test.

 

[Arachnophobia]

On the passive/aggressive discussion: Keirsey noticed a similar thing when he distinguished informative from directive roles in communication. Directive types are the STs and NJs, they are taking charge and give orders in communicating, informative types are the SFs and NPs, they are more likely to give informations, ideas etc. to get people to do something.