Joined
·
206 Posts
is there a certain MBTI that is the most common in people?
this has probably been asked a lot if so, my apoligies I'm new :wink:
this has probably been asked a lot if so, my apoligies I'm new :wink:
is there a certain MBTI that is the most common in people?
[INFP]
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Joined
·
11,928 Posts
I probably irritated you in your last thread with my flooding of posts, but...meh.
I don't think this would be asy to determine. I can already predict that people will bring up that Ns and Is are rare, but I'm not so sure about that. The latter is the one that seems most likely to be false. There are many type stats on the internet and in books and whatnot, but I don't trust MBTI type stats and I wouldn't put any weight in them.
But in general, most type stats seem to point to ISTJ or ISFJ as being the most common.
Also, if you have any more general MBTI questions, there's a forum section for those
I don't think this would be asy to determine. I can already predict that people will bring up that Ns and Is are rare, but I'm not so sure about that. The latter is the one that seems most likely to be false. There are many type stats on the internet and in books and whatnot, but I don't trust MBTI type stats and I wouldn't put any weight in them.
But in general, most type stats seem to point to ISTJ or ISFJ as being the most common.
Also, if you have any more general MBTI questions, there's a forum section for those
Joined
·
27 Posts
huh, I wouldn't have thought it would be those two... aren't introverts more uncommon then extroverts?
Joined
·
4,757 Posts
In my mind, given how our society is structured and what it values, the most common types have to be extroverts.
Joined
·
11,928 Posts
I don't think that introverts are rarer than extroverts. I've actually heard from more credible sources that it's more 50/50.
Plus, even if introverts were less common, that doesn't mean that in the general population, things would work out as smoothly as more ENFPs than INFPs, more ESFPs than ISFPs, more ESTJs than ISTJs, and so on...
I have no clue how they would make an accurate prediction due to the discrepancy of results between tests and re-taking of tests which effect a large number of people (they could encourage the testing of everyone but the same problem above still exists.)
It's commonly believed that the SJs (in particular the ISFJ) are the most common types. But there is quite a few what ifs involved because for one, many SJs would have little interest in the test because it serves little practical benefit outside of the workplace. As not all workplaces would need particularly organised overseers there may never be a need for numerous SJs to take the test. The IN types are about equally as rare (the INTP are believed by some to be as rare as the INFP or INFJ) but as for the rarest type I don't know how it could be truely determined but the traditional view has been the INFJ.
It's commonly believed that the SJs (in particular the ISFJ) are the most common types. But there is quite a few what ifs involved because for one, many SJs would have little interest in the test because it serves little practical benefit outside of the workplace. As not all workplaces would need particularly organised overseers there may never be a need for numerous SJs to take the test. The IN types are about equally as rare (the INTP are believed by some to be as rare as the INFP or INFJ) but as for the rarest type I don't know how it could be truely determined but the traditional view has been the INFJ.
Joined
·
11,928 Posts
How would you say that the IN types are equally as rare if you, like me, doubt the accuracy of MBTI type statistics?
Oh, I was entirely going by results I found online which claimed the IN types were equally as rare as each other. They weren't my conclusions.
Joined
·
206 Posts
Joined
·
303 Posts
Wait? Are you asking the MBTi type *known* for using their own drawn conclusions as facts and rarely use actual facts (correctly)...for a fact-based question on purpose? :tongue:
Just messing with all of us INFPs :crazy:
Just messing with all of us INFPs :crazy:
Joined
·
8,651 Posts
MBTI statistics are rather dubious and not reliable. Most show trends of SJ types being most frequent, and NJs being the least frequent. This seems to imply that Si is a very common cognitive process for a person to use, and Ni is one of the least common. Fe & Te appear more common judging functions than Ti & Fi also. Again, the accuracy of these stats is HIGHLY questionable.
The bias against Ss on this board is sort of inverted from reality - in reality, ESTJ seems to be the ideal type. You have to wonder if many test SJ due to that bias. On the other hand, maybe the ESTJ is ideal because so many people are SJ....
I also think MBTI tests do not gauge introversion very well - they tend to confuse it with sociability. On the other hand, many of the minds behind MBTI and related theories have been INxx types (ie. Carl Jung was likely INTP, Isabel Myers was INFP & Katherine Briggs was INFJ), and I personally notice bias in tests & profiles towards these types, as far as seeming more "intelligent" and strange in a "romantic" way. It's subtle, but there, and even much more apparent in MBTI online communities.
IMO, what the statistics indicate is how people see themselves in a test which uses behavior and interests to determine cognitive functions; some of the questions do deal with "mindset", but even that is just self-reporting. In short, MBTI stereotypes a bit, but it kind of has to in order to have a simple system that is easily grasped by the average person. As many of us know, MBTI tests often do not produce accurate results; many people who have done a bit of digging to understand functions realize their true type is different from how they tested at first.
I think I'm rambling now...
The bias against Ss on this board is sort of inverted from reality - in reality, ESTJ seems to be the ideal type. You have to wonder if many test SJ due to that bias. On the other hand, maybe the ESTJ is ideal because so many people are SJ....
I also think MBTI tests do not gauge introversion very well - they tend to confuse it with sociability. On the other hand, many of the minds behind MBTI and related theories have been INxx types (ie. Carl Jung was likely INTP, Isabel Myers was INFP & Katherine Briggs was INFJ), and I personally notice bias in tests & profiles towards these types, as far as seeming more "intelligent" and strange in a "romantic" way. It's subtle, but there, and even much more apparent in MBTI online communities.
IMO, what the statistics indicate is how people see themselves in a test which uses behavior and interests to determine cognitive functions; some of the questions do deal with "mindset", but even that is just self-reporting. In short, MBTI stereotypes a bit, but it kind of has to in order to have a simple system that is easily grasped by the average person. As many of us know, MBTI tests often do not produce accurate results; many people who have done a bit of digging to understand functions realize their true type is different from how they tested at first.
I think I'm rambling now...
Joined
·
206 Posts
:laughing::tongue:
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Join the discussion
