Personality

[Desabafar]

has anyone ever done one of these 16 personalities tests https://www.16personalities.com . my son has had to do one for a part time job he has applied for. are they bullshit or are they accurate, we both done one and it seems quite accurate for us but i was surprised he had to do one for a part time job, is this normal and does it actually work for hiring

 

im esfj consul, what are people that have done it and do you think it is bullshit or not

[Nalis]

Havent clicked the link but it sounds like Myers-Briggs from what you are saying.

 

Mine was ESTP from memory though that was about 12 years ago.

 

I think the questions are up to interpretation in these type of things so depends on the context in which they are answered. For example, do you answer an introvert / extrovert question as if you are with your mates, or in work, or in public? They are three very different scenarios for the same question.

Edited 8 September 2020 by Nalis

[Dunge]

I’ve done one at work, but certainly not for an interview. Frankly an employer should be more interested in using one to indicate how they manage you and how we are energised by different things, rather than whether they should employ you as a certain “type” in the first place.
 

Plus, none of the dimensions should really be treated as binary. They’re all really a scale and can change over time. They’re interesting as a snapshot for you and your mates, but making hiring decisions based on them is a mistake IMO.

[Webbo]

I'm a Virtuoso, apparently, the same as Clint Eastwood and Bear Grylls.

[HankMarvin]

37 minutes ago, Desabafar said:

has anyone ever done one of these 16 personalities tests https://www.16personalities.com . my son has had to do one for a part time job he has applied for. are they bullshit or are they accurate, we both done one and it seems quite accurate for us but i was surprised he had to do one for a part time job, is this normal and does it actually work for hiring

 

im esfj consul, what are people that have done it and do you think it is bullshit or not

Its not bullshit

 

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator, The MBTI is based on the conceptual theory proposed by Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung.

 

That said, I just look at the first letter normally, Introvert or extrovert when I see someone that has it displayed.

 

 

 

 

Edited 8 September 2020 by HankMarvin

[don_danbury]

46 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Havent clicked the link but it sounds like Myers-Briggs from what you are saying.

 

Mine was ESTP from memory though that was about 12 years ago.

 

I think the questions are up to interpretation in these type of things so depends on the context in which they are answered. For example, do you answer an introvert / extrovert question as if you are with your mates, or in work, or in public? They are three very different scenarios for the same question.

yeah the questions were very basic in that way. depends on the different situations and what not. anyway, i got adventurer which seems pretty accurate for me.

[LiberalFox]

Using them as part of a job interview seems pretty yikes to me. Just ask me about my personality if you want to actually know. 

 

This is like playing guess who but with personalities, you answer a bunch of questions and then based on the answer you get a profile that obviously matches somewhat with what you answered which happens to be how you see yourself. So of course it feels really accurate because that's how you just described yourself. It doesn't actually say anything about whether you actually have a correct read on your own personality. I'd find it more interesting if a bunch of people who knew me best had to answer based on what they thought of me and see how closely the answers matched with each other and my own self image.

 

 

Edited 8 September 2020 by LiberalFox

[Benguin]

I had to do Belbin for work, I’m a monitor evaluator.

 

done this one too but just out of interest. I’m a mediator. Kind of accurate but I find the questions can be very subjective to ones mood when doing the test. 

[Facecloth]

I'm a mediator, like Shakespeare, Fox Mulder and Frodo Baggins.

[Kopfkino]

I usually flip flop between INTP-T (Logician) and ENTP-T (Debater) depending on my frame of mind at the time. I think that's pretty much spot on for me, would probably be INTP most of the time.

 

It matches up well for me in other personality type tests so there must be some merit in it all but to what extent you can really gauge it is up in the air to me, there's lots of variables involved that can affect what comes out but its not meant to be taken as absolute, just a ballpark.

[LiberalFox]

I think Introvert vs Extrovert is one that changes variably with mood and motivation for me. I get INFP-A (mediator) or ENFP-A (campaigner), usually INFP. I guess if you wanted to be cheeky you could try and game it a bit, would imagine if you're doing something public facing extroversion would be more appealing. 

[Izzy]

2 hours ago, Desabafar said:

has anyone ever done one of these 16 personalities tests https://www.16personalities.com . my son has had to do one for a part time job he has applied for. are they bullshit or are they accurate, we both done one and it seems quite accurate for us but i was surprised he had to do one for a part time job, is this normal and does it actually work for hiring

 

im esfj consul, what are people that have done it and do you think it is bullshit or not

I came out as an ESFP (Entertainer) on this which makes sense as my job involves (did involve) lots of public speaking and training people.

 

I'm not a huge fan of psychometrics but can see their value as part of the recruitment process.

 

The problem in business is that people can get 'pigeon holed' and also use their personality types as an excuse. The amount of times I've heard people say "I don't do detail because I'm such and such a type" or "I'm not a people person because I'm such and such a type" and it can prevent people from getting out of their comfort zone and growing.

 

The best psychometrics are used at the next level which is how your style/traits effect your ability to work under pressure.

[Paninistickers]

Did one off a LinkedIn link on.mu feed whilst bored at work a couple of years back.

 

I found it remarkable. Intj-t was my type. It pretty.much got.me.to a tee. Staggeringly accurate. 

[Dr The Singh]

I did Myers Brigs, I'm a C U N T

[Mike Oxlong]

I assume that anyone not from Manchester who supports Man Utd has a personality disorder 

[SpacedX]

3 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

Its not bullshit

 

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator, The MBTI is based on the conceptual theory proposed by Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung.

 

That said, I just look at the first letter normally, Introvert or extrovert when I see someone that has it displayed.

 

 

 

 

Sorry, I have to disagree. Jung would be turning in his grave if knew how popular this garbage has become and the degree to which it subverted his archetypes. 

 

And that's precisely what it is - baseless pop psychology which is borderline caricature in its assumptions. Precisely why psychologists loath it - and psychology has become a science since the life of Carl Jung. Neither mother-daughter duo Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers were trained scientists. They developed the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator with the intention of helping women entering the workforce find work best suited to their personalities. In order to do this they summoned the influential yet unsupported theories of Carl Jung. Jung hypothesised in his book Psychological Types in 1921 that humans mainly fall into two categories: perceivers and judgers. Perceivers could be further split into people who prefer sensing and those who prefer intuiting, while judgers could be split into thinkers and feelers, resulting in four different types of people. The four types could also be divided into introverts and extroverts. However, Jung was not an empiricist and these classifications were shaped by observation and personal experience rather than being substantiated by evidence and the collection of data . He conceded that these types were not absolute, that we may manifest each to greater and lesser degrees and that since our values are emergent not fixed, this can change over time. That's the point, Jung never meant to categorise people, rather, emphasise and understand differences.

 

By developing the MBTI upon limited binaries it yields an oversimplified view of human personality. But human beings are complex, we don’t conform to neat categories, but rather a spectrum - a continuum.

 

Also, the flattering, vague descriptions for many of the types have huge amounts of overlap whereby many people could fit into several of them. This is known as the Forer effect, and is a technique long used by charlatans and mountebanks peddling all manner of woo and superstitious horseshit such as spiritualism, astrology, fortune telling, and other sorts of pseudoscience to persuade people they have accurate information about them. There is also a strong element of the Barnum effect - again general descriptions that can apply to anyone that people can read themselves into. 

 

I find it absolutely ****ing shocking that in the USA in particular large blue chip organisations are basing recruitment decisions on this junk. Might as well consult a horoscope. 

 

Is there any value associated with this? As harsh a critic as I am about the test, it does at least invite the process of self appraisal/introspection and reflective practice and as such can be a useful starting point so long as anyone applying it is aware of its limitations. 

 

This is a good read...

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/cui-bono/201603/are-scores-the-mbti-totally-meaningless

 

Incidentally - INFP. 

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

I'm ENTJ-A, a Commander like Steve Jobs, Gordon Ramsay, Maggie Thatcher or FDR?!? 

 

The only Commander whose orders nobody would obey......

[LiberalFox]

8 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

I'm ENTJ-A, a Commander like Steve Jobs, Gordon Ramsay, Maggie Thatcher or FDR?!? 

 

The only Commander whose orders nobody would obey......

Always knew you were a Thatcherite 

[HankMarvin]

59 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Sorry, I have to disagree. Jung would be turning in his grave if knew how popular this garbage has become and the degree to which it subverted his archetypes. 

 

And that's precisely what it is - baseless pop psychology which is borderline caricature in its assumptions. Precisely why psychologists loath it - and psychology has become a science since the life of Carl Jung. Neither mother-daughter duo Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers were trained scientists. They developed the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator with the intention of helping women entering the workforce find work best suited to their personalities. In order to do this they summoned the influential yet unsupported theories of Carl Jung. Jung hypothesised in his book Psychological Types in 1921 that humans mainly fall into two categories: perceivers and judgers. Perceivers could be further split into people who prefer sensing and those who prefer intuiting, while judgers could be split into thinkers and feelers, resulting in four different types of people. The four types could also be divided into introverts and extroverts. However, Jung was not an empiricist and these classifications were shaped by observation and personal experience rather than being substantiated by evidence and the collection of data . He conceded that these types were not absolute, that we may manifest each to greater and lesser degrees and that since our values are emergent not fixed, this can change over time. That's the point, Jung never meant to categorise people, rather, emphasise and understand differences.

 

By developing the MBTI upon limited binaries it yields an oversimplified view of human personality. But human beings are complex, we don’t conform to neat categories, but rather a spectrum - a continuum.

 

Also, the flattering, vague descriptions for many of the types have huge amounts of overlap whereby many people could fit into several of them. This is known as the Forer effect, and is a technique long used by charlatans and mountebanks peddling all manner of woo and superstitious horseshit such as spiritualism, astrology, fortune telling, and other sorts of pseudoscience to persuade people they have accurate information about them. There is also a strong element of the Barnum effect - again general descriptions that can apply to anyone that people can read themselves into. 

 

I find it absolutely ****ing shocking that in the USA in particular large blue chip organisations are basing recruitment decisions on this junk. Might as well consult a horoscope. 

 

Is there any value associated with this? As harsh a critic as I am about the test, it does at least invite the process of self appraisal/introspection and reflective practice and as such can be a useful starting point so long as anyone applying it is aware of its limitations. 

 

This is a good read...

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/cui-bono/201603/are-scores-the-mbti-totally-meaningless

 

Incidentally - INFP. 

 

 

You sound like you know what you're talking about, I was just reading from here.

 

 

The original versions of the MBTI were constructed by two Americans, Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers.^[15] The MBTI is based on the conceptual theory proposed by Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung,^[16] who had speculated that people experience the world using four principal psychological functions – sensation, intuition, feeling, and thinking – and that one of these four functions is dominant for a person most of the time.^[17] The four categories are Introversion/Extraversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, Judging/Perceiving. Each person is said to have one preferred quality from each category, producing 16 unique types.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers–Briggs_Type_Indicator#:~:text=The MBTI is based on,person most of the time.

 

 

 

[Fightforever]

Did it got architect https://www.16personalities.com/profiles/1205d6824c197.

I don't like these sorts of tests in general though trying to put everyone into boxes doesn't work because essentially everyone is different. Someone could switch personality types based on mood, scenario and/or development

Edited 8 September 2020 by Fightforever

[Rain King]

As expected.

 

 

[Rain King]

Just now, Rain King said:

As expected.

 

 

 

Originally read the F as an E too. Just shows my self belief!

[ozleicester]

8 hours ago, Nalis said:

Havent clicked the link but it sounds like Myers-Briggs from what you are saying.

 

Mine was ESTP from memory though that was about 12 years ago.

 

I think the questions are up to interpretation in these type of things so depends on the context in which they are answered. For example, do you answer an introvert / extrovert question as if you are with your mates, or in work, or in public? They are three very different scenarios for the same question.

If it is Myer Briggs.... they were proven to be completely fake and pointless some years ago. https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless

I did several back in the 90s-00s coz they were the big thing.. but utter bullsh*t

ENTP... Cancer    

[leicsmac]

Advocate.

 

Though, as others have said above, this type of test is like useful only as a curio.

[Crinklyfox]

16 hours ago, Desabafar said:

has anyone ever done one of these 16 personalities tests https://www.16personalities.com . my son has had to do one for a part time job he has applied for. are they bullshit or are they accurate, we both done one and it seems quite accurate for us but i was surprised he had to do one for a part time job, is this normal and does it actually work for hiring

 

im esfj consul, what are people that have done it and do you think it is bullshit or not

I did something similar called a Belbin test many years ago.  I'm including a link so you can compare the tests if you wish

 

https://www.belbin.com/about/belbin-team-roles/

 

The purpose of a Belbin test is to determine the characteristics of individuals, with the aim of seeing how they would fit into teams.  The theory is that the most successful teams contain people a variety of strengths so they complement each other.  As such, there is no right or wrong way to complete a Belbin test.