The MBTI is arguably one of the best-known personality tests around. Yet while the MBTI is widely embraced by the public, psychologists generally regard it with doubt and criticism. If you want to learn proper psychology rather than pseudoscience dressed up in scientific clothing, today's article will teach you several of psychology's key standards, so you can take a fresh, critical look at personality tests.
The MBTI Personality Test
The MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) was designed by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers after drawing on Carl Jung's theories, with the aim of using a questionnaire to measure a person's personality tendencies. In MBTI theory, personality can be described along 4 dimensions: Extraversion–Introversion, Sensing–iNtuition, Feeling–Thinking, and Judging–Perceiving. For example, if you score higher on the Introversion (I), iNtuition (N), Feeling (F), and Judging (J) questions in the test, it will conclude that you are an INFJ. That is roughly the logic, and it sounds reasonable enough — but does the MBTI hold up to scientific scrutiny, and does it deserve to be called psychology?
Want to understand yourself more deeply? MindForest — the self-discovery app that combines psychology with AI helps you explore your inner world and manage your emotions, anytime and anywhere.
The MBTI Is Not Widely Accepted by the Psychology Community
There are two main reasons the MBTI is called into question: shortcomings in its theory, and inadequacies as a measurement tool.
First, psychologists today tend mainly to study personality using traits rather than types. Trait theory stresses that any personality trait should be placed on a continuous (Continuous) spectrum (Spectrum). Take extraversion as an example: a type-based theory will sort people either as "extraverts" or as "introverts", whereas a trait-based theory describes a person's degree of extraversion — someone low in extraversion will be more introverted, while someone high in extraversion will naturally enjoy socialising more. At first glance the two seem no different, but trait theory does not force people of middling extraversion into either the extravert or introvert camp, and it does not lump the "slightly extraverted" together with the "extremely extraverted". This is precisely the great strength of trait theory: in real life, people's extraversion follows a normal distribution (Normal Distribution) — in everyday terms, most people's extraversion clusters around the average in the middle, with only a small minority scoring extremely high or extremely low.
By using a dichotomy (Dichotomy) to sort people's personalities, the MBTI overlooks exactly this reality. Most people's personality traits sit close to the median, and a dichotomy slaps an inaccurate category label on the large group of people who are neither very extraverted nor very introverted — the in-betweeners. When someone is classified as an INFJ, it does not mean they are not extraverted at all; chances are they are just slightly more introverted than others, rather than a textbook introverted, shy person. Theories that are category-based and try to sort personality into boxes (not only the MBTI) run up against the reality that personality usually follows a normal distribution, and so they are criticised on theoretical grounds.
As a test, one of the MBTI's key concerns is its accuracy as a measurement. In academic terms, reliability (Reliability) and validity (Validity) are two indicators psychologists use when evaluating a psychological test. Reliability refers to whether repeating a test yields consistent results. Assuming personality has not changed, a good personality test should give the same result whenever it is taken. However, early research shows that the MBTI's reliability is unreliable: participants took the MBTI twice, 5 weeks apart, and half of them failed to obtain the same result — reflecting that the MBTI is not a reliable test. As for validity, the MBTI is commonly used in career choice, yet research has found no link between the MBTI and job performance. At present, most research reports supporting the MBTI are conducted by the Center for Applications of Psychological Type and published in the academic journal that the centre oversees. The Center for Applications for Psychological Type operates with funding from the Myers-Briggs Foundation, and given the conflict of interest, it is unlikely to publish research opposing the MBTI; the results of these reports alone make it hard to offer convincing evidence for the MBTI. With no consistent statistical findings supporting the MBTI, psychologists therefore hold a reserved attitude towards it and do not adopt it in academic research.
Although the MBTI is criticised, it still carries great influence among the public. Part of this is down to its widespread use in the business world, and part may be because people tend to identify with the results of psychological tests. Psychology demands scientific verification, and we should constantly remind ourselves to learn with a critical attitude. As a local psychology education organisation, TreeholeHK shoulders the work of spreading knowledge. We currently offer online courses and in-person psychology courses to help you grasp the fundamentals of psychology and better understand yourself and society.
Comments
No comments yet — share your thoughts.