MBTI

维基百科，自由的百科全书

MBTI（Myers-Briggs Type Indicator，邁爾斯·布裏格斯性格分類法）是性格分類的一種，靠問出四個問題把人分成十六類。

MBTI性格测试由美国的心理学家Katherine Cook Briggs (1875-1968) 和她的女儿，心理学家Isabel Briggs Myers根据心理分析学家荣格(Carl G. Jung)的心理类型理论和她们长期观察和研究而著成。经过了长达50多年的研究和发展，MBTI已经成为了当今全球最为著名和权威的性格测试。

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a personality test designed to assist a person in identifying some significant personal preferences. Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers developed the Indicator during World War II, and its criteria follow from Carl Jung's theories in his work Psychological Types.^[1]

The Indicator is frequently used in the areas of pedagogy, group dynamics, employee training, leadership training, marriage counseling, and personal development.

Academic psychologists have criticized the indicator in research literature, claiming that it "lacks convincing validity data" ^[2][3][4] and that it is an example of the Forer effect.^[5]

The registered trademark rights in the phrase and its abbreviation have been assigned from the publisher of the test, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc., to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust.^[6]

目录 1 測試元素 2 Historical development 3 About the indicator 4 Items and scoring 5 性格取向 6 Type dynamics 6.1 The type table 7 Cognitive function dynamics in each type 7.1 Extraverts 7.2 Introverts 7.3 Function table 8 Temperament 9 Correlations to Other Instruments 10 Study of Scoring Consistency 11 Ethics 12 Criticism 12.1 Validity 12.2 Reliability 12.3 Utility 13 See also 14 Notes 15 References & Further Reading 16 外部链接

[编辑] 測試元素

這四個問題是：

• 心理能力的走向：你是「外向」﹙Extrovert﹚﹙E﹚還是「內向」﹙Introvert﹚﹙I﹚？
• 認識外在世界的方法：你是「感覺」﹙Sensing﹚（S）還是「直覺」﹙Intuition﹚（N）？
• 倚賴甚麼方式做決定：你是「理性」﹙Thinking﹚﹙T﹚還是「感性」﹙Feeling﹚﹙F﹚？
• 生活方式和處事態度：你是「判斷」﹙Judging﹚（J）還是「理解」﹙Perceiving﹚（P）？

根據4個問題的不同答案，可將人的性格分為16個種類。

[编辑] Historical development

C. G. Jung first spoke about typology at the Munich Psychological Congress in 1913. Katharine Cook Briggs began her research into personality in 1917, developing a four-type framework: Social, Thoughtful, Executive, and Spontaneous. The test was first taken by president Hoover and he didn't accept his results. Template:Verify source In 1923 Jung's Psychological Types was published in English translation (having first been published in German in 1921). Katharine Briggs's first publications are two articles describing Jung's theory, in the journal New Republic in 1926 (Meet Yourself Using the Personality Paint Box) and 1928 (Up From Barbarism). Katharine Briggs' daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, wrote a prize-winning mystery novel Murder Yet to Come in 1929, using typological ideas. She added to her mother's typological research, which she would progressively take over entirely. In 1942, the "Briggs-Myers Type Indicator®" was created, and the Briggs Myers Type Indicator Handbook was published in 1944. The indicator changed its name to the modern form (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®) in 1956.^[7][8]

[编辑] About the indicator

The indicator differs from standardized tests and others measuring traits, such as intelligence, instead classifying people's preferred types. According to Myers-Briggs Theory, while types and traits are both inborn, traits can be improved akin to skills, whereas types, if supported by a healthy environment, naturally differentiate over time. The indicator attempts to tell the order in which this occurs in each person, and it is that information, combined with interviews done with others who have indicated having the same preferences, that the complete descriptions are based on. The indicator then, is akin to an arrow which attempts to point in the direction of the proper description. The facet of the theory which posits that the features being sorted for are in fact types, and not traits which can be improved with practice, is hotly debated.

However, proponents of the indicator will explain that to learn about one's inborn traits is to create the opportunity to improve how one applies them in different contexts. In that sense, the MBTI can yield much personal change and growth.

The types the MBTI sorts for, known as dichotomies, are extraversion / introversion, sensing / intuition, thinking / feeling and judging / perceiving. Participants are given one of 16 four-letter abbreviations, such as ESTJ or INFP, indicating what their preferences are. The term best-fit types refers to the ethical code that facilitators are required to follow. It states that the person taking the indicator is always the best judge of what their preferences are and that the indicator alone should never be used to make this decision.

[编辑] Items and scoring

The MBTI includes 93 forced-choice questions, which means there are only two options. Participants may skip questions if they feel they are unable to choose. Using psychometric techniques, such as item response theory, the MBTI will then be scored and will attempt to identify which dichotomy the participant prefers. After taking the MBTI, participants are given a readout of their score, which will include a bar graph and number of how many points they received on a certain scale. Confusion over the meaning of these numbers often causes them to be related to trait theory, and people mistakenly believe, for example, that their intuition is "more developed" than their sensing, or vice versa.

During construction of the MBTI, thousands of items were used, and most were thrown out because they did not have high midpoint discrimination, meaning the results of that one item did not, on average, move an individual score away from the midpoint. Using only items with high midpoint discrimination allows the MBTI to have fewer items on it but still provide as much statistical information as other instruments with many more items with lower midpoint discrimination. The MBTI requires five points one way or another before it is nearly as sure it can statistically be concerning a preference.

[编辑] 性格取向

Dichotomies
Extraversion	Introversion
Sensing	iNtuition
Thinking	Feeling
Judging	Perceiving
A dichotomy is a division of two mutually exclusive groups, or in this case, type preferences.

• 內向 (Introvert) 及 外向(Extravert) 這兩個詞是指一個人發洩及獲得能量的方向。外向者偏向專注於外在的人和事, 傾向將能量往外釋放。而內向者則專注於自己的思想、想法及印象, 傾向將能量流往內。

• 感覺(Sensing)及直覺(Intuition) 是理解世界的方法。這裡指的非理性(nonrational)的方法, 所說的是人們如何處理接收到的資料。感覺者喜歡著眼於當前事物, 慣於先使用五官來感受世界;直覺者則著眼未來, 著重可能性及預感, 從潛意識及事物間的關聯來理解世界。

• 思考(Thinking)及情感(Feeling) 是下決定時內心鬥爭所側重的方向, 並配合以上的理解方法。思考型喜歡用「是-非」及「如果...就」的邏輯來作分析結果及影響, 或者作決定。情感型則喜歡使用價值觀及自我中心的主觀評價來作決定。可以說成思考型使用頭腦來作決定, 而情感型則用內心來作決定。外向型思考及情感傾向倚賴外在事物及為人接受的規則來作決定;反之, 內向型思考及情感則傾向於主觀, 倚賴自己的想法來構建邏輯組織及評價。

• Judging and Perceiving reveals the specific attitudes of the functions. J or P records which of the strongest of the judging functions or perceiving functions is outwardly displayed. People who prefer judging tend to like a planned and organized approach to life and prefer to have things settled. People who prefer Perceiving tend to like a flexible and spontaneous approach to life and prefer to keep their options open. (The terminology may be misleading for some—the term "Judging" does not imply "judgmental", and "Perceiving" does not imply "perceptive".)
  In J-types, the preferred judging function (T or F) is extraverted (displayed in the outer world). J-types tend to prefer a step-by-step (left brain: parts to whole) approach to life, relying on external rules and procedures, and preferring quick closure. The preferred perceiving function (S or N) is introverted.
  On the other hand, in P-types the preferred perceiving function is extraverted, and the preferred judging function is introverted. This can result in a "bouncing around" approach to life (right brain: whole to parts), relying on subjective judgments, and a desire to leave all options open.
  For introverts, it is the auxiliary function, not the dominant function, that this letter refers to. MBTI INTP, for example, has a dominant Judging function, introverted Thinking (Ti), but it is actually a Perceiving type in MBTI because the strongest Perceiving function is extraverted iNtuition (Ne). (Socionics, a personality theory similar to MBTI, follows opposite notation for introverts; the J/P designation in this theory refers to the dominant function for all types.)

[编辑] Type dynamics

The Sixteen Types
ISTJ	ISFJ	INFJ	INTJ
ISTP	ISFP	INFP	INTP
ESTP	ESFP	ENFP	ENTP
ESTJ	ESFJ	ENFJ	ENTJ
The table organizing the sixteen types was created by Isabel Myers, who preferred INFP (To find the opposite type of the one you are looking at, jump over one type diagonally.)

Population Breakdown
ISTJ 11.6%	ISFJ 13.8%	INFJ 1.5%	INTJ 2.1%
ISTP 5.4%	ISFP 8.8%	INFP 4.4%	INTP 3.3%
ESTP 4.3%	ESFP 8.5%	ENFP 8.1%	ENTP 3.2%
ESTJ 8.7%	ESFJ 12.3%	ENFJ 2.4%	ENTJ 1.8%
By using inferential statistics an estimate of the preferences found in the US population has been gathered.

The interaction of two, three, or four preferences are known as type dynamics, and when dealing with a four-preference combination it is called a type. In total, there are 16 unique types, and many more possible two and three letter combinations, which each have their own descriptive name. Additionally, it is sometimes possible to observe the interactions that each preference combination will have with another combination, although this is more unorthodox. Complete descriptions will contain the unique interactions of all four preferences in that person, and these are typically written by licensed psychologists based on data gathered from thousands of interviews and studies. The Center for Applications of Psychological Type has released short descriptions on the internet.^[9] The most in-depth descriptions, including statistics, can be found in The Manual.^[10]

[编辑] The type table

The type table is a visualization tool which is useful for discussing the dynamic qualities and interactions of preference combinations. It will typically be divided by selecting any pair of preferences and comparing or contrasting. One of the most common and basic has been used to the right. It is the grouping of the mental functions, ST, SF, NF and NT, and focuses on the combination of perception and judgment. Alternatively, if we group by the rows we will have the four attitudes which are IJ, IP, EP and EJ. There are also more complex groupings, such as combinations of perception and orientations to the outer world, which are SJ, SP, NP and NJ, or combinations of judgement and orientations to the outer world, which are TJ, TP, FP, and FJ.

[编辑] Cognitive function dynamics in each type

In each type, all four of the cognitive, or mental functions, which are sensing, intuition, thinking and feeling, are present and arranged in a different order. The type acronym is used as a quick way to figure out this order, which is slightly different in introverts and extraverts. An important point to remember is that the first and last letter of the type are used as guides to figure out the order of the middle two letters, which are the main priority. The chart below this section has the dynamics worked out for each type.

[编辑] Extraverts

If the first letter of the type is an E, such as ESTJ, then the dominant function is extraverted. The next step is to figure out to which of the middle two letters this applies. If the last letter is a P, then the dominant will be the second letter, the perceiving function, Sensing in this example, and if it is a J, then it will be the third letter, the judging function - in this case, Thinking. Thus, we can tell that the first or dominant function in the ESTJ is extraverted thinking, and the second is introverted sensing. The third function is the opposite of the second, and in this case is extraverted intuition, and the fourth is introverted feeling.

[编辑] Introverts

If the first letter of the type is an I, such as in INFP, then the dominant is introverted. To figure out which of the middle two letters this applies to, look at the last letter, which indicates which function is extraverted. If it is a P, then the introverted dominant function will be the third letter, which is the judging function, and if it is a J, then it will be the second letter, which is the perceiving function. (The process may seem backwards and slightly confusing for introverts.) Already it is possible to tell that the INFP has an introverted dominant, and since their perceiving function (iNtuition) is extraverted, the dominant must be the judging function (Feeling). Thus the dominant function is introverted feeling, and the second function (the auxiliary) is extraverted intuition.

The four functions alternate in orientation. For introverts, the sequence would proceed introverted, extraverted, introverted, extraverted. The third function (the tertiary) is the opposite of the second, and the fourth is the opposite of the first. For an INFP, with introverted feeling and extraverted intuition, the third function is introverted sensing, and the fourth is extraverted thinking.

[编辑] Function table

Template:MBTI table

Below, the MBTI personality archetypes, after David West Keirsey [1]. Keirsey adds four "Temperaments": SP - Artisan; SJ - Guardian; NF - Idealist; and NT - Rational.

Template:MBTI Archetypes

[编辑] Temperament

Temperament
SJ	SP	NF	NT
iStJ	iSfJ	iNFj	iNTj
iStP	iSfP	iNFp	iNTp
eStP	eSfP	eNFp	eNTp
eStJ	eSfJ	eNFj	eNTj
Keirsey's four temperaments within the MBTI.

Note: The following information is drawn from the unique contributions regarding 'Temperament' by David W. Keirsey to the existing Myers-Briggs system, which is not directly associated with the official Myers-Briggs Type Indicator:

Hippocrates, a Greek philosopher who lived from 460-377 B.C., proposed four humours in his writings. These were blood, phlegm, yellow bile and black bile. Around A.D. 190, Galen corresponded these to four temperaments: sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric and melancholic. In 1978, David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates reintroduced temperament theory in modern form and identified them as Artisan, Guardian, Idealist, and Rational. After developing modern temperament theory, Keirsey discovered the MBTI, and found that by combining Sensing with the perceiving functions, SP (Artisan) and SJ (Guardian), and iNtuition with the judging functions, NF (Idealist) and NT (Rational), he had descriptions similar to his four temperaments.^[11][12]

The Manual states on page 59 that, "It is important to recognize that temperament theory is not a variant of type theory, nor is type theory a variant of temperament theory." Keirsey later went on to develop the Keirsey Temperament Sorter, which was first included in his book Please Understand Me.

[编辑] Correlations to Other Instruments

McCrae & Costa ^[3] present correlations between the MBTI scales and the Big Five personality construct, which is a conglomeration of characteristics found in nearly all personality and psychological tests. The five personality characteristics are extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability (or neuroticism). The following study is based on the results from 267 men followed as part of a longitudinal study of ageing. (Similar results were obtained with 201 women.)

Template:MBTI study

These data suggest that four of the MBTI scales are related to the Big Five personality traits. These correlations show that E-I and S-N are strongly related to extraversion and openness respectively. T-F and J-P are more weakly related to agreeableness and conscientiousness respectively. The emotional stability dimension of the Big Five is largely absent from the MBTI.

These findings lead McCrae and Costa to conclude "There was no support for the view that the MBTI measures truly dichotomous preferences or qualitatively distinct types... Jung's theory is either incorrect or inadequately operationalized by the MBTI and cannot provide a sound basis for interpreting it."

[编辑] Study of Scoring Consistency

Split-half reliability of the MBTI scales is good, although test-retest reliability is sensitive to the time between tests. However, because the MBTI dichotomies scores in the middle of the distribution, type allocations are less reliable. Within each scale, as measured on Form G, about 83% of categorisations remain the same when retested within nine months, and around 75% when retested after nine months. About 50% of people tested within nine months remain the same overall type and 36% remain the same after nine months. ^[13]

[编辑] Ethics

Before purchasing the MBTI, practitioners are required to consent to an ethical code, in addition to meeting the educational requirements of class B and C psychological tests and assessments. After consenting to this code the usage of the indicator is largely unmonitored, which sometimes leads to abuses of the instrument. The ethical code contains, but is not limited to, the following points:^[14][15]

1. Results should be given directly to respondents and are strictly confidential, including from employers.
2. Respondents should be informed of the nature of the test before taking it, and must choose to take it voluntarily.
3. Allow respondents to clarify their results. They are always the last word as to which type is truly theirs. They should then be provided a written description of their preferences.
4. The test must be used in accordance with The Manual.

In addition, the results of the instrument should not, ethically, be provided to a client without an accompanying consultative interpretation offered by the practitioner who administered the instrument. This interpretation may be conducted in person, via telephone or online. While the instrument and resulting interpretive report are a first step in determining MBTI personality type, the consultative interpretation guides and supports the client in ensuring they achieve a best-fit MBTI personality type.

[编辑] Criticism

[编辑] Validity

The scientific basis of the MBTI has been questioned. Neither Katharine Cook Briggs nor Isabel Briggs Myers had any scientific qualifications and Carl Jung's theory of psychological type, which the MBTI attempts to operationalise, is not based on any scientific studies. Jung's methods primarily included introspection and anecdote, methods largely rejected by the modern field of cognitive psychology. ^[16]

The statistical validity of the MBTI as a psychometric instrument has also been subject to criticism, in particular, the dichotomous scoring of dimensions. For example, it was expected that scores would show a bimodal distribution with peaks near the ends of the scales. However, scores on the individual subscales are actually distributed in a centrally peaked manner similar to a normal distribution. A cut-off exists at the centre of the subscale such that a score on one side is classified as one type, and a score on the other side as the opposite type. This fails to support the concept of type--the norm is for people to lie near the middle of the subscale. ^{[17][5][18][3][4]}

It has been estimated that between a third and a half of the published material on the MBTI has been produced for conferences of the Center for the Application of Psychological Type (which provides training in the MBTI) or as papers in the Journal of Psychological Type (which is edited by Myers-Briggs advocates) ^[19] and it has been argued that this reflects a lack of critical scrutiny. ^[5][19]

[编辑] Reliability

The reliability of the test has been interpreted as being low, with test takers who retake the test often being assigned a different type. According to surveys performed by the proponents of Myers-Briggs, the highest percentage of people fell into the same category on the second test is only 47%. Furthermore, a wide range of 39% - 76% of those tested fall into different types upon retesting weeks or years later, and many people's types also found to vary according to the time of the day.^[5][18] Skeptics claim that the MBTI lacks falsifiability, which can cause confirmation bias in the interpretation of results with the terminology of the MBTI so vague that it allows any kind of behavior to fit any personality type, resulting in the Forer effect, where an individual gives a high rating to a positive description that supposedly applies specifically to them ^[5][16] so that when people are asked to compare their preferred type to that assigned by the MBTI only half of people pick the same profile. ^[20]

[编辑] Utility

The relevance of the MBTI for career-planning has been questioned, with reservations about the relevance of type to job performance or satisfaction, and concerns about the potential misuse of the instrument in labelling individuals. ^[5][21]

[编辑] See also

• Psychometrics
• Personality psychology
• Big five personality traits
• Holland Codes
• Socionics
• Aptitudes
• EQ SQ Theory
• Keirsey Temperament Sorter
• DISC assessment
• False dilemma
• Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

[编辑] Notes

Template:Wikiquotepar

[编辑] References & Further Reading

• Hunsley J, Lee CM, Wood JM (2004). Controversial and questionable assessment techniques. Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Lilienfeld SO, Lohr JM, Lynn SJ (eds.). Guilford, ISBN 1-59385-070-0
• Martin, Charles R. (2001); Role of Type in Career Mastery. "Quick Guide to the 16 Personality Types and Career Mastery: Living with Purpose and Working Effectively" (Fountain Valley CA: Telos Publications, 2001), 3
• Berens, Linda V.; and Nardi, Dario (1999); What Is Personality "Type?". "The 16 Personality Types: Descriptions for Self-Discovery" (Fountain Valley CA: Telos Publications, 1999), 2
• Berens, Linda V.; and Nardi, Dario (1999); What Is Best-Fit Type?. "The 16 Personality Types: Descriptions for Self-Discovery" (Fountain Valley CA: Telos Publications, 1999), 6
• Berens, Linda V.; and Nardi, Dario (1999); Ways to Describe Personality. "The 16 Personality Types: Descriptions for Self-Discovery" (Fountain Valley CA: Telos Publications, 1999), 2
• Berens, Linda V.; Cooper, Sue A.; Ernst, Linda K.; Martin, Charles R.; Myers, Steve; Nardi, Dario; Pearman, Roger R.; Segal, Marci; and Smith, Melissa A. (2001); Applications of Type in Organizations. "Quick Guide to the 16 Personality Types in Organizations: Understanding Personality Differences in the Workplace" (Fountain Valley CA: Telos Publications, 2001), 1
• Bess, T.L. & Harvey, R.J. (2001, April). Bimodal score distributions and the MBTI: Fact or artifact? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego.
• Bourne, Dana (2005); Personality Types and the Transgender Community. Retrieved November 14, 2005
• Falt, Jack; Bibliography of MBTI/Temperament Books by Author. Retrieved December 20, 2004
• Geyer, Peter (1988); An MBTI® History. Retrieved December 20, 2004.
• Georgia State University; GSU Master Teacher Program: On Learning Styles. Retrieved December 20, 2004.
• Jung, Carl Gustav (1965); Memories, Dreams, Reflections. Vintage Books: New York, 1965. p. 207
• Matthews, Paul (2004); The MBTI is a flawed measure of personality. bmj.com Rapid Responses. Retrieved February 9, 2005
• Myers, Isabel Briggs (1970); Personal letter to Mary McCaulley. The MBTI Qualifying Program: The Center for Applications of Psychological Type, 2004. p. 20
• Myers, Isabel Briggs (1980); Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Davies-Black Publishing; Reprint edition (May 1, 1995). ISBN 0-89106-074-X
• Paul, Annie Murpy (2004); The Cult of Personality Testing. Free Press. ch. 5
• Personality Plus; Employers love personality tests. But what do they really reveal?
• Skeptics Dictionary "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" [2]
• The Myers & Briggs Foundation; Ethical Use of the MBTI® Instrument. Retrieved December 20, 2004
• Virginia Tech; The Relationship Between Psychological Type and Professional Orientation Among Technology Education Teachers. Retrieved December 20, 2004
• Alex Lukeman, Ph.D., 1998, Personality & Intelligence
• The Myers & Briggs Foundation: How Frequent Is My Type?
• Estimated frequencies compiled from a variety of MBTI® results from 1972 through 2002, including data banks at the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CPP, Inc) and Stanford Research Institute (SRI).
• Thomas G. Long (October 1992). "Myers-Briggs and other Modern Astrologies". Theology Today 49 (3): 291-95.

[编辑] 外部链接

MBTI－问卷及分析

• 职业倾向测验

My MBTI Personality Type

• The 16 MBTI Types -- Myers & Briggs

16 Personality Type Comparison

• 16 Personality Type Comparison

Publisher

• CPP -- Publisher of the MBTI
• OPP -- Licenced distributor of the MBTI in Europe

Organization of Type Professionals & Type Enthusiasts

• The Association for Psychological Type

Criticism

• Information from the Skepdic's Dictionary
• Measuring the MBTI and Coming Up Short -- Commonly Cited Critique of the MBTI from an academic psychologist

Template:Jungian psychology