[RoboTeddy]

I've heard this too, but I'm not sure how it could be true.

What would we hope for from a personality indicator? We'd hope that it would be useful for making predictions.

At an absolute minimum, MBTI could be used to predict the answers people give on an MBTI questionnaire. And what about beyond that? On the basis of someone testing as an I (introvert) vs E (extrovert), we might be able to predict whether someone would feel drained or invigorated after a busy social event. Has there really been work done to show that MBTIs have zero useful predictive value?

I will readily believe that there might be more useful models of personality, and that MBTI is no longer in vogue in psychological literature, and that MBTI was originally motivated on pseudoscientific principles, and that there more principled alternatives — but it doesn't necessarily follow that MBTI cannot be used to make useful predictions.

[NalNezumi]

>What would we hope for from a personality indicator?

Consistency, to begin with. (among other things) MBTI is not consistent, The thing Adam Grant did [1] I tried myself: Take the SAME test twice(or more) with about 3 weeks in-between. Hilariously enough, on one test I got that I were "entrepreneurial" and "social" while the second time I got "introverted" and "analytic/cautious". Not by itself contradictory but inconsistent nevertheless.

>but it doesn't necessarily follow that MBTI cannot be used to make useful predictions.

The problem is that it does follow that! Especially when it is used in HR practice! I have seen HR people construct "project groups" based on the members MBTI score!

When you take in to account these "personality tests" you have to consider the false classification too; If you base your judgement on false classification the test have now done damage to whatever process you used it for.

Would you be willing to follow & trust a medical diagnosis test that have NO scientific backing, not consistency, have a lot of false diagnostics, and based on that test, conduct life-endangering surgery?

It's fun for personal recreation, but MBTI is used in more than that, and have lasting effects to the individual and organizations when practiced. And that's why the fad has to die.

[1] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/give-and-take/201309...

[vokep]

I wonder if there may be some component of how one interprets the questions having a strong influence on the quality of the results. Maybe not, but, everyone I've talked to that has a strong opinion on MTBI being bs often grounds it in part with personal experience of taking the test multiple times and getting different results. I have taken the test at least about once a year since I found out about it many years back. I've taken the test in different forms, different environments, different moods when taking it, and still almost every time I got INTP. For a short period where I was going through a bit of a social growth spurt, I got ENTP. Also when taking the test a week or so after my first exposure to psychedelics, I tested INFP. I took care to go to answer the questions as honestly and accurate as I could, and that is the resulting experience I had. As well, when introducing others to it, I've guessed their type prior to knowing their result and been right on 3/4 letters most every time. Only a handful of trials of that and certainly not a conclusive scientific test, but this is part of what kept me interested in the test.

So given that, along with the anecdotal alignment of the personality descriptions with my experience, I personally believe MTBI may have more value than its given credit for. Its remarked by others it does already have similarity with Big 5. My thinking is that people want more from it than it is and they are somehow thinking it claims to be more than it is. In the most simple form the personality types seem to be more about describing particular (potentially somewhat arbitrarily categorized) archetypes as opposed to specific behavior types. Or put another way, it seems more about describing internal personality experience than external behavior. So it may call me introverted, but I may not be introverted by behavior according to others, but I may view myself as introverted, so that is the correct result. Am I just grasping at a belief here, or is there really absolutely "NO scientific backing"