Birthstone wrote:
Young Lean wrote:
Birthstone wrote:
Meyers-Briggs is good for letting someone know what personality they believe they are. As an objective measure of personality traits it isn't that great.
For a true personality review, you need to have a professional administer a test like the IPIP Big 5 that Doldol mentioned, or even better the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory.
As an objective measure of personality traits the test is pretty solid considering you answer honestly, there just arent as many aspects as the big 5. The lack of scientific backing primarily lies in their interpretation of social communication preferences or goals. No sense in regurgitating whats already been covered.
Not sure how that can be true when you yourself admit the results change depending on your mood.
Mood does not affect personality. Personality, by definition, is mostly stable over time. That's why the Meyers-Briggs isn't good as an objective measure. Other measures are much more consistent.
I don't think I said the results change on your mood. The test doesn't question you based off of how you feel in the moment, it's based off of your general tendencies. If you are answering the questions impulsively then you will get impulsive results. Mood does in fact change your personality quite a bit, not sure where you're getting that from. Personality by definition is not specifically stable or unstable.
An example, "You do not usually initiate conversations." you can agree or disagree to an extent of 3 on either side.
Let's say you're feeling lower than usual in the moment, but usually you're pretty outgoing. Answering an extent of "Disagree" because you dont want to talk to anyone at that moment would be answering the question incorrectly. Thinking of how you usually act, and answering the proper extent of "Agree" would be answering correctly.
I see that you're not saying it's complete garbage, but my biggest strife is you saying "Meyers-Briggs is good for letting someone know what personality they believe they are" as if they're just looking for a sense of affirmation within the test. Yes it happens, but only if the test is done wrongly.
It has also already been said that the test is more so an indicator, meaning it's a general measurement of your personality.
Doldol wrote:
Urh I'm sorry but no, Honestly the problem with Big 5 is that it doesn't really provide you answers to everyday life, it doesn't really say anything simple about you like "You're good at protecting people" or something, it gives many scientific data points which provide answers to psychologists or neuroscientists to aid in research, you can't use it solely personally as these datapoints need to be contrasted to a big sample size every time the test is performed.
That still doesn't mean that you should listen to what the MBTI tells you about yourself, it's based on how non-experts interpreted pseudo-scientific research by Carl Jung (who never intended it to be used this way). The outcomes differ per organization providing the test and have never proven to be correct & It is obviously heavily commercialized. You should consider it as valid as your weekly horoscope. Still though, without duplicity, if it's fun for you to read into these things, sure. :3
But don't build your self-identity on it.
////
I'm sure synthic could jump in here if he wants to stop trolling/memeing for 1 sec, and actually contribute something valuable since afaik he's a psychology student.
I see what you mean, we know any diy test has the capacity to misdirect people. But I think most of the time that is more so the fault of whoever is blindly accepting everything they read.
The test more or less gives a list of social habits you may or may not engage in, and provides detail about how or why you might engage in them.
There are many things to potentially take away from this, but by no means should you base your entire personality off of it.
All of this is stated in the
framework section *cough cough* of the website :^)
Birthstone
