Lately, personalty tests such as ‘MBTI’ are gaining more and more traction. Schools are making it mandatory for students to complete it, and even using the results to ‘objectively’ evaluate them.
2 Likes
I would not want to attend any school (I assume you are American and mean what others calls a university, a place of higher education) that has a policy of holding them in such high regard.
6 Likes
Meyers Briggs has been criticised for being binary; even if you score roughly in the middle on each category, the result will be the same as someone who scored very convince in one category.
That said, it can give insight what makes you tick, and from trying it with friends, it’s pretty accurate. And even if you disagree, that gives insight.
The DISC personality test is common in the workspace (I’ve taken it 4 times now, once for each employer…). Despite being very simple, knowing the DISC type of my colleagues and clients has made interactions much better.
If someone is red: be to the point and actionable.
If someone is blue: be precise and orderly.
2 Likes
I suppose that MBTI tests are more reliable than horoscopes, but I still consider it more like pseudoscience, as many of such “pop” personality tests are.
The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a self-report questionnaire that makes pseudoscientific claims to categorize individuals into 16 distinct “psychological types” or “personality types”.
8 Likes
At no point.
Even assuming that they have some sort of indication or thought put behind them, any chance of reliability vanishes when you know the test in which you will “compete” in, beforehand.
This means that you can study for the test and get the result you like.
E.g. look at the Meyer Briggs nonsense:
At some point it was an internet fad for people to start their posts by saying “As an INTJ person I…” which probably meant that you could safely predict whatever tripe they were going to say next wouldn’t be of much value. (imagine how gullible you have to be to believe that you have the “innovative, independed, and driven by their own original ideas” tag of the INTJ, and still not have enough thoughts of your own to NOT shoehorn yourself like that 
). Thankfully that fad has faded, since the people that did this rightfully got ridiculed mercilessly.
So, if you know the basic characteristics of each category, you can reliably, even without any other preparation, get the result you like.
I actually tried that for fun, back when they were popular, and a lot of those tests where floating in the internet, even for free.
100 questions, 5 different answers each.
Tried it 8 times, easily managed to get 8 different results. 
To quote Carlin “it’s all bullshit and it is bad for you”.
Sounds like an odd way to discriminate people and students at this day and age.
I am usually averse to frivolous litigation, but I am amazed that noone has sued them to oblivion.
7 Likes
Here is a good source for some information regarding such tests generally, especially the distinction between those considered medical (psychiatric) and those considered non-medical: Personality Tests
The MMPI is typically used for getting a high security clearance in the U.S.
1 Like
Well, that’s funny.
See how easily an example test of that sort can be manipulated.
First, I run the test just to see what kind of questions there were, without much care on maintaining a particular desire to score on some of the measured results, since I went into it without knowing who those where. My main idea was “I need to answer in a way that would give me a “sane enough” result to get me cleared” which is an easy task, since I am definitely sane enough anyway.
Result:
I think that this is not just “sane enough”, but saner than most and on my first try. 
Now that I knew the questions and the “ten gauges” and that the test checks for “validity”, I went for another run, where I assumed the persona of a hypochondiac phychasthenic deviant applicant and tried to really raise the validity and score high on “nut-case” spectrum and see if I could pull it off:
Nailed it. 
Do note that I got 93% validity, by giving 100% fake answers.
The questions/answers are so obvious that it really is a waste of time, resources and money.
Where is DOGE when you need it?
1 Like
I think you overlook two important points: (1) Most people going into the test have never heard of it and have no intention to manipulate it; (2) in a security context, it is just one minor tool in a much larger investigation. Like a polygraph, which can also be manipulated from both sides, its main value may be as a psychological lever.
4 Likes
I didn’t overlook that. I passed the test even with the same ignorance. In my first effort I didn’t really try to manipulate the test, I just gave sane answers, as a sane person myself.
On my second try I did try to manipulate the test and managed it easily.
The point is that even minor knowledge of the test can help you get whichever result you desire. Let’s say that this was a test to discharge you from the mandatory/draft army service (we do have a similar test). There is a very obvious way to get the “this dude should go home” kind of result, easily.
Hopefully the security part of the screening process involves more rigorous and robust processes/tests/criteria.
I wouldn’t ever attempt to lie on a polygraph to be honest. I think this is something that really needs extensive training and experience and I am not a good liar, at all.
Now, if you take the test while polygraphed, then that changes things radically and I would conceed that the margin of manipulating the result is severely diminished. 
In the aforementioned test we have in the army we have a different “psychological lever” to keep people honest. You can manipulate the test to get the “I5 - phychological” result ( unfit for service for psychological reasons), but that paper follows you around for life.
In every job in this country, the employer asks for your “military service completion” paper and if that paper says that you are insane, then you are “non employable” until you turn 40 and people stop to really ask for that paper (because they assume that you have it).
So, unless people are really insane, they tend to avoid pretending insanity, even though it seems tempting at the time.
In my congnitive psychology class, we were told to treat them like mini games, they are fun and neat to read by did not provide any value. My professor specifically was very against any sort of online personality test and stayed away from them in the class.
The one that was brought up the most was “MBTI”, I’ve seen people mention it before but I’ve assumed nobody took it too seriously.
5 Likes
The point isn’t to conjure up answers to earn some kind of identity, as if the results change who you are in any way.
The point is to answer the questions honestly, usually in some kind of small group setting, to help the members understand the different ways group members think.
Without little games like this, many can think subconsciously “everyone thinks or acts as I do” and so the tool becomes an ice breaker to talk about viewpoints without anyone feeling like theirs is “wrong” or “weird”
I’m not sure sane people need to try to give sane answers
2 Likes
I would agree if not for this:
Schools are making it mandatory for students to complete it, and even using the results to ‘objectively’ evaluate them.
Once that happens, then you can expect people to try to locate which is the most “advantageous” result and work/train towards getting it. Which is, as I demonstrated practically, very easy to achieve. Which makes these tests mostly worthless.
Also I did mention that it was, at some point, an internet fad. While I wouldn’t spend a dime on such things and did some free ones for my own amusement, a lot of people paid good money to get “evaluated” just to have a sense of belonging in some “elevated group” like those in the Meyer Brigg scale. If you read through them you will see that all of them are positive, which is a red flag for a “feel-good” kind of scam.
The only thing most of those tests managed to evaluate was “who is gullible enough to pay for something without value”.
The opposite can also happen (or should I say, mostly happens?).
Just because you got pidgeon-holed into a group, now you cannot disagree with the label that got plastered on you, lest you disappoint your group’s peers. 
You do not need labels and groups to inquire/discuss viewpoints.
Stretch your hand for a handshake, say “Hello, nice to meet you” introduce yourself and things will roll from there.
Or maybe I am too old now, this doesn’t work anymore and I haven’t noticed yet. Could be.
In my experience the people that have turned their group identity into their personal one, are the least interesting and least likely to have an opinion worth discussing, because if you are familiar with their group, they tend to have the exact same taking points and they cannot discuss them anyway because:
a) They are not salient points which they thought of their own, but points that they have “inherited” from their group. Thus their understanding of those points is paper-thin
and
b) Discussing said points might mean that they might have to examine, alter or even abandon them, which is a cardinal sin.
True, which is why I didn’t have to try.
But if I was insane and I didn’t want the test to show it, I would have probably aced that too because it is easy to get whichever result you feel like.
2 Likes
In the context of mandatory schooling, I agree.
I would argue it’s only a red flag in the context of being used for identity sake.
Agreed, who pays for a test that is free elsewhere.
I’ve done the test a handful of times in different groups, maybe I was just lucky, but I didn’t notice anyone “trapped” by their results.
Correct, you don’t need them, they’re just a tool, a common language to use to discuss different ideas. There are many other tools that also exist for such purpose.
Maybe your circles are much more self reflective than mine. In my experience, identifying your own personal biases based on how you were raised is not so easy.
Yeah agreed, this is rare everywhere AFAICT. Not many people are comfortable with changing their beliefs.
2 Likes
You are interpreting evaluating as the students getting a grade, as if a for example ENTP would be graded 10 / A for being good, and INTJ gets an 1 or F for bad. I find it incredibly unlikely that a school would use the test in that way.
I can’t know the context, but it seems much more likely that the tests will be used in the context BHydden named:
Or about using the objective evaluation in the context of making a personalised lesson plan for students, to better understand their talents and weaknesses.
1 Like
Depending on the kind of test and its results, you could make experiments where you mis-position some people in the tests and see if they alter their behaviour to follow the label you have artificially provided to them
I was born, raised and live in a village.
Personal bias is generally rarely an issue in rural places (since it is mostly expected), but it even less so in the Balkans. Being “unbiased” here can actually be the most anti-social thing you can do.
On the contrary, I find it incredibly unlikely that this is not the point.
If not, then the issue the OP raised wouldn’t exist in the first place.
If it is just inconsequential flair just used as an “ice-breaker”, why would anyone - the OP included - even care?
That’s even worse, for various reasons. It is past midnight here and I am sleeping on my keyboard, but off the top off my head:
a) Those tests are usually inaccurate and considered pseudo-scientific, for valid reasons
b) Even if they were accurate and veracious (which they are not), those tests results can change with time, since we are talking about students (be they children or teenagers)
c) Those tests could turn into a self-fulfilled prophecy, urging the student to morph into the group characteristics assigned
d) last by not least, those groups are arbitrary and restrictive
Here is the image again:
I’ve circled the characteristics I’ve exhibited during my life. For all of them there is a practical example, even for the “outgoing” which is the only characteristic I crossed out, but I decided to actually set a high bar of entry.
Yes. Almost all of them.
And their opposites.
I can be “enthusiastic” AND “grumpy”.
If you propose a game of Go at a Go club? I am enthusiastic. If you want me to go to the dancing club, I am grumpy
If you ask for my opinion I can be an “original thinker who enjoys speculation”. If you ask for facts I can be “an unoriginal thinker that will bore you with sources.”
and so forth…
I am willing to bet that most - if not all - of the people in this forum would be able to attribute to themselves instances where their character, or their circumstances, have led them to exhibit all of those characteristics and their opposites, multiple times in their lives.
Why would you restrict yourself or your child based on a bizarro-test that someone made to put people in some boxes, for their own purpose? 
1 Like
The critisms you post are valid, but only for the dumb free online tests. The image you are using is from a free internet knock off. Those ask you at best 20 questions and then answer a generic blurb. You can’t judge the actual test based on that.
If you get a real test, you get 100+ well designed questions and a very nuanced 20 page analysis rapport. It’s not locking you into boxes.
These tests aren’t pretending to do anything magical. They are asking you a lot of very similar questions. If you consistently show a preference in your answers to certain hypothetical situations, then the analysis shows that you have a preference for answering a certain way.
It just illuminates your own answers. Then based on that it gives some advice on how you can use that in your advantage. I’m hard pressed to find criticism in that. Or how that locks you into self fulfilling boxes.
The criticism that it is pseudo-scientifc, sure but it’s not like a scientific approach exists. The alternative is to talk to a school guidance counselor, if there is one. That’s less scientific and depends on the counselor.
Compare the free websites with a professional one like Insights and MBTI.
Btw Insights is the one I’ve had administered 4 times, not Disc. And I would let my (hypothetical) kid take it, because the rapport gives us tons of stuff to talk about, stuff that otherwise would not be discussed.
3 Likes
To summarise, online tests are useless and similar to cold reading, like this great example
I’ve taken real ones as well. The European Union has its own brand of them to actually determine if they are going to interview for a position or not, so such tests can be very serious issues and with real life consequences and potential benefits or drawbacks if you just happen to not be able to improve on them - how fair, eh? … I did improve from 70/100 in my first “I’ve never seen this before” attempt to 96/100 in my final one. None of my other skills improved. Just my “test taking”, which is an extra indication that those tests are not useful and just serve as arbitrary boxing and gate-keeping.
So the exact same things apply to them. And worse, because now it is not just “fun and game”. You could lose your job or never even get hired over tests like that.
As I’ve already said earlier, I have tried those 100+ questions tests when they were “in vogue”. Even the free ones did deliver a 10 page analysis report. It was all inflated tripe.
Even the one I took earlier to run my small experiment had 104 questions. Far more than the “at best 20 questions”.
Now, are the paid ones even more convoluted and “serious looking”? I guess they’d have to be, in order to maintain the facade of being worth any money, but that doesn’t make them any more useful.
They are pretending to do anything useful at all, and that’s already a wild claim, as far as I am concerned
I find it quite easy actually.
Creating an imaginary box, putting people there and then selling them “courses”, “insight”, dating coaching", “advice” and “lists of professions that they should be aiming for” is not something that I find useful. I could potentially go as far as calling it a scam and unethic, to be frank, but let’s not go that far and just say that it is counter-productive and only benefits the people that perpetuate the fad.
For example:
https://www.16personalities.com/intj-relationships-dating
There is a button there:
It takes you to their “pay us to guide you” page:
They are such bandwaggoneers, that they’d added an AI advisor… on HUMAN personality
True, but just because there is not a valid, peer-reviewed scientific approach on this, it does not mean that the best “service providers” around that field, get to have the respect befitting a scientific authority.
Even the best scientific paper is full of caveats and “ifs” and conditions.
You can read their language above. They are selling certainty
I can’t say that there is much improvement.
In the Insights site:
“The power to see yourself as others see you”
"Discovery Full Circle. A psychologically safe 360 experience to help teams connect & collaborate "
A bold statement, indeed.
They go on (bolded emphasis added by me):
"About Insights Discovery and our products
Insights Discovery is our transformational experience for learners all over the world. It brings psychology to life in an accessible, practical model that shows people how understanding themselves better can make a positive difference in the workplace and beyond. Based on four colours, Insights Discovery helps individuals learn more about their preferred behaviours, the strengths they bring and the challenges they’re likely to face. The best thing about Insights Discovery is that it shows us how we prefer to act - or the space we’re most comfortable in – but it reminds us that personality is fluid; every individual can draw on their less inclined behaviours to handle the demands of specific situations. But they can only do this when they’re self-aware…
All of our learning journeys start with Insights Discovery and self-awareness – it’s the foundation on which all other human skills are built. Our follow-on products apply the Insights Discovery methodology – with all of its memorability and accessibility – to specific challenge areas, including teamwork, leadership, resilience and more.
Find out more about all of our products and how they help people build the skills they need to succeed at work."
So, it is “psychologically safe” yet “transformational”.
They admit that “personality is fluid” (to cover their bases) and then immediately plug you that you cannot unlock/use your fluid personality traits, unless you are self aware about them (which is obviously an extremely far-fetched statement designed to generate FOMO).
And then, just a modest claim that their “Insights Discovery and self-awareness – it’s the foundation on which all other human skills are built”.
When does the bit-connect dude come out?
Anyway, let’s see the “official Meyer Briggs” site. It might be better?
“The Myers-Briggs Company is one of the world’s largest business psychology providers. We empower individuals and help organizations to improve teamwork and collaboration, develop leaders, foster diversity, and solve their most complex people challenges.”
Nice word salad. At least they are corporately accurate. “Business psychology providers”. Noice!
Well, they have a section with MBTI Facts. I want in on that
Now, that is an interesting read and I’d have a lot of stitches for their hide, but this is already getting too long, so I’ll just go to the section where they seem to adress my concerns:
“I have heard the MBTI® assessment “puts people into a box.” Does it?”
Within it they alternate between the “it is not much, just focuses on four core aspects of personality” (so it is not a box, not because it doesn’t put you in categories, but because those are not complete - amazing argument ), with going around telling you useful the test can be regardless of being such a narrow endeavor and then finishing off with this:
“Some people do say they feel “put into a box” and this can be the case with any personality questionnaire, not just the MBTI assessment. People with an unsatisfactory MBTI experience are often those who did not participate in a skilled interpretation session with an MBTI certified practitioner, and they may not have had the chance to discover their best-fit type. Therefore, a feedback session with an MBTI certified practitioner or completing MBTIonline, which includes an interactive feedback session, is recommended.”
Argument a) Hey if we are boxing people, so does everyone else, so lay off, ok?
Argument b) If you didn’t get a satisfactory result, it is because you didn’t pay enough to get a pro and a “skilled interpretation session with an MBTI certified practitioner” (what a blatant sales pitch - who certifies those practitioners by the way? Oh, they do! hohoho)
Argument c) Throw us some more money and you’ll have “the chance to discover their best-fit type”. Wait “best-fit type”? Isn’t that the part where they tried to tell us about the “not-boxing people”. They must have forgotten in the fervor of the sales pitch
Argument d) Pay more to get the “interactive feedback session” whatever that is.
Oh, yeah. I wouldn’t want to miss on an “interactive feedback session”. Isn’t that what the word “discussion” means? Oh, sorry. My mistake. A discussion is free. An “interactive feedback session” is when you pay for it. How naive of me.
Anyway, I’ve only dipped my toe into the “serious websites” and Carlin’s “its all BS and it’s bad for you” quote only rings more in my head.
It could be me, though.
As an ENTJ, ENFJ, ESFJ, ESTJ, ENTP, ENFP, ESFP, ESTP, INTJ, INFJ, ISFJ, ISTJ, INTP, INFP, ISFP, ISTP person, I tend to be a bit annoyingly nit-picky. 
I should have stopped there, but I have had a very nice day - which resulted in a nice headache - so I thought to myself, “ok, I need a cherry on top of this”, so I went back to the other site and checked their products. Immediately their “Self-aware leader” jumped out on me since it is a topic that I was very interested in, on very practical terms.
Right off the bat, WHAM!
*What’s the impact?
It’s not just the leaders themselves that will benefit from this development. Having self-aware leaders operating at all levels of an organisation can lead to significant business benefits."
What are these people on?
Isn’t it obvious that achieving the improvement of an organisation and business benefits is the goal of trying to become a better leader? Leadership is, by definition, something applied to/for/on others.
Then some corporate word-salads follow and a FOMO pitch for the whole service and then we hit the “What is it?” part. Let’s see:
“The Self-Aware Leader is Insights’ solution for developing great leaders at all levels of an organisation.”
Amazing. I am in the Insights website and the service is called the “Self-Aware Leader” so what else could it be? Then, they proceed to stuff the paragraph with what leadership is, but not what this program is. So… what is it? We do not know yet, other than that it exists and is made by Insight, as is evident that we are in the Insight website, in case we lost it from our sight.
Next up the “Ways to use it”. That has to contain something practical right? We might even find out what this thing is:
“The Self-Aware Leader is an ideal next step from Insights Discovery.”
Damn! Immediate plug for a different service which you “ideally” would have to buy.
“We recommend it for existing leaders who want to adopt a more purposeful, self-aware approach, but also for new leaders who would benefit from learning more about their style and its impact on others.”
Oooook, they’ve gone full vegan with the word-salads. This is just a fancy way to recommend it to everyone.
“Self-aware leaders will:” Oh, finally something practical?
"- Adapt their approach from day one to be more responsive to the needs of those they lead
- Build their new self-knowledge into a development plan that will help them reach their leadership and career goals
- Identify what they can change about their approach to influence the success of their team and organisation"
So, the “Self-aware Leader” program, is a program that will improve your leadership.
I thought that was self-evident, but hey.
“How does it work?” (parenthesis are my additions)
"This is a learning experience (duh!) that makes time for intense self-reflection and creates a safe space for leaders to share their challenges and aspirations. (when does the part where Insight actually does something, comes in?) Building on the knowledge from the Insights Discovery Personal Profile, (Oops, it is not just “ideal” to buy the previous service, but kinda mandatory) leaders are challenged to reflect inwards (so you are not teaching them anything. ok) on who they are, and consider how they can build their leadership capabilities in a way that’s authentic for them.
Leaders work with the Insights Discovery Transformational Leadership Profile, which gives insight into eight critical abilities (oh, great. More paid boxes) within the leadership dimensions, as well as some really practical tips (Some? oh, well at least there are some practical tips) for enhancing their effectiveness in each area.
Leaders will be able to explore their own leadership style (Still no news on any insights provided by Insights. The people that pay seem to do the exploring, themselves), and then – through a modular approach (whatever that mambo-jumbo means in this case) – turn their attention to those leadership dimensions (considering there are 8 critical abilities, leadership must be eight-dimensional too) they need to develop further."
“Who is it for?”
Well, I do not need to read that. It must be for anyone and everyone. Provided they have money, that it. Yup. Read it. It is. What a surprise!
“Develop stronger, self-aware leaders. Complete the form, and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible…”
Blatant information gathering and artificial inflation of importance. We have so many clients, you need to wait your turn hohoho.
Anyway, it’s all corpo-funk/junk.
Fun to read and consider, but nothing I’d pay money for.
I’d like to thank you for providing those two links and the opportunity to peruse them.
They have been grand fun and quite a blast from the past.
When I was younger (thus much more vigorous - I am aware that people find me annoying now, but I am much more tame compared to 15-20 years ago), in other fora, people would come in the afternoon and blatantly go “hey we found that silly thing online. Chew it up and let’s laugh at it” or even better “I have an assignment on this topic/website/issue. What do you think about that webpage with information about it?”. Oh, the fun I’ve had chewing through corporate mambo-jumbo and the inane stuff that people seem take seriously just because society as a whole seems to take them seriously.
I haven’t done that in a while.
Damn old age and the lack of worries-free time it comes with.
Aren’t the professional tests also mostly online too, though?
For the EU ones you’d have to go to a very professional testing center on your own expense to prevent cheating, but I highly doubt that the average professional test goes to such rigorous lengths.
2 Likes
According to my sister back when she was into MBTI, one of the things the interviewer does is assign the type even if it is not what the test indicated. Which struck me as fitting very well with my opinion that humans are very good at fitting some set of categories to data, so you could have just about any set of categories (such as the 4 Hogwarts Houses or the 16 MBTI types) and place people into them in a way that felt reasonable. It did not give me any confidence that MBTI was any better than Enneagram or Astrology, needless to say
That said, I like the Five Factor Model, but part of that is that it makes modest claims like “you can be right about 55% of the time guessing someone’s gender based on this factor”
All that said, I don’t mind MBTI as a conversation starter, I just object to presenting it as more than it is
1 Like
I have no clue what this is, but alternatively they could have pitched this as:
“Use our system to potentially get a 5% increase chance on a coin toss prediction”.
Though, granted, it doesn’t sound good enough to pay for, that way
Ok, I googled it. I’ve had a run into this one recently.
A former student of mine is in university and is now taking the relevant courses on being an HR worker (I honestly feel sorry for her, but I can’t say that) and she recently sent me some of that stuff asking for some help in organising/translating them for some “professoral ditch assignment” (the professor is ditching the students to do his work on one of his projects). I had quite the laugh with the “extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to experience” list and its parafernalia. I even helped her write a part of a group essay on that, since they assignment asked them to go out and interview people to provide them “real life work experiences in which those 5 things would apply/help with”.
I’ve rarely written more jargon-filled BS than that. According to her, that interview part and my example, aced it 
On one hand I did try my best to help her write a good essay/assignment.
On the other hand, that kind of pseudo-sensical jargon-fest being what you need to come up with in order to get top grades is distasteful.
I do not mind them either… it is a safe way to discern immediately that I am losing my time there.
So, in a way, I find them so useless, that they are useful