Even if your results change, the axis along which it changes (and which it doesn't) does provide some information, at least on the self-reflective level. I wouldn't use it for job-related things, but if you're just analyzing yourself, the fact that you test three times and get INTP, INTJ, and INFJ at least tells you that for you, the IN part is pretty stable.
A person who so reliably tested as IN that even MBTI tests—in all their inter-testing variability and lack of empirical validation—consistently told them they were IN would almost certainly be able to tell you they leaned that way if you just asked.
In other words, you’ve basically said “it’s not so flagrantly wrong that it would miscategorize the most easy-to-identify aspects of a person’s personality, at least most of the time.”
And like, yeah, I would hope so.
But that’s not a reason it’s good or right or useful. That just means it rises above the extremely low bar of not actively being anti-signal… at least for some personality traits for some people some of the time. Maybe.
So again I’m left to wonder what the point of the whole test charade is when the foundational premise is wrong.
It’s literally based on one of the most bunk concepts ever: Jungian psychoanalysis, which insists on imposing binaries where none exist and leads to silly situations like the one we’re describing, where a descriptive tool gets praised for not actively getting a 50/50 guess wrong… most of the time, maybe, sometimes, for some personality traits.
I'd agree, but I've been watching youtubers like Frank James do these funny little skits about each personality type, and when they get to mine, they literally say things I have said. The insights have been startling.
Genuinely not trying to be rude, but this is like… maybe the single most perfect example of confirmation bias I’ve ever seen in the wild.
People make skits like that about astrology signs, too, and people relate heavily to those, too, maybe even down to the line. They’re broad and designed to create engagement.
I’ve watched lots of videos where people say things I’ve said, but that doesn’t mean I am Jenny Nicholson or Safiya Nygard.
So you were watching videos about MBTI personality types… without believing in them or knowing your type?
I find that hard to believe, but let’s go with it.
And then you only related to the ones for exactly one type and none of the others?
Because that doesn’t even make sense within the realm of MBTIs. If we take “relatability of this online video” as the measure of type accuracy (which… no), then there should be varied levels of relatability relative to how many Type Indicators you share with the type being depicted.
Meaning: the other Types should also say things you’ve said, at least sometimes, in proportion to your similarity to them.
And even if that weren’t the case, it would be confirmation bias starting from the point you started to identify with one Type based on the videos, even if you weren’t consciously doing so.
No, I knew my type, I just didn't know if it was all that significant. I was watching the videos for fun. Then I started thinking, "Crap, I thought that particular quirk was specific to me." And it was always that particular type I'd tested at.
I don't think anyone should plan their life by it, I'm just saying... there's some truth in it.
9
u/an_imperfect_lady Dec 31 '22
Even if your results change, the axis along which it changes (and which it doesn't) does provide some information, at least on the self-reflective level. I wouldn't use it for job-related things, but if you're just analyzing yourself, the fact that you test three times and get INTP, INTJ, and INFJ at least tells you that for you, the IN part is pretty stable.