Date: September 26, 2023 11:34AM
Pseudoscience at its worst. It amazes me that even some "scientific types" actually seem to take this seriously.
Here is an Abstract of a study on the effectiveness MBTI:
"Despite its immense popularity and impressive longevity, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) has existed in a parallel universe to social and personality psychology. Here, we seek to increase academic awareness of this incredibly popular idea and provide a novel teaching reference for its conceptual flaws. We focus on examining the validity of the Jungian-based theory behind MBTI that specifies that people have a “true type” delineated across four dichotomies. We find that the MBTI theory falters on rigorous theoretical criteria in that it lacks agreement with known facts and data, lacks testability, and possesses internal contradictions. We further discuss what MBTI's continued popularity says about how the general public might evaluate scientific theories."https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.12434
This represents a consensus opinion in the scientific community.
Note: There is no such thing as a "normal" human personality. However, there *is* such a thing as an average or statistically assessed response to a written test, or set of questions, or to some specified behavior occurring under specified conditions. Of course, in neither case do the statistical results mean a thing as to either what variables exist in the real world as related to human personality, or what 'natural' categories exist when discussing human nature.