4 x as many INFJs in Australia per capita than elsewhere.

[Flavus Aquila]

I was looking up MBTI distributions and stumbled across an Australian survey of about 20,000 Australians taken in 2005. The results are extremely divergent from US statistics, and my mind is turning over possible historical and social factors.

INFJs make up 4.35% of the Australian population.
INTJs make up 7.1% of the population.

No wonder I have always loved living here... it's an introverted intuitive paradise.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...2Ps66z0eW1JuSU6Tg&sig2=c4U6lPuGdr_WZ3rQgsSbQA

 

[Eventhorizon]

Odd.
I hear the sun is really strong down there. Maybe that has something to do with it?

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Odd.
I hear the sun is really strong down there. Maybe that has something to do with it?

The nurture/nature aspect is difficult to begin to speculate about.

High vitamin D?
Convict ancestry?
Family structures?
It's geographical isolation, and the kind of people willing to immigrate here?
Dietary differences?
?????

 

[Krypton]

[nitpick]Actually, INFJs make up 4.35% and INTJs make up 7.1%. You'd have to average the numbers done by gender here, not just add them up, and that's still assuming there's an equal share of men and women. [/nitpick]

 

[hush]

I was looking up MBTI distributions and stumbled across an Australian survey of about 20,000 Australians taken in 2005. The results are extremely divergent from US statistics, and my mind is turning over possible historical and social factors.

INFJs make up 8.7% of the Australian population.
INTJs make up 14.2% of the population.

No wonder I have always loved living here... it's an introverted intuitive paradise.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...2Ps66z0eW1JuSU6Tg&sig2=c4U6lPuGdr_WZ3rQgsSbQA

I think you might be looking at that data wrong... You combined the male and female percentages to 8.7 for INFJs, and 14.2 for INTJs, but if you combine all the percentages on that chart, you get right around 200%, so it's impossible for the population to be represented by the combined percentages. I think they just meant that 2.6% of the males were INFJ, with 6.1% for the females, so on average about 4.35% of the population.

 

[hush]

In the Wings beat me to it, it seems.

 

[hush]

[nitpick]Actually, INFJs make up 4.35% and INTJs make up 7.1%. You'd have to average the numbers done by gender here, not just add them up, and that's still assuming there's an equal share of men and women. [/nitpick]

At the bottom it shows that 11,538 of the participants were male, whereas 8,456 were female. Slightly skewed towards males, which explains the higher incidence of Thinking types vs. Feeling types, as there tend to be more male Thinking types than female ones.

 

[the]

People most likely to take a survey: infj

 

[hush]

People most likely to take a survey: infj

Can't even deny it.

 

[Krypton]

At the bottom it shows that 11,538 of the participants were male, whereas 8,456 were female. Slightly skewed towards males, which explains the higher incidence of Thinking types vs. Feeling types, as there tend to be more male Thinking types than female ones.

Mmmmm...using percentages would pretty much eliminate that skewing though, as long as the male and female populations were split up (which, in this study, they are). Sure more men+more men being thinkers would skew a pool not divided by gender, but if you convert the fractions the right way, the numbers are the same.

(That was a shitty explanation. Ah well)

 

[hush]

Mmmmm...using percentages would pretty much eliminate that skewing though, as long as the male and female populations were split up (which, in this study, they are). Sure more men+more men being thinkers would skew a pool not divided by gender, but if you convert the fractions the right way, the numbers are the same.

(That was a shitty explanation. Ah well)

Not a bad explanation, you make a good point.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

People most likely to take a survey: infj

That factor would apply to every survey, so it is the difference in regional distribution which is noteworthy.

Yes... I added the male and female figures. Will amend the thread when I get to a computer.

 

[cvp12gh5]

I was looking up MBTI distributions and stumbled across an Australian survey of about 20,000 Australians taken in 2005. The results are extremely divergent from US statistics, and my mind is turning over possible historical and social factors.

INFJs make up 8.7% of the Australian population.
INTJs make up 14.2% of the population.

No wonder I have always loved living here... it's an introverted intuitive paradise.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...2Ps66z0eW1JuSU6Tg&sig2=c4U6lPuGdr_WZ3rQgsSbQA

These results are accurate for the small samplings of individuals they tested. But to say that the percentages apply to the Australian population would be inaccurate. You have to remember that there are approximately 23 million people living in Australia. The sampling numbers are not adequate enough to claim percentages for Australia as a whole.

 

[Wyote]

I hear the sun is really strong down there. Maybe that has something to do with it?

Everyone has been forced indoors the majority of their life

 

[Flavus Aquila]

These results are accurate for the small samplings of individuals they tested. But to say that the percentages apply to the Australian population would be inaccurate. You have to remember that there are approximately 23 million people living in Australia. The sampling numbers are not adequate enough to claim percentages for Australia as a whole.

Anything over about 1000 people is usually adequate, if it is randomised. Most political polling works on numbers less than 2000.

 

[cvp12gh5]

Anything over about 1000 people is usually adequate, if it is randomised. Most political polling works on numbers less than 2000.

Right. And I also find political pollings to be b.s., lol.

1000 plus may seem adequate, but when you compare that number (even 20,000) with over 23 million, I would think it should be questioned.

 

[the]

That factor would apply to every survey, so it is the difference in regional distribution which is noteworthy.

Yes... I added the male and female figures. Will amend the thread when I get to a computer.

That's just like your opinion man.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Right. And I also find political pollings to be b.s., lol.

1000 plus may seem adequate, but when you compare that number (even 20,000) with over 23 million, I would think it should be questioned.

It's a survey, not a census.

Given that there has been no MBTI census in any country (as far as I know), we just have to take surveys for what they are and deal with that.

 

[cvp12gh5]

It's a survey, not a census.

Given that there has been no MBTI census in any country (as far as I know), we just have to take surveys for what they are and deal with that.

I'm just saying. I don't find any of these survey results to be acceptable. If they can't start with a realistic number of survey takers then why even bother putting a percentage to the results and claiming x% of whatever population is xxxx? Sure you can take the results for what they are, but they can't be applied realistically to a whole country when you aren't working with good numbers.

For all we know, INFJ's and INTJ's may be more common than we thought. And there may even be a higher percentage of these types in Australia.

 

[Krypton]

I'm just saying. I don't find any of these survey results to be acceptable. If they can't start with a realistic number of survey takers then why even bother putting a percentage to the results and claiming x% of whatever population is xxxx? Sure you can take the results for what they are, but they can't be applied realistically to a whole country when you aren't working with good numbers.

For all we know, INFJ's and INTJ's may be more common than we thought. And there may even be a higher percentage of these types in Australia.

It's a survey, not a census.

Given that there has been no MBTI census in any country (as far as I know), we just have to take surveys for what they are and deal with that.

I mean, this is kind of what metastudies are for. Though I guess there are still problems with that given the amount of time it'd take for enough studies to pop up.