The MBTI was scientifically reviewed and dismissed in the 1970's (I think) because it has little predictive power, despite some peoples' opinions to the contrary. The test itself is too dichotomous and simplistic. In reducing people to binary terms, it did not accurately adhere to Carl Jung's personality system. The type codes, INFJ, INTJ, INTP, ENTP, etc, are merely shorthanded symbols for patterns of phenomenon that are much more complex and nuanced than the test allows for. An INFJ, for instance, is not just an emotional introvert with a neurotic preponderance for making character judgments: it is an individual who uses a static mental configuration - Ni-Fe-Ti-Se, in this case - in a dynamic, evolutionary manner to organize, interpret, and apply information such that they may effectively navigate life. Everyone possesses a particular flavor for each of the functional classes; it's just a matter of which ones and to what end. Unfortunately, Jung's theory is so qualitatively expansive that verification of personality is, at the moment, impossible, rendering precise measurement and meaningful understanding moot. So, little can be said beyond corroborations of anecdotal evidence, although the utility value of such data may be useful for identifying and recognizing genuinely different modes of operating and methods of processing information.