INFJ, Not as Rare as Predicted? | INFJ Forum

INFJ, Not as Rare as Predicted?

88chaz88

88chaz88

Back for a limited time only
Retired Staff
Mar 17, 2010
4,872
1,225
766
MBTI
????
Enneagram
9w1
Or at least not on OkCupid.

I found this interesting snippet of data that's gathered from their site:

interesting.png


As the vertical line equals the average this means more people got I, N, F, and J. As you know, this goes against every stat that the official MBTI tests predict.

Very interesting imo.

Discuss.
 
It might just be due to the need for reassurance by people with I and N types to verify who they are by redoing the test(s) over and over again. This site, and other MBTI forums, probably provide a majority of that test's consistent traffic.
 
Daeledin said:
It might just be due to the need for reassurance by people with I and N types to verify who they are by redoing the test(s) over and over again. This site, and other MBTI forums, probably provide a majority of that test's consistent traffic.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but could that really be happening so much that it turns a statistic that should be 65% E, to just 40%? As well as the other scales?

There are a number of reasons as to why these results differ from what the official sites predict (note how the official sites always just predict and never actually provide results), but could they all add up to make results that differ so greatly?
 
Very interesting, Melkor...Doesn't it seem that we fall on one side of the vertical line or the other side? I'm sure there are some that fall exactly in the middle, but I bet they are the real rare ones. Would you please explain to me why you think more people "seem to fall on the I, N, F, and J side"? I'm certainly not a statistician, but I don't quite get what you are trying to say and why you've drawn that conclusion. Details?
 
I think Adymus needs to find this.

He's very much a field agent in the MBTI world, and he claims INFJ's aren't quite so rare as we're led to beleive.

He's also capable of putting anything I might have to say on the issue twice as eloquently, so I shall humbly wait on his approval!.
 
deadred said:
Very interesting, Melkor...Doesn't it seem that we fall on one side of the vertical line or the other side? I'm sure there are some that fall exactly in the middle, but I bet they are the real rare ones. Would you please explain to me why you think more people "seem to fall on the I, N, F, and J side"? I'm certainly not a statistician, but I don't quite get what you are trying to say and why you've drawn that conclusion. Details?
Click to expand...

I'm not Melkor.

The reason I say that is the vertical line indicates the average results, and the lines are moved from the middle over to the I, N, F, and J sections. This means on average most people got I, N, F, and J.

I'm shit at explaining things.
 
Melkor said:
I think Adymus needs to find this.

He's very much a field agent in the MBTI world, and he claims INFJ's aren't quite so rare as we're led to beleive.
Click to expand...

A view shared by both of us.

I hate the way the official statistics make bold claims and then provide their results as predicted. If you're gonna claim that out of just 16 types, one makes up just 1% of the population, you better provide some actual gathered data.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IndigoSensor
I don't think we will ever completely know which type is more rare or more common. We can get a general idea, but that's about it. The most accurate way to do it would to have random people take it. Not so much by choice either. My personal experience with people backs this up; INxx types will seek out these tests the most, and ESxx will actually avoid it to some extent. This isn't fullproof, but it is accurate to some degree. I have have asked close to, sheesh, like 50+ people to take myers briggs tests. Across the board ESxx types often will either dislike taking the test, won't have interest, or just won't care in general. Where as INxx types will often respond "ooh, tell me more". The nature of personality itself, will skew the results one way or another (as far as satistical massing) if you allow people to go out of their way to find the test. This goes for any kind of social satistics. You have to be completely random, and can't allow people to find it, then choose to do it, that imparts a huge bais in this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Love and 88chaz88
every mbti forum I have ever been on claims their type is 1% of the population..
.

Infjs are not special.
 
I think Slant wants to be special.

*folds arms*

Well don't look at me!
 
INFJ's

I don't think INFJ's are the rarest. I don't think they are common, but certainly not the rarest. If I had to guess what the rarest type was, I would say ENTJ's, but I say that with only slight confidance. You can draw trends and patterns from all of the satistics out there, but only loose ones at best. The patterns I see is that xxFP's are pretty common, and S's tend to be slightly more common, and J's tend to be slightly less common. That's about. Beyond that it is anyones guess who which is the most common and least common. The only way we could know is if we make at least 1/2 the people on the planet take the test and insure that they didn't have testing bais.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melkor
Introverts and intuitive are generally overrepresented on the internet. Feelers and Judgers are the majority overall. The OkCupid distribution is not surprising.
 
88chaz88 said:
Or at least not on OkCupid.

I found this interesting snippet of data that's gathered from their site:

interesting.png


As the vertical line equals the average this means more people got I, N, F, and J. As you know, this goes against every stat that the official MBTI tests predict.

Very interesting imo.

Discuss.
Click to expand...

I won't go into the whole discussion "are the INFJs really the rarest type or not" because I just don't care about it, but I think that you can't make any conclusion about it from shown statistics, other than one they already gave you, and those are ratios of dual letters. To conclude what number of INFJs would be possible from this statistics showed in the picture you need the information of the correlation between non-dual letters, and you don't have that. And I can't see how you came to the conclusion that shown statistics are against those of the official MBTI?

So elaborate, I'm curious, maybe I missed something?
 
IndigoSensor said:
I don't think we will ever completely know which type is more rare or more common. We can get a general idea, but that's about it. The most accurate way to do it would to have random people take it. Not so much by choice either. My personal experience with people backs this up; INxx types will seek out these tests the most, and ESxx will actually avoid it to some extent. This isn't fullproof, but it is accurate to some degree. I have have asked close to, sheesh, like 50+ people to take myers briggs tests. Across the board ESxx types often will either dislike taking the test, won't have interest, or just won't care in general. Where as INxx types will often respond "ooh, tell me more". The nature of personality itself, will skew the results one way or another (as far as satistical massing) if you allow people to go out of their way to find the test. This goes for any kind of social satistics. You have to be completely random, and can't allow people to find it, then choose to do it, that imparts a huge bais in this.
Click to expand...

I got an ESTP to do the test no problem.
 
Siamese cat said:
I won't go into the whole discussion "are the INFJs really the rarest type or not" because I just don't care about it, but I think that you can't make any conclusion about it from shown statistics, other than one they already gave you, and those are ratios of dual letters. To conclude what number of INFJs would be possible from this statistics showed in the picture you need the information of the correlation between non-dual letters, and you don't have that. And I can't see how you came to the conclusion that shown statistics are against those of the official MBTI?

So elaborate, I'm curious, maybe I missed something?
Click to expand...

Which is why the thread is titled "INFJ, Not as Rare as Predicted?" rather than "INFJ's Aren't as Rare as Predicted."

It gives the impression that the subject is up for debate and I'm not assuming anything rather than me just making a clear statement.

Although according to previous statistics, I and N are supposed to be less common. These ones directly challenge that at least.
 
Last edited:
Well, I really hope INFJs aren't as rare as predicted. It's kind of frightening and isolating to think that everyone else in your society mentally works in a completely different manner from yourself.
 
Melkor said:
I think Slant wants to be special.

*folds arms*

Well don't look at me!
Click to expand...


Someone needs to shove my foot up your mouth!!!!
 
athenian200 said:
Well, I really hope INFJs aren't as rare as predicted. It's kind of frightening and isolating to think that everyone else in your society mentally works in a completely different manner from yourself.
Click to expand...

People are far more similar than they are are different, imo. And our similarities seem more ingrained and substantial than our differences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back