When is it time to move on from Myers-Briggs?

[floatingbridge]

I've been introduced the OCEAN model of personality, which takes a more spectrum-view of personality.
Rather than MBTI which categorises people into more binary... black, white, states.

The following article suggests the two theories can overlap:
https://ianraugh.wordpress.com/2015/02/02/big-5-versus-mbti/

Should we be moving on from this romanticised view of people?
When is it time to move on from Myers-Briggs?

OCEAN certainly would be more realistic, practical to apply, and easier to be scientifically-tested.

 

[Pin]

I've been introduced the OCEAN model of personality, which takes a more spectrum-view of personality.
Rather than MBTI which categorises people into more binary... black, white, states.

The following article suggests the two theories can overlap:
https://ianraugh.wordpress.com/2015/02/02/big-5-versus-mbti/

Should we be moving on from this romanticised view of people?
When is it time to move on from Myers-Briggs?

OCEAN certainly would be more realistic, practical to apply, and easier to be scientifically-tested.

MBTI is unscientific nonsense. It's time this community moves on, even me.

 

[Professor Snep]

MBTI is unscientific nonsense. It's time this community moves on, even me.

 

[the]

I was going to suggest the big 5 before reading the op.

 

[Wyote]

Nobody should really be using mbti as a be all end all method of discerning personality types or human behavior. Nor should anyone really think of an individual as anything set in stone in a particular way.
There is a lot of value in understanding aptitude and trait complexes, and mbti and the teachings of Carl Jung are an excellent starting point or addition to your knowledge base in understanding the human mind.
You don't ever "move on" because there are good foundational pieces of information, but you should always be expanding knowledge in any area.
When is it time to focus on learning new and different information? That's up to each individual to decide.
Think of yourself as building a car, mbti is like a coat of paint or chassis. There's lots more you need for a whole car.

Also, mbti does work on a scale but the divide from one side to the other gives the impression that they are separate. Once you know this, mbti seems more reasonable as long as you don't put much stock in the labels. Percentages are more relevant. And with the integration of Assertive vs Turbulent, mbti becomes almost exactly like the big 5.

 

[Stu]

I always thought of the Jungian personality type models as just a good way for an individual to reflect on what they might be missing in their interactions and perceptions.

 

[jyrffw54]

Three letters


JCF

I haven't looked too much into Big Five, but it seems rather shallow to me from what I've read of it. But maybe I need to read more on it to appreciate it more.

 

[ZcM4xzkjgzCjytBc]

I think MBTI is what it is. It's those who draw their own conclusions, adopt their past knowledge to it, want it to be what it isn't, make it more than it is, blame it for generalizing, etc., are those who think it's bullshit. There is a lot of bullshit in MBTI, and it all comes from the many people who misinterpret it (most people)

It's just knowledge. Whether you find it useful is up to you.

We all move-on.

 

[t5juyt]

I have no intention of moving on from MBTI. I find it highly beneficial.

 

[Ryso89]

I don't bring it up in conversation when I meet people, but if I meet a similar spirit I'll be inclined to drop the "have you taken the MBTI"?

I wouldn't recommend younger people take the test because they don't quite know themselves as well as someone a bit older and more aware of themselves. The test will help me identify habits, strengths, weaknesses, maybe even prejudices, limitations. The control freak in me wants to know everything there is to know about an individual so that I can better manipulate my interactions with said individual. It's always useful.

Is there a better psychological assessment out there?

 

[Lurk]

FIVE STARS

 

[MrSquared]

When? When you're ready and you know you want more and/or something else. Go for it!

 

[charlatan]

I've been introduced the OCEAN model of personality, which takes a more spectrum-view of personality.
Rather than MBTI which categorises people into more binary... black, white, states.

Ah, there's a really clear answer to your question: MBTI traditionally is associated with genuine dichotomies, but actually there's no reason to view it as genuine dichotomies. In fact, the data (as Big 5 leading theorists McCrae and Costa have said) is consistent with traditional psychometric consensus, which is that personality tends to vary more continuously.

(As a note, CG Jung, whose ideas inspired the MBTI, also viewed people's personalities in terms of degree very clearly; for instance, he distinguished Cuvier/Nietzsche as a stronger polarity between the extraverted and introverted thinking types than in the case of Darwin and Kant.)

So really, there's no reason to move on from the MBTI. The idea that people really fall into discrete types is a bit archaic but there's no reason not to view preferences in terms of degree.
At that point, you have things like the subtle differences between T/F and Big 5 Agreeableness, and understanding these can deepen one's understanding.

(Admittedly I guess the tests don't implement a Likert scale or something to allow for degrees, but really, it's not hard to imagine doing that. Also, the Step II does something similar, in that it considers facets of a dimension, and allows one to be in-pattern and out of pattern, which is similar to considering degree of preference.)


The big warning also is that MBTI is often associated with CG Jung's theory, but the truth is it was inspired by it, and is quite different, and the associations drawn are quite sloppy/need to be unpacked. There's a priori no functions theory built into the indicator, and its interpretation as 4 linear dimensions doesn't lend itself to the interpretation of functions theory, since the 4 linearly independent dimensions point of view just suggests ESFP and INTJ, e.g., are just 4 apart and suggests nothing about an implicit commonality like sharing an Se-Ni axis or Fi-Te axis.

Also note that Myers allowed for omissions on tests, and the notion of an "X" on a dimension was reportedly allowed in the past at least, so this suggests there's nothing inherent to the construction of the test which suggests you can't interpret it as dimensions vs genuine dichotomies.

 

[Vigilance]

MBTI is limiting. In the outside world, I consider myself an extrovert. On the internet, I am highly introverted. What is all of this introvert/extrovert crap anyways and who cares, seriously? You are an individual. Don't box yourself into four letters. I like learning about my type, but I think a lot of it is nonsense and funny. I think it helps me learn more about myself in some ways, like how I learn and observe information, but I never let four letters tell me what my strengths and weaknesses are. If you adhere to MBTI, to the fullest extent possible, you are limiting yourself.

A common excuse I have found on the Forum is this: 'I am an introvert, so it is hard for me to meet/talk to new people, be with them, or start conversations with them.' This is not true. If only these people were not so limiting all the time in their beliefs.

 

[Happy Phantom]

FIVE STARS

I take it you're not a fan? Try Tony Robbins. lol

 

[Aluni]

It said I'm extraverted! HAHAHAHA!....... I'm friendly but you must go away after 30seconds of our interaction or it gets weird "HI and BYE!"

 

[heartcore]

If you don't like a self-glorifying aspect of MBTI, move to the enneagram. It's much better.