Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Keirsey Temperament Theory

  1. #1
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Keirsey Temperament Theory

    I know the Keirsevian so-called "Temperament Theory". It is a very simple theory which sorts the people into 16 types.

    There are 4 basic dichotomies :

    attentive I - E expressive
    introspective N - S observant
    friendly F - T tough-minded
    probing P - J scheduled

    and 2 derivative dichotomies :

    pragmatic / cooperative = NTP NTJ STP SFP / NFP NFJ SFJ STJ
    directive / informative = NFJ NTJ STP STJ / NFP NTP SFP SFJ

    but, I still don't understand how NFJ can actually be directive, and NTP be informative. I think an NTP would actually be better at leading than an NFJ... (Keirsey, not MBTI)

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Somewhere I have Keirshey's book "please understand me" lying around. Should have a look at it. I never could get into Keirshey theory, something about the unpracticality of the way Keirshey writes his material.

  3. #3
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rmcnew
    Somewhere I have Keirshey's book "please understand me" lying around. Should have a look at it. I never could get into Keirshey theory, something about the unpracticality of the way Keirshey writes his material.
    I somewhat like Keirsey, because it is very easy to use ; it's not function-based and it is pure differential psychology, like FFM and 16PF. I see typology as a scalable thing : Keirsey is easier to learn and less efficient than MBTT, and MBTT is easier to learn and less efficient than Socionics.

    I could be pretty optimistic, but I think :

    Keirsey requires 20-30 minutes to be learned and used efficiently. Take longer to learn about each separate type, and advanced caracteristics of "temperaments".

    MBTT requires 2-3 days to be learned and used efficiently. Take longer to learn about each separate function, and each separate type with his functional dynamics.

    Socionics requires 2-3 weeks to be learned and used efficiently. Take even longer to learn advanced material, like Reininian traits, the +/- model, etc.

    For example, if a boss doesn't really want to worry about psychology, he can use Keirsevian model ; even if it is a bogus model, it could help him to improve organisation's social stability, or at least his understanding.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    mcnew.... seriously...... can you do anything to improve your spelling? it's just hard to look at.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    992
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    There are 4 basic dichotomies :

    attentive I - E expressive
    introspective N - S observant
    friendly F - T tough-minded
    probing P - J scheduled
    Keirsey's model does describe something partly innate.
    It can help understand people too.
    It is poorly compatible with socionics - naturally.
    "Arnie is strong, rightfully angry and wants to kill somebody."
    martin_g_karlsson


  6. #6
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousSoul
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    There are 4 basic dichotomies :

    attentive I - E expressive
    introspective N - S observant
    friendly F - T tough-minded
    probing P - J scheduled
    Keirsey's model does describe something partly innate.
    It can help understand people too.
    It is poorly compatible with socionics - naturally.
    They are partly innate, because Keirsey does pure differential psychology.

    Keirsey actually measures the "directiveness" of an individual :

    S, T, and J are directive traits.
    N, F, and P are informative traits.

    If you have 2 or 3 directive traits, you are directive, or else you are informative. Keirsey seems to like MBTI but I think it resembles more FFM. At least, MBTI is less incompatible to Socionics than Keirsey.

  7. #7
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    pragmatic / cooperative = NTP NTJ STP SFP / NFP NFJ SFJ STJ
    directive / informative = NFJ NTJ STP STJ / NFP NTP SFP SFJ

    but, I still don't understand how NFJ can actually be directive, and NTP be informative. I think an NTP would actually be better at leading than an NFJ... (Keirsey, not MBTI)
    Directive sounds like controlling like Judging. Informative sounds like observing like Perceiving. The general public thinks that a leader needs to control a situation.

    However, i've read that although most bosses are Judgers, probable because they want to be bosses, they are no better at there job than Perceivers if compared at the end results. Although Judgers scored higher with "getting the job done within deadline". The perceivers got more points on other parts.

  8. #8
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    pragmatic / cooperative = NTP NTJ STP SFP / NFP NFJ SFJ STJ
    directive / informative = NFJ NTJ STP STJ / NFP NTP SFP SFJ

    but, I still don't understand how NFJ can actually be directive, and NTP be informative. I think an NTP would actually be better at leading than an NFJ... (Keirsey, not MBTI)
    Directive sounds like controlling like Judging. Informative sounds like observing like Perceiving. The general public thinks that a leader needs to control a situation.

    However, i've read that although most bosses are Judgers, probable because they want to be bosses, they are no better at there job than Perceivers if compared at the end results. Although Judgers scored higher with "getting the job done within deadline". The perceivers got more points on other parts.
    Keirsey said P is not perceiver, and J is not judger ; P is probing and J scheduling.

    Bosses are mainly STJ, NTJ, and NTP.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    Bosses are mainly STJ, NTJ, and NTP.
    Real life bosses are sometimes ENTP, very seldom INTP. According to Keirsey (as well as according to Socionics and MBTT) the INTP/INTp is one of the least interested in being a boss of all the types.

  10. #10
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    Bosses are mainly STJ, NTJ, and NTP.
    Real life bosses are sometimes ENTP, very seldom INTP. According to Keirsey (as well as according to Socionics and MBTT) the INTP/INTp is one of the least interested in being a boss of all the types.
    Yes, because Ip types are generally very passive...

  11. #11
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,630
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    Bosses are mainly STJ, NTJ, and NTP.
    Real life bosses are sometimes ENTP, very seldom INTP. According to Keirsey (as well as according to Socionics and MBTT) the INTP/INTp is one of the least interested in being a boss of all the types.
    Yes, because Ip types are generally very passive...
    go talk with an ISTp-Te or ISFp-Fe and then tell me what you think?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  12. #12
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,329
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    I know the Keirsevian so-called "Temperament Theory". It is a very simple theory which sorts the people into 16 types.

    There are 4 basic dichotomies :

    attentive I - E expressive
    introspective N - S observant
    friendly F - T tough-minded
    probing P - J scheduled

    and 2 derivative dichotomies :

    pragmatic / cooperative = NTP NTJ STP SFP / NFP NFJ SFJ STJ
    directive / informative = NFJ NTJ STP STJ / NFP NTP SFP SFJ

    but, I still don't understand how NFJ can actually be directive, and NTP be informative. I think an NTP would actually be better at leading than an NFJ... (Keirsey, not MBTI)
    So basically, according to what you wrote above:
    introspective+probing = informative; this makes sense and refers to one type of leadership, the kind that requests information prior to making a decision or taking action. such as what are the goals of the company? what are the goals of the client? and then using that information towards solving whatever problem or motivating people towards some action. This blends in rather well with what I've written about NTps and how they are good at helping to define problems. One aspect of a good leader is the ability to recognize and/or define problems and solutions. NFps are good at recognizing problems, not so much defining it.

    observant+friendly = informative; (you and I once discussed how I don't remember keirsey saying that F = friendly and T = toughminded, and since I don't have my book out of storage yet, I can't comment further )

    observant+tough-minded = directive; (see comment directly above)

    introspective+scheduled = directive; this makes sense and refers to another type of leadership, the kind that already has the plan made out and is trying to "encourage" follow through of it. These are the leaders that tell people what to do and when to do it, some even attempt to tell how to do it as well. In cases of emergencies, NPs slip into this style of leadership as well. This is also how most military chain-of-commands work.


    I could be wrong, but I seem to recall Keirsey's Please Understand Me II going into leadership styles of each of his types.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  13. #13
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousSoul
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    There are 4 basic dichotomies :

    attentive I - E expressive
    introspective N - S observant
    friendly F - T tough-minded
    probing P - J scheduled
    Keirsey's model does describe something partly innate.
    It can help understand people too.
    It is poorly compatible with socionics - naturally.
    I think it would be great to learn to see what Keirsey saw in people, and be able to see what socionics sees, at the same time, without letting assumptions about how the two systems fit together get in the way.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey Temperament Theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick
    I think it would be great to learn to see what Keirsey saw in people, and be able to see what socionics sees, at the same time, without letting assumptions about how the two systems fit together get in the way.
    Very good point. I agree completely.

  15. #15
    Word Definition Warrior – WDW Troll Nr 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    dispersed into the cosmos
    TIM
    H-ILE-Ne 7w6-2w1-1w9
    Posts
    1,955
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have been looking Keirsey for while. It is usually mistaken as MBTI or being blend into it.

    As it is too simplified it is not very compatible with socionics while it can be compatible to some extent with MBTI.
    Keirsey is mainly concerned with roles and discards cognition as it is hard and hardly measurable. If I understood it correctly his temperament system was purely pragmatic decision just to make it effective (too many Ti disabled individuals).
    For example:
    Queen Elisabeth II
    Keirsey: ISTJ, guardian temperament.
    Socionics: ESI/ISFj-Fi which translates to MBTI ISFP.
    MBTI: ?

    When socionics takes into account subtype systems it might fit wih bit better correlation with Keirsey's roles. Fitting them with role variants makes it more difficult due to Te-Fi/Fe-Ti valuing differences.
    ESFj as an example:
    ESFj creative subtype: guardian but I can see it sometimes overlapping with idealistic temperament.
    ESFj harmonising: guardian temperament.
    ESFj normalising: stays in guardian temperament and rarely rational temperament.
    ESFj dominant: this one has lots of artisan temperament traits.

    Ej creative IE subtype: likely same as Keirsey's role even with role variant with S but with N possible J-P flip.
    Ej dominant IE subtype: ethicals might have J-P flip
    Ep dominant IE subtype: same
    Ep creative IE subtype: E-I flip possibility
    Introverts are difficult (due to (ir)rational introverted base)
    Ij dominant IE subtype: ESI shifts towards guardian temperament while LSI goes towards rational and guardian temperaments. XII ones are harder, maybe P-J flip.
    Ij creative IE subtype: might remain the same. Best correlation among introverts.
    Ip dominant IE subtype: J-P flip for SLI and lesser extent SEI: guardian -> artisan.
    Ip creative IE subtype: Possible E-I flip (puts more thought to rational element). Ethcials might change J-P. IEI possibly blends within artisan temperament as composer role variant

    I have very hazy understanding of Keirsey's ISXX role variants especially concerning artisan vs guardian temperaments. I think it fails in there.

  16. #16
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think you are making things way to complicated.

  17. #17
    summerprincess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    US
    TIM
    IEI 4w3 sx/sp
    Posts
    519
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Keirsey system confuses me so much because it's similiar to MBTI but not the same & similiar to Socionics but not the same. On top of that it looks, to the untrained eye, to be exactly the same bc it uses the same letters for types. I've taken the keirsey test a couple of times on the official website and I've gotten ENTJ, ENFJ, and ENFP. Maybe I would look into the system further if I thought it would help significantly with personality development like Socionics, but it doesn't seem to do it for me. Hmm

  18. #18
    The sleeping beauty Velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by summerprincess View Post
    The Keirsey system confuses me so much because it's similiar to MBTI but not the same & similiar to Socionics but not the same. On top of that it looks, to the untrained eye, to be exactly the same bc it uses the same letters for types. I've taken the keirsey test a couple of times on the official website and I've gotten ENTJ, ENFJ, and ENFP. Maybe I would look into the system further if I thought it would help significantly with personality development like Socionics, but it doesn't seem to do it for me. Hmm
    I've got ENFJ too the first time I took this test but it's because sometimes socionics introversion don't overlap with psychological or commonly understood intoversion. IEIs can be pretty bubbly between people, still they are introverts.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    557
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the idea of socionics, Jung, etc should be to take common themes appearing in the more psychological versions of introversion/extroversion and extract typical information-theoretic philosophies.

    If it gets way too removed from the psychological theory, it becomes entirely cognitive, and personally I think the whole n, s, f, t framework is inherently intended to capture psychological aspects of consciousness and how they influence information processing.

    For pure, unadulterated information-processing, it seems to me like there's no reason to go with this N, F, T, S sort of framework. The point though is how people experience consciousness influences their philosophies of information-processing, and one can try to study those forms in more refined a way -- even somewhat removed from the direct interactions they have with psychological properties.

    The key here is having dominant extraversion in a IE doesn't imply one is an extrovert in the larger personality clusters...because plainly, those clusters are not about modeling cognition, they involve various cohering features of personality. Including, say, behavioral and energetic ones. Someone with relatively low energy might still have, say, Ne base.

    Like the idea of Ne is to fixate all one's consciousness on the object of interest, imbuing it with all one's focus, energy, etc, and this produces a certain typical information .. a kind of "absolute" potential of the object. But in practice, this kind of information is perceivable and might be the most of interest to someone who is quite low energy, not outgoing, not easily enthused, etc.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    557
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In fact, one of the things I constantly wonder about nowadays is what the "energy/vital" component of model A really "should mean"

    I do think people have a more psychological personality type that is not the same as their so-called psychological information type necessarily. How related this is to a "vital" type is something I'm wondering

  21. #21
    summerprincess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    US
    TIM
    IEI 4w3 sx/sp
    Posts
    519
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Velvet View Post
    I've got ENFJ too the first time I took this test but it's because sometimes socionics introversion don't overlap with psychological or commonly understood intoversion. IEIs can be pretty bubbly between people, still they are introverts.
    Yeah I totally agree; a great example of this is Phoebe from Friends in my opinion

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •