To be added to periodically with assortments. (Others of course can post anything they find also).
I would ideally like to see correlations between the eight Jungian functions and measures such as the Big Five, IPIP, the enneagram etc., and also, correlations between relationship success/happiness/length etc. I have found very little - and nothing in regards exactly what I want. (It is known for example that extroversion, conscientiousness, and low neuroticism in the Big Five are correlated with successful relationships).
The big five versus the big four: the relationship between the MyersBriggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and NEO-PI five factor model of personality: Adrian Furnham
Person. indirid. Dif;r: Vol. 21, No. 2, 303-307, 1996
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE REVISED
NEO-PERSONALITY INVENTORY AND THE
MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE INDICATOR
ADRIAN FURNHAM, JOANNA MOUTAFI AND JOHN CRUMP
University College London, UK
SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY, 2003, 31(6), 577-584
Correlations between each disorder at the 99% confidence level (with each MBTI scale in order of strength of correlation: the letters in brackets are the scales in MBTI "order"): after the semi-colon (if present) are correlations at the 95% confidence level.
Antisocial: TPN (NTP)
Avoidant: I
Borderline: NP
Dependent: I
Histrionic: EF
Obsessive-Compulsive: IJT (ITJ); IJTS (ISTJ)
Paranoid: TI (IT)
Passive-Aggressive: P; PIN (INP)
Sadistic: TP; TPN (NTP)
Self-Defeating: NI (IN)
Schizoid: TI (IT)
Schizotypal: ITNP (INTP)
Last edited by Socionics Is A Cult; 04-11-2017 at 07:06 PM.
Relationships Between Suicidal Behavior
and Personality Types
Sue Street, PhD, and Jeffrey D. Kromrey, PhD
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, Vol. 24(3), Fall 1994
Study participants were asked to respond on a 6-point scale according to the most extreme extent they had experienced suicidal ideation or actions: actual attempt (6), some planning (5), serious consideration (4), entertained thoughts (3), idle thinking (2), and never considered (1).
Spiritual But Not Religious? Evidence for Two Independent Dispositions
Gerard Saucier1 and Katarzyna Skrzypinska2
1University of Oregon 2University of Gdansk, Poland
Journal of Personality 74:5, October 2006
Last edited by Socionics Is A Cult; 05-07-2016 at 12:58 AM.
Building Evidence of Validity: The Relation Between Work Values, Interests, Personality, and Personal Values
Melanie E. Leuty and Jo-Ida C. Hansen
Journal of Career Assessment 2013 21: 175 originally published online 16 November 2012
The five-factor model of personality and Holland's RIASEC interest types
F. De Fruyt, I. Mervielde
Personality and Individual Differences
Volume 23, Issue 1, July 1997, Pages 87–103
Type scores from the above chart (^), assuming that the primary function makes up up two-thirds of a person's Ego, and the secondary function makes up one-third. This basically tells you, for example, in the case of NeTi (ILE)...or perhaps "pseudo"-ILE, how it might theoretically score for each trait. Perhaps rather limited.
The five-factor model of personality and Holland's RIASEC interest types
F. De Fruyt, I. Mervielde
Personality and Individual Differences
Volume 23, Issue 1, July 1997, Pages 87–103
Thus a list of which codes fit each primary code best, in order
(e.g. this might be useful if you know you favour a particular code)
R: RICE (-A-S)
I: IRCE (-A-S)
A: ASE (-I-R-C)
S: SAEC (-I-R)
E: ECRSAI
C: CERIS (-A)
The five-factor model of personality and Holland's RIASEC interest types
F. De Fruyt, I. Mervielde
Personality and Individual Differences
Volume 23, Issue 1, July 1997, Pages 87–103
Correlations of NEO-PI-R facet scores with Holland code scores
Correlations between Big Five traits and Holland codes.
Last edited by Socionics Is A Cult; 05-22-2016 at 12:02 AM.
Correspondence between five-factor and RIASEC models of personality.
Schinka JA, Dye DA, Curtiss G.
Journal of Personality Assessment
1997 Apr;68(2):355-68.
Correlations between Holland codes and NEO-PI-R scales (Big Five) Correlations for men are in the top right of the diagram, and in the bottom left for women
The subjects were asked to pick their most preferred color and their least preferred color of the four given. Blue was chosen as the most preferred color among both sexes. In the younger group the order from most preferred to least preferred was blue, red, green, then yellow. For the older group the order of color preference from most preferred to least preferred was blue, green, red, then yellow. Yellow was the least preferred color in both groups. In this study it shows that gender doesn’t make a difference in color preference. It was age that was the divider (Dittmar, 2001).
However, this study leaves a lot of room for changes for more consistent and accurate studies. Once again there was an uneven amount of male and female participants in the study which in turn begs to question whether or not the data collected is accurate or significant. The study did not represent a certain color or shade of the color so it was up to the participant to determine what they likes which leaves too much room for participant’s creativity. There was also an age gap from 44 to 52 years of age. The fact that there was not a consistent color or colors to choose from leaves room for error.
Lange and Rentfrow referenced a study done by Stone on Designing Effective Study Environments showing that the mood of workers tended to be much more positive when working in a blue environment rather than a red one. The arousal of the individual was much higher when working in the red environment so that when they were asked to do a more thrilling task the red color interfered with their performance. Lange and Rentfrow also referenced Luscher and Scott on their studies of Personality and their color test. Their findings found that introverted people, i.e. people with high internal arousal, preferred much cooler colors like blues and greens because they reduced their inner arousal. On the flip side, extroverts, i.e. people with low internal arousal, were drawn to warmer colors such as reds and oranges to increase their inner arousal. Lange and Rentfrow also state that readers read slower and comprehend less when reading in a red environment. This suggests that color effects cognitive arousal which in turn can effect, or even hinder, cognitive performance.
Looking at the Murray and Deabler’s study on mood-tones, their results indicated the association between mood and color. Their cross-regional study that corresponded with an earlier study by Wexner, proved that Americans across the board associate colors to moods, however, not always in the same way. The subjects were given a set list of words and a set of eight colors in the form of 8.5x11 inch pieces of paper, they were then asked to select the color that best represents the word in the word list. Both Wexner and Murray and Deabler’s studies had variations and differences, but they also had some definite similarities. Blue and green were consistent among both studies. The participants overwhelmingly related these two colors with the words Secure, Tender and Calm. These colors were also somewhat systematically not relevant to the word Defiant. Contrasting evidence showed that Red was most correlated with Defiant, Cheerful, Exciting, and Powerful and was by and large not associated with Secure, Tender, and Calm. Indicating that certain colors correspond with certain moods and those certain colors elicit the same strong emotional responses consistently among different groups of people.
Leon, Gillum, Gillum, and Gouze concentrated a portion of her research to looking at personality stability. Her longitudinal study obtained substantial evidence towards personality stability on an individual level. Using the MMPI, she gathered data 4 different times from the same 71 men over a 40 year period. The group of emotionally stable and physically healthy men was reported, in her study, to have a significant degree of personality stability over the 40 years span. The MMPI scores of the men’s tests were fairly consistent with some minor fluctuations, supporting that personality is stable over time.
The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in college students’ dietary intake and quality in relation to their Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality preferences. Students from three large introductory nutrition classes and 26 other classes were recruited to participate. Students (n = 302) completed a scannable version of the food frequency portion of the National Cancer Institute's Health Habits and History Questionnaire (NCI-HHHQ) and the MBTI. Dietary intake was compared using an adapted version of the Diet Quality Index (DQI), a multidimensional indicator of quality, and the recommended servings from the Food Guide Pyramid. Differences were determined by grouping the students according to their personality preferences and applying analysis of variance. Students preferring Extraversion, Intuition, or Judgment had tendencies for better dietary habits. Although some differences existed between men and women, Extraverts, in general, in comparison to Introverts, had higher intakes of grain, fruit, and dairy servings, with an overall superior DQI and a lower percentage of kcalories from fat; however, they also had a higher percentage of kcalories from alcohol. Intuitive women, in comparison to Sensing, had a superior DQI, consumed more fruit servings and breakfasts per week, and had a lower percentage of kcalories from sweets. Women preferring Judgment, as compared to those preferring Perception, consumed a significantly lower percentage of kcalories from alcohol and more frequent breakfasts. Suggestions for future research and for improving nutrition education are made based upon the link between certain personality preferences and dietary quality.
During the past decades, a number of studies have explored personality group differences in the Big Five personality traits among students in different academic majors. To date, though, this research has not been reviewed systematically. This was the aim of the present review. A systematic literature search identified twelve eligible studies yielding an aggregated sample size of 13,389. Eleven studies reported significant group differences in one or multiple Big Five personality traits. Consistent findings across studies were that students of arts/humanities and psychology scored high on Neuroticism and Openness; students of political sc. scored high on Openness; students of economics, law, political sc., and medicine scored high on Extraversion; students of medicine, psychology, arts/humanities, and sciences scored high on Agreeableness; and students of arts/humanities scored low on Conscientiousness. Effect sizes were calculated to estimate the magnitude of the personality group differences. These effect sizes were consistent across studies comparing similar pairs of academic majors. For all Big Five personality traits medium effect sizes were found frequently, and for Openness even large effect sizes were found regularly. The results from the present review indicate that substantial personality group differences across academic majors exist. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
I found the following in a text file on computer dated from about a month ago (I think I must have been intending on gathering more studies together, because two of these studies are small, and because there seemed to be quite a lot of variability when I was looking into it before. I am posting it nonetheless).
Top 3 personality types for clergy
Roy Oswald and Otto Kroeger of the Alban Institute collected data about Myers-Briggs personality types for more than 1,300 clergy. The selection of clergy was not random, so may not be representative of the entire clergy population, but information is still interesting.
Of the 16 Myers-Briggs types, these three were the most frequent.
ENFJ (16.1%)[...]
ESFJ (12.4%)[...]
ENFP (11.6%)[...]
The two least common types are:
ISTP (0.9%)[...]
ESTP (0.3%)
Psychological Types of Male Evangelical Missionary Personnel Training in England: A Role for Thinking Type Men?
A sample of 92 male evangelical missionary personnel completed Form G (Anglicised) of the MBTI. The two predominant types among this group were ESTJ (24%) and ISTJ (15%). In the group as a whole there were clear preferences for extraversion over introversion, for sensing over intuition, for thinking over feeling, and for judging over perceiving.
Psychological type profile of Roman Catholic priests : an empirical enquiry in the United States
This study explores the psychological type profile of Roman Catholic priests serving in the United States, drawing on data provided by 55 priests who completed the Francis Psychological Type Scales. The data demonstrated clear preferences for introversion (67 %), sensing (64 %), and judging (91 %), and for a balance between thinking (49 %) and feeling (51 %). A very high proportion of priests reported preferences for ISTJ (27 %), compared with 16 % of men in the U.S. population. Implications of these findings are discussed for ministry in the Roman Catholic Church.
I somehow ended up on this reddit but can't remember how. People are all the same when it comes to defending their strongest belief systems... the irony doesn't escape me.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I somehow ended up on this reddit but can't remember how. People are all the same when it comes to defending their strongest belief systems... the irony doesn't escape me.
I doubt the majority of the people are typed correctly so they all have no reliability. I doubt that priests are mainly S too because S are more down to earth generally.
Thalmayer, A. G., Saucier, G., & Eigenhuis, A. (2011, August 22). Comparative Validity of Brief to Medium-Length Big Five and Big Six Personality Questionnaires. Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0024165
A general consensus on the Big Five model of personality attributes has been highly generative for the field of personality psychology. Many important psychological and life outcome correlates with Big Five trait dimensions have been established. But researchers must choose between multiple Big Five inventories when conducting a study and are faced with a variety of options as to inventory length. Furthermore, a 6-factor model has been proposed to extend and update the Big Five model, in part by adding a dimension of Honesty/Humility or Honesty/Propriety. In this study, 3 popular brief to medium-length Big Five measures (NEO Five Factor Inventory, Big Five Inventory [BFI], and International Personality Item Pool), and 3 six-factor measures (HEXACO Personality Inventory, Questionnaire Big Six Scales, and a 6-factor version of the BFI) were placed in competition to best predict important student life outcomes. The effect of test length was investigated by comparing brief versions of most measures (subsets of items) with original versions. Personality questionnaires were administered to undergraduate students (N 227). Participants’ college transcripts and student conduct records were obtained 6–9 months after data was collected. Six-factor inventories demonstrated better predictive ability for life outcomes than did some Big Five inventories. Additional behavioral observations made on participants, including their Facebook profiles and cell-phone text usage, were predicted similarly by Big Five and 6-factor measures. A brief version of the BFI performed surprisingly well; across inventory platforms, increasing test length had little effect on predictive validity. Comparative validity of the models and measures in terms of outcome prediction and parsimony is discussed.
Keywords: inventories, psychometrics, psychological assessment, test validity, five factor personality
model
Interesting that logicals are so disordered. Maybe because they are more logical with their disorder - I am ill so therefore I am doing ill things hehe. But seriously, it looks weird as ethicals were less likely to have personality disorders.
Interesting that logicals are so disordered. Maybe because they are more logical with their disorder - I am ill so therefore I am doing ill things hehe. But seriously, it looks weird as ethicals were less likely to have personality disorders.
This surprised me, too. The only guess I have is that ethicals, being more in touch with their feelings, may be better at regulating them and keeping them healthy (on average).
Edit: although unfortunately this doesn't apply to me, since I'm dealing with depression. blegh.
"Our data confirm McClelland’s (1962 ) finding that physical
scientists enjoyed music but avoided art, poetry, plays, and
most other arts, while also validating Terman’s (1954 )
report that scientists’ favorite arts-related avocation is
photography. Nonscientists appear to enjoy writing
poetry, performance arts, and visual arts to a significantly
higher degree than the average scientist.
Eminent scientists have a different profile of arts
and crafts interests than do typical scientists. The typical
Royal Society and National Academy of Sciences
member was almost twice as likely to have crafts avo
cations as the typical Sigma Xi member or the U.S.
public. Nobel laureates were almost three times as
likely to have arts and crafts avocations as Sigma Xi
members and the U.S. public, and about 50% more
likely to have such avocations than Royal Society or
National Academy of Sciences members."
"A more detailed analysis of the incidence of specific
avocations yields equally significant differences
between the various groups. The results (Figure 2)
demonstrate that Nobel laureates are at least as likely
(and as much as a factor of 8 more likely) to be
photographers than the average scientist; at least a factor
of 2 (and as much as 18) more likely to be a practicing
musician, composer, or conductor; at least a factor
of 7 more likely to be a visual artist, sculptor, or
printmaker; at least a factor of 7.5 more likely to be a
craftsperson engaged in woodwork, mechanics, electronics,
glassblowing, and so on; at least a factor of 12
more likely to write poetry, short stories, plays, essays,
novels, or popular books; and at least a factor of 22
more likely to be an amateur actor, dancer, magician,
or other performer. "
Last edited by Socionics Is A Cult; 07-14-2022 at 03:31 PM.
These metrics are all wrong! Where is the measurement for their posture while seated? Frequency for their eyes to waver during a conversation? How do we know if their stools are loose or solid?
Socionics is lightyears ahead of all this pseudoscience.
ENFJ-A = ENFJ-Assertive; ENFJ-T=ENFJ-Turbulent (16personalities.com types, where A and T includes the Big Five trait of Neuroticism (A=low; T=high).
It would make more sense to do an actual Holland test (or determined your affinity manually) than to use this table. Also, ordering beyond one, two, three letters, won't be especially useful and using more letters will be overly restrictive in any case (I think I determined my ordering as ICSARE a long time ago). I just thought it would be interesting.
The correlations I made here are from a research paper - the 32 SimilarMinds SLOAN profiles have their own "favored careers" pages distinct from that, but they seem be somewhat similar to the Holland code ordering here.
______________________________________________ 1 - Not everyone has typed themselves nor can a selftype be found for some users.
2 - The affirmative results include, at least, one user who tested more than once and received, at least, one other type.
This is a very old thread and the SLOAN test results were not all at the same time...but the data is immediately available so...
For the extroversion/introversion dichotomy, there was a correspondence between Global 5-SLOAN and Socionics of 77/83 (93%).
For the intuition/sensing dichotomy, there was a correspondence between Global 5-SLOAN and Socionics of 59/80 (74%).
For the ethics/logic dichotomy, there was a correspondence between Global 5-SLOAN and Socionics of 68/83 (82%).
For the rational/irrational dichotomy, there was a correspondence between Global 5-SLOAN and Socionics of 59/83 (71%).
(Multiplying those four scores together gives a % of 39.85% - in the actual sample, there was a full correspondence of 33/68 = 48.53% (not everybody had a clear preference on all dichotomies hence the sample is only 68)).
Based on this data, the Global 5-SLOAN test would be a reasonable way of determining Socionics type.