ArticlePDF Available

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some psychometric limitations



The present paper critically reviews the psychometric adequacy of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Although the instrument is extremely popular in applied settings, there is an urgent need for the development of valid and comprehensive local norms, in order to increase its predictive validity and utility within the Australian context. In addition, there are a number of psychometric limitations pertaining to the reliability and validity of the MBTI, which raise concerns about its use by practitioners. In view of these serious limitations, routine use of the MBTI is not recommended, and psychologists should be cautious as to its likely misuse in various organisational and occupational settings
Bond University
Humanities & Social Sciences papers Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some
Psychometric Limitations
Gregory J. Boyle
Bond University,
This Journal Article is brought to you by the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at ePublications@bond. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Humanities & Social Sciences papers by an authorized administrator of ePublications@bond. For more information, please contact Bond University's
Repository Coordinator.
Recommended Citation
Gregory J. Boyle. (1995) "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some Psychometric Limitations" ,,
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI):
Some Psychometric Limitations
Bond University
The present paper critically reviews the psychometric adequacy of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).
Although the instrument is extremely popular in applied settings, there is an urgent need for the development
of valid and comprehensive local norms, in order to increase its predictive validity and utility within the
Australian context. In addition, there are a number of psychometric limitations pertaining to the reliability
and validity of the MBTI, which raise concerns about its use by practitioners. In view of these serious
limitations, routine use of the MBTI is not recommended, and psychologists should be cautious as to its likely
misuse in various organisational and occupational settings.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or MBTI (Briggs-Myers & Briggs, 1985) is an extremely popular
personality inventory which has received widespread use over the last 30 years (Carlyn, 1977). The
MBTI is a self-report questionnaire designed to quantify non-psychopathological personality types
as postulated in Jung's psychodynamic type theory (see Myers & McCaulley, 1985).
Each individual's personality type is described in terms of a four-letter code, a brief descriptive
interpretation of which is provided on the back of the report form. For a simple (four-dimensional),
straightforward description of one's personality make-up, use of the MBTI would seem an
appropriate choice. The instrument is ipsatively scored, and predominantly utilises forced-choice
(true/false) items. Four dichotomous dimensions classify individuals either as extraverted (E) or
introverted (I), sensing (S) or intuitive (N), thinking (T) or feeling (F), and judging ( J) or perceiving
(P). Combinations of the four preferences determine personality types. Each individual is classified
in terms of one of 16 possible four-letter codes (such as ESFJ, ENFP, INTP, and ISFJ). Each type is
said to define a specific set of behavioural tendencies, reflecting differences in attitudes, orientation,
and decision-making styles. All materials, including the manual, test booklets, answer sheets, and
score keys, are professionally produced.
The Jungian construct of extraversion is embedded within a somewhat different conceptual
framework than either Cattellian or Eysenckian interpretations. The E-I dimension does not pertain
to shyness versus gregariousness, but focuses on whether one's general attitude towards the world is
actively oriented outward to other persons and objects, or is internally oriented (Sipps & Alexander,
1987). The S-N dimension describes the individual's characteristic perceptual style. Sensing is
viewed as attending to sensory stimuli, whereas intuition involves a more detached, insightful
analysis of stimuli and events. Somewhat reminiscent of the field dependence-independence
distinction, for the T-F dimension, thinking involves logical reasoning and decision processes, while
feeling entails a more subjective, interpersonal approach. Thomas (1983) reported a correlation
between field independence and thinking of 0.37, suggesting a small amount of commonality. The J-
P dimension distinguishes between the judging attitude associated with prompt decision making
(often before all facts are at hand), while perception involves greater patience and waiting for more
information, before making decisions (cf. Thomas, 1984). The individual is typed as either one or
the other (each dimension is discontinuous, rather than continuous). Willis (1984, p. 483) indicated
that the J-P dimension determines which of two function preferences is dominant and which is
auxiliary (S or N versus T or F). The auxiliary style is used only in unusual situations; such as when
an introverted child is required by the school system to "play the role" of an extraverted individual.
DeVito (1985, p. 1030) asserted that"the dominant and auxiliary function is not well developed in
Jung's writings (see McCaulley, 1981, pp. 301-302) and is the most controversial aspect of Myers'
interpretation of Jung". To date, the validity of the dominant and auxiliary functions has not been
tested empirically.
The four main MBTI dimensions can be placed within the context of modern thinking about
personality theory concerning the major dimensions of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness,
Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (see Digman, 1990; Goldberg, 1992). Additionally, in the
most comprehensive higher-order factor analytic study of personality dimensions to date, Krug and
Johns (1986) carried out a scale factoring of the 16PF on well over 17,000 individuals, and
crossvalidated their findings across sex. They reported six second-order factors labelled:
Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Tough Poise, Control, and Intelligence. These
dimensions have been verified independently in a higher-order factor analysis of the Cattell,
Comrey, and Eysenck scales by Boyle (1989). The E-I dimension of the MBTI relates directly to the
Extraversion-Introversion higher-stratum factor; the S-N dimension appears to relate to Tough Poise
– Sensitivity (i.e., sensing individuals may exhibit scepticism and tough poise, whereas intuitive
persons appear to be more sensitive); and both the T-F and J-P dimensions appear to relate
somewhat to Conscientiousness, Control, and Intelligence, and to the Openness dimension in the
Norman Big Five, as implemented in say the NEO-PI (Costa & McCrae, 1992). The MBTI appears
to measure about 30-35% of the normal personality trait variance. However, it clearly places a
proportionately greater emphasis on cognitive styles than do most other personality instruments.
Current Forms of the MBTI
The 126-item Form G which is now the standard version of the MBTI (cf. Leiden, Veach, &
Herring, 1986) was constructed from the 166-item Form F, with nine items slightly reworded to
reduce reading level, and with 38 experimental items and two other items removed. Only the first 95
items need be answered to score the instrument. As Coan (1978, p. 973) pointed out, inclusion in
Form F of the experimental items (not used for scoring purposes) serves only to increase testing
time, and provides no relevant information for standard use of the instrument. Misunderstanding of
items is potentially problematic. As well, an abbreviated version (A V) also exists, comprising only
50 items. The manual provides normative data for high school and university student samples, but
data for the general adult population is notably lacking. There is little empirical information on
minorities or working-class populations.
Scoring of the Instrument
Scoring of the MBTI is either in terms of preference or continuous scores. According to the manual,
continuous scores are appropriate for research purposes only.1 As stated by DeVito (1985), use of
continuous scores is not emphasised. Jungian theory underlying construction of the MBTI asserts
that an individual's dichotomous preference scores symbolise fundamental differences between types
(e.g. introverts versus extraverts). However, most psychometricians regard personality dimensions
such as extraversion-introversion as continuous, and normally distributed. According to Wiggins
(1989, p. 538), "The principal stumbling block to more widespread acceptance of the MBTI lies in
the structural model of bipolar discontinuous types to which the test authors are firmly committed."
Consequently, use of dichotomous forced-choice items greatly limits both the theoretical and
statistical import of the MBTI. Wiggins argued that there is no evidence to support Jung's theory of
bimodal distributions of preference scores, and that evidence of stability of types is lacking. Thus, as
Wiggins pointed out, the four-variable types remaining stable across measurement occasions exceeds
50% only rarely. Another problem is "considerable redundancy in the scoring operation because the
two contrasting scales of each pair are scored on the basis of essentially the same items". (Coan,
1978, p. 974).
Item Homogeneity
Use of preference scores (with concomitant restriction in variance) requires computation of phi
coefficients if both variables represent true dichotomies (Gorsuch, 1983, p. 296). According to
Willis (1984), median phi estimates of item homogeneity for Form Fare .60 (E-I), .69 (S-N), .59 (T-
F), and .71 (J-P), and median tetrachoric correlations (if the dichotomous variables actually represent
continuous dimensions) are .76 (E-I), .87 (S-N) , .78 (T-F) , and .80 (J-P). The inconsistency of these
dichotomous preference score estimates has been alluded to by Carlyn (1977).
Item homogeneity estimates based on the continuous scores are .79 (E-I), .81 (S-N), .78 (T-F), and
.82 (J-P). Nevertheless, item homogeneity estimates based on continuous scores may be
inappropriate given the assumption underlying the MBTI of dichotomous dimensions (even though
continuous scores provide greater precision than do dichotomous scores). These estimates suggest
moderately high levels of item homogeneity, and the possibility of associated item redundancy and
narrow breadth of measurement (Boyle, 1987, 1991; Cattell, 1978).
Test-Retest Reliability
McCaulley (1981) has investigated the test-retest reliability (stability) of the MBTI. Estimates of the
proportion of preferences reclassified into the same categories ranged from 61 % to 90%. For
continuous scores, median stability coefficients are .78 (E-I), .78 (S-N), .69 (T-F), and .74 (J-P),over
intervals from five weeks to 21 months. For Form G, the corresponding Spearman-Brown corrected
estimates (cf. Ferguson, 1981) are .73 (E-I), .69 (S-N), .64 (T-F), and .69 (J-P). Likewise, for the
abbreviated version (Form A V), the corresponding Spearman-Brown corrected estimates are .52
(E-I), .47 (S-N), .42 (T-F), and .42 (J-P). However, little direct information for Forms G and A V is
available (Carskadon, 1979, 1982). Clearly, Form G is less reliable than Form F (because of the
reduction in number of items), and Form A V is considerably less reliable than Form G. These test-
retest estimates for the current forms of the MBTI indicate some instability. For enduring personality
dispositions, stability estimates should be in the 0.8 to 0.9 range (see Boyle, 1985).
Reviews supportive of the validity of the MBTI have been provided, for example, by Carlyn (1977),
and Carlson (1985). According to Carlson (p. 357), "literature on the scale (one bibliography lists
approximately 700 references) reflects largely successful efforts to apply it in a large variety of
educational, clinical, counselling, business, and research settings." Despite these claims, the
psychometric limitations of the MBTI raise concerns about the validity of the instrument.
Using continuous scores, the instrument has been correlated with several well known psychological
inventories(Corman & Platt, 1988; Schurr, Ruble, & Henriksen, 1988). Yet there has been little
attempt to ascertain inter-battery relationships via multiple regression procedures. Evidence
concerning the interrelationships of the MBTI with other well known personality inventories remains
mostly at the simple correlational level. Interpretations of concurrent validity based solely on
correlations are likely to be biased due to the unreliability of correlation coefficients (Detterman
There have been several factor analyses of the MBTI (e.g. Sipps, Alexander, & Friedt, 1985;
Thompson & Borrello, 1986a, 1986b; Tzeng, Outcalt, Boyer, Ware, & Landis, 1984) - (see Carlyn,
1977, for a summary of earlier factor analytic studies). In general, these factor analyses have
followed variants of the "Little Jiffy" procedure (principal components plus orthogonal varimax
rotation, an inadequate method of exploratory factor analysis; see Boyle, 1988, pp. 742-745;
Gorsuch, 1983; McDonald, 1985). Therefore, the results of these analyses which claim to support
the independence of the four MBTI dimensions are unsatisfactory, and in part may be a statistical
artifact due to (a) extraction of at four factors, and (b) use of inappropriate orthogonal rotation. More
appropriate confirmatory factor analyses of the MBTI dimensions remain to be undertaken (e.g. via
LISREL, COSAN, EQS). The question is not whether other structures can be found for the MBTI (a
common result from exploratory factor analyses), but whether the purported structure of the
instrument is valid-a confirmatory rather than an exploratory issue (cf. Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989).
Undue reliance on exploratory factor analyses of the MBTI to the exclusion of confirmatory methods
has undoubtedly resulted in theory conflation, rather than more appropriately discriminating between
Regarding predictive validity, Myers (1962, p. 77) recommended that the MBTI is best viewed "as
affording hypotheses for further testing and verification rather than infallible expectations of all
behaviors". Since the MBTI types are not "source traits" verified factor analytically (i.e., "causal"
psychological dimensions), predictions based on these "surface traits" (discontinuous types) are
inevitably less powerful and remain somewhat speculative. On a different note, there are no scales
built into the MBTI to detect the effects of random responding, response sets such as social
desirability, or either conscious or unconscious response distortion. Social desirability response set
appears to influence scores on the EI and JP scales (McCaulley,1981, p. 339). Also, there is no
control for the mood of the respondent, which may greatly affect responses (Howes & Carskadon,
1979). Consequently, the issue of motivational distortion in the MBTI responses needs to be
The MBTI is one of the most frequently used instruments for personality assessment. However, as
Bjork and Druckman (1991) pointed out, the instrument's popularity is not consistent with research
evidence. Furthermore, the MBTI manual does not provide norms based on continuous scores. Much
of the supporting evidence provided in the manual is of questionable validity (Coan, 1978). Reliance
on dichotomous preference scores rather than continuous scores unduly restricts the level of
statistical analysis (such as assigning frequencies to the 16 types). As DeVito (1985, p. 1032)
indicated, "The issue regarding type vs. continuous scores will probably remain most unsettling for
those espousing traditional test construction standards and procedures." Empirical evidence does not
strongly support the Jungian notion of discrete or "true" dichotomies.
As well, there are problems in using MBTI preference scores to predict behavioural or occupational
outcomes. In addition, test-retest estimates raise doubts about the stability of MBTI-type scores.
Some investigators (e.g. Anastasi, 1990) have suggested that all personality questionnaires have
dubious psychometric standing. Certainly, the problems associated with item transparency, and
concomitant response distortion ranging all the way from lack of self-insight to deliberate faking, as
well as the effects of response sets in general, apply universally to self- report questionnaires (Boyle,
Bjork and Druckman (1991) asserted that most of the extant studies of the MBTI are defective and
that there is insufficient research into the utility of the MBTI in organisational settings. They further
argued (p. 99) that, "At this time, there is not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of
the MBTI in career counseling programs. Much of the current evidence is based on inadequate
methodologies. "
Overall, the MBTI provides a psychometrically simple description of Jungian personality types.
Although this brief characterisation may be useful in some applied contexts (such as in predicting an
individual's characteristic style of behaviour, intellectually and interpersonally), there are evident
psychometric limitations of the instrument. With further research and refinement, the MBTI may
serve a more useful role in applied psychological assessment. Certainly, development of valid and
comprehensive local norms (including relevant motivational distortion scales, e.g. Faking Good;
Faking Bad) should increase its predictive validity within the Australian context. Given the lack of
appropriate local norms, it would seem prudent for practitioners to be alert to its possible misuse,
and to be cautious in undertaking personality assessments with the instrument. The current
enthusiasm for the METI is certainly not warranted on psychometric grounds.
1. This viewpoint is contentious. Psychometrically, a continuous scoring system should be used with
at least four to five response options per question (cf. Joreskog & Sorbom, 1988).
Anastasi, A. (1990). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Bjork, RA., & Druckman, D. (1991). In the mind's eye: Enhancing human performance.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Boyle, G.J. (1985). Self-report measures of depression: Some psychometric considerations. British
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 45-59.
Boyle, G.J. (1987). Review of the (1985) "Standards for educational and psychological testing:
AERA, APA, and NCME". Australian Journal of Psychology, 39, 235-237.
Boyle, GJ. (1988). Elucidation of motivation structure by dynamic calculus. In J.R Nesselroade &
R.B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 737-787). New
York: Plenum.
Boyle, GJ. (1989). Re-examination of the major personality-type factors in the Cattell, Comrey, and
Eysenck scales: Were the factor solutions by Noller et al. optimal? Personality and Individual
Differences, 10, 1289-1299.
Boyle, GJ. (1991). Does item homogeneity indicate internal consistency or item redundancy in
psychometric scales? Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 291-294.
Briggs-Myers, I., & Briggs, K.C. (1985). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Carlson, J.G. (1985). Recent assessments of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 356-365.
Carlyn, M. (1977). An assessment of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Joumal of Personality
Assessment, 41, 461-473.
Carskadon, T.G. (1979). Test-retest reliabilities of continuous scores on Form G of the Myers-
Briggs Type Indicator. Research in Psychological Type, 2, 83-84.
Carskadon, T.G. (1982). Sex differences in test-retest reliabilities of continuous scores on Form G
of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Research in Psychological Type, 5, 78-79.
Cattell, R.B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York:
Coan, RW. (1978). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Eighth Mental Measurements
Yearbook, 1, 973-975.
Corman, L.S., & Platt, R.G. (1988). Correlations among the Group Embedded Figures Test, the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and demographic characteristics: A business school study.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 507-511.
Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4, 5-
Detterman, D.K. (1979). Detterman's laws of individual differences research. In Sternberg, R. &
Detterman, D.K. (Eds.), Human intelligence: Perspectives on its theory and measurement (pp.
165-175). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
DeVito, A.J. (1985). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Ninth Mental Measurements
Yearbook, 1, 1030-1032.
Digman, R.M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of
Psychology, 41, 417-440.
Ferguson, G.A. (1981). Statistical analysis in psychology and education (5th ed.). Singapore:
Goldberg, L.R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big Five factor structure. Psychological
Assessment, 4, 26-42.
Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis (5th ed.). New York: Plenum.
Howes, R.J., & Carskadon, T.G. (1979). Test-retest reliabilities of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
as a function of mood changes. Research in Psychological Type, 2, 67-72.
Jareskog, K.G., & Sarbom, D. (1988). PRELIS: A program for multivariate data screening and
data summarization: A pre-processor for LISREL. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
Jareskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: User's reference guide. Mooresville, IN:
Scientific Software.
Krug, S.E., & Johns, E.F. (1986). A large scale cross-validation of second-order personality
structure defined by the 16PF. Psychological Reports, 59, 683-693.
Leiden, LJ., Veach, T.L., & Herring, M.W. (1986). Comparison of the abbreviated and original
versions of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality inventory. Journal of Medical
Education, 61,319-321.
McCaulley, M.H. (1981). Jung's theory of psychological types and the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator. In P. McReynolds (Ed.), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol. 5, pp. 294-352):
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McDonald, R.P. (1985). Factor analysis and related methods. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Myers, LB. (1962). Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing
Myers, LB., & McCaulley, M.H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-
Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Schurr, K.. T., Ruble, V.E., & Henriksen, L.W. (1988). Relationship of Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator personality characteristics and self-reported academic problems and skill rating with
Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 187-196.
Sipps, G.J., & Alexander, R.A. (1987). The multifactorial nature of extraversion-introversion in the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Eysenck Personality Inventory. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 47, 543-552.
Sipps, G.J., Alexander, R.A., & Friedt, L. (1985). Item analysis of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 789-796.
Thomas, C.R. (1983). Field independence and Myers-Briggs thinking individuals. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 57, 790.
Thomas, C.R. (1984). Regression of Myers-Briggs Type scales. Psychological Reports, 55, 568.
Thompson, B., & Borrello, G.M. (1986a). Construct validity of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 745-752.
Thompson, B., & Borrello, G.M. (1986b). Second-order factor structure of the MBTI: A construct
validity assessment. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 18,148-
Tzeng, O.C.S., Outcalt, D., Boyer, S.L., Ware, R., & Landis, D. (1984). Item validity of the Myers-
Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 255-256.
Wiggins, 1.S. (1989). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Tenth Mental Measurements
Yearbook, 1, 537-538.
Willis, C.G. (1984). Review of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Test Critiques, 1, 482-490.
... There are several instruments for the self-assessment of personality, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) [78] and the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS) [49], based on Jung's theories. However, their psychometric validity has been questioned over the years [1,12] The most popular instruments for measuring the Big Five traits are the NEO-PI [23] and the NEO-PI-R [24]. McCrae [69,70] has found NEO-PI-R to be reliable even after translating and administrating it across 36 countries, also showing that it is possible to use trait mean values to capture systematic differences. ...
... Finally, we lower-cased the text and removed all the stopwords using NLTK. 12 Overall, the 50 subjects contributed 1,543 emails, with an average of 30.86 per developer (min 15, max 55, median 33, SD 8.45). After collating the email bodies and performing the data cleaning, we found that each developer has contributed on average 1,111.04 ...
Full-text available
Assessing the personality of software engineers may help to match individual traits with the characteristics of development activities such as code review and testing, as well as support managers in team composition. However, self-assessment questionnaires are not a practical solution for collecting multiple observations on a large scale. Instead, automatic personality detection, while overcoming these limitations, is based on off-the-shelf solutions trained on non-technical corpora, which might not be readily applicable to technical domains like software engineering. In this paper, we first assess the performance of general-purpose personality detection tools when applied to a technical corpus of developers’ emails retrieved from the public archives of the Apache Software Foundation. We observe a general low accuracy of predictions and an overall disagreement among the tools. Second, we replicate two previous research studies in software engineering by replacing the personality detection tool used to infer developers’ personalities from pull-request discussions and emails. We observe that the original results are not confirmed, i.e., changing the tool used in the original study leads to diverging conclusions. Our results suggest a need for personality detection tools specially targeted for the software engineering domain.
... Their introduction is demonstrated in Table 1 below. Respectively, their leadership styles are classified based on the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) model through a narrative analysis of their leadership styles and traits [4]. Finally, some implications are put forward in the conclusion section to shed light on future business leadership studies. ...
... ENFJ people believe in their dreams and regard themselves as rescuers and capable people, and often they do. Jack Ma's dreams were not understood, but they shocked the world with their dreams come true [4]. ...
... studies have been conducted on construct MBTI validity and test-retest reliability (including a meta-study byCapraro and Capraro (2002) which showed good results), others have argued that there are scientific limitations to these studies, the use of MBTI, and its underlying theory (e.g.,Boyle, 1995;Pittenger, 2005;Stein and Swan, 2019). ...
Full-text available
Critical, time-bounded, and high-stress tasks, like incident response, have often been solved by teams that are cohesive, adaptable, and prepared. Although a fair share of the literature has explored the effect of personality on various other types of teams and tasks, little is known about how it contributes to teamwork when teams of strangers have to cooperate ad-hoc, fast, and efficiently. This study explores the dynamics between 120 crowd participants paired into 60 virtual dyads and their collaboration outcome during the execution of a high-pressure, time-bound task. Results show that the personality trait of Openness to experience may impact team performance with teams with higher minimum levels of Openness more likely to defuse the bomb on time. An analysis of communication patterns suggests that winners made more use of action and response statements. The team role was linked to the individual's preference of certain communication patterns and related to their perception of the collaboration quality. Highly agreeable individuals seemed to cope better with losing, and individuals in teams heterogeneous in Conscientiousness seemed to feel better about collaboration quality. Our results also suggest there may be some impact of gender on performance. As this study was exploratory in nature, follow-on studies are needed to confirm these results. We discuss how these findings can help the development of AI systems to aid the formation and support of crowdsourced remote emergency teams.
... Despite its prominence in hiring strategies, much research disputes its validity and usefulness [e.g. 10,53] and argues for better models of personality [37], including FFM. ...
Existing work on personality traits in software development excludes game developers as a discrete group. Whilst games are software, game development has unique considerations, so game developers may exhibit different personality traits from other software professionals. We assessed responses from 123 game developers on an International Personality Item Pool Five Factor Model scale and demographic questionnaire using factor analysis. Programmers reported lower Extraversion than designers, artists and production team members; lower Openness than designers and production, and reported higher Neuroticism than production -- potentially linked to burnout and crunch time. Compared to published norms of software developers, game developers reported lower Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion and Agreeableness, but higher Neuroticism. These personality differences have many practical implications: differences in Extraversion among roles may precipitate communication breakdowns; differences in Openness may induce conflict between programmers and designers. Understanding the relationship between personality traits and roles can help recruiters steer new employees into appropriate roles, and help managers apply appropriate stress management techniques. To realise these benefits, individuals must be distinguished from roles: just because an individual occupies a role does not mean they possess personality traits associated with that role.
... The scientific foundation of it is lacking at best, there are issues with validity and reliability (Boyle, 1995;Stein & Swan 2019 the scales now are two sided continuums. One from self-enhancement to self-transcendence and one from openness to change to conservation. ...
Full-text available
In the economical context of tight labor markets, “the great resignation” and “the battle for talent” and within the philosophical zeitgeist based on utilitarian and existential beliefs, we explore the value of work, that is, the value experienced by the employee. We follow a cross disciplinary approach integrating both recent and not so recent insights in organizational and behavioral psychology in an economic model of cardinal utility. The extensive literature review led to the conceptually clustering of the types of needs that are addressed, material needs, social needs, and identity related needs. We distance ourselves from a needs satisfaction perspective following the economic assumption of non satiation. We develop the subsequent utility categories: material utility, social utility, and transformational utility. The theory and the random utility model created is a cross disciplinary integration effort. A survey is created and validated following DeVellis (2016) scale development method. The study confirms, via the methods of factor analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM) at least 3 and possibly 4 dimensions of job utility. Further refinement of the scale with SEM leads to the compact and robust Simple Present Job Utility Scale supporting the three factor model. Post-hoc we look for mediators and moderators in the effects of job utility on job satisfaction and turnover intention, we find that all but material utility are mediated by job satisfaction in their relationship to turnover intentions. We did not find evidence of the utility factors moderating each other's relationships to the behavioral outcomes looked at. This together with the limitations outlined from the study form the segway into our recommendations for future research. Special attention is paid to the ethical implementation of the study and the broader impact the development of models for data-driven HR practices have on society, equality, privacy and justice.
... However, the Myers-Briggs classification has been criticized for its lack of validity and utility, such as unstable test-retest reliability and inaccurate predictive validity (Boyle, 1995). Moreover, the MBTI is not correlated with other personality scales (Furnham, 1996), and has not been validated by empirical research (Druckman and Bjork, 1991). ...
Full-text available
There is considerable anecdotal evidence suggesting that software engineers enjoy engaging in solving puzzles and other cognitive efforts. A tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful thinking is referred to as a person’s ‘need for cognition.’ In this article we study the relationship between software engineers’ personality traits and their need for cognition. Through a large-scale sample study of 483 respondents we collected data to capture the six ‘bright’ personality traits of the HEXACO model of personality, and three ‘dark’ personality traits. Data were analyzed using several methods including a multiple Bayesian linear regression analysis. The results indicate that ca. 33% of variation in developers’ need for cognition can be explained by personality traits. The Bayesian analysis suggests four traits to be of particular interest in predicting need for cognition: openness to experience, conscientiousness, honesty-humility, and emotionality. Further, we also find that need for cognition of software engineers is, on average, higher than in the general population, based on a comparison with prior studies. Given the importance of human factors for software engineers’ performance in general, and problem solving skills in particular, our findings suggest several implications for recruitment, working behavior, and teaming.
... In other words, personality is a collection of the traits that contribute to an individual's distinct personality. Nowadays, many different types of personality models are utilized to characterize personalities, such as the "Big Five Personality Traits model" [3], "VIA Classification of Character Strengths" [4], "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)" model [5,6], and "Jung's Theory of Personality Type models". It has been discovered that "MBTI" is more powerful because it has a broader application in a variety of disciplines. ...
Full-text available
The term personality may be expressed in terms of the individual differences in characteristics pattern of thinking, feeling, and behavior. This work presents several machine learning techniques including Naive Bayes, Support Vector Machines, and Recurrent Neural Networks to predict people personality from text based on Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Furthermore, this project applies CRISP-DM, which stands for Cross-Industry Standard Process for Data Mining, to guide the learning process. Since, CRISP-DM is kind of iterative development, we have adopted it with agile methodology, which is a rapid iterative software development method, in order to reduce the development cycle to be minimal.
... Another important aspect that other studies have explored is related to the possible psychometric limitations of MBTI. In [19], it is mentioned that the instrument does not provide norms based on continuous scores and also raises doubts about its stability, citing examples in which the performance of test-retests demonstrated instabilities in the consequent results of the instrument. This topic regarding the reliability of MBTI (test-retest) is also discussed in [20] suggesting the need for further studies to be carried out at MBTI in order that its validation can be subjected to statistical techniques that guarantee greater trust regarding the validity of its results. ...
Full-text available
The formation of high-performance teams has been a constant challenge for organizations, which despite considering human capital as one of the most important resources, it still lacks the means to allow them to have a better understanding of several factors that influence the formation of these teams. In this sense, studies also demonstrate that teamwork has a significant impact on the results presented by organizations, in which human behavior is highlighted as one of the main aspects to be considered in the building of work teams. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator seeks to classify the behavioral preferences of individuals around eight characteristics, which grouped as dichotomies, describe different psychological types. With it, researchers have sought to expand the ability to understand the human factor, using strategies with multiagent systems that, through experiments and simulations, using computer resources, enable the development of artificial agents that simulate human actions. In this work, we present an overview of the research approaches that use MBTI to model agents, aiming at providing a better knowledge of human behavior. Additionally, we make a preliminary discussion of how these results could be explored in order to advance the studies of psychological factors' influence in organizations' work teams formation.
Online and offline community are both studied but not as an intersection. There is a gap in the literature on the nature of community that is blended online with offline and geographically situated. SPENCE, a Model of online/offline community with measurement principles - capabilities - was formulated. It aims to provide an integrated view of residential online/offline community that offers a lens of synthesis. It is based on the definition: social exchange using channels of digital multi-media and physical expression, leading to permanent social ties connected across social graphs, from proximity informed by a diversity of values, interests and needs, bounded in settlement combining physical and cyber place, curated by an entrepreneur. SPENCE has six facets - settlement, proximity, exchange, net/latticework, channels and entrepreneur; and four capabilities - trust, influence, information and intelligence. iii Two Case Studies, based on online/offline communities in London, deployed the methods of interview, survey and online social network study to discover the nature of online/offline community, how to investigate it and what policy initiatives could be implemented to develop it. The Survey and Twitter Study methods were merged into a Twofold Instrument. The contributions of the thesis are: the Model SPENCE; novel concepts derived from the Model i.e. decile fabric, net/latticework, VINs ratio, diverse cohesion, specific cohesion, and capabilities, which offer updates on established concepts. The affordances of online/offline community include situated cognition, blended relations between people with cohesions in the social fabric predicated on a greater exchange of informal/formal assets. It is recommended that national digital infrastructure is developed to extend online/offline community, either as independent instances or as an integrated national platform. A twofold investigation method, measuring the national total of decile fabric, would offer a pragmatic automated approach to assist a national development programme.<br/
This article is based on the hypothesis that Generation Z’s propensity for undivided perception of digital and physical reality (phygital reality) and their fairly easy absorption of new learning formats, in particular blended learning, are interrelated. To prove the existence of this relationship, the authors, based on the methodology of social constructivism and interpretivism, put forward several hypotheses and conduct an empirical study. For a detailed analysis of the research topic the authors conduct three questionnaire polls among university students in St. Petersburg. The first survey is related to identifying the features of socialization of “digital natives”, the second - to identify the cognitive inclinations of Generation Z, the third - the choice of type of education (traditional/classroom, blended or distance learning). The results of the study confirm the main hypotheses of the study, which are that the characteristics of Generation Z make them maximally adapted to blended learning and that the propensity to blended learning is due to a number of factors, such as satisfaction with the content of disciplines, propensity for self-development, satisfaction with the organization of the educational process, work in the specialty after graduation, group work in classes and the use of sources recommended by the teacher. Factor and regression analysis conducted during the study confirms the data obtained.
Prior studies have yielded estimates for relations between the Group Embedded Figures Test, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, and demographic characteristics. This study presents findings for 107 men and 119 women enrolled in business school. Correlations between the Embedded Figures and Sensing-Intuition scale of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator were significant as were values of Judgment-Perception with both Sensing-Intuition and Thinking-Feeling. Scores on the two tests show these students perform differently from the normative population.
, Summmy.-Test-retest reliabilities of continuous scores on the MyersBriggs Type Indicator scales were examined for 64 male and 70 female college students, using an 8-wk. test-retest interval. Reliabilities were generally satisfactory (n ranging from .73 to .87) with the exception of scores for males on the Thinking-Feeling scale (r = .56). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Myers, 1962) attempts a psychometric representation of Carl Jung's (1923) theory of type. The four scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator measure preferences for extraversion vs introversion (E-I) , sensing vs intuition (S-N) , thinking vs feeling (T-F), and judgment vs perception (J-P). Continuous scores are used to indicate both the direction and strength of the preference on each scale. Scores over 100 (the division point) represent preferences for introversion, intuition, feeling, or perception, depending on the scale, with higher scores indicating stronger preferences; scores under 100 represent preferences for extraversion, sensing, thinking, or judgment, with lower scores indicating stronger preferences. Although the Myers-Briggs has been used increasingly as a research and counseling instrument in the last fifteen years, test-retest reliability studies have been surprisingly few. Stricker and Ross (1964) used a rather long, 14-mo. testretest interval with 41 male Amherst College students. Test-retest correlation coefficients for continuous scores ranged from .69 to .73 for all scales except Thinking-Feeling, which was .48. Levy, Murphy, and Carlson (1972) tested 146 male and 287 female college students, all black, at Howard University, using an 8-wk. test-retest interval. Coefficients obtained ranged from .69 to .80 for the males and .78 to .83 for the females. The present study was designed to measure test-retest reliabilities of continuous scores on the four Myers-Briggs dimensions, using a moderate time interval and a population typical of that used in psychology experiments. Subjects were 64 male and 70 female introductory psychology students at Mississippi State University. Participation partially fulfilled a course requirement. Subjects filled out Form F of the Myers-Briggs initially and on retest 7 wk. later, using the standard test instructions each time. Test-retest correlation coefficients were calculated for continuous scores on each of the four scales, using the Pearson r formula. Males and females were considered separately. The coefficients obtained and the means and standard deviations for each group are shown in Table 1.l All coefficients were sig