This is a really nice article, and expresses a lot of things I've dwelled on myself.
On test reliability: I've long had a pet theory that the T-F and J-P axes are much less reliable than the other two. From personal experience, I've taken the 16Personalities test (and similar MBTI tests) several times in the past ten years, and I've never once scored outside the IN box; but I scored INTJ as a young teen, INFP just a moment ago. The reliability stats you give seem to support this theory for the T-F, but not really for the J-P, so idk. (Relatedly: Maybe people are just relatively worse at assessing their T-F and J-P? There's definitely a social pressure to exaggerate conscientousness and adjacent traits in one's self reports, and I imagine that for men there's motivation to downplay how "emotional" one is.)
Also, you mention that "If anything, outlier high IQ people are slightly shifted towards feeling". I was wondering why you think that is? Any specific examples?
MBTI has significant correlation to Big 5, so its lesser validity is likely primarily due to this. The basic MBTI is more popular, likely because typical people prefer the typological and strengths-weaknesses/equal value framing.
The J/P dichotomy mixes conscientiousness (like being orderly, as a strength) with being closed (like being closed to new information or options, as a weakness), versus being unconscientious with being open. Disorganized, unplanned and unadaptable, unambiguous people obviously, commonly exist, but that is socially undesirable.
As a complement to Big 5, more men should be classified as disagreeable (Big 5) feelers (cognitive type), not thinkers. They primarily process information through a lens of valuations that are simply more competitive and individualistic. This includes their feeling identification as “thinkers.”
Both of these dichotomies have weaker Big 5 correlations and are philosophically weak. I think personality typology has something more to offer, which people are far less aware of, but not where it overlaps with Big 5.
This is a really nice article, and expresses a lot of things I've dwelled on myself.
On test reliability: I've long had a pet theory that the T-F and J-P axes are much less reliable than the other two. From personal experience, I've taken the 16Personalities test (and similar MBTI tests) several times in the past ten years, and I've never once scored outside the IN box; but I scored INTJ as a young teen, INFP just a moment ago. The reliability stats you give seem to support this theory for the T-F, but not really for the J-P, so idk. (Relatedly: Maybe people are just relatively worse at assessing their T-F and J-P? There's definitely a social pressure to exaggerate conscientousness and adjacent traits in one's self reports, and I imagine that for men there's motivation to downplay how "emotional" one is.)
Also, you mention that "If anything, outlier high IQ people are slightly shifted towards feeling". I was wondering why you think that is? Any specific examples?
>"If anything, outlier high IQ people are slightly shifted towards feeling"
It’s from looking at the statistics from Myers’ book. Not really sure why.
MBTI has significant correlation to Big 5, so its lesser validity is likely primarily due to this. The basic MBTI is more popular, likely because typical people prefer the typological and strengths-weaknesses/equal value framing.
https://www.clearerthinking.org/post/how-accurate-are-popular-personality-test-frameworks-at-predicting-life-outcomes-a-detailed-investi
The J/P dichotomy mixes conscientiousness (like being orderly, as a strength) with being closed (like being closed to new information or options, as a weakness), versus being unconscientious with being open. Disorganized, unplanned and unadaptable, unambiguous people obviously, commonly exist, but that is socially undesirable.
As a complement to Big 5, more men should be classified as disagreeable (Big 5) feelers (cognitive type), not thinkers. They primarily process information through a lens of valuations that are simply more competitive and individualistic. This includes their feeling identification as “thinkers.”
Both of these dichotomies have weaker Big 5 correlations and are philosophically weak. I think personality typology has something more to offer, which people are far less aware of, but not where it overlaps with Big 5.