Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Probably an awareness of the history of MB and the research about its utility: https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personali...


All models are wrong, but some are useful.

I have found the MBTI to be useful despite the empirical inaccuracy of the test itself. Even without taking the test, people can self-identify as one (or more) types. This then serves as a meaningful basis for discussion as well as raising awareness that people are deeply different in terms of their ways of thinking. It is quite an eye opener the first time you see someone self-identify as a personality type that is very different to your own.

None of the personality theories are 'proven' of course. We won't get that until we have a fuller understanding of the brain. But it is well accepted within psychology that personality is a thing. And personality types (Big 5, MBTI, etc) are useful models for now despite their shortcomings.

This is a fairly good post with some additional thoughts on the MBTI debate: https://dynomight.net/in-defense-of-myers-briggs.html


Check out “the human element” which is the basis for firo-b.

It actually has international data to support its model.


That's an interesting article but I just have a few questions about it. How would someone exactly prove that a certain theory in a field as subjective as psychology to be true? What kind of studies would prove the usefulness of something like MBTI? While I agree it does limit people to certain binaries that aren't necessarily always 100% accurate, I have found it to be fairly accurate myself and think it describes people to a decent degree of accuracy.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: