Principles of personality testing
In 1942, Katherine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs produced a questionnaire that divided people's personalities into 16 types. It became known as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and later became one of the most widely used personality tests in the world. Today, personality testing is a multibillion-dollar industry used by individuals, schools, and companies. But none of these tests, including the MBTI test, the Big Five test, the DiSC assessment, the process communication model, and the Enneagram, really revealed the truth about personality. In fact, whether personality is a stable and measurable individual trait is debatable.
Part of the problem is how the tests are built. Each metric defines personality based on a different set of metrics: for example, the Myers-Briggs personality taxonomy divides people into personality "types" by focusing on traits such as introversion and extroversion, while the Five Indicators rate participants based on five different personality traits. Most are self-reported, meaning that the results are based on questions that participants answer about themselves. So lying is easy, but even with good intentions, objective self-evaluation is tricky.
Let's take a look at this question in the Big Five: How do you rate the accuracy of the phrase "I'm always prepared"? There's a clear yes answer here, which makes it hard for us to stay objective. People subconsciously aim to please others: when asked to agree or disagree, we exhibit a bias toward answers that we think the person or agency asking the question wants us to answer. There is also a question: justice and fairness, which one do you value more? What about harmony and forgiveness? You may value both sides of each pair, but the MBTI test will force you to choose one of them. While it's easy to assume that the outcome of this forced choice must reveal a true preference to some extent, it's not: the same person sometimes changes the answer when faced with the same forced choice problem multiple times.
Given these design flaws, it's not surprising that test results may be inconsistent. One study found that five weeks after the first Myers-Briggs personality taxonomy test, nearly half of the people were assigned to different types. Other studies of the Myers-Briggs personality taxonomy have found that people with very similar scores end up being placed in different categories, suggesting that the strict divisions between personality types do not reflect real-life nuances.
To complicate matters further, the definition of personality traits is constantly changing. The Swiss psychologist Carl Jung, who popularized the term introvert and extrovert, defined an introvert as someone who insists on his principles regardless of circumstances, while an extrovert defines a person who shapes himself according to circumstances. Introverts later become shy, while extroverts are extroverts and lively people. Today, introverts find that time alone can restore energy, extroverts draw energy from social interactions, and people who are both extroverts and introverts fall somewhere between these two extremes.
But the application of personality tests goes far beyond self-discovery. Schools use them to advise students on what to study and what to do. Companies use these tests to decide who to hire and what position to hold. However, the results of the study do not predict how a person will perform in a particular role. So, by using personality tests in this way, institutions may deprive people of opportunities to excel, or prevent them from considering certain paths.
All of these tests are based on the concept of an innate, unchanging personality. But a growing body of research suggests that personality changes during critical periods, such as during school or when you start working. While some characteristics of a person's behavior may remain relatively stable over time, others are malleable and influenced by our upbringing, life experience, and age. All of this depends more or less on how the personality test is used. Anyone who uses them should have reservations about the results, but personal use isn't too harmful — testers may even learn some new terms and concepts in the process. Think of these tests as learning tests, don't get stuck in them.
Translated by TED
Translator: A getaway who doesn't like zz milk tea