Table of ContentsView AllTable of ContentsHistoryTest OverviewThe Myers Briggs TypesComparisonsReliability and ValidityOnline MBTI TestsNext in Myers-Briggs Type Indicator GuideINTJ: The Architect (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Judging)

Table of ContentsView All

View All

Table of Contents

History

Test Overview

The Myers Briggs Types

Comparisons

Reliability and Validity

Online MBTI Tests

Next in Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Guide

Close

Have you ever heard someone describe themselves as an INTJ or an ESTP and wondered what those cryptic-sounding letters could mean? What these people are referring to is their personality type based on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).

This article discusses how the Myers-Briggs types were created, what the 16 different MBTI types are, and how this personality typing system works.

The Development of the Myers-Briggs Test

By helping people understand themselves, Myers and Briggs believed that they could help people select occupations that were best suited to their personality types and lead healthier, happier lives.

Myers created the first pen-and-pencil version of the inventory during the 1940s, and the two women began testing the assessment on friends and family. They continued to fully develop the instrument over the next two decades.

An Overview of the Test

Based on the answers to the questions on the inventory, people are identified as having one of 16 personality types. The goal of the MBTI is to allow respondents to further explore and understand their own personalities including their likes, dislikes, strengths, weaknesses, possible career preferences, and compatibility with other people.

No one personality type is “best” or “better” than another. It isn’t a tool designed to look for dysfunction or abnormality. Instead, its goal is simply to help you learn more about yourself. The questionnaire itself is made up of four different scales.

Extraversion (E) – Introversion (I)

Extraverts (also often spelled extroverts) are “outward-turning” and tend to be action-oriented, enjoy more frequent social interaction, and feel energized after spending time with other people. Introverts are “inward-turning” and tend to be thought-oriented, enjoy deep and meaningful social interactions, and feel recharged after spending time alone.

We all exhibit extraversion and introversion to some degree, but most of us tend to have an overall preference for one or the other.

Sensing (S) – Intuition (N)

This scale involves looking at how people gather information from the world around them. Just like with extraversion and introversion, all people spend some time sensing and intuiting depending on the situation. According to the MBTI, people tend to be dominant in one area or the other.

People who prefer sensing tend to pay a great deal of attention to reality, particularly to what they can learn from their own senses. They tend to focus on facts and details and enjoy getting hands-on experience. Those who prefer intuition pay more attention to things like patterns and impressions. They enjoy thinking about possibilities, imagining the future, and abstract theories.

Thinking (T) – Feeling (F)

This scale focuses on how people make decisions based on the information that they gathered from their sensing or intuition functions. People who prefer thinking place a greater emphasis on facts and objective data.

They tend to be consistent, logical, and impersonal when weighing a decision. Those who prefer feeling are more likely to consider people and emotions when arriving at a conclusion.

Judging (J) – Perceiving (P)

The final scale involves how people tend to deal with the outside world. Those who lean toward judging prefer structure and firm decisions. People who lean toward perceiving are more open, flexible, and adaptable. These two tendencies interact with the other scales.

Remember, all people at least spend some time engaged in extraverted activities. The judging-perceiving scale helps describe whether you behave like an extravert when you are taking in new information (sensing and intuiting) or when you are making decisions (thinking and feeling).

Taking the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator can provide a lot of insight into your personality, which is probably why the instrument has become so popular. Even without taking the formal questionnaire, you can probably immediately recognize some of these tendencies in yourself.

According to the Myers & Briggs Foundation, it is important to remember that every type has value.

When working in group situations in school or at work, for example, recognizing your own strengths and understanding the strengths of others can be very helpful. When you are working toward completing a project with other members of a group, you might realize that certain members of the group are skilled and talented at performing particular actions. By recognizing these differences, the group can better assign tasks and work together on achieving their goals.

How MBTI Differs From Other Instruments

The MBTI is just one approach to personality typing. Personality typing refers to systems that categorize people based on their traits, tendencies, and other characteristics. Other popular types of personality tests include:

However, the Myers-Briggs types differ in some important ways. First, the MBTI is not really a “test.” There are no right or wrong answers, and one type is not better than any other type. The purpose of the indicator is not to evaluate mental health or offer any type of diagnosis.

Also, unlike many other psychological evaluations, your results are not compared against any norms. Instead of looking at your score in comparison to other people’s results, the instrument’s goal is to simply offer further information about your unique personality.

According to the Myers & Briggs Foundation, the MBTI meets accepted standards ofreliabilityandvalidity. The official website for the test suggests that it has a 90% accuracy and test-retest reliability rating. One study found that while the scale showed strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability, variations were observed.Other studies indicate that the reliability and validity of the instrument have not been adequately demonstrated. For example, some research suggests that around many people get differing results when they later retake the test and the test is not a good predictor of success in different careers.

RecapWhile the MBTI remains a popular assessment, there is not enough evidence for its scientific validity to recommend using it as a personality or career guidance tool.

Recap

While the MBTI remains a popular assessment, there is not enough evidence for its scientific validity to recommend using it as a personality or career guidance tool.

The MBTI Today

Because the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator is relatively easy to use, it has become one of the most popular psychological instruments currently in use today. Approximately two million U.S. adults complete the inventory each year.

While there are many versions of the MBTI available online, it should be noted that any of the informal questionnaires that you may find on the Internet are only approximations of the real thing.

The current version of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator includes 93 forced-choice questions in the North American version and 88 forced-choice questions in the European version. For each question, there are two different options from which the respondent must choose.

7 SourcesVerywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Original research.Yang C, Richard G, Durkin M.The association between Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Psychiatry as the specialty choice.Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:48-51. doi:10.5116/ijme.5698.e2cdCenter for Applications of Psychological Type.Estimated frequencies of the types in the United States population.Spiotta AM.Incorporation of personality typing into a neurologic surgery residency program: Utility in systems based practice, professionalism, and self-reflection.World Neurosurg. 2018;120:e1041-e1046. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.09.007Capraro RM, Capraro MM.Myers-Briggs type indicator score reliability across: studies a meta-analytic reliability generalization study.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2002;62(4):590-602. doi:10.1177/0013164402062004004Pittenger DJ.The utility of the Myers-Briggs type indicator.Review of Educational Research. 1993;63(4):467-488. doi:10.3102/00346543063004467The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Versions of the MBTI questionnaire.Additional ReadingBjork RA, Druckman D.In the Mind’s Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 1992.Jung CG. Psychological Types. In Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press: 1971.Lawrence GD, Martin CR. Building People, Building Programs. Center for Applications of Psychological Type. 2001.Myers IB, Peter BM. Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. 1980.Pittenger DJ.Measuring the MBTI…And Coming Up Short.Journal of Career Planning and Employment. 1993;54(1):48-52.The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.).Reliability and Validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Instrument.The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.). All Types Are Equal.

7 Sources

Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Original research.Yang C, Richard G, Durkin M.The association between Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Psychiatry as the specialty choice.Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:48-51. doi:10.5116/ijme.5698.e2cdCenter for Applications of Psychological Type.Estimated frequencies of the types in the United States population.Spiotta AM.Incorporation of personality typing into a neurologic surgery residency program: Utility in systems based practice, professionalism, and self-reflection.World Neurosurg. 2018;120:e1041-e1046. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.09.007Capraro RM, Capraro MM.Myers-Briggs type indicator score reliability across: studies a meta-analytic reliability generalization study.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2002;62(4):590-602. doi:10.1177/0013164402062004004Pittenger DJ.The utility of the Myers-Briggs type indicator.Review of Educational Research. 1993;63(4):467-488. doi:10.3102/00346543063004467The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Versions of the MBTI questionnaire.Additional ReadingBjork RA, Druckman D.In the Mind’s Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 1992.Jung CG. Psychological Types. In Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press: 1971.Lawrence GD, Martin CR. Building People, Building Programs. Center for Applications of Psychological Type. 2001.Myers IB, Peter BM. Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. 1980.Pittenger DJ.Measuring the MBTI…And Coming Up Short.Journal of Career Planning and Employment. 1993;54(1):48-52.The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.).Reliability and Validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Instrument.The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.). All Types Are Equal.

Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Original research.Yang C, Richard G, Durkin M.The association between Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Psychiatry as the specialty choice.Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:48-51. doi:10.5116/ijme.5698.e2cdCenter for Applications of Psychological Type.Estimated frequencies of the types in the United States population.Spiotta AM.Incorporation of personality typing into a neurologic surgery residency program: Utility in systems based practice, professionalism, and self-reflection.World Neurosurg. 2018;120:e1041-e1046. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.09.007Capraro RM, Capraro MM.Myers-Briggs type indicator score reliability across: studies a meta-analytic reliability generalization study.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2002;62(4):590-602. doi:10.1177/0013164402062004004Pittenger DJ.The utility of the Myers-Briggs type indicator.Review of Educational Research. 1993;63(4):467-488. doi:10.3102/00346543063004467The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Versions of the MBTI questionnaire.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Original research.

Yang C, Richard G, Durkin M.The association between Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Psychiatry as the specialty choice.Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:48-51. doi:10.5116/ijme.5698.e2cd

Center for Applications of Psychological Type.Estimated frequencies of the types in the United States population.

Spiotta AM.Incorporation of personality typing into a neurologic surgery residency program: Utility in systems based practice, professionalism, and self-reflection.World Neurosurg. 2018;120:e1041-e1046. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.09.007

Capraro RM, Capraro MM.Myers-Briggs type indicator score reliability across: studies a meta-analytic reliability generalization study.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2002;62(4):590-602. doi:10.1177/0013164402062004004

Pittenger DJ.The utility of the Myers-Briggs type indicator.Review of Educational Research. 1993;63(4):467-488. doi:10.3102/00346543063004467

The Myers & Briggs Foundation.Versions of the MBTI questionnaire.

Bjork RA, Druckman D.In the Mind’s Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 1992.Jung CG. Psychological Types. In Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press: 1971.Lawrence GD, Martin CR. Building People, Building Programs. Center for Applications of Psychological Type. 2001.Myers IB, Peter BM. Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. 1980.Pittenger DJ.Measuring the MBTI…And Coming Up Short.Journal of Career Planning and Employment. 1993;54(1):48-52.The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.).Reliability and Validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Instrument.The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.). All Types Are Equal.

Bjork RA, Druckman D.In the Mind’s Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 1992.

Jung CG. Psychological Types. In Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press: 1971.

Lawrence GD, Martin CR. Building People, Building Programs. Center for Applications of Psychological Type. 2001.

Myers IB, Peter BM. Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. 1980.

Pittenger DJ.Measuring the MBTI…And Coming Up Short.Journal of Career Planning and Employment. 1993;54(1):48-52.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.).Reliability and Validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Instrument.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.). All Types Are Equal.

Meet Our Review Board

Share Feedback

Was this page helpful?Thanks for your feedback!What is your feedback?HelpfulReport an ErrorOtherSubmit

Was this page helpful?

Thanks for your feedback!

What is your feedback?HelpfulReport an ErrorOtherSubmit

What is your feedback?