{"id":9191,"date":"2020-12-24T16:13:56","date_gmt":"2020-12-24T15:13:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/?p=9191"},"modified":"2020-12-24T16:13:56","modified_gmt":"2020-12-24T15:13:56","slug":"myers-briggs-results-of-46-twitter-raters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/2020\/12\/myers-briggs-results-of-46-twitter-raters\/","title":{"rendered":"Myers Briggs: results of 46 Twitter raters"},"content":{"rendered":"

Slightly odd topic for a Christmas Even post, but some time ago, I talked with some people about the Myers Briggs personality model<\/a>. As a contrarian, I am of course interested in pushing against the mainstream view of my social circle (if reasonable). In wide culture, Myers Briggs is very popular, but among psychologists, <\/a>it is not popular<\/a>, so according to Jacob Falkovich’s reaction model<\/a>, my relevant outgroup here are the psychologists (academics) and other 115 IQ left-intellectuals<\/a>, so naturally, I think there might be something to the Myers Briggs. At least, a lot of the criticism of it is overstated.<\/p>\n

Going into details would take too long now, but briefly, there are some interesting occupational patterns<\/a>, and taking the dichotomous nature of the types into account, the reliability of the test is fine (I agree with critics that typing people is not generally a good idea when the distributions are mostly continuous<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Anyway, as a kind of public test of interpersonal perception, I asked my Twitter followers to guess my type. I’ve taken these MB type tests for at least 15 years, and I always get the same type, so my test reliability is 1.00.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Let's do a public test of Myers Briggs. Guess my personality type. I always get the same type, across 20 years and different tests.<\/p>\n

I will take all the guesses put in replies to this into a spreadsheet.<\/p>\n

— Emil O W Kirkegaard (@KirkegaardEmil) December 13, 2020<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n