Last revised

The "Test"

Please do not write and tell me you must be an INFJ because that's what you got on "the test."

Do not tell me how many times you've taken "the test," either.  "The test" is merely a single data point.  And it is often WRONG.  The type experts estimate that it can be wrong anywhere from 25% to 50% of the time.

In short, it's not a blood test!

I realize it makes me unpopular to assail the test -- but when it isn't foolproof and it's highly fallible, does it make sense to rely on it, even plan your life by it?*

David Keirsey states, My guess is that the various Jungian instruments—MBTI, (Keirsey Temperament) Sorter, Singer-Loomis, Gray-Wheelwright, MMTIC—are wrong about half the time, which is to say they misclassify about every other person.

So here are some important questions to ask yourself:

Did you VALIDATE your results?  Have you undergone a Self-Discovery process?  Do you understand what the letters mean?  Does the INFJ description (preferably the research-based Berens/Nardi description) sound like you, like somebody read your diary ?  Do you know anything about the topic, or have you just stumbled onto something new and fun?

The truth is, you can better validate your results and determine your type after you've learned something about the theory.  You can even learn it here!

But please do NOT tell me what "the test" says as if that is the sole, definitive answer regarding your type.  All "the test" did was open a door and show you a new way to think about yourself.  That doesn't make the test's outcome right or wrong.  Only you can make the outcome right or wrong.

"The test" is not the answer.  It's a launch pad to start questioning.

* * *

So What's Wrong With "the Test"

Following is an allegory to illustrate why it's foolish to rely only on the "test":

The Frog Researcher

A researcher was conducting an experiment with a frog for his doctorate degree.

He placed a frog on a table and said, "Jump." It jumped four feet. Then he cut off one leg of the frog and said "Jump," and the frog jumped three feet. Then he cut off the second leg and commanded it to "Jump." The frog could jump only two feet. Then he cut the third leg, and when he said "jump," the frog could jump only one foot.

Then he cut off the fourth and last leg and commanded it to "Jump." Now, the frog could not jump.

The researcher wrote and submitted his thesis with the conclusion:

"When a frog loses all four legs it becomes deaf."

The thesis was rejected.

The reason cited for rejection of the thesis was:

The sample size was too small to arrive at the conclusion!

Reactions to the story usually include:

- that is how research is done
- numbers are important
- something is more important than logic
- methodology cannot overtake common sense
- are they so stupid to conclude like this....
- evaluate a thesis like this, one should...

The best ones say:

- men always conclude with insufficient evidence;


- do frogs have four legs? I thought they had only TWO!!

Thanks to Senthil Athiban for sharing this fable

* * *