22 October 2006

My Personality Test Results

Some time ago, out of curiosity, I did a few Myers-Briggs type indicator test to find out what personality category I fall into. This test classifies a person based on four different types of indicators, on a scale between two extremes (e.g. one of the indicators is the Extrovert-Introvert dichotomy; no prizes for successfully guessing which side I lean towards). Usually, the results of the test can be used to predict which jobs are more suited for that personality (e.g. an introvert is hardly makes a good stand-up comedian), or the social interaction of that person.

I took the four free online tests linked from the Wikipedia entry, all of which involves answering a collection of questions (numbering 50 and above) about what I'd do in a particular situation. Being unauthorised tests, I do not put too much faith in its results, but then again, I took them just for fun; I do not need it to tell me my future directions.

http://www.personalitytest.net/types/index.htm says I'm an INTJ.

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp seconds that INTJ verdict.

http://similarminds.com/jung.html agrees with the above two of me being an INTJ.

http://4np.net/ddli/, however, thinks I'm more of an INTP.

I gather that these unofficial tests point to me as an INTJ. According to Personality Test Center's description of personality types,

INTJ: "Scientist". Most self-confident and pragmatic of all the types. Decisions come very easily. These are the most independent of all types. They love logic and ideas and are drawn to scientific research. They can be rather single-minded, though.. 1% of the total population.


Heh heh, it nailed it right with its "scientist" representation, eh? But the following lines of description don't quite fit: self-confident, pragmatic, decisive... Self-confidence is definitely not my defining trait. Pragmatic? Only when I'm doing science; in life, I can be quite idealistic - quite the opposite. As for my decisiveness, I can, ironically, decisively say that I am not at all decisive.

Seeing what the detailed description say, certain attributes clearly manifest in me:

When stress increases, ... social interaction, which is not their strength, becomes increasingly difficult for them.


Also,

The INTJ may then find themselves spending an inordinate amount of time fighting horrible thoughts, tempting absurdities, and feelings of worthlessness.


However, reading the description for an INTP (which the last test label me as), I seem to fit more into that profile:

INTP: "Architect". Greatest precision in thought and language. Can readily discern contradictions and inconsistencies. They are good at logic and math and make good philosophers and theoretical scientists, but not writers or salespeople. 1% of the total population.


Firstly, there are almost no characteristics which I cannot identify myself with (as opposed to the description of an INTJ) except at the part of "greatest precision". Also, there are certain descriptions that fits amazingly well:

INTPs lack follow-through and this can isolate their ideas from practical examination. Their notions become over-intellectualized and too abstract to be of practical benefit.


In particular,

If stress continues, the INTP's mind seems to freeze and block out the vital information it has worked so hard to accumulate. Their creative juices stop flowing and they suffer from stage fright, writers block, and a general inhibition of their ingenious thinking and fluent language skills.


In addition, one of the job listed for an INTJ is "scientist", while for an INTP, "physicist" appears. Perhaps I'm an INT?, split between Judging and Perceiving.

That's a pretty interesting foray into my own personality. I'll probably talk more about my personality some time in the future. To end with a question, from the description of INTJs as friends,

Those who are close to the INTJ will highly value them for their ideas and knowledge.


Do you value my rubbish?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Yes, probably. Depends on the topic of conversation, really. Politics? No thanks