Answer to Question #289966 in Psychology for Didi

Question

Based on the 16 personality tests, Do the items on this test appear to measure the concepts that the test claims to measure? This speaks to the face validity of the test.

Did the test do anything to address the acquiescence response set?

Please conclude with some final thoughts. Some examples of questions you might address are: What was your overall impression of the test you took? What did you think about some of the examples included in the test and what made them good or poor tests of personality? What, if anything, could be done to improve the test you took?

Answer 1

The Myers -Briggs Personality Test

 Personality testing and assessment refer to techniques designed to study and measure the behavioral traits of different individuals exhibited across various situations and environments. Below we look at Myers -Briggs personality test and its significant limitations which render it ineffective thus according to many experts, the limitations of this tool seem to outweigh any positive aspects. The test basis its results on behavioral binaries which include; Extraverted or introverted, sensing or intuiting, thinking or Feeling and Judgement. 

The test includes at several different cognitive functions that people make use of in interacting with others of daily basis. Extroverted functions are anchored on interaction with the environment, while introverted functions process through analysis and reflection.

However, Myers-Briggs is widely viewed as more of a theory, with no empirical evidence. This has subsequently continued to raise concerns over the tool. Davis Simine a researcher asserts that unless (MBTI) are tested scientifically one cannot tell the difference between them and pseudoscience such as astrology (Chen,2018).

 

There are numerous limitations found in Myers-Briggs test as discussed;

Low Test, Re-Test Reliability

Many researchers argue that the fact that the same individual can get different results when retaking the test it is a prove that this tool is unreliable. “Across a 5-week re-test period, 50% of the participants received a different classification on one or more of the (MBTI) scales,” states David Pitteger in his popular paper, Cautionary Comments Regarding the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Pitteger, 2005). Another study revealed, 39% and 76% of individuals taking the test on different occasions received different results, even just after five weeks (Boyle, 1995).

Poor Validity

William L. Gardner research of personality types and managerial behaviors asserted the MBTI was a very poor predictor of personality and  behavior . “improvement on type of construct and measures are still needed because there are uncertainties about it’s [MBTI] type theory and operationalization (Gardner and Martinko, 1996).”

Missing Pieces of Personality

Some researchers feel the MBTI is not broad enough because its categories do not cover the full components of personality. For example, one cannot measure emotional stability using this tool which is essential in predicting patterns, thoughts, feeling and actions.

Bimodal Grouping – Personalities Are Not Static

There are numerous inconsistencies and flaws evident in Myers -Briggs in that the personality traits are not static especially in the two groupings after the test. According to Ronald E. Riggio, Ph.D.  “In actuality, personality dimensions are continuous, with persons being more or less extraverted or introverted (Riggo, 2014).”

 

 

 Need for a Better Diagnostic Tool.

Suresh Balasubramanian, the Myers-Briggs company’s general manager, defended the test, stating, “When you look at the validity of the instrument, it’s just as valid as any other personality assessment (Gholipor2019).” There is therefore need to come up with a better and effective diagnostic tool to measure aptitude.

References:

 

Arthur, M.B. (2018, September 16). The strange history behind the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator – and what that can mean for you. Retrieved from <span style="color:

windowtext;">https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelbarthur/2018/09/16/the-strange-history-behind-the-mbti-and-what-that-can-mean-for-career-owners/#5f0082782fb3</span>

Boyle, G.J. (1995). Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator MBTI): some psychometric limitations. Retrieved from <span style="color: windowtext;">https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Myers%E2%80%90Briggs-Type-Indicator-(MBTI)%3A-Some-Boyle/b5e63da24d471d85d9f6fb0e2cab9e431dd78960</span>

Chen, A. (2018, October 10). How Accurate Are Personality Tests? Retrieved from <span style="color: windowtext;">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-accurate-are-personality-tests/</span>

Gardner, W.L. and Martinko, M.J. (1996). Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to study managers: A conceptual model and research agenda. Journal of Management. 22:45-83