Hey, great video! Despite what 16P has done in terms of attracting many people to MBTI I think that it has done a ton of damage to the understanding of cognitive theory, both to MBTI and other models. Big 5 and MBTI have strong correlation but not enough to directly copy one system to the other. For example, on my IQ video I correlated openness to intuition because the correlation is .72 which is exceptionally strong, but the other correlations were much less so and cannot be correlated to such a degree. Agreeableness to Feeling is only .44. At around 13:10 you make a point about not being conscientious in youth and this is extremely important for cognitive theory. Ni doms (INTJ/INFJ) Don't generally develop their extroverted judging function until their late teens through their mid-twenties. That’s why many of them under perform in youth and excel in later life - this is the balance aspect that Jung stressed the importance of. MBTI is a quantitative measurement built entirely around a qualitative theory. 16P is a quantitative measurement that is built around another quantitative measurement that attempts to then correlate with a qualitative theory. There are too many steps removed for it to accurately judge what it claims to judge. Keep up the good work!
Completely! As we both agree, the MBTI dichotomies can only be loosely correlated with Big 5 parameters, and as such using MBTI type codes to piggyback Big 5 scores is extremely misleading and has lead to a huge amount of mistyping! Yes indeed, the Feeling/Agreeable correlation is particularly bad. I also have to recognise the way in which the website has popularised, albeit indirectly, cognitive function based typology, but the tradeoff has been pretty significant. I like your remarks on Ni-dom development - I'd definitely agree this can oftentimes be the case, and can definitely draw a causative relationship between my own Fe development and the conscientiousness I talked about. Let me know if you have a video on your own type-development as I'd love to hear it!
Great video and really like your comment. In my case, 10 years ago when I was very young- as a less experienced, and less worldly meaning with more abstract understanding of the world, my MBTI score was INTJ-A. Since as I absorbed and developed pragmatic approach to life through my own knowledge, experience as well as lenses of people who I came across all paths of life, the score has now changed to INFJ-A, make sense! As we go through more life experiences, as we acquire wisdom through hands-on exploring or/and researching that naturally leading into unpacking the biases- conscious, or unconscious that predominantly learnt or got transferred from our environment, parents, etc. will naturally lead to inevitably reshaping our cognitive behavioural responses, and capabilities, consequently change of overall personalities. Depending on our paths, exposure we have had, knowledge acquired those changes may vary- large or slight. Understanding of a personality that comprised of certain behavioural responses-inwards or outwards- and cognitive abilities at a given time as a fluid parameter that could be a spectrum of characteristics is very important which don’t get enough emphasis in describing many of these personality typing, instead often trying whole population pigeonhole into rigid boxes. Thank you for shining a light on this :)
I think the reason 16P has garnered so much attention is because it has a freemium model, great front end design and even fosters its own community for free discussions. Not surprisingly, 16P forbid discussing other personality theory models. From a business perspective, they managed their ecosystem very well. From a model accuracy perspective, yeah, it's really flawed.
My experience matches exactly what you are describing: 16p gave me INTJ/INFJ, but following the 8 cognitive functions, INTP fits me much much better. As an INTP, I don’t like when there are many unresolved details which eat into my internal thoughts and feelings. This makes me score high on conscientiousness in the pseudo-MBTI test (“J”). I’m also quite sensitive to the feelings and reactions of others (less so of myself), due to my uncertainty around Fe. This gave me a 50/50 T/F in that non-cognitive system. So for 10 years I said I was INXJ. So happy to have found the 8-function model.
Yes, I also believe that neuroticism comes from trauma and can be separated from the functions. It is a big part of our brain and neurological pathways though. And if you have grown up in a highly pressured home for instance, it's gonna manifest in how you learn, which kind of information you trust, etc. I mean your whole brain and development is affected. I my book, highly pressured children will for instance not have the surplus energy to develop into extraverted children because all energy goes into 'survival'. So in that sense, I guess you can argue that neuroticism is coherent with certain cognitive behaviors (a certain function stack or lead function) that have been developed as coping styles. And that then neuroticism maybe often are linked to these certain cognitive behaviors. This have had me wondering, whether certain personality types are healthier than others...
Cheers for your comment! I wouldn't say this is necessarily the case, as everybody responds to pressure differently regardless of cognitive type - there are too many factors involved to say that a single factor of personality (and Neuroticism is made up of a host of factors in the first place) will influence a cognitive stack in a specific way. Similarly, there is a huge amount of cognitive variance in 'non-neurotic' people too :) Furthermore, some people are more genetically predisposed towards neuroticism than others - it's not always a result of trauma. There are in reality types within types within types, with the 16 types just being general areas people exist within. No single one of these areas are going to be innately healthier than others - they just, oftentimes, have different requirements for 'health parameters' being met :)
Thank you for this very well reasoned explanation. I think it’s very important that people come to understand what psychological type IS (natural preferences for certain cognitive processes) and what it is NOT (everything else, including specific traits and behaviors). If people like the Big 5 and pseudo MBTI for their practical purposes that’s fine but we shouldn’t confuse that with function-based typology.
Cheers Danny - yes, we're totally on the same page! Cognitive type and personality are two highly seperate areas of study, and trying to encapsulate the latter within a Big 5 score just isn't going to work. I believe such tests can be a fun way to measure how our behaviour (or more accurately our perception of our behavior) can change from year to year but outside of that I believe the applications to be limited for the individual.
Fantastic! You use words to describe thoughts i struggle to articulate and I appreciate this sooooo much. This makes a lot of sense. I never made the connection til someone commented that it was big five of my 16personalities video and now your breakdown shows exactly how and why and this needs to be understood!!
I'm an ENTP that tested INFP on 16p. Now that I understand more about the website and how it's made, I can totally understand why I had that result. And if I read the INFP description there, tbh, it totally suits me. But when I started learning more about the cognitive funtions and digged deeper into INFP, I didn't see myself there AT ALL. Some tests also gave me INFJ for the longest, even more accurate ones, but again INFJ was still not the best description suited for me. The more I searched I understood that I'm an ENTP, but not a really healthy one I have to admit, and ig that's why I also didn't see myself in that description at first, even just the cognitive description of it. And it's just like you said, it's impossible to put cognitive functions into a box, because there's too many variables for it. Thank you for this video, I hope it reaches more people, because most don't understand the harm 16p is doing. It still might hold some good to it, but not until people understand what real, true cognitive functions are and how they are supposed to help us!
16 personalities was great at getting my type (like even my cog funcs!) right but the descriptions were so bad that I needed to learn more from other sources. Which led me to discovering so much more about myself. So win, win? Lol.
It can definitely be the case! Sadly not many people are so lucky - the correlations between the dichotomies and Big 5 scores is pretty loose, so a person can answer very accurately and receive a completely different type score from this website.
I don't know for sure, but it seems like the T/A dichotomy on 16 personalities was added, because of the Big 5's Neuroticism category. My personality psychology teacher, Dr. Jean Twinge, was critical of MBTI not having it. I later told her about the 16 personalties version. I did notice, that when were introduced to some of the Facebook studies, that a high friend count would suggest high extraversion. I'm an INFJ w/ 1,200 Facebook friends, but I'm quite introverted in my private life. I think I was something like 60-70% conscientious and fairly high in agreeableness, but I think these results fluctuate, as you mentioned. I was definitely high in openness.
Indeed! The problem is 16P doesn't actually use the dichotomies, but rather the Big 5 scores with which the dichotomies are only loosely correlated. I'm an INFJ and I consistently receive an Extraverted score from Big 5 tests and pseudo-MBTI such as this one. I also test as disagreeable, which, as AsuraPsych has pointed out in this comments section, has a very low correlation with F vs T :)
I actually measure as an INTP in pretty much every typology type test, including actual MBTI and 16 Personalities (excepting Socionics, which labels things by a different system). For OCEAN, I am generally high Openness, medium conscientiousness, very low extraversion, low agreeableness, and medium high neuroticism.
Oh yes, there can absolutely be a solid correlation for some people.. perhaps even as high as 50% of people will have similar experiences to yourself. Very interesting!
The problem with reducing big 5 traits (such as NEO-PI) to the likes of MBTI is doing the vast amount of research a giant disfavor. While MBTI has done a magnificant job of marketing through its extraordinary claims, the evidence to back up those claims are not there. From a theoretical perspective the two systems are fundamentally different. Big 5 measures traits that aim to find the difference between people. MBTI follow typology theory and therefore seeks to reveal what is the commonalities for one group. While the items of MBTI correlate with big 5, the letters are completely random, meaning there is no valid connection between your acutal score from items and the letters. I advice you check out a couple of studies. The first two are looking at the validity of MBTI and how to seems so appealing, but is acutally not. The third is a meta analysis that shows just how little MBTI actually has for backing. 1: Stein, Randy, & Swan, Alexander B. (2019). Evaluating the validity of Myers-Briggs Type Indicator theory: A teaching tool and window into intuitive psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(2), E12434-N/a. Link: swanpsych.com/publications/SteinSwanMBTITheory_2019.pdf 2: Stein, Randy, & Swan, Alexander B. (2018). Deeply Confusing: Conflating Difficulty With Deep Revelation on Personality Assessment. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 10(4), 514-521. Link: www.swanpsych.com/publications/Stein_Swan_2018_deeplyconfusing.pdf 3: Ken Randall, Mary Isaacson, & Carrie Ciro. (2017). Validity and Reliability of the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator. Journal of Best Practices in Health Professions Diversity, 10(1), 1-27. Link: www.jstor.org/stable/26554264
This is great, thank you! The greatest problem lies in the instrument itself; cognitive functions are assumed from dichotomies that are (much like OCEAN scores) prone to change across an individuals lifetime. The instrument is a good attempt at correlating cognitive functions with consistently, context-independent behavioural/temperamental traits, but the fact is cognitive functions are far too subtle to be tested by scores aproximating Extraverted/Introversion etc. I have little doubt people's minds work differently to one another from birth, and the Twin Studies are just one example that go some way to proving a genetic level to personality. I do not believe cognitive functions make up the entirety (or even majority) of this static component to personality, but I do believe focusing on the differing ways people process information has merit.
Hello Harry! I do agree that most test online are mistyping people. In our previous chat I had told you that I took the MBTI test in high school. I should have been more clear. I was 15 years old and it was 1995. I had a smaller class about 400. It took 2 days to get everyone and they had brought in specialists to give us the test. Forced 2 answer questions as was originally designed. Just wanted to clear that up. :) I have taken the tests that you have in your description and have gotten INFJ. That I feel is my core type and I work in the realm of the other types as needed :) Great Video and I love your explanation, to be honest it was better than how my therapist described it lol ;) Look forward to more interesting videos. On a side note, I don't just use the MBTI for understanding myself. This is just one area I am exploring. MizLynn
Thanks for the great comment once again! It sounds like you got the real deal, and all the accumulated data adding up makes INFJ very likely indeed! I like how you phrased it as 'core type' - this is a much more accurate of what type actually is as, like you say, we move around according to context :)
Thank you for the great work you're doing with explaining cognitive functions and debunking sticky personality type myths! Do you know the channel 'Objective Personality'? If not, I think you would enjoy it tremendously. It's hosted by Dave and Shannon, who have developed a different and very detailed, systematic, meticulous method to effectively type people. They have deducted 512 types rather 16, as each of the 16 types have 32 sub-types. Importantly, the middle functions can be flipped, so as an INFJ, you might stack Ni, Ti, Fe, Se rather than Ni, Fe, Ti, Se. Because of e.g. the way you resonate, and describe how you value external feelings vs. thinking and truth seeking, I have a feeling you might have Ti above Fe in your function stack. Just a though from a fellow pattern seeking INFJ ;)
Hi! Thanks for the kind words :) I'm familiar with Dave and Shannon - they're great! CPT has a different approach - a lens function is always used in conjunction with a codec of the same orientation, so Ni-Fe doesn't exist within my system :) I would likely agree with many subtype variations, but CPT doesn't see these variations as subtypes per se owing to the fluidity of the model - a person's stack changes and adapts over time. There is some allignment between masculinity/feminitlty and convergence/divergence, but, conversely, while axis rotation does alter this (Convergent Se-Fe in an INFJ) the default state does not alter between individuals. So there are some definite similarities and differences :D
I want to get your book and you might touch on these things, but I see your personality, INFJ cognitive function pairs as Ni-Fe which I call "Understanding" and Ti-Se which I call "Design". So looking at the functions in pairs helps to more accurately get a picture of your full type, Understanding and Design. This seems less touchy and feely than labeling it a "feeling" type which it really isn't.
You make some of my favourite cognitive theory videos. You articulate a lot of the thoughts I have about MBTI/ socionics and our type but fail to express as articulately as you, particularly verbally. Listening to you I see you using our type as a case study on how the functions work, and so your videos are useful on different levels. They confirm my typing of myself, show me different means to articulate my internal thoughts succinctly but also help me conceptualise others within this system a little better. It's kind of funny that INFJs are known for being well-articulated (even myself), because oftentimes I feel like I can only articulate about 10% of what I think on a certain topic and I'm still not doing it as well as it happens in my head. It's actually really nice to watch videos from a slightly older INFJ (I'm 28) because it shows me the progression towards increased articulation. Not necessarily even increased understanding. Just increased refinement of thoughts and smoother articulation. However, I'm sure the fact that you've refined your thoughts on this to the extent that I find it relatable, means you've also progressed a lot further than me in thinking but have yet to refine that. It's very inspirational, and despite all the INFJs are mAgIc stuff on the internet it's actually one of the rare moments I feel comfortable and hopeful about identifying myself as this type; because it's a time I can see the progression towards articulation and better growth and see an even-handed view of our true capacities. It's surprising how few older INFJs there are on the internet that I can treat as a mentor-like-figure for growth, subtlety in expression, and balance. Thank you.
This comment has honestly made my day - thank you for this!! Generally the convergent-auxiliary is a function that must be 'practiced' (particularly alongside an Ni-Si dip for greater specificity in an INFJ) so many, many individuals will feel a similar uncertainty in their co-aux cogitations. SInce I prioritised this development I feel I may have less Fi-dip than the average INFJ, so there's definitely a tradeoff! But as your Ti will develop as you grow as will my Fi :) I realy appreciate your words! I have to add though that I look old for my age - I am in fact also 28! Haha. I was deep into ketogenesis when filming this video so that would have added a few years for sure!
I’m glad that this comment has the capacity to make your day despite that faux pas! I would have assumed about 33, which isn't too far off. Plus, most of that assumption is based on content/ context instead of appearance. I don’t really know how other 28 year-olds look. I just know people are starting to say I look young, which makes me wonder what 28 is supposed to look like. All in all 28 is a pretty variant age. Some people have put on weight, are missing teeth and have 3 children, some of us are still at uni looking the same as we did at 23 and making about as much progress. I think it’s interesting to note that while our uses of Ti or Fi in our internal realm *might* (or might not) be similar we would be more accustomed to interfacing with one or another based on context factors. I can definitely see how articulating Fi over Ti has been prioritised in my own life. I remember telling my mother as a teenager not to bother saying anything “smart” in front of my grandfather as it would only hurt her feelings when he didn’t validate her correctness or use her information (and since he didn’t like women who were smarter than him he’d find ways to make her look foolish in future social situations). Thinking about it from this perspective, it’s unlike that I’m going to actually be able to focus much on articulating my Ti during my younger years because it doesn’t really hold all that much social weight and it’s unlikely I’ll be given a huge amount of social contexts to safely articulate, test, and thus develop it. I can also imagine that if I was a man I’d probably only start to truly increase Fi dips in general conversations with society at large after having children, since it would serve more social purpose at this time. It would be interesting to track our communication styles to see how they change over time and if that correlates to more significant external or internal changes.
@@kitprojects Haha no worries at all! You raise very valid points and it would be interesting to track such things on a societal scale - hopefully as CPT develops this will become possible in the future!
Great stuff, that's cleared up a lot of my misunderstanding since I saw Jordan Petersons dismissive comments on MBTI, I only mentioned this yesterday on David Badurinas community page, some serious synchronicity going on here lol. It would still be great to get you & Jordan on a podcast video :)
What I don't understand about personality tests is why they ask me directly about my own opinion of myself. For example, I know this or that about myself to be true. How many of us know ourselves well enough to know with certainty? Are they measuring opinions or are they assuming my answer is accurate about myself? It seems to me that the questions should be about a person's preference rather than their conclusion about themselves.
@@CognitivePersonality yes I'm sure they are not, as none of human inventions are perfect. Anyway this typology thing helped me a lot to come out of my self damaging, suppressive behaviour, and realise my true possibilities. Literally you are my favourite youtuber so far. Thank you for your work. 😊🌸
@@CognitivePersonality Firstly because you are informative and helpful, and secondly (maybe this could be the first one 🤔) because of your appreciation of LoTR 🤗
Erik's test had me overthinking. "Do you prefer a clean house". Well, yes, I 100% would prefer not to live in filthy squalor. (Does that mean it's worth me spending a lot of effort on cleaning? Ah, no. No, it doesn't.) So I end up unsure if he's asking what he thinks he's asking. When I answer the actual questions (Se/Ni win!) I come out as an ISTJ. Thanks Eric, NOT 😉. INFJ
I suspect the Big 5 is favoured by people who want to think they ‘choose’ their personality via their behaviours and therefore there is a direct link to their morality. In this way, instead of understanding a persons cognition, they can damn others based on their Big 5 traits, and admire their own Big 5 score.
The thing I am searching for in a debate with someone is for them to actually "win". This is usually my objective, because then I grow as a person, and my mind is expanded. Of course, I will throw as much logic as I can fathom at their points, because I also want to understand the scope of the content with a high level of depth... I prefer this over "winning" a debate! And I like the word "discussion" better, actually :P
I can resonate with this my friend! I used to argue for the sake of victory, but quickly realised the entire exercise is far more fulfilling when I encourage people to contradict my arguments more effectively - I'd imagine this is common for other INFJs who enjoy debating :)
@@CognitivePersonality I also felt that way when younger, Harry. I would surmise that the more competent an INFJ gets with 'Ti', the less they would feel the need to "win" the debate (?)
@@tofusamurai22 Very much so! Activating both Si-specifity and lens-codec axial flexibility takes time and INFJs interested in developing this can definitely feel insecure and uncertain in their intellect in the early stages!
I think there is room for Big 5 based codes because of the different philosophy and methodology. However, they shouldn't use the MBTI codes because this creates confusion. The methodology difference is just too big. When I took the 16p test, I got ISTP-A. For the most part, it seems to have translated well between the 2 systems for me even after I learned about the functions (at least to my current understanding). However, I can see someone who is an ISTJ getting something similar on that test, especially if they work in a similar field that I do even though, as everyone knows, they have an entirely different stack.
Do the "cognitive functions" really matter if they don't impact behavior at all? Unless it impacts behavior, there's no way we can tell if they really exist or not. You start with observation (behavior) then work out the explanation (something like cognitive functions) not the other way around.
Oh they absolutely do, but it is more subtle and requires closer analysis. If we looked at behaviour alone, a few different cognitive function combinations can lead to the same behaviour, for example!
@@CognitivePersonality - true, even with the big 5 the same behavior can result from having high values on different dimensions. Still, I think this manifests itself in different patterns of behavior (different combinations of functions may lead to the same result in one situation, but if you look at how someone behaves over many situations, you're likely to see a difference. I'm wary that we know enough to figure out what's going on inside people's heads yet, though something important is definitely going on there.(This theory seems promising pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28189548/).
@@WorthlessWinner Indeed, but this is where a qualitative emphasis becomes paramount. Thank you for sharing this - this theory a (and related papers) looks fantastic!!
I found this very interesting and enlightening. I am an INTJ (quite clearly) and I score extremely high in concientiousness. (Same with openness. I score exceptionally low in extraversion, and extremely low in agreeableness. In neuroticism I fall on the low end of the scale, but not as low as those.) And of my INTJ friends I have gotten to take the test, they too are high in concientiousness. Just an observation. What you said makes sense. So now I am scratching my head and thinking on this.
Vow you are good at this man. thank you very much for this video, I really enjoyed it and learned a lot from it. looking forward to learning about neuroticism from you:)
I agree that personality tests just give you a "big 5" and then pretend it's MBTI.... which tricked me into thinking MBTI was less trash than it really is >_
@@ajaywankhede1905 We're on the same page now! The concept of duality relationships is an interesting one - I may cover this concept in its entirety within a video but, yes, I'll definitely be covering the ESTP more completely!
Sometimes when i like at you in your videos its like youre not looking at the camera, nor me but your focus and speech is strongly directed toward me. Its odd. Maybe its your eyes. Thode dreamy things
Great stuff, that's cleared up a lot of my misunderstanding since I saw Jordan Petersons dismissive comments on MBTI, I only mentioned this yesterday on David Badurinas community page, some serious synchronicity going on here lol. It would still be great to get you & Jordan on a podcast video :)
I'd absolutely LOVE that! I do believe I could change his mind on the subject and illuminate the utility (and validity) of a cognitive function based model :) Haha you're right about the synchronicity!
@@CognitivePersonality Here's a thought Harry, send him an email about your theory with a link to this video, maybe even chuck him a copy of your book, he seems pretty open to debate, especially if it's something that could change his mind. You never know where it may lead!
Hey, great video!
Despite what 16P has done in terms of attracting many people to MBTI I think that it has done a ton of damage to the understanding of cognitive theory, both to MBTI and other models.
Big 5 and MBTI have strong correlation but not enough to directly copy one system to the other. For example, on my IQ video I correlated openness to intuition because the correlation is .72 which is exceptionally strong, but the other correlations were much less so and cannot be correlated to such a degree. Agreeableness to Feeling is only .44.
At around 13:10 you make a point about not being conscientious in youth and this is extremely important for cognitive theory. Ni doms (INTJ/INFJ) Don't generally develop their extroverted judging function until their late teens through their mid-twenties. That’s why many of them under perform in youth and excel in later life - this is the balance aspect that Jung stressed the importance of.
MBTI is a quantitative measurement built entirely around a qualitative theory. 16P is a quantitative measurement that is built around another quantitative measurement that attempts to then correlate with a qualitative theory. There are too many steps removed for it to accurately judge what it claims to judge.
Keep up the good work!
Completely! As we both agree, the MBTI dichotomies can only be loosely correlated with Big 5 parameters, and as such using MBTI type codes to piggyback Big 5 scores is extremely misleading and has lead to a huge amount of mistyping!
Yes indeed, the Feeling/Agreeable correlation is particularly bad.
I also have to recognise the way in which the website has popularised, albeit indirectly, cognitive function based typology, but the tradeoff has been pretty significant.
I like your remarks on Ni-dom development - I'd definitely agree this can oftentimes be the case, and can definitely draw a causative relationship between my own Fe development and the conscientiousness I talked about.
Let me know if you have a video on your own type-development as I'd love to hear it!
Great video and really like your comment. In my case, 10 years ago when I was very young- as a less experienced, and less worldly meaning with more abstract understanding of the world, my MBTI score was INTJ-A. Since as I absorbed and developed pragmatic approach to life through my own knowledge, experience as well as lenses of people who I came across all paths of life, the score has now changed to INFJ-A, make sense!
As we go through more life experiences, as we acquire wisdom through hands-on exploring or/and researching that naturally leading into unpacking the biases- conscious, or unconscious that predominantly learnt or got transferred from our environment, parents, etc. will naturally lead to inevitably reshaping our cognitive behavioural responses, and capabilities, consequently change of overall personalities. Depending on our paths, exposure we have had, knowledge acquired those changes may vary- large or slight.
Understanding of a personality that comprised of certain behavioural responses-inwards or outwards- and cognitive abilities at a given time as a fluid parameter that could be a spectrum of characteristics is very important which don’t get enough emphasis in describing many of these personality typing, instead often trying whole population pigeonhole into rigid boxes. Thank you for shining a light on this :)
I think the reason 16P has garnered so much attention is because it has a freemium model, great front end design and even fosters its own community for free discussions. Not surprisingly, 16P forbid discussing other personality theory models. From a business perspective, they managed their ecosystem very well. From a model accuracy perspective, yeah, it's really flawed.
they really prioritized "marketing" over actual understanding
My experience matches exactly what you are describing:
16p gave me INTJ/INFJ, but following the 8 cognitive functions, INTP fits me much much better. As an INTP, I don’t like when there are many unresolved details which eat into my internal thoughts and feelings. This makes me score high on conscientiousness in the pseudo-MBTI test (“J”). I’m also quite sensitive to the feelings and reactions of others (less so of myself), due to my uncertainty around Fe. This gave me a 50/50 T/F in that non-cognitive system. So for 10 years I said I was INXJ. So happy to have found the 8-function model.
Yes, I also believe that neuroticism comes from trauma and can be separated from the functions. It is a big part of our brain and neurological pathways though. And if you have grown up in a highly pressured home for instance, it's gonna manifest in how you learn, which kind of information you trust, etc. I mean your whole brain and development is affected. I my book, highly pressured children will for instance not have the surplus energy to develop into extraverted children because all energy goes into 'survival'. So in that sense, I guess you can argue that neuroticism is coherent with certain cognitive behaviors (a certain function stack or lead function) that have been developed as coping styles. And that then neuroticism maybe often are linked to these certain cognitive behaviors.
This have had me wondering, whether certain personality types are healthier than others...
Cheers for your comment! I wouldn't say this is necessarily the case, as everybody responds to pressure differently regardless of cognitive type - there are too many factors involved to say that a single factor of personality (and Neuroticism is made up of a host of factors in the first place) will influence a cognitive stack in a specific way. Similarly, there is a huge amount of cognitive variance in 'non-neurotic' people too :)
Furthermore, some people are more genetically predisposed towards neuroticism than others - it's not always a result of trauma.
There are in reality types within types within types, with the 16 types just being general areas people exist within. No single one of these areas are going to be innately healthier than others - they just, oftentimes, have different requirements for 'health parameters' being met :)
Thank you for this very well reasoned explanation. I think it’s very important that people come to understand what psychological type IS (natural preferences for certain cognitive processes) and what it is NOT (everything else, including specific traits and behaviors). If people like the Big 5 and pseudo MBTI for their practical purposes that’s fine but we shouldn’t confuse that with function-based typology.
Cheers Danny - yes, we're totally on the same page!
Cognitive type and personality are two highly seperate areas of study, and trying to encapsulate the latter within a Big 5 score just isn't going to work. I believe such tests can be a fun way to measure how our behaviour (or more accurately our perception of our behavior) can change from year to year but outside of that I believe the applications to be limited for the individual.
Fantastic! You use words to describe thoughts i struggle to articulate and I appreciate this sooooo much. This makes a lot of sense. I never made the connection til someone commented that it was big five of my 16personalities video and now your breakdown shows exactly how and why and this needs to be understood!!
Thanks Michelle - I'm looking forward to our collab!
P.S. Digging the new channel name!
@@CognitivePersonality Thanks! I look forward to it as well!
I'm an ENTP that tested INFP on 16p. Now that I understand more about the website and how it's made, I can totally understand why I had that result. And if I read the INFP description there, tbh, it totally suits me. But when I started learning more about the cognitive funtions and digged deeper into INFP, I didn't see myself there AT ALL. Some tests also gave me INFJ for the longest, even more accurate ones, but again INFJ was still not the best description suited for me. The more I searched I understood that I'm an ENTP, but not a really healthy one I have to admit, and ig that's why I also didn't see myself in that description at first, even just the cognitive description of it. And it's just like you said, it's impossible to put cognitive functions into a box, because there's too many variables for it. Thank you for this video, I hope it reaches more people, because most don't understand the harm 16p is doing. It still might hold some good to it, but not until people understand what real, true cognitive functions are and how they are supposed to help us!
16 personalities was great at getting my type (like even my cog funcs!) right but the descriptions were so bad that I needed to learn more from other sources. Which led me to discovering so much more about myself. So win, win? Lol.
It can definitely be the case! Sadly not many people are so lucky - the correlations between the dichotomies and Big 5 scores is pretty loose, so a person can answer very accurately and receive a completely different type score from this website.
I don't know for sure, but it seems like the T/A dichotomy on 16 personalities was added, because of the Big 5's Neuroticism category. My personality psychology teacher, Dr. Jean Twinge, was critical of MBTI not having it. I later told her about the 16 personalties version.
I did notice, that when were introduced to some of the Facebook studies, that a high friend count would suggest high extraversion. I'm an INFJ w/ 1,200 Facebook friends, but I'm quite introverted in my private life. I think I was something like 60-70% conscientious and fairly high in agreeableness, but I think these results fluctuate, as you mentioned. I was definitely high in openness.
Indeed! The problem is 16P doesn't actually use the dichotomies, but rather the Big 5 scores with which the dichotomies are only loosely correlated.
I'm an INFJ and I consistently receive an Extraverted score from Big 5 tests and pseudo-MBTI such as this one. I also test as disagreeable, which, as AsuraPsych has pointed out in this comments section, has a very low correlation with F vs T :)
Cognitive Personality Theory Interesting, I didn’t know that!
I actually measure as an INTP in pretty much every typology type test, including actual MBTI and 16 Personalities (excepting Socionics, which labels things by a different system). For OCEAN, I am generally high Openness, medium conscientiousness, very low extraversion, low agreeableness, and medium high neuroticism.
Oh yes, there can absolutely be a solid correlation for some people.. perhaps even as high as 50% of people will have similar experiences to yourself. Very interesting!
My big 5 is like yours but slightly less conscientious
The problem with reducing big 5 traits (such as NEO-PI) to the likes of MBTI is doing the vast amount of research a giant disfavor. While MBTI has done a magnificant job of marketing through its extraordinary claims, the evidence to back up those claims are not there.
From a theoretical perspective the two systems are fundamentally different. Big 5 measures traits that aim to find the difference between people. MBTI follow typology theory and therefore seeks to reveal what is the commonalities for one group.
While the items of MBTI correlate with big 5, the letters are completely random, meaning there is no valid connection between your acutal score from items and the letters.
I advice you check out a couple of studies. The first two are looking at the validity of MBTI and how to seems so appealing, but is acutally not. The third is a meta analysis that shows just how little MBTI actually has for backing.
1: Stein, Randy, & Swan, Alexander B. (2019). Evaluating the validity of Myers-Briggs Type Indicator theory: A teaching tool and window into intuitive psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(2), E12434-N/a.
Link: swanpsych.com/publications/SteinSwanMBTITheory_2019.pdf
2: Stein, Randy, & Swan, Alexander B. (2018). Deeply Confusing: Conflating Difficulty With Deep Revelation on Personality Assessment. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 10(4), 514-521.
Link: www.swanpsych.com/publications/Stein_Swan_2018_deeplyconfusing.pdf
3: Ken Randall, Mary Isaacson, & Carrie Ciro. (2017). Validity and Reliability of the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator. Journal of Best Practices in Health Professions Diversity, 10(1), 1-27.
Link: www.jstor.org/stable/26554264
This is great, thank you!
The greatest problem lies in the instrument itself; cognitive functions are assumed from dichotomies that are (much like OCEAN scores) prone to change across an individuals lifetime. The instrument is a good attempt at correlating cognitive functions with consistently, context-independent behavioural/temperamental traits, but the fact is cognitive functions are far too subtle to be tested by scores aproximating Extraverted/Introversion etc.
I have little doubt people's minds work differently to one another from birth, and the Twin Studies are just one example that go some way to proving a genetic level to personality. I do not believe cognitive functions make up the entirety (or even majority) of this static component to personality, but I do believe focusing on the differing ways people process information has merit.
i got istp on MBTI and it was 100% accurate i might as well be a stereotype
@@CognitivePersonality I agree
Hello Harry!
I do agree that most test online are mistyping people. In our previous chat I had told you that I took the MBTI test in high school. I should have been more clear. I was 15 years old and it was 1995. I had a smaller class about 400. It took 2 days to get everyone and they had brought in specialists to give us the test. Forced 2 answer questions as was originally designed. Just wanted to clear that up. :)
I have taken the tests that you have in your description and have gotten INFJ. That I feel is my core type and I work in the realm of the other types as needed :)
Great Video and I love your explanation, to be honest it was better than how my therapist described it lol ;)
Look forward to more interesting videos.
On a side note, I don't just use the MBTI for understanding myself. This is just one area I am exploring.
MizLynn
Thanks for the great comment once again!
It sounds like you got the real deal, and all the accumulated data adding up makes INFJ very likely indeed! I like how you phrased it as 'core type' - this is a much more accurate of what type actually is as, like you say, we move around according to context :)
So much Meaty knowledge great work
Damn this test is amazing it got me chills
Thank you for the great work you're doing with explaining cognitive functions and debunking sticky personality type myths! Do you know the channel 'Objective Personality'? If not, I think you would enjoy it tremendously. It's hosted by Dave and Shannon, who have developed a different and very detailed, systematic, meticulous method to effectively type people. They have deducted 512 types rather 16, as each of the 16 types have 32 sub-types. Importantly, the middle functions can be flipped, so as an INFJ, you might stack Ni, Ti, Fe, Se rather than Ni, Fe, Ti, Se. Because of e.g. the way you resonate, and describe how you value external feelings vs. thinking and truth seeking, I have a feeling you might have Ti above Fe in your function stack. Just a though from a fellow pattern seeking INFJ ;)
Hi! Thanks for the kind words :)
I'm familiar with Dave and Shannon - they're great!
CPT has a different approach - a lens function is always used in conjunction with a codec of the same orientation, so Ni-Fe doesn't exist within my system :)
I would likely agree with many subtype variations, but CPT doesn't see these variations as subtypes per se owing to the fluidity of the model - a person's stack changes and adapts over time.
There is some allignment between masculinity/feminitlty and convergence/divergence, but, conversely, while axis rotation does alter this (Convergent Se-Fe in an INFJ) the default state does not alter between individuals.
So there are some definite similarities and differences :D
I want to get your book and you might touch on these things, but I see your personality, INFJ cognitive function pairs as Ni-Fe which I call "Understanding" and Ti-Se which I call "Design". So looking at the functions in pairs helps to more accurately get a picture of your full type, Understanding and Design. This seems less touchy and feely than labeling it a "feeling" type which it really isn't.
You make some of my favourite cognitive theory videos. You articulate a lot of the thoughts I have about MBTI/ socionics and our type but fail to express as articulately as you, particularly verbally. Listening to you I see you using our type as a case study on how the functions work, and so your videos are useful on different levels. They confirm my typing of myself, show me different means to articulate my internal thoughts succinctly but also help me conceptualise others within this system a little better.
It's kind of funny that INFJs are known for being well-articulated (even myself), because oftentimes I feel like I can only articulate about 10% of what I think on a certain topic and I'm still not doing it as well as it happens in my head. It's actually really nice to watch videos from a slightly older INFJ (I'm 28) because it shows me the progression towards increased articulation. Not necessarily even increased understanding. Just increased refinement of thoughts and smoother articulation. However, I'm sure the fact that you've refined your thoughts on this to the extent that I find it relatable, means you've also progressed a lot further than me in thinking but have yet to refine that.
It's very inspirational, and despite all the INFJs are mAgIc stuff on the internet it's actually one of the rare moments I feel comfortable and hopeful about identifying myself as this type; because it's a time I can see the progression towards articulation and better growth and see an even-handed view of our true capacities. It's surprising how few older INFJs there are on the internet that I can treat as a mentor-like-figure for growth, subtlety in expression, and balance. Thank you.
This comment has honestly made my day - thank you for this!!
Generally the convergent-auxiliary is a function that must be 'practiced' (particularly alongside an Ni-Si dip for greater specificity in an INFJ) so many, many individuals will feel a similar uncertainty in their co-aux cogitations.
SInce I prioritised this development I feel I may have less Fi-dip than the average INFJ, so there's definitely a tradeoff! But as your Ti will develop as you grow as will my Fi :)
I realy appreciate your words! I have to add though that I look old for my age - I am in fact also 28! Haha. I was deep into ketogenesis when filming this video so that would have added a few years for sure!
I’m glad that this comment has the capacity to make your day despite that faux pas!
I would have assumed about 33, which isn't too far off. Plus, most of that assumption is based on content/ context instead of appearance. I don’t really know how other 28 year-olds look. I just know people are starting to say I look young, which makes me wonder what 28 is supposed to look like. All in all 28 is a pretty variant age. Some people have put on weight, are missing teeth and have 3 children, some of us are still at uni looking the same as we did at 23 and making about as much progress.
I think it’s interesting to note that while our uses of Ti or Fi in our internal realm *might* (or might not) be similar we would be more accustomed to interfacing with one or another based on context factors. I can definitely see how articulating Fi over Ti has been prioritised in my own life. I remember telling my mother as a teenager not to bother saying anything “smart” in front of my grandfather as it would only hurt her feelings when he didn’t validate her correctness or use her information (and since he didn’t like women who were smarter than him he’d find ways to make her look foolish in future social situations). Thinking about it from this perspective, it’s unlike that I’m going to actually be able to focus much on articulating my Ti during my younger years because it doesn’t really hold all that much social weight and it’s unlikely I’ll be given a huge amount of social contexts to safely articulate, test, and thus develop it. I can also imagine that if I was a man I’d probably only start to truly increase Fi dips in general conversations with society at large after having children, since it would serve more social purpose at this time. It would be interesting to track our communication styles to see how they change over time and if that correlates to more significant external or internal changes.
@@kitprojects Haha no worries at all!
You raise very valid points and it would be interesting to track such things on a societal scale - hopefully as CPT develops this will become possible in the future!
Great stuff, that's cleared up a lot of my misunderstanding since I saw Jordan Petersons dismissive comments on MBTI, I only mentioned this yesterday on David Badurinas community page, some serious synchronicity going on here lol. It would still be great to get you & Jordan on a podcast video :)
Yes! Responded to your other comment :)
What I don't understand about personality tests is why they ask me directly about my own opinion of myself. For example, I know this or that about myself to be true. How many of us know ourselves well enough to know with certainty? Are they measuring opinions or are they assuming my answer is accurate about myself? It seems to me that the questions should be about a person's preference rather than their conclusion about themselves.
This is the problem with self-reported data across the board!
Lol I am a hard core INFJ and got ENTJ in Erik Thor's test 😅
Honestly, even tests I consider better than others are limited by their own medium - tests as a whole are not a reliable determinant of type :)
@@CognitivePersonality yes I'm sure they are not, as none of human inventions are perfect. Anyway this typology thing helped me a lot to come out of my self damaging, suppressive behaviour, and realise my true possibilities. Literally you are my favourite youtuber so far. Thank you for your work. 😊🌸
@@deepforestgreen8308 Wow, thank you for saying that - this is great to hear and it means a lot!
@@CognitivePersonality Firstly because you are informative and helpful, and secondly (maybe this could be the first one 🤔) because of your appreciation of LoTR 🤗
Erik's test had me overthinking. "Do you prefer a clean house". Well, yes, I 100% would prefer not to live in filthy squalor. (Does that mean it's worth me spending a lot of effort on cleaning? Ah, no. No, it doesn't.) So I end up unsure if he's asking what he thinks he's asking.
When I answer the actual questions (Se/Ni win!) I come out as an ISTJ. Thanks Eric, NOT 😉. INFJ
I suspect the Big 5 is favoured by people who want to think they ‘choose’ their personality via their behaviours and therefore there is a direct link to their morality. In this way, instead of understanding a persons cognition, they can damn others based on their Big 5 traits, and admire their own Big 5 score.
The thing I am searching for in a debate with someone is for them to actually "win". This is usually my objective, because then I grow as a person, and my mind is expanded. Of course, I will throw as much logic as I can fathom at their points, because I also want to understand the scope of the content with a high level of depth... I prefer this over "winning" a debate! And I like the word "discussion" better, actually :P
I can resonate with this my friend! I used to argue for the sake of victory, but quickly realised the entire exercise is far more fulfilling when I encourage people to contradict my arguments more effectively - I'd imagine this is common for other INFJs who enjoy debating :)
@@CognitivePersonality I also felt that way when younger, Harry. I would surmise that the more competent an INFJ gets with 'Ti', the less they would feel the need to "win" the debate (?)
@@tofusamurai22 Very much so! Activating both Si-specifity and lens-codec axial flexibility takes time and INFJs interested in developing this can definitely feel insecure and uncertain in their intellect in the early stages!
@@CognitivePersonality gah! CPT is fuggin' fascinating! Excellent stuff! ^_^
what i got to know from this video : You can change your personality through practice
thanku sir🙏
I think there is room for Big 5 based codes because of the different philosophy and methodology. However, they shouldn't use the MBTI codes because this creates confusion. The methodology difference is just too big. When I took the 16p test, I got ISTP-A. For the most part, it seems to have translated well between the 2 systems for me even after I learned about the functions (at least to my current understanding). However, I can see someone who is an ISTJ getting something similar on that test, especially if they work in a similar field that I do even though, as everyone knows, they have an entirely different stack.
Very valid points :)
I would attach Neuroticism to Feeling, no?
No
Do the "cognitive functions" really matter if they don't impact behavior at all?
Unless it impacts behavior, there's no way we can tell if they really exist or not.
You start with observation (behavior) then work out the explanation (something like cognitive functions) not the other way around.
Oh they absolutely do, but it is more subtle and requires closer analysis. If we looked at behaviour alone, a few different cognitive function combinations can lead to the same behaviour, for example!
@@CognitivePersonality - true, even with the big 5 the same behavior can result from having high values on different dimensions. Still, I think this manifests itself in different patterns of behavior (different combinations of functions may lead to the same result in one situation, but if you look at how someone behaves over many situations, you're likely to see a difference.
I'm wary that we know enough to figure out what's going on inside people's heads yet, though something important is definitely going on there.(This theory seems promising pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28189548/).
@@WorthlessWinner Indeed, but this is where a qualitative emphasis becomes paramount.
Thank you for sharing this - this theory a
(and related papers) looks fantastic!!
I found this very interesting and enlightening. I am an INTJ (quite clearly) and I score extremely high in concientiousness. (Same with openness. I score exceptionally low in extraversion, and extremely low in agreeableness. In neuroticism I fall on the low end of the scale, but not as low as those.) And of my INTJ friends I have gotten to take the test, they too are high in concientiousness.
Just an observation.
What you said makes sense. So now I am scratching my head and thinking on this.
Cheers! Te authority types will seldom test as non-conscientiousness to be honest; variation occurs more within Ti and Fe authority types.
ok .. that makes sense
thank you
been enjoying your channel btw
Vow you are good at this man. thank you very much for this video, I really enjoyed it and learned a lot from it. looking forward to learning about neuroticism from you:)
I really appreciate your comment!
I'm definitely considering a video dedicated to that subject :)
Are you going to do something similar with enneagram?
Definitely at some point yes! :)
I agree that personality tests just give you a "big 5" and then pretend it's MBTI.... which tricked me into thinking MBTI was less trash than it really is >_
mbti type is a box but without bottom
Hah, nice analogy!
I keep getting 50 and 50 between enfp and entp
And im literally both of them
Tests aren't very reliable!
@@marumakar No.
Can you make a video on your dual estp and how Fe manifest in estp..
I'm definitely looking forward to making an in-depth ESTP video at some point!
Can you elaborate on what you mean by 'dual'?
@@CognitivePersonality I thought you were an infj do infj dual is estp in socionics.thats what I mean by dual..
@@ajaywankhede1905 We're on the same page now!
The concept of duality relationships is an interesting one - I may cover this concept in its entirety within a video but, yes, I'll definitely be covering the ESTP more completely!
Thank you.
We ever evovle,there is no fixed state
The Big 5 seems more of a relative measure, and therefore it is not very fundamental.
Does anyone know the best MBTI test
PsychologyJunkie is pretty good
@@CognitivePersonality thank you
Bro is trying hard to convince us that he is INFJ
Sometimes when i like at you in your videos its like youre not looking at the camera, nor me but your focus and speech is strongly directed toward me.
Its odd. Maybe its your eyes. Thode dreamy things
Interesting - yes, maybe it's the Ni gaze!
Great stuff, that's cleared up a lot of my misunderstanding since I saw Jordan Petersons dismissive comments on MBTI, I only mentioned this yesterday on David Badurinas community page, some serious synchronicity going on here lol. It would still be great to get you & Jordan on a podcast video :)
I'd absolutely LOVE that! I do believe I could change his mind on the subject and illuminate the utility (and validity) of a cognitive function based model :)
Haha you're right about the synchronicity!
@@CognitivePersonality Here's a thought Harry, send him an email about your theory with a link to this video, maybe even chuck him a copy of your book, he seems pretty open to debate, especially if it's something that could change his mind. You never know where it may lead!
@@glassbackdiy3949 I may very well do that!
Another thing I don't like about JP