I keep starting these online tests for these things but there's never the required "well, it depends" option.
The online tests for the Big 5 personality assessment tend to have five options: definitely, kinda, neutral, kinda not, definitely not. Just the fact that they're not binary makes me feel better about them.
I keep starting these online tests for these things but there's never the required "well, it depends" option.
The online tests for the Big 5 personality assessment tend to have five options: definitely, kinda, neutral, kinda not, definitely not. Just the fact that they're not binary makes me feel better about them.
Yeah, but for me "it depends" isn't the same as "no preference" - once I had a context, I could be very strongly definitely or definitely not.
Well, you can decide not to play along, sure, and considering what you've shared about yourself, I get the impression that you've been asked and even required to play along with all kinds of stupid crap in your life, so why would you want to do it in your free time? I find approaching it as a game to play works, but that's me.
And I get that context matters. The big 5 test that comes up first when I search has these options: very inaccurate, moderately inaccurate, neither accurate nor inaccurate, moderately accurate, very accurate. The first item simply says "Worry about things." Which, c'mon, depends on the things! So I take it as asking in general, do I worry about things? Am I in general a worrier? I worry about some things, but overall not a lot, so I'd go with moderately inaccurate for that one.
These sorts of tests don't have context for a reason; they're not going to get into the weeds about whether the party will have real ale or a would-be home mixologist making apple-tinis or some such. They have to be general for a lot of people to be able to take them. But that does give them all a "here are a few ill-fitting boxes -- squeeze yourself into one of them" feeling.
I am INF"J" but was far more fascinated the interactions and the more complex stuff around them. For instance, there are two types of MBTI tests online online, one is a straight preference test and one is the original Myer-Briggs test where the final letter indicates which of the middle two you extravert. On one I am J and on the other I am P and I pretty strongly in either according to which type of test I am taking, hence the quotation marks. The value above is the preference one but it is the one most people recognise in me. My family would definitely put me a P.
You see every one can act as extra-verted and when I do my preferred mode is Intuitive Thinking because those are both extraverted. So I come across as very logical and academic. However, I am strongly introverted, so my internal world where I am "at home" if you like is full of gut feelings to sensual experiences.
Secondly, most of my life I have situations where I am surrounded by significant other introverts. That means in those situations I have learnt to act as an extrovert. The result is that I will often appear pretty much the didact. Note the shorter I am in resources I am the more of a didact I will be. If I am socially supported the more I am able to react to the emotional atmosphere. Also as I commented with my family my "P" - ness comes out. When I was a teenager my Aunt got me a card that said "My final answer is 'Maybe'". Most of that is because at the time when I am often expected to make decisions I have little access to my preferred decision making process, i.e. emotions. My family prefer decisiveness which often comes from people who tend to extravert judgement over perception. So I am the one who dithers and then suddenly, when I have been away somewhere quiet, I have a strong very clear answer, but my family rarely waited for that answer to come so all they ever got was maybe. Then my sister and mum are both E??J and Dad was almost certainly INTJ.
Myers Briggs is surely about preferences. The tests have shown ENTJ for me. Mostly I prefer extroversion but I need introversion times, to be on my own and reflect. I have a strong preference for seeing into things, but have learned from my wife the real value of just seeing things, not rushing to analyse. I’m very close in preferring values-based thinking to logical thinking as mostly I tend to use one to check the other. And I’m quite close in preferring order to flexibility. I never give a train an even chance of leaving before I get to the station.
I know that Myers Briggs is pseudo science but I think it has given me a more generous appreciation of human diversity, including my own! I think it can become unhelpful if we see it as somehow establishing an identity, rather than a guide to preference.
I did a "proper" MBTI assessment during a training course when I still worked for the BBC. The result was Strong I, mild N, mild F strong P. I have also done the non-approved tests you can find online, and the results have always been the same. I am quite satisfied that this accurately reflects the aspects of my personality which I am being tested for, though it is somewhat broad-brush. My late wife was ENFJ, according to the web tests, but I think that this was accurate for her.
Comments
The online tests for the Big 5 personality assessment tend to have five options: definitely, kinda, neutral, kinda not, definitely not. Just the fact that they're not binary makes me feel better about them.
Yeah, but for me "it depends" isn't the same as "no preference" - once I had a context, I could be very strongly definitely or definitely not.
And I get that context matters. The big 5 test that comes up first when I search has these options: very inaccurate, moderately inaccurate, neither accurate nor inaccurate, moderately accurate, very accurate. The first item simply says "Worry about things." Which, c'mon, depends on the things! So I take it as asking in general, do I worry about things? Am I in general a worrier? I worry about some things, but overall not a lot, so I'd go with moderately inaccurate for that one.
These sorts of tests don't have context for a reason; they're not going to get into the weeds about whether the party will have real ale or a would-be home mixologist making apple-tinis or some such. They have to be general for a lot of people to be able to take them. But that does give them all a "here are a few ill-fitting boxes -- squeeze yourself into one of them" feeling.
I've spent my life squeezing myself into ill-fitting boxes
You see every one can act as extra-verted and when I do my preferred mode is Intuitive Thinking because those are both extraverted. So I come across as very logical and academic. However, I am strongly introverted, so my internal world where I am "at home" if you like is full of gut feelings to sensual experiences.
Secondly, most of my life I have situations where I am surrounded by significant other introverts. That means in those situations I have learnt to act as an extrovert. The result is that I will often appear pretty much the didact. Note the shorter I am in resources I am the more of a didact I will be. If I am socially supported the more I am able to react to the emotional atmosphere. Also as I commented with my family my "P" - ness comes out. When I was a teenager my Aunt got me a card that said "My final answer is 'Maybe'". Most of that is because at the time when I am often expected to make decisions I have little access to my preferred decision making process, i.e. emotions. My family prefer decisiveness which often comes from people who tend to extravert judgement over perception. So I am the one who dithers and then suddenly, when I have been away somewhere quiet, I have a strong very clear answer, but my family rarely waited for that answer to come so all they ever got was maybe. Then my sister and mum are both E??J and Dad was almost certainly INTJ.
I know that Myers Briggs is pseudo science but I think it has given me a more generous appreciation of human diversity, including my own! I think it can become unhelpful if we see it as somehow establishing an identity, rather than a guide to preference.