INFJ, Not as Rare as Predicted?

[Honey]

Well, I really hope INFJs aren't as rare as predicted. It's kind of frightening and isolating to think that everyone else in your society mentally works in a completely different manner from yourself.

I always disliked the idea that INFJs are the rarest for the reason you specified. However, I do think that INFJs are probably indeed the rarest type overall but somewhat less rare on the internet. How many INFJs do you meet in your daily life even in psychology classes and how often on these forums do you hear people saying that their sister, mother, grandma and dear I say it, even themselves is an INFJ and you just know from reading their posts that the person they are describing is most likely not an INFJ?

People online who are not INFJ, tend to like to identify with the type in my experience and these people are often those who like the idea of the type being rare not truly realising that that is not always such a good thing at all. Then there are people of certain other types who just seem so obsessed with having their types be seen as more rare and INFJs as less so with very little sensible evidence as back-up, all very silly indeed.

People with Ni primary or secondary are just more rare overall I think than people with Ne and SJs (Ne) are more common than SPs (Ni). If INFJs are not the rarest then I think it is INTJ then possibly ENXJ but my bet would firmly be on INFJ going by both the formal MBTI statistics and my own real life experience.

 

[DoveAlexa]

Heh, it seems like I can't throw a flamepost without hitting an INTJ though, so I think its waaay less rare than even the less-rareness of INFJ.

 

[Honey]

Heh, it seems like I can't throw a flamepost without hitting an INTJ though, so I think its waaay less rare than even the less-rareness of INFJ.

I think people can often mistake ISTJ using there Ne with INTJs in the same way some seem to mistake ISFJs (and IXFPs) for INFJs. I too meet quite a few INTJs and ENTJs and it can seem like you know many after you know about four but compared to the tens of certain other types you meet on a daily basis it is not really that much.

 

[the]

every mbti forum I have ever been on claims their type is 1% of the population..
.

Infjs are not special.

yup

 

[Trifoilum]

I think that statistic is made per....code. Instead of per type.

the I, N, F, J, is high; it doesn't mean it's always INFJ; it can also mean INTJ, INTP, ISTP, or ENTJ, INTJ, INFP, ENFP, and others. But they kept the statistics in terms of each codes.

*like; ENTJ, ENFJ, INFJ, INFP, ISFP, ISTJ. There's 3J, 4N, 2E, 4I, 2P, 2T, 1S and 4F*

As per why, I'm with the camp that some type might have more difficulty to be convinced / willing to do the test.

 

[Raccoon Love]

You guys are forgetting that OkCupid is not a valuable source.

The test does not even state how many people took it.

50% could be from this forum for all we know.

 

[54192&#cmy]

Ya now I fit in.....

 

[Honey]

every mbti forum I have ever been on claims their type is 1% of the population..
.

Infjs are not special.

yup

That is part of the problem with this rare type issue, people are equating rareness with specialness; because something is rare does not mean it is more special than something more common and the world would probably fall apart if there were too many IN types in it. Statistically, there is bound to be a rarest type, the most current formal statistics says that is INFJ, even if the figures are correct, that does not mean that that type is better or more special than any other type. In my opinion, that has presented more disadvantages than advantages and I cannot say that I feel more special than anyone else...usually.

 

[Reon]

You guys are forgetting that OkCupid is not a valuable source.

The test does not even state how many people took it.

50% could be from this forum for all we know.

It's a test. I suspect there will be a random slant towards introvert, intutive, maybe a slight to feeling, and that's it. With that being said, I've never agreed about the issue that INFJs are the rarest. You can't base a statistic on top of another (not exactly well founded) statistic.

 

[Raccoon Love]

It's a test. I suspect there will be a random slant towards introvert, intutive, maybe a slight to feeling, and that's it. With that being said, I've never agreed about the issue that INFJs are the rarest. You can't base a statistic on top of another (not exactly well founded) statistic.

My point is that this test might not been so well known, it might be relatively new, not to mention that this is posted on forums mainly about INXX types and its taken repetitively by the same users.

 

[Skathac]

My point is that this test might not been so well known, it might be relatively new, not to mention that this is posted on forums mainly about INXX types and its taken repetitively by the same users.

Like polling living and dead people to find out what the ratio is between living and dead people, obviously it would be skewed towards the people actually voting.

 

[Reon]

My point is that this test might not been so well known, it might be relatively new, not to mention that this is posted on forums mainly about INXX types and its taken repetitively by the same users.

I'm not following well. The test is on OkCupid and, yes, you can't tell how much actual information the test has but this test is hosted on the okcupid site, I don't many people go there specifically to take the tests to boost/lower the intuitive/sensing feeling/thinking dichotomies.

My point is that it's biased to the type of people who would attracted to that site...pretty much

 

[Raccoon Love]

I'm not following well. The test is on OkCupid and, yes, you can't tell how much actual information the test has but this test is hosted on the okcupid site, I don't many people go there specifically to take the tests to boost/lower the intuitive/sensing feeling/thinking dichotomies.

My point is that it's biased to the type of people who would attracted to that site...pretty much

True, but we don't know how many users exactly take it from OkCupid. It does not state who takes what, and Okcupid works as a search engine for quizzes not only for its intended purpose. You can easily search ''MBTI test'' on Google and be redirected to the Okcupid test, without actually being aware of what Okcupid is. I was referring that those who actually search up MBTI, can be members of various INXX forums, later post the test where members of those type gather, and not only multiple members taking it, but they take it more then once(I personally taken this test about 20 times). For all we know, more then 50% of the results could be coming from this people taken the test from their specific forum as Okcupid does not offer any sort of validation, such as dates, people who have taken it etc which ends up skewing the entire result.

 

[enfp can be shy]

Most people aren't online, and if they are online, they are not interested in personality theories. Ouch. (we're freaks )

 

[Billy]

INFJs definitely are rare, I think we are over represented on the internet though, trait of being introverted and intuitive I guess, we spend a LOT of time processing information on the web. I maintain a LOT of my social life on here and I have taken that ok cupid test a few times and got INFJ a few times.

I would imagine real extroverts wouldn't spend so much time on the internet. Certainly not as much as an Introvert. So guessing real world statistics via web statistics is kind of illogical.

IRL I know a SHITLOAD of sensors, like most everyone I know is one. On the rare occasion I have met other intuitives they have tended to be NTs by a slightly larger margin then NFs. Most men men I meet are Ts. most women F's.

Of all the types I have only met 1 INFJ outside of my family my brother tests as INFJ as well. But outside of us I dont know any others but 1 or 2.

I know a lot of ENF's though.

 

[DoveAlexa]

I would imagine real extroverts wouldn't spend so much time on the internet. Certainly not as much as an Introvert. So guessing real world statistics via web statistics is kind of illogical.

Sort of an aside, but this makes me wonder about all these E-targeted websites like twitter and Facebook. They seem like they are always advertising the site as things you do on the go between binge-drinking at parties after going to a big press conference and other such BS. I really don't know if these are the kind of people who even care to use these sites... Then again, its not like I hang out with E's so who knows.

 

[Reon]

True, but we don't know how many users exactly take it from OkCupid. It does not state who takes what, and Okcupid works as a search engine for quizzes not only for its intended purpose. You can easily search ''MBTI test'' on Google and be redirected to the Okcupid test, without actually being aware of what Okcupid is. I was referring that those who actually search up MBTI, can be members of various INXX forums, later post the test where members of those type gather, and not only multiple members taking it, but they take it more then once(I personally taken this test about 20 times). For all we know, more then 50% of the results could be coming from this people taken the test from their specific forum as Okcupid does not offer any sort of validation, such as dates, people who have taken it etc which ends up skewing the entire result.

I see. Thanks. I'm still not superbly sure that INFjs are the rare pokemon of the MBTI types. Rather. I should say that I think the methods to deduce this (Basically get a group of people and test them; effectually becoming the benchmark) is rather inexact. Continuing to assert such an idea as if fact is rather redundant and gives undue importance to the type itself in the eyes of some individuals

 

[Raccoon Love]

Sort of an aside, but this makes me wonder about all these E-targeted websites like twitter and Facebook. They seem like they are always advertising the site as things you do on the go between binge-drinking at parties after going to a big press conference and other such BS. I really don't know if these are the kind of people who even care to use these sites... Then again, its not like I hang out with E's so who knows.

There has actually been people taking this test on Facebook.

A large majority were extroverts.

If you look at the ''mypersonality'' APP

 

[88chaz88]

Okay, just to clarify, I'm not arguing that INFJ isn't a rare type, just not as rare as 1%.

Do you really think that out of 100 people you know only 1 will come up as INFJ? It's an abnormally small statistic.

 

[Raccoon Love]

I see. Thanks. I'm still not superbly sure that INFjs are the rare pokemon of the MBTI types. Rather. I should say that I think the methods to deduce this (Basically get a group of people and test them; effectually becoming the benchmark) is rather inexact. Continuing to assert such an idea as if fact is rather redundant and gives undue importance to the type itself in the eyes of some individuals

Very true, thing is we can never know for sure. All we have done is follow assumptions. INFJ's here s far, go by the fact that they feel different and don't feel like they fit, I wonder if other types might get this strong feelings as well.