Official MBTI Statistics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 16771
  • Start date Start date
Deleted member 16771 said:
It sounded like you were asking me to stop or were irritated... or you were just saying 'go to bed'. I don't know :sorrowful:
Click to expand...

Lol I was attempting humor. That's a lot of overrepresentation, intjs are tough on themselves. Just my roundabout way of saying it's ok to chill brah.
 
Wyote said:
Lol I was attempting humor. That's a lot of overrepresentation, intjs are tough on themselves. Just my roundabout way of saying it's ok to chill brah.
Click to expand...
Oh, ok, phew, I'll try :sweatsmile:

I didn't actually set out with the intention of 'proving' anything, it's just that I said I'd divulge the stats when I have time, and I've had a couple of days off from my work, so I started with the next category on their website after the age one, which happened to be education.

EDIT: Even so, I was surprised at the numbers, though anecdotally I reported Masters as my highest level of education though I'm studying for a doctorate right now, and your gf just defended her thesis recently, right? So maybe it makes sense in that regard, but of course the real question is 'what's driving these types into doing doctorates'?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted member 16771 said:
Oh, ok, phew, I'll try :sweatsmile:

I didn't actually set out with the intention of 'proving' anything, it's just that I said I'd divulge the stats when I have time, and I've had a couple of days off from my work, so I started with the next category on their website after the age one, which happened to be education.

EDIT: Even so, I was surprised at the numbers, though anecdotally I reported Masters as my highest level of education though I'm studying for a doctorate right now, and your gf just defended her thesis recently, right? So maybe it makes sense in that regard, but of course the real question is 'what's driving these types into doing doctorates'?
Click to expand...

I was saying go to bed but I intended it humorously. I do appreciate the pretty graphs!
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
It's from the Official MBTI website and I know from how it went down with my membership that all of this is self reported. There is absolutely no fact-checking here and so it might be the case that this data also captures the willingness to lie or misrepresent, though I don't know why anyone would do this, since it's anonymous.
Click to expand...
Thank you @Deleted member 16771
I was unaware such data existed there. I will need to dive deeper into it if I have the chance. (It is nice to sit back and see what others have found in their areas of interest.)
I wonder what the numbers/graphs would look like out there in the real world.
 
MoonFlier said:
Thank you @Deleted member 16771
I was unaware such data existed there. I will need to dive deeper into it if I have the chance. (It is nice to sit back and see what others have found in their areas of interest.)
I wonder what the numbers/graphs would look like out there in the real world.
Click to expand...

I've seen lots of similar data
 
MoonFlier said:
I wonder what the numbers/graphs would look like out there in the real world.
Click to expand...
I wish the website allowed you to distinguish between the self-reported stuff (the people who pay $50 to take the test online, which is a massive waste of money) and the results of the actual field practitioners out there typing for corporations, &c. I don't know if one or the other category dominates their numbers tbh.
 
Wyote said:
I've seen lots of similar data
Click to expand...
Okay, but collected from where?
I started looking at the values in relation to people I know. It was just easiest to see if they trend toward what I've seen, and of course they do as I'm from a stereotypical middle class white family which stressed the sciences.
But, what about those who grew up not as advantaged? Surely they're across the spectrum in the same manner, but may never have had the chance to get their schooling? How about the other less advantaged groups of people?

Self reporting is great, but also requires one seeks out the place to report, meaning there must be an interest there to start with. That alone is not reflective of the whole population.

Most elderly folk are leery of putting any information on the web, never mind taking online polls that will identify them, as they don't trust technology to not be tracking them. I know middle age, technical folk who don't own smart phones for this reason.

The list goes on.
I'm not trying to be argumentative. In fact I think the numbers and charts reveal something amazing. When looking at the real world we need to understand, it's a very big place and what we have here is just a tiny sampling.
 
MoonFlier said:
I was unaware such data existed there. I will need to dive deeper into it if I have the chance. (It is nice to sit back and see what others have found in their areas of interest.)
Click to expand...
You sound like you've signed up... you can find the data under 'My Tools' > 'Type Trends'
View attachment 48183

P.S. I'm INTJ from an underclass background (single mother, raised on state benefits), and as I mentioned, I'm doing a PhD... though most of the biases you mentioned can't be corrected for in the data we can access (and they don't ask about class background). However, these are the catgories they do include:
Age; Education; Ethnicity; Gender; Occupation; Organization; Situation; Sector

By 'organization', they mean level in the hierarchy (entry level, supervisory, management, executive, &c.). By 'Situation' they mean unemployed/part-time/full-time, &c.

P.P.S. You can see 'Age' on the front page of this thread... essentially it shows that younger folk skew towards FP, while older folk skew SJ.
 
MoonFlier said:
The list goes on.
I'm not trying to be argumentative. In fact I think the numbers and charts reveal something amazing. When looking at the real world we need to understand, it's a very big place and what we have here is just a tiny sampling.
Click to expand...

There's lots of issues with data collecting across the board but generally in stats they have a lot of corrective measures. Nothing's perfect no matter how crazy you get with your sampling, but you can get a pretty dang good estimate.

Deleted member 16771 said:
though most of the biases you mentioned can't be corrected for in the data we can access (and they don't ask about class background).
Click to expand...

That's a shame
 
jkxx said:
Thank you @Deleted member 16771 for collecting these. I made them into charts for those of us who are more visual, perhaps it will provide another perspective. Also find them rather curious myself.

View attachment 46809

View attachment 46810
Click to expand...
Jkxx made some really cool charts for the generational data.

What his charts show is that the generational data reveals actual trends, rather than simply an uneven distribution of types - most types genuinely decline or rise in frequency at the same or similar rates over time.
 
Thank you for making these as well, I find them just as interesting as the original data set.

EDIT: Even so, I was surprised at the numbers, though anecdotally I reported Masters as my highest level of education though I'm studying for a doctorate right now, and your gf just defended her thesis recently, right? So maybe it makes sense in that regard, but of course the real question is 'what's driving these types into doing doctorates'?
Click to expand...

The first thought which crossed my mind (excluding the issue of access to education which was mentioned earlier) is that maybe some types are driven toward learning strongly (whether internal curiosity to understand or the need to apply what has been learned in the world - yes I just did a straight Ti vs Te intention with those.) And from there going deep into education kind of follows naturally but I'm sure there is much more to it than this.

What is up with the two STJ types? Not the graph itself but with this being the situation shown by the data - I remember seeing it before as well and couldn't think of a reason for it other than maybe these types don't end up taking the test in sufficient numbers until after they get close to the age 30 mark.
 
jkxx said:
What is up with the two STJ types? Not the graph itself but with this being the situation shown by the data - I remember seeing it before as well and couldn't think of a reason for it other than maybe these types don't end up taking the test in sufficient numbers until after they get close to the age 30 mark.
Click to expand...
That's a very good point... Perhaps the STJs are more likely to have the test administered to them by the practitioners when they're already in work/in the corporate world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top