Personality and Psychology Testing for Dummies

This is one in a series of short discussions of the myriad ways our society in general, and the mental health field in particular, fail to understand the veteran culture. That there is a such a thing as a “Veteran Culture” as something unique is itself a hotly contested when not summarily dismissed concept.

Are you an ENFP? An INTP? Or maybe an ISFJ? If you have ever taken the Myers-Briggs Personality Indicator (MBPI) test, you have a clue what those acronyms mean or at least know they purport to mean something about your basic personality. The idea is that everyone is described according to four paradoxical pairings of traits, with each of the four letters of the resulting acronyms casting the person on one side or the other of some dichotomy.

Military, law enforcement and all those who require a security clearance take several forms of personality and psychology tests. In fact, this type of testing was originally developed as a way to determine suitability for frontline action, i.e., which soldiers were most likely to develop “shell shock”.

Nowadays, personality and psychology tests are separate and distinct with the former most often seen as informative, even just for fun, and the latter as more diagnostic in nature. It is important to bear in mind psychological or diagnostic testing can be just for fun or idle curiosity too, but using personality testing as a primary diagnostic tool can be quite dangerous. To better explain, here’s a breakdown of the MBPI personality type result of ISFJ.

The “I” means you are more Introverted as opposed to Extroverted. This is not necessarily how you behave, think of it more like losing energy rather than gaining it being around other people. Saying, or thinking, “I really don’t feel up to people-ing today” in response to a social invitation captures this definition. It doesn’t mean you don’t like people, are overly shy, or even insecure. It’s about what happens in you in response to being around others.

As an ISFJ you also fall into the “Sensing” rather than “Intuiting” the world around you category. Yes, the “S” is for “Sensing” and “N” is for “Intuitive”, and if that bugs you as being illogical, just think phonetically. Sensing here would be more observational or literal and intuiting would be more of a trust your gut approach.

How you perceive what you Sense or Intuit is captured by either F for “Feeling” or T for “Thinking”. It is how you describe your decision-making process. A Thinker would be an analyst, and a Feeling type would be a diplomat.

The final letter choice of J is for “Judging”, which is presented in opposition to P for “Perceiving”. At first blush, this seems a repeat of the “Feeling vs Thinking”, and in truth there is a lot of interplay. The intent here is the previous refers to how you make decisions within yourself and this “Judging vs Perceiving” is more about how you approach the outside world. There is a connotation of being open to the world around you in Perceiving, letting the world tell you what it is. Judging is more about selecting and interacting with the world based on an interior-oriented set of criteria.

So, if you are an ISFJ, you don’t dislike people, necessarily, but find being social more often than not draining. You also consider yourself a realist, preferring to take the world in as you see it; if it walks like a duck, it’s not a camel with duck-shaped feet. Because these two traits can seem to infer a bit of coldness, or aloofness, you’ll justify the existence of feelings for your decisions, and reject accusations of over-thinking. But, because you are a realist at heart, you’re more likely to let people and experiences tell you what they are rather than subscribe to an emotion-based pretense.

In other words, you’re a well-adjusted thinker with feelings, the kind of person that can be trusted, relied upon, etc., etc. Just what everyone wants to be and what every organization, boss, whatever, could want on their team or as their leader.

As you can see, this is all highly scientific. Do I really need to add a /sarc tag? Given that, it is mind-boggling how much stock is given to, and how many decisions are made on the MBPI test. The single biggest indictment of these types of tests being used as selection criteria for anything, is the ISFJ is the most common result of the sixteen different possible combinations. That is proof positive of a phenomenon known as Social Desirability bias in testing. If these tests and results are relied upon in any diagnostic capacity, that is the hallmark of an organization that values pre-determined, easily categorized metrics over substantive results, hence the title of this piece.

The MBPI does, however, give valuable information when Social Desirability bias is understood. It tells us how a person wants to be perceived. Which is the exact opposite of the purpose of the test, determining the inner personality of the test-taker. With this perspective, let’s look at another way of understanding the result of an ISFJ.

An ISFJ wants to be perceived as social but not too social, because being too social is needy or flighty, unreliable, un-serious. The proof is seeing the world as it really as, based on facts and learning and experience. But not as emotionless automaton, but with feelings about things too, and that is a perfectly logical and acceptable way to make decisions. Most of all, an ISFJ is a realist who accepts things as they are presented, without some Pollyanna, wishful-thinking perception.

This is not as deeply a cynical description of the personality of the tester who gets assigned the ISFJ type as it may seem. It is more a description of the often unconscious motivational drivers, presented harshly.

At this point, then, it may come as a surprise that I recommend taking the MBPI test. Here’s a link to do just that. (I’m recommending the test, and I like this online site for how it explains the results. I am not endorsing the organization or suggesting buying the “premium” part. I have no opinion on either). Why, after this scathing diatribe on these types of tests do I make this recommendation?

The answer is in the how. Do it on your own and don’t plan on sharing the results with anyone. This is how to combat the Social Desirability to which we are all subject, particularly when those outcomes will be viewed by someone who has some sort of decision-making authority over us. And because, at the end of the day, understanding ourselves better, gaining insights into who we are and how we do life is always a good thing.

Being surprised at some of your results is an even better thing. Like nearly everyone in my field, taking the MBPI and a slew of other personality and psychology tests were part and parcel of our education. Fortunately, the professor that made taking this particular test an assignment did so in the best possible way. First, we all went to an online portal and took the test and received points for completing the task, meaning the results would be seen as well.

Unbeknownst to us beforehand, the assignment was scheduled to be repeated but with true anonymity of results, meaning no mechanism to track if we even completed the task. For that second go, we were encouraged to think a bit deeper about our responses. The point of the lesson was both to understand Social Desirability bias in these types of tests as well as how to compensate for that in practice, i.e., there are significant clues about a person in how they want to be perceived.

My results surprised me in one crucial area. This led to some pretty significant shifts in self-perception. And this is why, despite my cynical hostility for use of these tests, as well as self-score measures in general if the results are to be shared, I highly recommend taking five minutes or so and doing the MBPI yourself. Alone. Without sharing the results. With anyone.

That said, I will share the letter assignment that shocked me about myself. My four-letter MBPI result starts with an “I” for Introvert. Initially, I completely rejected this and spent serious time researching what supported that result, ready to call into question the validity of the whole thing. By that point in life I certainly knew myself fairly well, having decades of experience of acquaintanceship.

Then I realized something very important. I had always been a bit of a social butterfly, something my family, friends and just about anyone who met me would attest to being true. I had been. When I was younger. Now, there are more days than not when it is a real struggle not to decline social occasions because I just don’t feel up to people-ing. I lose those battles more and more regularly. Perhaps I’m just older. Maybe not wiser, but certainly more tired.

If you are struggling, reach out to a buddy or call 988 and press 1 if you want to identify as a veteran. If you are not struggling, reach out and be the buddy to someone else.

Category: Mental Health