Stuff You Should Know examines personality tests, focusing on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The hosts trace the test's development by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers after World War II, its widespread adoption in corporate America, and the certification process required to administer it today.
The hosts explore criticisms of the MBTI, including its tendency to categorize people into rigid types rather than recognizing personality as a spectrum. They discuss how the MBTI differs from scientifically validated tests like the "Big Five," and address concerns about using personality tests for employment decisions and legal proceedings, despite warnings from the MBTI's creators about such applications.

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
After World War II, Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers developed the MBTI, drawing inspiration from Carl Jung's theories. As Chuck Bryant explains, they modified Jung's work to better suit the modern American workforce, particularly focusing on helping women find suitable jobs in the post-war era. The test categorizes people into 16 personality types using four dichotomous scales.
The MBTI gained significant traction in corporate America, with Josh Clark noting that by the 1990s, 89 of the Fortune 100 companies were using it. Today, administering the test requires certification through CPP, involving a four-day training program costing $1,500-$1,600.
Bryant and Clark highlight several criticisms of the MBTI, particularly its tendency to box people into rigid categories rather than recognizing personality as a spectrum. They point out that preferences often overlap MBTI dichotomies, and a person's type can change with different situations.
The hosts emphasize that the MBTI lacks scientific validity compared to other psychological tools, as it's based primarily on personal observations rather than empirical research. They compare it to astrology, noting how both tend to present results in an unfailingly positive light.
While some personality tests, like the "Big Five," have scientific backing, Clark and Bryant discuss how all tests struggle to capture human complexity. They explain that personality is shaped by numerous factors beyond innate traits, including motivation, emotion, social roles, and experiences.
The hosts note that more legitimate psychometric tests attempt to overcome subjectivity by asking questions in various forms and interpreting results on a spectrum. However, Bryant questions the overall meaningfulness of these tests, given the difficulty in establishing what's considered "normal."
Despite warnings from the MBTI's creators, many corporations use the test for employment decisions, including hiring, firing, and promotions. Clark points out that serious psychologists view the MBTI with skepticism, particularly regarding its use in professional settings. The test's application has extended into legal proceedings, raising concerns about the impact of subjective personality assessments on people's lives.
1-Page Summary
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a personality assessment tool, was developed in the mid-20th century and has significantly influenced both the workplace and popular understanding of personality.
After World War II, Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers developed the MBTI, having been influenced by the works of Carl Jung. Chuck Bryant explains that Briggs and Myers built upon and modified Jung's theories, even choosing to omit much of his work on the unconscious as they felt it was ill-suited for the modern American workforce. Briggs and Myers dedicated decades to develop the MBTI, but interestingly, they established the personality types first and then worked backward to create a test that could identify these types.
During their research and development phase, they administered the MBTI to about 5,000 medical students from George Washington University and observed their career paths. This long-term study was influential in refining the MBTI over time.
The MBTI was particularly motivated by the need to integrate women into the workforce following the post-World War II era. It was crafted to help determine the types of jobs for which women might be best suited and most likely to enjoy. The test was designed to categorize individuals into one of 16 personality types using four dichotomous scales: introverted or extroverted, sensing or intuition, thinking or feeling, and judging or perceiving.
By the 1990s, the MBTI had garnered substantial traction in the corporate space, as Josh Clark reveals that 89 of the Fortune 100 companies employed the MBTI. The test’s popularity surged in the '70s after Myers-Briggs switched to CPP as i ...
History and Development of Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
Chuck Bryant and Josh Clark explore the limitations and criticism surrounding personality tests like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), challenging their accuracy and scientific basis.
Chuck Bryant and Josh Clark contend that human personality is too complex to be confined to a single category, as MBTI and similar tests attempt to do. During their discussion, Clark voices his skepticism about defining a person by one personality type, given that individuals can exhibit traits from different types within even a single day or situation. Bryant highlights that one major critique of personality tests is the oversimplification of the vast array of human personalities.
The MBTI in particular, which is based on Carl Jung's theories, is criticized for categorically boxing people into types instead of allowing for a personality spectrum. The hosts point out the intrinsic issue with this approach, emphasizing that personality traits aren't black and white and that people often find themselves in the middle of the MBTI's dichotomies.
The hosts outline that the MBTI lacks validity and reliability when compared to other psychological tools favored by psychologists, such as the "big five" personality traits. They discuss the foundations of the MBTI, pointing out that it stems from personal observations and theories by Jung, Briggs, and Myers rather than empirical research. The scientific community, they note, has largely rejected Jung's ideas, with the implication being that any tool based on his teachings, such as the MBTI, is also discredited.
Bryant and Clark dive into the MBTI's creation, describing it as problematic due to its lack of rigorous scientific data. They compare the MBTI to astrology, arguing that like horoscopes, it presents results in an unfailingly positive light, which may skew how individuals perce ...
Critiques of the Mbti and Other Personality Tests
The legitimacy and effectiveness of personality tests are heavily scrutinized in light of their historical context and the complexities of the human psyche.
Personality tests, such as the Rorschach test, have been criticized for their subjectivity and potential to mislabel individuals. A study in 2000, given to mentally sound elementary school children, resulted in a high percentage being mislabeled as borderline psychotic because of their Rorschach test results. This instance underscores serious concerns about the accuracy of such tests and suggests that they may cause more harm than good.
Clark and Bryant discuss the historical practice of personality testing, which has often entailed categorizing people into fixed types, such as the four humors or Carl Jung's personality types. These categorical approaches are now being questioned for failing to capture the multifaceted and dynamic nature of human personality.
The "Big Five" personality traits—extraversion, agreeableness, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and neuroticism—are recognized in scientific literature and considered more valid by psychologists than other tests, like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The conversation acknowledges the Big Five as an attempt by psychologists to quantify personality traits more reliably.
Nevertheless, personality is recognized as being shaped by a multitude of factors, including motivation, emotion, social roles, and personal experiences, not just innate traits. Psychologists recognize that there is more to an individual than just the Big Five traits, and that understanding someone’s personality requires a more in-depth exploration, including their motivations, emotions, attitudes, abilities, self-concepts, social roles, autobiographical memories, and life stories.
Psychometric tests that try to overcome su ...
Psychometrics and Personality Test Validity
Personality tests are commonly used in corporate settings and even legal proceedings, but their reliability and ethical implications are often called into question.
Josh Clark and the hosts discuss the widespread use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in corporate America. Despite the MBTI being commonly referred to as a test, its creators, CPP, assert it should not be used as such. A significant number of companies—89 of the Fortune 100 as of the 1990s—have relied on the MBTI for employment decisions, including hiring, firing, and promotions. Yet, CPP cautions against using the MBTI for such purposes.
Clark emphasizes that psychologists view the MBTI with skepticism when it comes to its practical application in professional settings, indicating that the test is not typically used by serious psychologists.
The MBTI’s use extends beyond corporate e ...
Personality Tests in Corporate and Legal Contexts
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
