I've taken the Myers-Briggs test several times (in college) and got "INTP" each time.

http://www.personalitypage.com/INTP.html

Apparently, there are only 16 personality types...

http://www.personalitypage.com/high-level.html

I'm not sure how accurate the others are, but they nailed me perfectly.

I've also taken this test several times in both undergrad and grad school and I'm pretty sure I usually end up at "INTJ."  I think the test is somewhat limited, but it's pretty good.  The Strengths Finder test is a different kind of test, but the results are typically more accurate since there are 34 possible strengths and they show you your top 5.  Everyone had do it in my last job and the accuracy of the results was stunning.

.

I just took the questionaire, and I ultimately ended up as an "ESFJ." And while I do agree to a large extent, I think there are hints of "INFP" in me as well.  At least, I'd like to believe so anyway.

.

Heh, 'course not. ;)   Though I must admit that I was a little more than surprised at the vehement hate leveled against the film; I guess I'm in the minority of folks who genuinely enjoyed X3. 

It still can't touch M:I-3, though, which is the current top contender for my movie of the year.  Damn, I so wanna see it a third time.....

Whenever I've taken the Myers-Briggs, I end up INTP, and none of them are even close.  On the I-E scale, I'm about 75% Introverted; on the N-S scale, I'm 100% iNtuitive (I've taken the test at least five times, and I don't think I've answered a single question S on any of them); on the T-F scale, I'm about 85% Thinking; and on the P-J scale, I'm about 95% Perceptive.  All of my friends are INTPs or close variants (INTJ, INFP, ENTP).

I've always found it interesting that the people who take this test several times seem to end up being INTPs or close variants.  Here on this thread, we have three people (Jodo Kast, XLord007, and myself) who have admitted taking this test many times, and being either INTP or INTJ.  I think there is something in the NT personality type that makes you want to understand as much as possible about yourself, so you keep taking tests like this (and IQ tests, and the Strong Interest Inventory, and others).

The more I take these types of tests, though, the more I wonder if my answers are indicators of my true personality.  I keep getting this feeling that maybe my answers reflect a fake model of what I think my personality is rather than what it really is.  In other words, I have this model of what I think I am like, or what I would be like ideally, and then answer the questions by applying the question to this model personality.

I've taken the test a few times since high school and always receive this one:

http://www.personalitypage.com/INFP.html

I do think there is some danger of that in the M-B test.  That's why I like the Strengths Finder assessment.  I know it's based on one of those popular management books and you can't do it for free, but the test is much longer than the M-B test and it will repeatedly ask you similiar questions in different ways to test your bias towards a specific view of yourself.  If you ever get the chance to take it, I'd highly recommend it as the results are really interesting.  I've even used the results from it to sell myself in job interviews ("here are my top five strengths and this is how I will use them to add value to your team").

Every time I have taken this, and it has now been several times over the past few years, I land on INTJ, which is fairly accurate.

But, like IQ tests such as the WAIS or Shipley, there is probably room for error.
There is always a deviation.

I have a strong disbelief in the concept of personality tests/profiles. Strong, strongstrongstrong.

One test told me that I was either lying or had some sort of severe trauma (i.e. - I was sexually abused..?).

I mean, I think I do it all. I put on roles as I see fit in situations, but I doubt there's a "dominant" or "true" role to me ... consider Sartre's explanation of the onion metaphor. You peel away at the layers, but eventually, there is NO core or center. The layers just get smaller. In other words, there's no "essential" you. These tests seem to claim that there is, and that these categorized types help us see it.

nnnnnnnnooooooooooooo thank you.

Seriously...look at these sixteen labels:

Duty Fulfillers, Guardians, Nurturers, Caregivers, Mechanics, Doers, Performers, Artists, Executives, Scientists, Visionaries, Thinkers, Givers, Protectors, Inspirers, Idealists

C'mon. On any given day I might be a different one of these! Except...maybe mechanic. I don't see mechanic for me.

But it's like...doing jobs in a Final Fantasy game. You can learn to be all of these, but your "base" is job-less.

That's how I see it. Call me crazy.

Ramza

Whenever I take this test, I usually get INFP and the description is fairly accurate. I'm less idealistic now than I was before I graduated college.

I think it is the best of the X-Men films.

I haven't, and have no interest in seeing, MI:3 though.

I hope people don't look at the Myers-Briggs test too seriously.

1)Neither Katharine Briggs nor Isabel Briggs Myers had any scientific qualifications.  Also Carl Jung's theory of the psychological type (the basis for the MBTI) is also not based on any scientific studies.

2)Pittenger, D.J. (1993) "Measuring the MBTI...And Coming Up Short" notes that the highest percentage of people who fall into the same category on the second test is only 47%, and 39% - 76% of those tested fall into different types upon retesting weeks or years later!  Also (very interestingly) many people get different results dependong on the time of the day they take the test.

So although it can be fun, I think the test has little practical, nor scientific value.

cheers,

-avatar!

avatar, right on. What these discrepancies show us is that, in the end, we don't know OURSELVES as well as we think we do; and, furthermore, we are not as "static" as we think we are.

That said, I like Carl Jung, especially the way his work was used in Xenosaga.

Ramza