I am a Ravenclaw. I’ve taken numerous online quizzes to sort me into my Hogwarts House and they all come back consistently Ravenclaw.
I agree with this. I‘m too wimpy to be a Gryffindor, too snarky to be a Hufflepuff, and not ambitious enough to be a Slytherin. Also, I’m pretty academically oriented and take my rejection from a fast food restaurant where the manager told me that my GPA was too high as a badge of honor. Ravenclaw through and through.
Myers-Brigs personality test, though, changes every time I take it. Now, granted, I’m taking online free versions and that shouldn’t be mistaken for an actual authorized version by a trained administrator. Nevertheless, yesterday I took it again and got ISFP-A, which described me as an adventurer.
Hmmm. Not really an adventurer type, although I’m married to an adventurous soul so maybe it’s rubbed off on me.
To keep reading, click here: Hogwarts Sorting Hat or Myers-Briggs? Which is Better?
And to see if your Hogwarts House and your Myers-Briggs scores match (mine don’t), click here: Does Your Myers-Briggs Type Align With Your Harry Potter House?
See if you’re a match.
The sorting hat and the Myers-Briggs are equal, in my opinion. I have had the experience of having to take the “authorized version by a trained administrator.” In fact, all of the employees in my function were required to do so. Once the results had been interpreted, each of us had a conference with the administrator regarding the results. Later, when we were all flown to HQ for our End-of-Year Meeting, 1/2 day of the 4 1/2 – day meeting were spent on Myers-Briggs. My beef with Myers-Briggs — and many other comparable tests — is that they are so subjective, both from the standpoint of the person being tested and the interpreter of the results, and that they are not scientifically validated. Myers-Briggs measures how test takers are, subjectively, feeling at the time they are taking the test, their moods, as it were. As a result, as noted in the article, each time you take it, the results are different. Furthermore, no one has scientifically validated the test by statistically checking to see if — in fact — those who answer a certain way on Myers-Briggs are, actually, more “adventurous,” say, in real-life objective reality. A test that is scientifically-valid would be replicable; that is, a retest would come out with substantially the same result. Myers-Briggs and its ilk are fine for parlor-game-type entertainment. But, I am appalled that anyone would rely on them to make consequential, life-changing decisions.
Depends what you are using it for. Training and Development or Hiring….if for hiring…just roll dice, respectfully
I am also Ravenclaw. I haven’t found Meyer-Briggs too accurate for me.
Any tool can be misused. I’ve certainly seen examples of people doing stupid things with any of these tests – usually some variation of using the “results” to reinforce their own ideas/biases – but I will say having my department do the MBTI years ago really helped us sort out some bad dynamics on our team. The consultant who administered the test and ran the retreat where we discussed the results emphasized that they weren’t about good/bad or right/wrong or even what role we were supposed to play, but about how we communicate and how we process information. That in turn allowed people to reframe our interactions as simple differences rather than indecisiveness or impulsiveness, for example.
And training, exercises and discussions at the retreat about differences in how people communicate and process information wouldn’t have done the same thing?
But when the test isn’t valid even generalized conversations are false because it is based on incorrect information.
I see value in the 16 possible personality types, and general instruction on how to communicate with each of them. I don’t agree with the test itself though – it places too much emphasis on immediate emotions.
I’ve always found it depressing when people talk about others MB results. One could learn about others, understand their drive and observe their strengths and weaknesses. They could ask people for feedback and how they interacted with the people being considered. But that would take some thought, time, and respect. Instead you can be given 4 letters.
I find people’s astrological sign more interesting than their 4 letters.
My work uses some kind of “red, green, blue, yellow” personality quiz (no clue if it has a proper name), and it always makes me die a little inside when it’s brought up. Supposedly I’m a “driver”, and my boss is “expressive”, which is supposed to explain why she refuses to give me proper criticism and keeps trying to ask me “what do you think you did wrong here?”
There are cases where the Socratic method just does not work! That sounds like punishment, not feedback.
I had a boss who used the Socratic method when I asked him objective questions. I finally said, in exasperation, “I am not stupid. I know how to do research. I know how to find answers. If I am asking you a question, it is because I have exhausted every other means of finding the answer. All I want from you is the answer!”
I’ve taken the MB a couple of times either through school or work and I’ve consistently been an INFP. Personally, I do think that it fits me (it’s what I would pick if I had to choose between the options in each category), however, I know enough about life and people to take it with a grain of straw. Most of the time, people fall somewhere in the middle of the two options depending on a variety of factors.
The only good I do see from test like these is that it can make you think more about who you are interacting with and how they may need a different style or way (ie. an extrovert may need to tone it down for an introvert).
Myers-Brigs is overblown in value. Why oh Why do so many companies and academics still use this outdated, never was any real value, snake oil?
And every time – every time! – I say something about Myers-Brigs those who believe in this tripe will try to label me as “whatever the stupid Myers-Brigs label is for doubters” as if that somehow or others proves their ridiculous beliefs.
So, yea, comparing it to Harry Potter make believe is about right.
Yes, grannybunny is right. MBTI has never been scientifically validated.
On a couple of Internet platforms I call out the lack of scientific validity of MBTI. Often enough, other forum participants vociferously disagree and sometimes resort to name calling. Well, I’m think skinned and don’t care. In every case, I ask them to provide citations from internationally respected journals of psychology. Never had a response.
To me, MBTI believers fall into the same categories as other pseudoscience adherents. Based on anecdotal evidence and weaknesses in their own critical thinking skills, they ardently believe. Difficult to impossible to persuade these people to consider an opposing view.