Larry, Did you learn nothing from this whole election debacle? No one cares about science or research or truth. That stuff just makes our heads hurt. We all want everything boiled down to a 4 letter pseudo-acronym. Or, better yet - a color. I'm an orange - I've no time to think about this stuff! ;P
(just kidding - really) On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:50:50 -0500, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The MBTI measures an abbreviated set of personality facets that are > better assessed by such instruments as the FFI or NEO-PI. It also > doesn't take into account Openness to Experience which in my mind is > as important as Extraversion or Neuroticism. > > The FFI is shorter than the Meyers-Briggs, but was developed using > more modern test development methods. Moreover it has much better > validity and reliability. The NEO-PI has over 200 items, and provides > a content space that adequately samples the 5 basic facets of > personality. > > In some research I did as part of a grad course on test development, > we related the NEO-PI and the Meyers Briggs using a sample of 3600 > business admins and marketing people in four different large > companies. The Meyers-Briggs model was not adequate to explain the > data (ie., the goodness-of-fit measures were not statistically > significant), while the full Five Factor Model provided a very good > fit to the data. When I ran a confirmatory factor analysis on the > data, again the NEO-PI adequately mapped to the underlying factors > within the data. In contrast only the E and N scales in the MBTI were > defined adequately, the remaining MBTI subscales split across all five > underlying factors in the data set. > > My own conclusion with these results is that why use a measure that > doesn't adquately represent what's within the population? I I was > still doing that sort of stuff, I'd trash the MBTI and start using the > FFI or the NEO-PI. > > pardon the experimental psychologist speak. > > > > larry > > On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:27:02 -0600, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > she stood up, exclaimed "I don't think I belong in this group", > > > and ran for the instructors. She should have been grouped with the INFPs. > > > > Great anecdote! Thanks. > > > > That's consistent with what I've seen. So, while Larry is probably > > right clinically (he certainly seems to be), generally I think it's an > > excellent test. > > > > Those "E" groups rock - you get the extroverted inventors together and > > pretty soon they're designing popsicle stick bridges. Elsewhere the > > "I" groups are quietly reading or just looking frightened watching the > > "Es" live it up. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:134653 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
