Hi, guys. I hate to burst the MBTI bubble, but I’m here to tell you that from a scientific standpoint, the Myers-Briggs test is highly problematic.
In the intricate world of psychology, personality is considered “an individual’s unique and relatively consistent patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving,” according to the textbook “Discovering Psychology” by Hockenbury and Hockenbury (I like sources). Anyway, there have been multiple theories proposed to categorize and better explain how certain personalities have similar patterns, etc.. There are more or less 4 main theories and many branches from these theories, the most famous being Sigmund Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theory. You can look into these more thoroughly, but I suggest, from a Christian perspective, do it with caution, prayer, and avoid anything Freudian. To be blunt, much of what he proposed is perverted.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a personality assessment created by Isabel Myers and Katharine Briggs which seems to stem from Trait Theory. However, MBTI differs from trait assessment in the sense that Trait Theories in that Myers-Briggs only allows between the extremes. For example, one of the most reliable inventories for “appraising” a normal population is the California Psychological Inventory, which scores along a spectrum between introversion and extroversion; MBTI only allows for either introvert or extrovert. Granted, on the 16Personalities test website, it will provide some sort of percentage.
In the end, I am not the final say on this. However, the largest issue with MBTI is its unreliability.
I don’t want to completely discredit Myers-Briggs. It’s a fun tool for research when trying to create variety among characters and finding how some people are similar to you and have corresponding interests. But in a sense it is personal type-casting and relying on it to the point where it becomes an identity factor is dangerous.