I’ve always had issue with Myers Briggs and this article from the Guardian rightly critiques the test.
There is very little science behind MB. In fact it was developed by two non experts, the Guardian describes them as ‘Housewives’. It doesn’t strand up to scientific rigour. That,in mind makes it dangerous.
The biggest and most profound problem with Myers Briggs is the basic premise we are one thing or another. There is no grey between the black and white.
If you meet me in a professional setting I might come across as extrovert, in a social situation I can be an introvert.
I have a degree in Neuroscience, I’m a thinker, yet in my job within UX I have to empathise, I would be terrible at my job if I didn’t feel.
I’ve had to take the Myers Brigss test before as part of a job interview. I didn’t get the job because of the “contradictions” present within the flawed test.
All the Myers Briggs test does is foster labels and labelling. Yes it can help individuals come to terms with themselves but to be used within an organisation is at best mistaken and it’s worst can label a person something they are not.
“Aleks Krotoski charts how digital culture is moulding modern living. Each week join technology journalist Aleks Krotoski as she goes beyond the latest gadget or web innovation to understand what sort of world we’re creating with our ‘always on’ lives.”
Henrich had thought he would be adding a small branch to an established tree of knowledge. It turned out he was sawing at the very trunk.
At the heart of most of that research was the implicit assumption that the results revealed evolved psychological traits common to all humans, never mind that the test subjects were nearly always from the industrialized West. Henrich realized that if the Machiguenga results stood up, and if similar differences could be measured across other populations, this assumption of universality would have to be challenged.
Designing applications to encourage a certain kind of behavior (especially with regards to health) is a rapidly emerging subfield of interaction design. Best practices are constantly evolving. With such a wide range of proven applications – from fitness monitoring wristbands to doctor-patient communication tools – the field is a great source of both inspiration as well as design strategies.
Or reasoned vs emotional decision making. I’d argue the there is little difference. On the whole your a problem solved by gut feel vs your reasoned response will often result in the same decision. It’ll just be a hell of a lot quicker to make that decision.