Discussion of Personality Scales

...

limitations. Both tests appeared to have the same test re-test reliability. Although my results were not saved from the first attempt at the MMPI, I do remember still scoring fairly high on the psychopathic deviate scale. I received the same typology both times I attempted the Myers-Briggs. I also did two different versions of the Myers-Briggs and received the ENFP typology on both. The description of the ENFP on 16personalities.com paints me in a very positive light- ”More than just sociable people-pleasers though, ENFPs, like all their Diplomat cousins, are shaped by their Intuitive (N) quality, allowing them to read between the lines with curiosity and energy. They tend to see life as a big, complex puzzle where everything is connected – but unlike Analysts, who tend to see that puzzle as a series of systemic machinations, ENFPs see it through a prism of emotion, compassion and mysticism, and are always looking for a deeper meaning.” Of course this is me!! I’m sure if I read any of the other description that it would be just as positive and certainly me as well. According to a study by McCrae and Costa there was no support found for the typological theory the instrument is intended to embody. “There was no evidence that preferences formed true dichotomies, the 16 types did not appear to be qualitatively distinct, because analyses of their joint effects on personality dimensions showed that only 1 of 55 interactions was significant,”(McCrae, Costa, 1989). In other words, despite its popularity, there is no evidence to support that there is anything distinctive about the 16 personality types derived from the Myers-Briggs. However, if I were to make improvements to this particular scale, reporting the results on a continuum would be a little more realistic than using distinct categorization.

In conclusion, although both tests have test re-test reliability this does not imply that both tests are valid. The self-reported data was different than the informant data for the Myers-Briggs in addition to the informant data varying itself. Despite its popularity, the Myers-Briggs does not stand up to validity testing. The MMPI has proved itself to be more valid than the Myers-Briggs, but it also has its weaknesses in certain areas (such as the psycopathy scale). Although my results for the Myers-Briggs scale were more pleasant to read the MMPI results were probably more accurate.

References

Balsis, S., Cooper, L. D., & Oltmanns, T. F. (2015). Are Informant Reports of Personality More Internally Consistent Than Self Reports of Personality?. Assessment, 22(4), 399-404.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers‐Briggs type indicator from the perspective of the five‐factor model of personality. Journal of personality, 57(1), 17-40.

MMPI Training Slides.(2015).Retrieved from:

Https://www.upress.umn.edu/test-division/mtdda/webdocs/mmpi-2-training-slides/interpretation-of-mmpi-2-clinical-scales. (2015).University of Minnesota Press.

Morey, L. C., & Le Vine, D. J. (1988). A multitrait-multimethod examination of Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory (MMPI) and Millon clinical multiaxial inventory (MCMI). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 10(4), 333-344.