Talk:INFJ

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 13 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] Dynamics

Amended the descriptions of type dynamics (hierarchy) to reflect my understanding of current thinking on MBTI (does this carry over to Keirsey and Socionics also?):

  • there is no general agreement about the attitude of the tertiary function (Te or Ti)
  • amended the description of type development to indicate that the tertiary tends to become more evident in midlife
  • likewise, the inferior usually develops in maturity and is often in evidence under stress (in the grip)

The article is still somewhat unsatisfactory. I think it would be worth reintroducing some (referenced) data on prevalence of the type plus some more useful description of its understood characteristics in MBTI, Keirsey, Socionics.

There is potentially some redundancy in the description of type dynamics also, as this is covered generically in the main article on Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

I have not looked at the other type descriptions. Potentially, it would be useful to come up with a set template for all 16 types, does anyone fancy making this a collective project? Wee Paddy 11:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

On the tertiary function, it is indicated by several sources, including the one by the Tiegers cited in the article, that the tertiary function has the same focus(inwards or outwards) as tbe first. The confusion often comes from the "shadow"; that is, the traits of the opposite type that a person displays during times of stress: ESTP for INFJs, and ESFJ for INTPs such as myself.

On the rest, I agree, there should be a template for the personality type pages, and a collective project could be just the thing these pages need. I would also suggest that anyone intersted check out the INTP talk page, as there is an ongoing discussion on suggested improvements.--User:Scorpion451|Scorpion451]] 23:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Percentage of INFJs?

From the article: "The small number of this type (1 percent) is regrettable..."

I have seen the figure listed both as 1 and 2 percent. Off the top of my head, I know [1] has the figure at "little more than 2 percent." Does someone have a source showing 1 percent? Thanks. --Square pear 02:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

One percent is definitely wrong. MBTI guesses 1-3% [2], Socionics much more [3]. Of course it differs from the point of view and the definition of INFJs. --Gronau 08:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The books by Keirsey usually say "1%". I have read others that say 1%. But some sites do say 1-2%. -- Andrew Parodi 17:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I've seen it listed as 1-2% for males and 1-3% for females. Wrad 02:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Best to give a range, I think, since exact numbers vary. ThreeOfCups (talk) 00:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Type Descriptions

I just deleted the descriptions on all of these personality types. A lot of them were copyvios from different sources, several of them being from http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/ , where they may or may not have been copied from other locations. Nonetheless, the three theories of MBTI, Keirsey Temperaments, and Socionics are quite different and require different descriptions of types, functions, relations, and other concepts. Socionics especially differs from the other two. The three theories should all be expanded upon in Wikipedia, but it is impossible to do this while there is a conglomeration of these three theories and they are treated as one and the same. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 01:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I added a new subheading for the characteristics sourced from the Dolphin Cove website that had been incorrectly listed under Keirsey Characteristics. I question the reliability of the information on the Dolphin Cove website, however; it's a members-only e-mail list, not a scholarly resource. Ajwenger 05:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Famous INFJs

That whole section is total bollocks. Unattributed speculation. Fictional characters (Worf????). What an embarrassment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.141.180.78 (talk) 14:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

Yeah, it's a little ridiculous. It seems like whoever added that section just picked a bunch of "nice" people concerned with human rights and gave them this personality type. --LakeHMM 06:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
It too was copied from another site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.132.218.100 (talk) 06:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

Removed it. I really didn't see any way to save it or any reason to keep it. Zoffoperskof 05:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone added a list again. I removed it. The only source I have any confidence in whatsoever is braintypes.com, who believes there are no famous INFJs throughout history. But even then, nobody's speculations can be proven unless typology is proven through some sort of genetic analysis - which is currently unavailable, obviously. _Anon_ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.67.199 (talk) 04:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Keirsey Characteristics

I was unable to find the following information on the website cited, nor is it consistent with anything of Keirsey's that I've read. Can someone provide a more specific citation? Otherwise, I think it should be deleted: "According to Keirsey, the INFJ is magnetically drawn to the ESTP and especially to the ENTP personality types because they see their complement in these types. The INFJ and ENTP might not get along as friends because of the insensitive nature of the ENTP and overly sensitive nature of the INFJ, but are a great match for intimate relationships because of the ENTP's willingness to be sensitive and concede their stubborn ways to the INFJ in relationships." Ajwenger (talk) 04:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

A reply: I think Keirsey mentioned something about types being attracted to their opposites in Please Understand Me II - but I don't have that book on hand. At any rate, I think it's ridiculous to generalize about what "types" of people other "types" are attracted to; there is no quantifiable evidence to support such claims, except "personal experience," which is purely individualistic. I score INFJ on all the tests, and my partner scores INTP, but I am not going to claim that INTP is the ideal for the entire INFJ type just because of my own personal success with an INTP. _Anon_ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.67.199 (talk) 04:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Deleted. Seemed to violate NPOV. ThreeOfCups (talk) 00:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cognitive functions

Agree with Ontologicos that these are not strictly MBTI functions. Myers and Briggs adapted them from Jung's Psychological Types. The text that follows the heading is not specific to MBTI. ThreeOfCups (talk) 02:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

I created templates for text that's the same across all 16 type articles to eliminate the hours of work it takes to update the same text 16 times. This is a recommended use for templates according to Wikipedia policy WM:TEMP.

To edit the templates, follow the URL on the Edit page. Make sure that the changes you make to the templates are appropriate for all 16 type articles! (INFP, ESTJ, etc.) ThreeOfCups (talk) 23:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling of Extraversion

The MBTI, Keirsey Temperament Sorter, and related Jung Typology assessments use the original spelling, Extraversion, rather than the modern corruption, Extroversion. In this context, Extraversion is jargon and should be thus spelled. ThreeOfCups (talk) 14:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)