Skip to main content

MBTI Test: Is Myers-Briggs Test Valid? According to Science

Science of People Team 15 min read
In This Article

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is one of the most popular personality tests in the world, with over 2 million people...

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is one of the most popular personality tests in the world, with over 2 million people https://eu.themyersbriggs.com/en/tools/MBTI/Myers-Briggs-history taking it annually.

But popularity doesn’t equal scientific validity. While some praise it as an insightful tool for self-discovery, others dismiss it as corporate fluff.

So, what does science actually say? Let’s dive into the evidence behind the MBTI’s validity, reliability, and practical applications.

What is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)?

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a personality assessment that categorizes people into 16 distinct personality types. Developed in the 1940s by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers, the test measures four key dimensions of personality:

  • Extraversion (E) vs. Introversion (I): Where you focus your attention and get your energy
  • Sensing (S) vs. Intuition (N): How you take in information
  • Thinking (T) vs. Feeling (F): How you make decisions
  • Judging (J) vs. Perceiving (P): How you organize your life

Combining these four binaries creates the 16 personality types (for example, INTJ or ESFP) that have become part of our cultural vocabulary.

How Accurate is the MBTI?

The accuracy of the MBTI is hotly contested.

Our take: MBTI is not the most accurate personality test and should be used casually.

But to more deeply understand the debate, we need to consider what accuracy actually means in this context. Unlike measuring something concrete like height or weight, personality is more complex and fluid. A personality test’s accuracy involves several factors:

  • Reliability: Does it consistently produce the same results?
  • Construct validity: Does it actually measure what it claims to measure?
  • Practical application: Do the results meaningfully reflect real-world behavior?
    • Studies show mixed results. While someone identified as an “introvert” might indeed prefer solitary work, they may be quite outgoing in certain contexts, challenging the binary classification.
  • Predictive value: Can the results predict important life outcomes?

Interestingly, despite scientific debates about these measures, many people report feeling their MBTI type strongly “fits” them.

This subjective accuracy—where people recognize themselves in their type descriptions—might explain the test’s enduring popularity.

However, this perceived accuracy could also be explained by the Barnum effect, where people tend to accept general personality descriptions as uniquely accurate to them.

Is the MBTI Scientifically Supported?

The scientific community’s relationship with the MBTI has been complex and often contentious.

When the test was first published in 1943, the academic community largely rejected it https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/my-brothers-keeper/202002/in-defense-the-myers-briggs —not necessarily due to its merits, but because neither Katherine Briggs nor Isabel Myers held advanced psychology degrees.

This initial skepticism, combined with gender bias against two female researchers in the 1940s, may have contributed to the test’s ongoing credibility challenges in academic circles.

The debate continues today, with many academics dismissing the MBTI as unscientific while others defend its validity.

Here at Science of People, we prefer to use the Big 5 personality science which is more widely accepted and has better research. (see more on this below)

Let’s examine the evidence on both sides:

Evidence Against MBTI’s Validity

1. Binary Category Problems

Perhaps the largest criticism of the MBTI is the test’s forced dichotomies. Traits exist on a spectrum, but the MBTI reduces them into categories, making no distinction between individuals who might—for example—have only a slight preference for introversion and those who are extremely introverted.

As psychologist Dr. Jaime Derringer https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/the-problem-with-the-myers-briggs-personality-test notes, “Most people score in the middle, with few scoring very high or low on any trait.” This creates several issues:

  • Forces continuous traits into arbitrary categories
  • Oversimplifies complex personality dimensions
  • Creates artificial divisions where natural variation exists
  • May give different types to people with similar scores (e.g., two individuals who score on either side of the brink between Introversion and Extraversion will have different types despite being closer to each other than many others in their own type)

2. Reliability Concerns

Another troubling finding about the MBTI is its inconsistency over time. As Dr. Stephen Benning https://www.intlreviewinstem.org/post/what-is-the-myers-briggs-test-and-is-it-an-acceptable-tool explains, “More than one-third of people receive different four-letter types after a four-week period.” This instability raises serious questions about what the test is actually measuring:

  • Up to 50% of people get different results after five weeks
  • Changes most common for middle-scoring individuals
  • Results influenced by mood and situation
  • Difficulty replicating results consistently

3. Limited Predictive Power

While the MBTI can be engaging for self-reflection, it falls short when used to predict real-world outcomes. Despite its widespread use in professional settings, research consistently shows it has little value in predicting job performance or other measurable behaviors:

  • Poor predictor of job performance
  • Limited evidence for behavioral predictions
  • Weak correlations with objective outcomes
  • Insufficient evidence for high-stakes decisions

But it’s not all gloom and doom! Many people, including academics, still stand by the MBTI. Here’s why:

Evidence Supporting MBTI’s Validity

1. Strong Theoretical Foundation

Unlike many popular personality assessments, the MBTI wasn’t created in a vacuum. It builds upon Carl Jung’s well-established psychological theories, developed through his clinical observations and research. The test has undergone decades of refinement and empirical testing since its creation in the 1940s:

  • Built on Carl Jung’s established psychological theory
  • Underwent decades of empirical testing and refinement
  • Shows consistent internal structure across populations
  • Demonstrates construct validity when compared to other personality measures

2. Strong Reliability for Clear Preferences

While there are reliability concerns for individuals with moderate scores, proponents of the MBTI point to strong evidence https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-17564-003 of consistency for people with clear preferences:

  • Reliability coefficients ranging from.48 to.89 across different studies, with higher consistency for clear preferences
  • More recent versions of the test show improved reliability metrics overall

3. Neurological Evidence

Some preliminary research by Dr. Dario Nardi

Play

suggests possible connections between personality type and brain activity, though these findings require further peer-reviewed validation:

  • Different types show distinct patterns of brain activity
  • Specific cognitive functions correlate with activation in particular brain regions
  • Provides potential biological basis for personality preferences

4. Career and Educational Correlations

Another argument for MBTI’s validity comes from career satisfaction data. While the test shouldn’t be used for hiring decisions, research shows striking patterns in career choices and success:

  • Law students: 3x more likely to be Thinking (T) types
  • Police officers: 4x more likely to be Sensing (S) types
  • School administrators: 6x more likely to be Judging (J) types
  • Rhodes Scholars: 13x more likely to be Intuitive (N) types

How Scientific is the MBTI Compared to Other Tests?

When evaluating the MBTI’s scientific merit, it’s essential to compare it to other personality assessment tools, particularly its main competitor in the field of personality psychology: the Big Five model, also known as the Five Factor Model (FFM) or OCEAN.

The Big Five has emerged as the dominant paradigm in personality psychology over the past few decades, earning widespread acceptance in the academic community through extensive research validation.

Here at Science of People, the Big Five is our preferred personality science. See your results with our (free) personality test using the Big 5 science:

MBTI vs. The Big Five Personality Test

The Big Five and MBTI represent fundamentally different approaches to measuring personality. While MBTI was developed to test Jung’s theoretical ideas, the Big Five emerged from statistical factor analysis of personality traits, letting the data reveal natural patterns rather than imposing theoretical categories.

The Big Five measures five core dimensions:

  • Openness to Experience - creativity, curiosity, and openness to new ideas
  • Conscientiousness - organization, responsibility, and goal-directed behavior
  • Extraversion - sociability, assertiveness, and energy in social situations
  • Agreeableness - compassion, cooperation, and concern for others
  • Neuroticism - emotional stability, anxiety, and stress response

Key differences between the approaches:

  • MBTI uses binary categories while Big Five measures traits on a spectrum
  • Big Five includes emotional stability (Neuroticism), which MBTI doesn’t measure
  • MBTI focuses on preferences, while Big Five measures behavioral patterns
  • Big Five shows stronger predictive validity for life outcomes
  • MBTI offers richer descriptions of personality types and their interactions

Are Personality Tests Accurate in General?

The question of accuracy in personality testing is complex and depends largely on what we’re trying to measure. Research shows that well-designed personality assessments can provide valuable insights, but with important limitations.

The Big Five has emerged as the most scientifically robust measure because it:

However, all personality tests face certain challenges:

  • Better at describing patterns than predicting specific behaviors
  • More accurate for extreme traits than moderate ones
  • Can be influenced by current mood and circumstances
  • May be affected by self-reporting bias
  • Work best when combined with other assessment tools

For practical purposes, both tests serve different needs. The Big Five remains the gold standard for research and academic psychology, providing robust scientific measurement of personality traits. The MBTI, despite its limitations, can be valuable for self-reflection and team building when used appropriately and not over-interpreted.

How Does the Myers-Briggs Measure Personality?

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator uses a structured questionnaire format to assess personality preferences. The official MBTI assessment contains 93 questions, though unofficial versions may vary in length. Here’s a detailed breakdown of how the test operates:

Question Format and Structure

The test presents two types of questions:

  • Forced-choice questions where you select between two options (Example: Do you prefer to a) think through ideas aloud or b) process thoughts internally?)
  • Likert-scale items where you indicate how much a statement applies to you (Example: Rating from “very like me” to “very unlike me”)

Each question is designed to assess one of the four primary dichotomies (E-I, S-N, T-F, or J-P). The questions probe various aspects of:

  • Social preferences and interaction styles
  • Information processing tendencies
  • Decision-making approaches
  • Life organization preferences

Scoring Mechanism

The MBTI uses a sophisticated scoring system that analyzes response patterns across all dimensions. For each of the four dichotomies, the test:

  • Calculates a preference clarity index (that is, how definitively you favor one trait over its opposite in each category)
  • Provides a numerical score showing preference strength
  • Determines confidence levels in the results

For example, an INTJ result might show varying preference strengths: Strong preference for Introversion (30 points), moderate for Intuition (15 points), slight for Thinking (5 points), and clear for Judging (25 points).

These scores help create a more detailed understanding of how each preference manifests. Ultimately, however, the final result distills the findings into the four binary identifiers many have come to know and love.

The Four MBTI Type Dimensions Explained

To evaluate the MBTI’s validity, we first need to understand what it actually measures. Let’s dive deeper into each dimension:

Extraversion (E) vs. Introversion (I)

  • Extraversion: Focuses energy outward, learns through action and discussion
  • Introversion: Focuses energy inward, learns through reflection and thinking

In Practice: An extrovert might solve a problem by talking it through with colleagues, while an introvert might prefer to analyze the situation independently before sharing conclusions.

Sensing (S) vs. Intuition (N)

  • Sensing: Focuses on concrete details and present reality
  • Intuition: Focuses on patterns and future possibilities

In Practice: When planning a project, a sensing type might focus on specific, immediate steps and resources needed, while an intuitive type might envision potential future challenges and opportunities.

Thinking (T) vs. Feeling (F)

  • Thinking: Makes decisions based on logic and objective analysis
  • Feeling: Makes decisions based on values and human impact

In Practice: When managing team conflict, a thinking type might focus on finding the most logical solution regardless of feelings, while a feeling type might prioritize maintaining team harmony and considering individual perspectives

Judging (J) vs. Perceiving (P)

  • Judging: Prefers structure, planning, and closure
  • Perceiving: Prefers flexibility, spontaneity, and keeping options open

In Practice: When approaching a deadline, a judging type might create a detailed schedule and stick to it, while a perceiving type might adapt their approach as new information emerges, often working best under pressure

Let’s look at how these preferences combine by examining one of the 16 MBTI types!

Consider an INTJ (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Judging). This type combination might manifest as follows:

Their Introverted nature means they process internally before sharing ideas. Combined with Intuition, they often see patterns and connections others miss. Their Thinking preference leads them to make decisions based on logic rather than emotional impact, while their Judging trait drives them to create structured plans and see them through.

In practice, imagine an INTJ project manager. They might:

  • Spend time alone analyzing project data before team meetings
  • Create comprehensive long-term strategies rather than focusing on immediate tasks
  • Make tough decisions based on data rather than team preferences
  • Develop detailed project timelines and expect strict adherence to deadlines

Want to work effectively with other people? Check out our handy cheat sheet for working with five distinct personality types:

How to Use Personality Tests Constructively

Whether you’re taking the MBTI, Big Five, or other personality assessments, understanding how to interpret and apply the results appropriately is crucial. Personality tests can provide valuable insights when used as tools for reflection rather than as definitive labels or predictors.

Practical Applications of Personality Tests

The most effective use of personality assessments comes from understanding their strengths and limitations. While research advises against using personality tests for high-stakes decisions like hiring and promotion, they may serve as valuable tools for personal reflection and understanding team dynamics.

Appropriate uses include:

  • Self-reflection and personal growth
  • Understanding communication preferences
  • Team building and group dynamics
  • Career exploration (not selection)
  • Professional development planning

Best practices for getting value from personality tests:

  • View results as preferences rather than fixed traits
  • Consider results as hypotheses to test, not definitive truth
  • Look for patterns across multiple assessments
  • Focus on development opportunities rather than limitations
  • Use results to understand differences, not justify behavior

Key things to avoid:

  • Making major life decisions based solely on test results
  • Using tests for hiring or promotion decisions
  • Stereotyping yourself or others based on type
  • Treating results as permanent or unchangeable
  • Using results to predict specific behaviors

For best results, combine personality assessments with:

  • Professional guidance and interpretation
  • Real-world behavior observation
  • Feedback from colleagues and friends
  • Personal reflection and journaling
  • Practical experimentation with different approaches

Remember: Personality tests are tools for insight, not crystal balls! Their value often comes from the self-reflection they promote and the conversations they spark, rather than from the specific labels they assign.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About the MBTI

Is the Myers-Briggs test accurate?

The MBTI’s accuracy depends on its use. It can provide insights into personality preferences but shouldn’t be used as a predictor of behavior or capability.

What is the most accurate personality test?

The Big Five is generally considered the most scientifically validated personality assessment, though “accuracy” depends on what you’re measuring.

Are personality tests accurate in general?

Personality tests vary in scientific validity. The most reliable tests measure traits on a spectrum and show consistency over time.

Should employers use personality tests for hiring?

Most experts recommend against using personality tests for hiring. Skills assessments and structured interviews are better predictors of job performance.

A Balanced Perspective on the MBTI

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator sits at an interesting crossroads between scientific skepticism and practical utility. While it doesn’t meet all the rigorous standards of modern psychological testing, dismissing it entirely might mean overlooking its potential benefits when used appropriately.

Key takeaways from the research:

  • Personality exists on a spectrum rather than in binary categories
  • MBTI test results are most reliable for those with strong preferences
  • The test’s theoretical foundation in Jung’s work provides structure, though its forced dichotomies create limitations
  • Career choice and satisfaction shows interesting correlations with type preferences, even if they don’t predict performance

For the most scientifically robust understanding of your personality, consider taking the Big Five assessment. This evidence-based tool provides a more nuanced view of your personality traits along a continuous spectrum rather than in binary categories.We’ve got an in-depth primer on the Big Five as well a free personality assessment here: Take Our Free Personality Quiz and See Where You Rank for the Big 5 Traits

Share This Article