Which Assessment is Better, The Big 5 or MBTI?

[WildeChilde]

I've been a pretty big fan of MBTI since college, but lately I've read a few articles talking about the Big 5 as being the assessment endorsed by leading psychologists. Jordan Peterson seems to like it a lot, and while I find his stance on objective truth a bit puzzling, his explanations of Jungian psychology and other topics are very clear and resonant with my own experience.  

Which one is better?  Personally, I feel the Big 5 is a more detailed analysis of one's personality, but at the end of the day, I don't know what it means to hear that a person is let's say moderate in extraversion, high in conscientiousness, low in neuroticism, low in agreeableness, and high in openness.  By contrast, if I hear somebody say they scored as an ESFP, I have an idea of what they are like.  They'd probably be a good person to have at a party for example.  I've read criticism of MBTI saying that it is too black-and-white and gives the tester an extreme result.  Additionally, they say that the results are often highly variable, where a person could test as an INTJ one day and test as ENFP the next.  This hasn't been my experience, but I can see how this could happen if the person taking the test is basing their answers on their current mood.  I like MBTI and am warming up to the Big 5, but I'd like to know y'alls opinions on this topic.  

[Spiral]

I'm ESFP-A. 

Althouht I don't think spending much time analysing these types and trying to oppose your life after them is very fruitful. You find the weaknesses you have iron those out and move on. I mean it's nice to know what you are like but it's usefulness is limited. Plenty of other variables to take into consideration.

[Joseph Maynor]

Do both.  Both are powerful.  You want to have results from both to work with.  

Edited February 10, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Shin]

It's necessary to comprehend the big aspects of your present personality, but aside that it is too limiting, because once you start to peel your ego (you) you start to see that you have no idea whatsoever where it will lead you.

What will probably stay is your dominance in extraversion/introversion, but aside that you really shouldn't take anything into account, it will just limit your growth in your mind.

Edited February 10, 2018 by Shin

[Staples]

Psych student here. Big 5 has more scientific reputability, MBTI is an easy sell because it's so simple. MBTI leaves no room for nuance because it is binary in nature.

But they're both models for personality, one of the most complex things humans have attempted to study. No model is holistic enough yet, which is what I'm working on now.

[Joseph Maynor]

52 minutes ago, Staples said:

Psych student here. Big 5 has more scientific reputability, MBTI is an easy sell because it's so simple. MBTI leaves no room for nuance because it is binary in nature.

But they're both models for personality, one of the most complex things humans have attempted to study. No model is holistic enough yet, which is what I'm working on now.

MBTI is very good.  Use it as a tool.  No test is perfect.  MBTI is powerful and has a lot of research and theory behind it.  

Edited February 16, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Staples]

@Joseph Maynor MBTI is very limited by its own design. When that test presents results, it gives it to you on the basis of the character you get assigned. If you're an INTP, it will give you advice specifically tailored for INTPs, but it doesn't give you any extra nuanced information on each of those spectrums. There's a big difference in personality for the person who scores 1% compared to the person who scores 49% in introversion. But MBTI will give them the same advice regarding their introversion because they fall into the bottom 50%. 

Good Big 5 tests give you specific information based on each trait, based on how high you scored, which MBTI doesn't do, it lumps them all together as a whole. 

MBTI is a dumbed down big 5 score, and it incorrectly assume's that it can just create archetypes as a final result based on the pretty letters you're sorted into. No one is surprised when they're told they are an introvert or an extrovert or somewhere in the middle. You already know intuitively exactly where you fall there. I have a suspicion you'd be more accurate if you read the description of each trait, and rate yourself on a scale of 1-100, without going through all the fancy questions.

Also, regarding OPs post, he mentions that MBTI varies too much in results, which is true. I have no data for this, but I also believe the big 5 varies a lot too, I've taken it 3 times and my conscientious levels have been estimated from 2% to 75%.

Personality models do not work. No one (or no ego) is the same consistent entity and will have the same decision-making tendencies even on an hourly basis. They're regulated by food, exercise, energy, awareness, social status and many more factors that would be too many to list. If they get changed significantly enough, you're a different person on the spot.

[h inandout]

I've tried MBTI and found interesting results, although my personality is really quite amalgam, but the exercise was certainly worth my time because it led to some mild insights about how we interact with each other.  I don't think I know enough people who use it to feel confident talking about it.  I do however, use the doshas: Vata, Pitta, Kapha.  Time tested, and the metaphors can really lead to some great insights.  But it can also lead to severe stereotyping, which I guess you just have to put up with if you wanna go deeper with it.

[Erlend K]

Of the mbpi only the extrovertion - introvertion scale has any empirical corrolation with anything that matters in real life, like behaviour and mental health. The three other indicators are mostly considered bullshit by most modern psychiatrists. The big 5 is generaly considered a more useful clasification. 

Generaly it is not very useful to try to understand yourself by finding some label like the mbpi types to describe yourself with. These are all normaly distributed with the majority of people lying close to the average on each dimention and only a minority of people having a clear "type" on any indicator. 

[Nahm]

They serve well in data collection and clarity on ‘where I ‘m at now”, but it’s the other-than-what-it-says-you-are which is where the growth is. Looking into things like epigenetics helps open the mind to the fact that we are creating ourselves, in that sector. We are what we think we are. Careful not to allow useful data to end up reinforcing limited thinking of capacity.

[CuteCornDog]

MBTI is great.

 

Not everyone understands it though.

[h inandout]

I would add that the usefulness of personality assessment helps you see how you interact with society and how other people may be doing something completely different, and how ultimately we are all balancing each other out.  You can be more of yourself and sometimes you might want to be someone else.  You might want to go for jobs or pursue a variety of life strategies that help you make the most of your natural you.  But sometimes that doesn't work out, so we look around at all the other people and say why is life working or not working for them?  How can I help and support them?  How can I learn from their approach?  How can I either capitalized on imbalanced characteristics over which I have no control?

[Ibn Sina]

Hardcore INTP here.