Strangely enough, there's lots of INTx people in the community even though Meyer Briggs is not very well respected in the Psych community. I would really like an answer to that. Scott Alexander brought that up the other day and it had me intrigued because its an argument I've made to my friends.
Me: I swear that INTP explains me really well!
Them: Its a horoscope! Of course you would think that!
I think by horoscope they meant the personality aspect of it rather than the prediction aspect. People will think any personality test explains them. ("Which Scooby Doo character are you? Scaaary accurate!")Cactus Head:
To be meta-contrarian about this, it's a real difference from horoscopes in my opinion. People use their star sign to determine which of the twelve horoscopes they will read and they'll think it applies to them no matter what the star sign is---each of the twelve horoscopes are equally fluffy BS. With MB, people read the descriptions first and decide which type they are, and some types will resonate a lot more than others. On this basis, I think the MB is grasping at something real. I'm introverted, the eight extraverted types will not describe me at all. I will concede that a) the big five factor analysis (OCEAN) is better, and b) peoples' traits as measured by these things are unimodally distributed instead of bimodally distributed.
I'd like to see some good research into Meyer Briggs that isn't afraid to alter it. INTP is very accurate in describing my personality. Much more so than any others. But I'm also borderline on the first and third letters (on an official test, I was near the 50% mark). ENTP isn't too inaccurate, and INFP isn't too inaccurate, but I don't identify with ENFP very much, and none of the others. It seems more accurate than other personality tests in some aspects. But what are those aspects? And why has the scientific community largely completely rejected it rather than trying to redeem what DOES work?