# Do Psychologists use MBTI?



## Mcblahflooper94 (Oct 13, 2013)

Just wondering, because I could imagine knowing types very well could help you get to know people better and know their functions. I know that some people I meet now I can easily type and I can say certain things to appease them or peeve them  any psychologists on this forum maybe want to chime in??


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

I don't think so, if they do use personality tests they usually use the BIG 5.


----------



## Lurianar (Apr 17, 2013)

Wellsy said:


> I don't think so, if they do use personality tests they usually use the BIG 5.


Pretty much this. They also have much more powerful tools to their assets. MBTI isn't reliable enough (people typing different types depending on mood) to be used through such a close and professional environment.

This doesn't discredit the MBTI though. This system is actually incredibly powerful for personal development and how to understand others.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

As a matter of fact, some psychologists do use MBTI.

FYI many do not even use Big Five. 

It all depends. Many psychologists don't even use personality assessments at all. Every psychologist is different, every doctor/client context is different. This question seems too broad.


----------



## Denbox (Jun 11, 2013)

Does anyone have sources?


----------



## lilpixieofterror (Oct 24, 2013)

Some psychologist find personality assessments, such as MBTI, as useful and others find them as total bunk. I've seen and read both ends of the spectrum and everything in between.


----------



## OrdinarinessIsAFWTD (Jun 28, 2011)

Not many, I'd wager. It's usually a punch-line among academics.

They don't tend to sneer at the Big Five quite as much.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Mcblahflooper94 said:


> Just wondering, because I could imagine knowing types very well could help you get to know people better and know their functions. I know that some people I meet now I can easily type and I can say certain things to appease them or peeve them  any psychologists on this forum maybe want to chime in??


I've seen two psychologists this year. It's just art psychology, so psychologists don't even recognize it. They may have learned about the 16 types and Jung in the first year of university, as I've heard from someone who did first year psychology. Then again, it's not given any real value during that year. 

The first when I asked about MBTI, replied with the most confused face as to such a thing even existing. She mentioned some thing called MPPA or something like that, but as it turns out MBTI is definitely not something that psychologists want to use. It's less about development and more about setting yourself aside from other types ; development comes when you can challenge core beliefs and you can't do that if you try to use external descriptions like MBTI to justify who you are. Core beliefs are ingrained and very specific to who you are, and tend to make a lot of sense when you review past experiences, and when identified can overturn repetitive and intrusive thoughts that even the mentally ill have. MBTI cannot do that and cannot be applied to everyone (eg: schizophrenics or people with split personality disorder), so they never use it.

Other than that, a psychologist who is helping me identify these core beliefs totally doesn't mention MBTI at all. 

Even Big Five is not very reliable to them, studies have found that a certain tribe with different cultures don't even have qualities that can be discerned by extroversion/introversion as stated in the Big Five : http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/03/big-five.aspx

Core beliefs is the way to go now, and if you have 16 types people tend to have anxiety over whether they're being that type rather than being themselves, and why these people have that anxiety is more important to psychologists.


----------



## QrivaN (Aug 3, 2012)

I'd imagine that (most) psychologists would rather get to know the patient better on a more individual level so as to treat said patient in a way specifically designed to help them, instead of using any sort of "type" to identify the patient, as that would come closer to stereotyping.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

l was shocked to learn a social worker/therapist friend of mine had never heard of it.

Had her take the test, she's a total INFJ but got INTJ. l'm working on her.


l knew another therapist years ago (actually was my therapist at one point) who seemed like she would have been interested, but never mentioned it.

She was a little obsessed with the way l processed information because l think she knew it was similar to her, she was always looking for ways for us to be the same ''____'', but she didn't know what to call it.

l think she's either ENFP or ENFJ.


----------



## Andre2807 (Nov 14, 2013)

I don't know any psychologists, but I believe that MBTI assessments creates stereotypes and generalisations. I think psychologists do cold reading (not the psychic type), but reading body language, tone of voice and try to find reason behind the patient's behavior by asking questions.


----------



## Killionaire (Oct 13, 2009)

Lurianar said:


> Pretty much this. They also have much more powerful tools to their assets. MBTI isn't reliable enough (people typing different types depending on mood) to be used through such a close and professional environment.


Where do you get such great respect for psychologists? Have you ever dealt with any of them? I've had experience with several therapists (psychologists) and two psychiatrists. They were all ignorant, stupid (compared to me anyway), and totally useless and worthless. They have no ability to help anyone. They didn't help me at all but I fixed myself with the help of some good books. There are a few smart psychologists (very few) but I have contempt for all the rest of them. I don't think most therapists are interested in learning anything they could use to actually help people and solve their problems. The reason is that solving problems is less profitable. If you solve someone's problems they don't need to pay you anymore.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

AverOblivious said:


> MBTI is definitely not something that psychologists want to use. It's less about development and more about setting yourself aside from other types ; development comes when you can challenge core beliefs and you can't do that if you try to use external descriptions like MBTI to justify who you are. Core beliefs are ingrained and very specific to who you are, and tend to make a lot of sense when you review past experiences, and when identified can overturn repetitive and intrusive thoughts that even the mentally ill have. MBTI cannot do that and cannot be applied to everyone (eg: schizophrenics or people with split personality disorder), so they never use it.
> 
> Other than that, a psychologist who is helping me identify these core beliefs totally doesn't mention MBTI at all.
> 
> ...


"Core beliefs," eh?

There's now over 50 years of data — from hundreds of studies in peer-reviewed journals and so on — that strongly suggests that there are a handful of human personality dimensions that (1) are multifaceted (i.e., that involve multiple characteristics that tend to co-vary in a statistically meaningful way), (2) tend to be relatively stable through life, and (3) are substantially genetic. The "Big Five" is an umbrella term for several somewhat independently-developed typologies with respect to which respectable amounts of data have been gathered and that seem to basically involve the same five underlying dimensions (notwithstanding some theoretical variations from typology to typology and from typologist to typologist), and the four MBTI dichotomies appear to be tapping into four of the Big Five factors — albeit, again, with various theoretical variations both between the MBTI and Big Five and among different MBTI theorists.

In the modern world of personality typology, the relevant scientific standards include judging typologies in terms of two broad criteria known as _reliability_ and _validity_. Reliability basically has to do with internal consistency, while validity relates to the extent to which the theoretical constructs actually relate to reality. Going all the way back to 1985, the second edition of the MBTI Manual devoted two chapters to the issues of reliability and validity, and there's been substantial additional confirmation in the years since.

McCrae and Costa are probably the most prominent Big Five scientists, and they long ago concluded (see this article) that the four MBTI dichotomies were essentially tapping into four of the Big Five factors, and that there was respectable scientific data in support of the MBTI dichotomies.

Over twenty years ago now, John B. Murray ("Review of Research on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator," Perceptual & Motor Skills, 70, 1187, 1990) summed up the MBTI's status this way:



Murray said:


> The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has become the most widely used personality instrument for nonpsychiatric populations. ... Approximately 300 studies of the MBTI are cited by Buros (1965, 1978) and over 1500 studies are included in the [1985] edition of the [MBTI Manual]. ... The research on the MBTI as a psychometric instrument and as an application of Jung's typology was reviewed and some of its modern applications considered. ...
> 
> The reliability of the M-B Indicator has been improved in recent years. ... Studies reviewed by Carlyn (1977) as well as later studies have shown generally satisfactory split-half and test-retest reliabilities. ...
> 
> ...


Here are three more sources, if you're interested. Each of the last two includes a roundup of multiple studies.

Hierarchical Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the MBTI
MBTI Form M Manual Supplement
MBTI Step II Manual Supplement

Particularly noteworthy (to me, anyway) is the fact that twin studies have established that identical twins _raised in different households_ are substantially more alike with respect to the Big Five and MBTI dimensions than more genetically dissimilar pairs, which strongly suggests that these typologies are tapping into personality dimensions that are relatively hard-wired — however imperfectly and/or incompletely grasped and defined they may be at this stage.

I should probably also note, though, that the data support for the MBTI relates almost exclusively to the four MBTI _dichotomies_ — which correlate with four of the Big Five dimensions — rather than the eight "cognitive functions." As I understand it, and as further discussed in this long INTJforum post, the few attempts to test/validate the functions — and, in particular, the functions model most often discussed on internet forums (where INTJ = Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTP = Ti-Ne-Si-Fe) — have not led to a respectable body of supporting results.

As for "core beliefs"... I'll confess I'd never even heard of them. So I tried to check out the Wikipedia article, but dang, there isn't one! So then I Googled "core beliefs," and danged if I've been able to find any reference to any psychological theory that goes by that name and has any respectable body of studies behind it.

But OK, I'll admit I didn't spend _that_ long searching. Hopefully you can steer me to two or three respectable sources that will explain to me what the "core beliefs" system is all about and help convince me and any other deluded forumites that "core beliefs" have left extraversion/introversion and the rest of the Big Five and MBTI dimensions in the dust.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

reckful said:


> "Core beliefs," eh?


This is just my interpretation of the term, but it does make sense.

Taking MBTI/Big5 or any typology system for instance you're likely to find overlappings within a type's worldview, outlook, opinions and values. They may not be 1:1 overlaps but _principally_ seem to show a clear path where it's headed. An inter-type underlying principle/consensus so to speak. Chances are that this "consensus" is the result of the conscious attitude, which within MBTI, or by Jung, would be solely/mostly defined by a person's dominant function.

If you now moved away from typology and its technical construct, you'd still be able to estimate these principles and consensus without a technical framework built around them. You could then say these ingrained tendencies are one's "core values". Fostering growth or change for that matter as result of challenging said core value in translation would mean no more than questioning and challenging the conscious attitude of a person. Challenging the ego. Ideally, if the battle would be won or had a positive effect challenging a person's 'core values' would result in a person mellowing out by scaling down their conscious attitude - to not be caught up solely in their narrow-mindedness when their dominant reigns supreme to the point of blindly dismissing all else but what it sees fit.

In a Jungian sense this would close the gap between the dominant and inferior and as such diminish shadow activity of the unconscious as the pair moves closer together. The less tight your conscious attitudes reigns the less need for your inferior/shadow to compensate resulting in overall more balance.

So the very bottom line: 'core values' in my mind basically fits within the technical framework Jung/MBTI has established, except that these frameworks may not be actively used. Then again, that's merely my interpretation of the term; I doubt anything official in that regard exists.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

reckful said:


> "Core beliefs," eh?
> 
> There's now over 50 years of data — from hundreds of studies in peer-reviewed journals and so on — that strongly suggests that there are a handful of human personality dimensions that (1) are multifaceted (i.e., that involve multiple characteristics that tend to co-vary in a statistically meaningful way), (2) tend to be relatively stable through life, and (3) are substantially genetic. The "Big Five" is an umbrella term for several somewhat independently-developed typologies with respect to which respectable amounts of data have been gathered and that seem to basically involve the same five underlying dimensions (notwithstanding some theoretical variations from typology to typology and from typologist to typologist), and the four MBTI dichotomies appear to be tapping into four of the Big Five factors — albeit, again, with various theoretical variations both between the MBTI and Big Five and among different MBTI theorists.
> 
> ...


I'm not going to go with the 'this is the right and only possible alternative' approach, mainly because I'm basing this off personal experience with qualified psychologists while you're basing your conceptions off of theory. 

The method of identifying and challenging core beliefs is a method they use to fight off 'unhelpful thoughts' or 'intrusive thoughts', however the thing is the core belief is generally pertinent to yourself. I never said it was a replacement for MBTI or Typology, I meant that since psychologists (in the case of what the OP meant) generally help the people around them, they can't do this with MBTI, and therefore, do not use it. 

I'm sure there aren't any articles on Core Beliefs, because that's pretty weird if there was. You totally missed the point I was making throughout your post. That was only a personal suggestion, as to what psychologists I have known have applied to help people with mental illness, etc. In other words, they had not touched any of what you are recording. 

I know nothing about Big Five (haha?), it's not related to the point I was making.I was just replying to the others who were so definite psychologists use these things in their handling of patients. If you use potentially impractical theories with patients, (that have not worked helping the mentally ill) patients won't be happy with that sort of treatment. If anything my post was an opinion piece and I'm not going to back it up with empirical facts to show you how much its worth compared to your points on Big Five. However, challenging core beliefs is an aspect of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy which I meant, when I said that Core Beliefs can help challenge mental illnesses. 

I googled 'Core Beliefs' and I found one of the sheets that psychologists like the one I knew give to patients : http://www.cci.health.wa.gov.au/docs/ACF3B8A.pdf

From your stance, I can already tell you are going to take this Big Five frontier to the very end, so I'm not going to contradict you on anything and this is solely my perspective. Mainly for the fear of conflict. Conflict should be avoided. Good day.


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

The counselor I see has heard of the MBTI. When I first met her, she seemed more interested in it than she does now. She let me borrow the book she had about MBTI in children and copied a couple pages from some other book. But recently it came up and I had to remind her of the dichotomies, which was slightly disappointing. Doesn't really bother me much though, as I'm more of a CF fan and she didn't have a desire to go that far into the theory.

While I think there could potentially be a use for MBTI in counseling, it shouldn't be used as a shortcut for "knowing" a person. There's a ton of variation, so just because you know their type doesn't mean you know what they're like.


----------



## Lurianar (Apr 17, 2013)

Killionaire said:


> Where do you get such great respect for psychologists? Have you ever dealt with any of them? I've had experience with several therapists (psychologists) and two psychiatrists. They were all ignorant, stupid (compared to me anyway), and totally useless and worthless. They have no ability to help anyone. They didn't help me at all but I fixed myself with the help of some good books. There are a few smart psychologists (very few) but I have contempt for all the rest of them. I don't think most therapists are interested in learning anything they could use to actually help people and solve their problems. The reason is that solving problems is less profitable. If you solve someone's problems they don't need to pay you anymore.


I had a very positive experience with two different psychologists. Of course, they were from the public domain and not paid per each 'meeting', so their motivation wasn't about trying to suck the money out of me as it was basically free. Also, since it was a public service, they tried to fix the problems as many more students would need the services - To this end, they didn't have the choice but to actively try to fix the problems I had.

I heard a lot of horror stories about psychologists. I never experienced it, though.


----------



## OldManRivers (Mar 22, 2012)

I have seen the MBTI used by psychologist as a personal evaluation more useful by the client in broad terms, with the advice to not take it serious - and the test were done in very controlled conditions. I have seen it used by personnel managers who, regardless of outcome, cannot be challenged and that "type" controls job placement. 
The MBTI does not consider variability and someone in the market for a job, desperate and stressed out, will not be fairly treated.


----------



## OldManRivers (Mar 22, 2012)

Killionaire said:


> Where do you get such great respect for psychologists? Have you ever dealt with any of them? I've had experience with several therapists (psychologists) and two psychiatrists. They were all ignorant, stupid (compared to me anyway), and totally useless and worthless. They have no ability to help anyone. They didn't help me at all but I fixed myself with the help of some good books. There are a few smart psychologists (very few) but I have contempt for all the rest of them. I don't think most therapists are interested in learning anything they could use to actually help people and solve their problems. The reason is that solving problems is less profitable. If you solve someone's problems they don't need to pay you anymore.


I think that is a reasonable appraisal, but understandably colored by your personal experience. Any therapy that is not client centered is, in my opinion, bogus. An auto mechanic finds what is broken and fixes it: people are not machines and cannot be simply diagnosed and fixed. The client should by into the program and have ownership of the problem. Worked for me as therapist - and in a way, that worked for you.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

AverOblivious said:


> I never said it was a replacement for MBTI or Typology, I meant that since psychologists (in the case of what the OP meant) generally help the people around them, they can't do this with MBTI, and therefore, do not use it. ...
> 
> I'm sure there aren't any articles on Core Beliefs, because that's pretty weird if there was. ...
> 
> If anything my post was an opinion piece and I'm not going to back it up with empirical facts to show you how much its worth compared to your points on Big Five.


Well, just as a reminder, your initial post said that "Big Five is not very reliable to [psychologists]", and that "studies have found" that "a certain tribe" didn't have introverts and extraverts, whereas "core beliefs" can be "applied to everyone," leading to your conclusion that "core beliefs is the way to go now."

By contrast, as further explained here (at the same website you linked to), "core beliefs" is a specific _therapeutic technique_ (part of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy) that some therapists use in connection with certain specific psychological disorders that appear to be responsive to that approach.

So, in other words, comparing "core beliefs" to the MBTI or Big Five is a classic apples/oranges thing — and your latest post makes it sound like maybe you understand that now. "Core beliefs" have nothing to do with personality types and are certainly not the "way to go now" for someone who's interested in the kinds of insights that the MBTI and Big Five can offer.


----------



## Mcblahflooper94 (Oct 13, 2013)

Paradigm said:


> The counselor I see has heard of the MBTI. When I first met her, she seemed more interested in it than she does now. She let me borrow the book she had about MBTI in children and copied a couple pages from some other book. But recently it came up and I had to remind her of the dichotomies, which was slightly disappointing. Doesn't really bother me much though, as I'm more of a CF fan and she didn't have a desire to go that far into the theory.
> 
> While I think there could potentially be a use for MBTI in counseling, it shouldn't be used as a shortcut for "knowing" a person. There's a ton of variation, so just because you know their type doesn't mean you know what they're like.


I agree completely. I've met a lot of types who are nothing alike but their functions (specifically ENFPs for some reason ). All I'm saying is that I could imagine it could help to know how a patient takes information in. Like, I don't think that the same questions should be asked to an INTJ as a ESFP.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

reckful said:


> "Core beliefs" have nothing to do with personality types and are certainly not the "way to go now" for someone who's interested in the kinds of insights that the MBTI and Big Five can offer.



I think you're point that I outlined above is _totally invalid_. You haven't even heard of Core Beliefs until I told you about it, and yes, it's part of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) that I said before. It's pretty much one of the few alternatives to medication that helps mental illness more effectively than treatment by medication. This is an article about CBT being a practical technique (not the medication point) : http://psychcentral.com/blog/archiv...cognitive-behavioral-therapy-cbt-for-anxiety/

Another thing is, psychologists are expensive and one session lasts for only around an hour or so. The thing is you shouldn't practice something like MBTI which people end up not knowing 'what their type is?' for over 2 or 3 years - it's never an exact science. Then again, I still don't know what my type is to be honest. 

CBT only lasts for 10 weeks average, and this is practical for psychologists and has worked to improve a person to a point where they can even consider something like MBTI in a healthy state.

I would quote more, but then again I'm guessing you have access to Google and the individuals suffering from mental illnesses or psychologists on YouTube who have posted blogs about how much CBT has helped them, and you can look up how much more CBT has to offer than _debatable art_ _psychology_ theories like MBTI and other a bit more evident theories like Big Five, which _don't necessarily_ apply to everyone (Unless you can back up that fact with another study to make me realize otherwise, which is going to take everyone in the world perhaps).

Well I do enjoy MBTI, but if you really think it should be used in place of psychological techniques that have worked for people with mental illness (in other words, has 'a lot more to offer') - then you're wrong.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

AverOblivious said:


> I think you're point that I outlined above is _totally invalid_. You haven't even heard of Core Beliefs until I told you about it, and yes, it's part of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) that I said before. It's pretty much one of the few alternatives to medication that helps mental illness more effectively than treatment by medication. This is an article about CBT being a practical technique (not the medication point) : How Effective is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) for Anxiety? | World of Psychology
> 
> Another thing is, psychologists are expensive and one session lasts for only around an hour or so. The thing is you shouldn't practice something like MBTI which people end up not knowing 'what their type is?' for over 2 or 3 years - it's never an exact science. Then again, I still don't know what my type is to be honest.
> 
> ...


It sounds like you completely misunderstood my post.

Once again, with feeling: Your initial post said that "Big Five is not very reliable to [psychologists]", and that "studies have found" that "a certain tribe" didn't have introverts and extraverts, whereas "core beliefs" can be "applied to everyone," leading to your conclusion that "core beliefs is the way to go now."

And my last post emphasized that "comparing Core Beliefs to the MBTI or Big Five is a classic apples/oranges thing." The MBTI and Big Five don't involve therapeutic strategies for treating psychological disorders and, conversely, "core beliefs" have nothing to do with the kinds of relatively hardwired dimensions of _normal_ personality that the MBTI and Big Five deal with.

So no, I don't think the MBTI "should be used in place of psychological techniques that have worked for people with mental illness." That's not what the MBTI and Big Five are about.


----------



## JoanCrawford (Sep 27, 2012)

Meritocrat said:


> Not many, I'd wager. It's usually a punch-line among academics.
> 
> They don't tend to sneer at the Big Five quite as much.


Ugh. The Big Five in my opinion doesn't even compare to the quality received with Myers Briggs.


----------



## OrdinarinessIsAFWTD (Jun 28, 2011)

JoanCrawford said:


> Ugh. The Big Five in my opinion doesn't even compare to the quality received with Myers Briggs.


LOL. It doesn't even TRY to hide its biases. Agreeable vs egocentric? Inquisitive vs. noncurious??


----------



## Engelsstaub (Apr 8, 2016)

I don't know what they'd use it for. Especially clinical psychologists.

Let's assume John Smith comes to a psychologist/therapist/psychiatrist. He's interested in John Smith, his personal issues and experiences. ENTJ would give him no valuable data.


----------



## BigApplePi (Dec 1, 2011)

Mcblahflooper94 said:


> Just wondering, because I could imagine knowing types very well could help you get to know people better and know their functions. I know that some people I meet now I can easily type and I can say certain things to appease them or peeve them  any psychologists on this forum maybe want to chime in??


I would recommend learning some MBTI basics to any psychologist. After all people are different and the MBTI is a starting approach. Would you expect the same thing from an extrovert as an introvert? From a thinker as a feeler? Would you talk to each the same way?


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

I worked at a private practice that employed a psychometrician. She would go to work places and give people the MBTI and then explain - industrial psychologist way - how to improve the work atmosphere.

In the states the APA gives "continuing education" credits to PsyD and Phd in Psychology counsellors for their required continuing education, so the American Psychological Association sees it as a viable addition to one's education.

I got credited in the MBTI Step I & MBTI Step II for credits when I was a counsellor only (Masters Degree counsellors require continuing education), but I didn't really use it on the job much at all. I did some studies with it in profiling criminal behaviour (I ended up in forensics for about 4 years) and I wrote up some papers for it, but it wasn't anything all that conclusive.

People here are really disbelieving when I tell them in the past that I have used the MBTI as a counsellor. I don't think they believe me for some stupid reason. Or they have this idea that means that I went around typing people and telling them a bunch of pseudo-scientific BS that wasn't true or something. It's not really about how it's used so much as that yes, some people who are in psychology do use it. The way they use it might be very different from what one imagines, but it is used. And the money made through using it, like in the psychometrician's example, is good money sure, but it's not just about making money. It's that the services she provided had meaning and value to those who sought them. 

She tested me as an INTJ MBTI and an INFp Socionics. heh.


----------



## Lou Lemons (Apr 20, 2019)

Generally, not. But I am sure some do, depending on their theoretical orientation. A Jungian psychologist would have some knowledge of Jungian typology, which is what inspired the MBTI. Overall, however, psychologists are more likely to use MMPI, MCMI, PAI, NEO assessments. For me personally, if a person came in and was interested in the MBTI, I might use that as a good starting point for exploring how the person sees themselves and processes being-in-the-world. I think it is good for a psychologist to have knowledge of different ways that people may understand personality, to be able to meet a person where they are at. MBTI can be a pretty useful way of understanding personality, as long as it's not held too tightly and used to stereotype people.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

I think my therapist used it as a generic surface profile like not to intimately assist with anything but simply to attempt to identify communication style etc through functions. And I am pretty sure it’s commonly used like bright flashes mentioned in work settings to help with identifying that sorta stuff

But my gawd I would hope that it’s not used in major clinical type of stuff


----------



## Engelsstaub (Apr 8, 2016)

Sites like Personality Hacker claim to have helped many people with their materials, but I wonder how far their help goes beyond what a decent coach would do without referring to any typology. After all it's not hard to determine whether a person needs motivation, assertiveness or other things.


----------

