# Correlation between IQ and MBTI types.



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

Two questions here.

Background. I was reading and watching about INTP and took a MBTI test. The score percentages were very strong INTP and most everything fits me.

One suggested that the INTP are the highest IQ group and I'm not sure I understand why, but it brought up some interesting questions.

Q. Does the IQ determine the type or does the type determine the IQ or what is the relationship to this?

<Opinion> Some thing used to determine IQ would lend an advantage to people that use logic as well as how they analyze a question or problem.

if this is the case, would you be a different type if you had a lower or higher IQ? Do people develop into a MBTI type based on their IQ?


Q. What's the difference between two people with the same MBTI type with a 1 SD difference (15 points). So a person with 115 vs 130, what would the difference be? Do they think quicker? Handle more complex problems?

Christopher Langan, explained it as having more room to put more things in your head. Something like RAM on a computer that can run more complex programs.

Maybe another question would be do you think the IQ tests don't take into account the skills offered by other MBTI types?


----------



## Dora (Apr 25, 2016)

I'm not getting too involved into this debate, because I simply don't have any empirical data to work with, and it's potentially explosive. However, I think MBTI and IQ are not related. It's possible that some types are better at sitting down to a desk and filling a form for 30 minutes of undivided attention than other types, however, I don't believe in MBTI-related tiering of intelligence. There are people who are better equipped to make the right call in a snap decision, and others that are better equipped to sit and problem-solve.


----------



## Hulie (Jul 31, 2016)

I'll take a crack at it. Disclaimer: I'm hardly an expert at this kind of thing, and I definitely don't mean to put any personality type down; I hope it doesn't seem that way! And please don't take any of this as fact, I'm just toying with ideas here, assumptions are just assumptions, not even sure that they are true!

1. Assuming IQ is the result of the cognitive processes of the brain, that would mean type could have an effect on measured IQ and not the other way around. However, people with a higher IQ might find themselves in environments which encourage the development of certain cognitive processes and not others, thus IQ leads to development of specific functions. But this would raise another question: does type change just because other functions are developed? To what degree is personality changeable? 

I agree with your opinion. IQ specifically measures one's ability to think logically and problem solve. Certain cognitive functions are better suited to this. That said: just because a function is not high in one's stack, does not mean one can't use it. How effective one will be, I'm not sure. I'm afraid I'm out of my depth there. 



> if this is the case, would you be a different type if you had a lower or higher IQ? Do people develop into a MBTI type based on their IQ?


This is sort of getting into the issue of genetics vs environment. If personality type is primarily due to genetics, your type shouldn't change, regardless of IQ. However, if you believe that environment is a big factor in personality development, it would be possible to change type (and possibly IQ score due to hypothetical better performance on measures of intelligence due to the development of certain functions). It might be worth noting that general intelligence is thought to be largely hereditary, which _may_ point to type being genetic as well.

2. I'm not too sure about this one, sorry. 


> Christopher Langan, explained it as having more room to put more things in your head. Something like RAM on a computer that can run more complex programs.


That's a good way of putting it.

IQ tests only test one's ability to reason and problem solve, not other skills. I would think that proficient use of different cognitive functions would lead to success in different areas and aspects of life. Whether you think those skills and natural talents would rightly be called intelligence is another matter. I personally think that it's a matter of semantics. Those abilities not being called intelligence doesn't make them any less useful or valuable. 

Of course there will always be variation in IQ within types and between people. 

I'd like to add a question of my own. To what degree is the variable that IQ tests measure, logical reasoning, a skill? If one improves their ability to answer IQ test questions, has their actual cognitive ability actually changed?


----------



## Dora (Apr 25, 2016)

Hulie said:


> I'd like to add a question of my own. To what degree is the variable that IQ tests measure, logical reasoning, a skill? If one improves their ability to answer IQ test questions, has their actual cognitive ability actually changed?


I don't think it has. You can learn new skills, or get more habituated to questions that pop-up on IQ tests, so have less performance stress while filling them, or learn to recognize patterns faster, because you have seen plenty before. However, I don't think it affects the actual intelligence.
What I'd need however is the ability to concentrate longer. I get bored and irritated by questions that take more time and concentration to solve:blushed:


----------



## zynthaxx (Aug 12, 2009)

KarlJay said:


> Two questions here.
> Q. Does the IQ determine the type or does the type determine the IQ or what is the relationship to this?


Neither, imo. I think that your opinion hits close to target, though: A person's type is based on how they process data, and some types fall closer in the way they handle problems to the way required to successfully solve IQ test-style problems. What would be fun to see is the amount of difference perseverance makes to one's score. It is known that practicing IQ tests can elevate your scores. So how well can a person who is utterly disinterested in this style of problems perform if they decide to score well?



KarlJay said:


> would you be a different type if you had a lower or higher IQ? Do people develop into a MBTI type based on their IQ?


No, you'd simply be a dumb or smart [MBTI type]. There's plenty of examples of them all.



KarlJay said:


> Q. What's the difference between two people with the same MBTI type with a 1 SD difference (15 points). So a person with 115 vs 130, what would the difference be? Do they think quicker? Handle more complex problems?


Yes on both. Official IQ tests are timed, so you can get a relatively low score even if you answer all questions correctly by needing more of your allotted time, or by failing to finish in time.

If you look at it from a real-world perspective rather than within the limits of an IQ test you see people of all types making stupid decisions given the data available to them, meaning that type and intelligence are not so tightly intertwined.


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

This might be a variation on your question:
What if the way the question/problem was presented were changed? What if a question were drawn vs written or what if it were a 3d puzzle made of wood instead of words on paper?

As far as logic and answering question, I can see an advantage to that.

There's also the issue of some people not doing well with vocabulary, but can still be very good at logic and therefore underperform.

As far as this topic being potentially explosive, I'm not trying to go down that path, I'm more concerned about the relationship. It seems to be kind of the "chicken and egg" thing, and I'm wondering if anyone has found a correlation.

There's theories about IQ and use of violence as well as other things like needing a 90 or above IQ to make a society function well. Whereas MBTI types seem to be like parts of an ecosystem that all function together.


----------



## Dora (Apr 25, 2016)

KarlJay said:


> There's theories about IQ and use of violence as well as other things like needing a 90 or above IQ to make a society function well. Whereas MBTI types seem to be like parts of an ecosystem that all function together.


This bit got me curious. What is the link between IQ and use of violence? I don't even know which way the correlation goes. Makes sense that you need 90 and up though. Is it still the case that IQ 100 isn't an objective measurement globally, but rather the average of any given country? That's what I heard. It would mean that IQ 128 means one thing in the USA and another in Norway, or Botswana, or China.


----------



## DigitalPsyche (Sep 11, 2016)

Excerpt from the abstract of the only relevant study I've found on the Internet:



Ugur Sak said:


> The most common personality types among gifted adolescents were “intuitive” and “perceiving.” They were higher on the Introversion, Intuition, Thinking, and Perceiving dimensions of the personality scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) when compared to general high school students.


Read more here.



EDIT: I just found the abstract of another relevant study:



Kaufman said:


> It was hypothesized that individuals favoring Intuition and Thinking would be more intelligent and would favor fluid over crystallized intelligence relative to those favoring Sensing and Feeling, respectively. [...] Consistent with hypothesized relationships, people classified as Intuitive earned higher KAIT Composite IQs than those classified as Sensing. However, most other hypotheses were not supported, as the Fluid-Crystallized discrepancy was not meaningfully related to any MBTI dimension.



EDIT: ...and another one:



Furham said:


> General intelligence was significantly correlated with Extraversion-Introversion (El), Sensing-Intuition (SN), Thinking-Feeling (TF) and Judging-Perception (JP), indicating an advantage for Introversion, Intuition, Thinking and Perceiving.


----------



## Dora (Apr 25, 2016)

Thanks! That's quite possible, I guess. Same way as ESTP is most common with team sport athletes, at least in American football and basketball players. No wonders my office is intellectually intimidating - I'm sat with an INTJ and an INTP. I also know the stereotype for ESFP. Truth is, I have above average, though not exquisite IQ, but I'm just too distracted and generally not interested in the purely academic or statistical.


----------



## cotti (Aug 24, 2014)

I think IQ tests are generally more suitable to INTPs rather than Intuitive Dom types: that's becacause tests measure mainly deductive logical reasoning skills, but not for example the ability to grasp concepts and see relations between them. Furthermore they don't concern symbolic or metaphoric activity at all. One of the greatest genius of history , Goethe, probabily wouldn't have taken a really high score in such tests, which is ridicolous..
One more thing: I think not only solving problems requires intelligence , but creating those problems as well. The smart detective who solves all cases might not be as good at planning a crime, which requires intelligence too; INTJ and INTP may be an example of what I just wrote. The ability to create iq tests or problems in general is correlated to intelligence somehow doubtlessly, but in standard tests you are asked only to solve them.


----------



## Luminis (Aug 8, 2016)

I´ve asked myself same question recently and looked it up on the internet. The article I found suggested this: MBTI is at least partially linked to IQ, but it isn´t a hard rule. The S/N preference has the greatest impact on IQ. This was found by testing a big group of kids to see if they were ´talented´ (meaning intelligent) and found that the ratio of talented vs non-talented was greater with N kids. That doesn´t mean that S people are less intelligent though. It´s just more probable.

Furthermore, the article suggested how much the preferences influence the IQ:
S/N: 85%
I/E: 10%
T/F: 5%
P/J: 0%

The N´s are generally more intelligent - their ability to see the big picture etc.

The writer concluded that I´s are statistically more intelligent than Es, though I´ve met a real lot of intelligent Es too and I don´t think its much of an importance. Just that because Is don´t need others to fuel them makes them more independant or something in that lines. Also they are more likely to sit at home and study.

The T/F, the author said, Ts are statistically more intelligent, but its almost of no importance whether you are a T or an F.

The P/J prefference didn´t matter at all according to the author, but if he had to choose, he´d choose Ps, because the adaptive lifestyle is more flexible.

That would make the INTP statistically the most gifted type, closely followed by INTJs, then INFPs, INFJs, ENTPs, ENTJs, ENFPs, ENFJs, ISTPs, ISTJs, ISFPs, ISFJs, ESTPs, ESTJs, ESFPs, ESFJs.

Disclaimer: I don´t want o argue with anyone, I don´t have any data from myself, I was just relaying that article because I cannot find it at the moment. Being something else that the ´more intelligent´ preferences I just stated doesn´t make you more dumb by default, it´s just less statistically likely. I just thought it was a relevant piece of information.


----------



## Luminis (Aug 8, 2016)

Dora said:


> This bit got me curious. What is the link between IQ and use of violence? I don't even know which way the correlation goes. Makes sense that you need 90 and up though. Is it still the case that IQ 100 isn't an objective measurement globally, but rather the average of any given country? That's what I heard. It would mean that IQ 128 means one thing in the USA and another in Norway, or Botswana, or China.


In school they told me that the average world IQ is about 110. Which is strange, considering that 100 should be the average - after all, IQ is more or less measuring your mental age and most people´s mental and chronological age should match


----------



## Dora (Apr 25, 2016)

@Luminis I'm alright with accepting that considering filling in IQ tests successfully as the main criteria of intelligence, what you have provided is likely. I'm sure that INTxs will be statistically better at filling these in than ESFxs. However, I think if we have a debate about semantics, then the margin will smudge again. My hypothesis is, that sensors will be better at situational intelligence, where timely decisions and actions are key to a good solution. However, this will be hard to measure for IQ tests. What do you think? Any ideas on my hypothesis?


----------



## Luminis (Aug 8, 2016)

Dora said:


> @Luminis I'm alright with accepting that considering filling in IQ tests successfully as the main criteria of intelligence, what you have provided is likely. I'm sure that INTxs will be statistically better at filling these in than ESFxs. However, I think if we have a debate about semantics, then the margin will smudge again. My hypothesis is, that sensors will be better at situational intelligence, where timely decisions and actions are key to a good solution. However, this will be hard to measure for IQ tests. What do you think? Any ideas on my hypothesis?


If you take my favorite psychological definition of intelligence: intelligence is what IQ tests measure, then probably no. On second hand, as you said, there are more types of intelligence. For example, Fs would be better with emotional intelligence, but don´t have to be, because there´s something called cold empathy. About situational intelligence, I´m not sure about Ss, but perhaps that could correlate with extroverted function doms or those with developped extroverted functions? I´m just guessing here though. I don´t have intimate knowledge of the functions to answer you for sure.


----------



## Dora (Apr 25, 2016)

Luminis said:


> If you take my favorite psychological definition of intelligence: intelligence is what IQ tests measure, then probably no. On second hand, as you said, there are more types of intelligence. For example, Fs would be better with emotional intelligence, but don´t have to be, because there´s something called cold empathy. About situational intelligence, I´m not sure about Ss, but perhaps that could correlate with extroverted function doms or those with developped extroverted functions? I´m just guessing here though. I don´t have intimate knowledge of the functions to answer you for sure.


I think (and that's an opinion, not necessarily fact) that for situational intelligence, Se doms would probably score best. Based on personal experience, if I were in a burning building, I find it more likely that an ESTP fireman can think AND execute faster and better than an INTx one. But that's based on stereotypes and not taking into account other variables.


----------



## Parrot (Feb 22, 2015)

In a made up study I published it said that INTJs are generally average, in IQ, and by far the silliest type. The study further suggested that the best way to counter an INTJ's argument is to blow up a balloon and pop it in their face. This will cause the INTJ to giggle tremendously and release pellets of excrement from their posterior (*Parrot, 27*)

For INTPs, their IQ is impressive, but they usually fill it up with useless info, like how to build a competitive Magic the Gathering deck. (*Parrot 13*)

ESFPs have the highest dancing IQ. (*Parrot 71*)

Finally, ENFJs insist the results shouldn't matter as getting along is more important than competing (*Parrot 104*)


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

This thread's topic is very good kek.

I suspect the OP's TQ (Trolling Quotient) is: 167


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Ironically, topics about intelligence are rarely intelligently discussed.


----------



## attic (May 20, 2012)

Iq-tests(which I see as only one out of many kinds of intelligence) tend to be about abstractions, and about connecting series of dots, the longer the better. That that would be related to iNtuition doesn't surprise me. But as MBTI is about preference it still means there are sensors that have higher IQ-scores than intuitives, just not as many I guess.

If P matter(which there seemed to be more disagreement about) perhaps that depend on how it was measured? I can't remember what it was called... a sort of "kaos-y" kind of thinking, that, if it is in level with intelligence make you smarter, but if it is high and intelligence is low you get confused. If it is low, but intelligence is high, you might get knowledgable/wise but note innovative-intelligent. Make any sense? It seems a bit related to Ps kind of thinking to me. But I don't know, just brainstorming. Haha, and that is my strength myself, the kind of intelligence for brainstorming, while I can suck at tying it all together neatly and focused. I think there can be strengths in all the corners of this two-dimensional spectrum, as long as we live in groups of people with different strengths.

According to some brain-images introverts use more parts of their outer brains at once for problems, than extroverts, on average. I am guessing this can be good for more complex things, but can be bad for a bit simpler problems, as it probably tires the mind faster, and perhaps make you loose focus of confuse yourself with too many tangents(or perhaps that is just me). (perhaps introverts are the sprinters and extroverts the long distance runners? haha, just a thought, feel free to correct me)

I think it is a pity IQ and intelligence in generall is such a sensitive issue to talk about. I wish it wasn't, I guess as it has been overly valued many have some complex about it? or empathise with those who have?. There are so very many other strengths to be had than high IQ. We should value them as much instead I think and it wouldn't be as sensitive a topic.


----------



## Luminis (Aug 8, 2016)

attic said:


> If P matter(which there seemed to be more disagreement about) perhaps that depend on how it was measured? I can't remember what it was called... a sort of "kaos-y" kind of thinking, that, if it is in level with intelligence make you smarter, but if it is high and intelligence is low you get confused. If it is low, but intelligence is high, you might get knowledgable/wise but note innovative-intelligent.


That sounds very accurate



attic said:


> According to some brain-images introverts use more parts of their outer brains at once for problems, than extroverts, on average. I am guessing this can be good for more complex things, but can be bad for a bit simpler problems, as it probably tires the mind faster, and perhaps make you loose focus of confuse yourself with too many tangents(or perhaps that is just me). (perhaps introverts are the sprinters and extroverts the long distance runners? haha, just a thought, feel free to correct me)
> .


Happens to me often, I don´t have major difficulty finding a complicated solution to a problem only to completely miss the much simpler solution. However I don´t think it relies on I/E preference, instead, to me, it sounds like N/J - the long track run - seeing the big picture and planning ahead versus the S/P sprinters - focusing on the here and now and being impulsive.


----------



## Luminis (Aug 8, 2016)

Dora said:


> I think (and that's an opinion, not necessarily fact) that for situational intelligence, Se doms would probably score best. Based on personal experience, if I were in a burning building, I find it more likely that an ESTP fireman can think AND execute faster and better than an INTx one. But that's based on stereotypes and not taking into account other variables.


I guess Se doms sound like something that would score the best out of the extroverted doms. Perhaps followed by Te doms?

But overall, I guess the correlation depends on the type of intelligence you have in mind.
What´s generally perceived as ´intelligence´: NTs
Situational intelligence/Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: Se doms
Social/interpersonal intelligence: Fe doms or Fs in general
Intrapersonal intelligence: Introverted functions doms
Etc


----------



## soop (Aug 6, 2016)

Lol at the OPs questions. Looking forward to yet another thread on this in 2 days.


----------



## Michael82 (Dec 13, 2010)

Based on the outcome it'd be preferable to change the IQ testing system


----------



## Parrot (Feb 22, 2015)

PaladinX said:


> Ironically, topics about intelligence are rarely intelligently discussed.


You strike me as the type of guy that calls others "sheeple"


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

Dora said:


> This bit got me curious. What is the link between IQ and use of violence? I don't even know which way the correlation goes. Makes sense that you need 90 and up though. Is it still the case that IQ 100 isn't an objective measurement globally, but rather the average of any given country? That's what I heard. It would mean that IQ 128 means one thing in the USA and another in Norway, or Botswana, or China.


The way IQ works is that 100 will always be the average. It's not by country, it's by time. In other words, a 100 IQ in 1800 might be different than a 100 IQ in 1900. It's like the grading on a curve so that if the grade "C" were to be average then it would always be in the middle of the bell curve.

As far as the relationship to violence, I don't remember the exact range but it's near 90 maybe lower and it seems to have a spike in a narrow range. Kinda like a spiked bell curve with a few points either way at the peak having quite a few people in it.

From some views, it might be seen as tribal instinct vs a more developed social structure.

People of a higher IQ value non violent resolution whereas people at the lower end see it as a way to get what they want. It can be used to destabilize nations as they pretty much end the same way, war and genocide.

IIRC, it also has a strong gender correlation. I don't think I need to say which gender has the stronger correlation to violence


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

Michael82 said:


> Based on the outcome it'd be preferable to change the IQ testing system


Maybe just a better understanding of it's meaning. Maybe like the LSAT vs GMAT or some other test, maybe IQ is more specialized that we think by placing a higher value on certain skills like logic.


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

narcissistic said:


> This thread's topic is very good kek.
> 
> I suspect the OP's TQ (Trolling Quotient) is: 167


It's up to others if they want to turn a perfectly valid exploration into a relative topic into a mud-sling, but some of us want to explore things more to get a better understanding of the world we live in.

I hope it doesn't get defensive, but the boldest of theories do tend to offend.

Remember, the Sun being the center of our universe probably would have been considered trolling at the time.


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

KarlJay said:


> It's up to others if they want to turn a perfectly valid exploration into a relative topic into a mud-sling, but some of us want to explore things more to get a better understanding of the world we live in.
> 
> I hope it doesn't get defensive, but the boldest of theories do tend to offend.
> 
> Remember, the Sun being the center of our universe probably would have been considered trolling at the time.


Indeed indeed,

I shall make a thread:
"The correlation between stool and MTBI"

I mean, it could be reaching it.
But I see "valid exploration" in such.

No one will be laughing when stool testing is the new way to determine MBTI typing.


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

attic said:


> According to some brain-images introverts use more parts of their outer brains at once for problems, than extroverts, on average. I am guessing this can be good for more complex things, but can be bad for a bit simpler problems, as it probably tires the mind faster, and perhaps make you loose focus of confuse yourself with too many tangents(or perhaps that is just me). (perhaps introverts are the sprinters and extroverts the long distance runners? haha, just a thought, feel free to correct me)
> 
> *I think it is a pity IQ and intelligence in generall is such a sensitive issue to talk about*. I wish it wasn't, I guess as it has been overly valued many have some complex about it? or empathise with those who have?. There are so very many other strengths to be had than high IQ. We should value them as much instead I think and it wouldn't be as sensitive a topic.


On the usage of the brain, you might think of is as using a big-rig to get a loaf of bread and how expensive it would be to operate a big-rig for that. Another view might be a that the simple task doesn't take as long because it's being attacked by a more powerful force and maybe that force is used to it and dismisses it quickly. Like a child asking what is 5X5, it's not that much of a challenge.

The IQ discussion has become taboo for a reason. Some used it for various reasons that I think we all know about, so I won't go into it, but there is something else that's very important.

People of lower IQ don't know they are a lower IQ. In a study, it was found that most Americans think their are above average. This violates math, but it's the way people think.

This IMO, correlates to one of the other problems that we face, problem solving. People divide on issues that require certain skills in problem solving, like economics or other social issues. This causes people to divide and entrench. This is the case in many nations like the UK and the US.

People don't seem to be able to agree on which way to go forward and as the clock keeps ticking, things are getting worse.

Some of us can use our problem solving skills to address these issues, but the division makes implementation of the solution very difficult.

Making these subjects taboo, doesn't help.


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

narcissistic said:


> Indeed indeed,
> 
> I shall make a thread:
> "The correlation between stool and MTBI"
> ...


I'm not sure how to read this, I'm new here but I'm guessing you don't approve of the topic. Is there something offensive about looking this relationship?

It doesn't seem offensive to talk about careers or relationships and personality types, why would other issues be so offensive?

Is anyone offended when type X is suggested to be a sports star while type Y is suggested to be an author?


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

KarlJay said:


> I'm not sure how to read this, I'm new here but I'm guessing you don't approve of the topic. Is there something offensive about looking this relationship?
> 
> It doesn't seem offensive to talk about careers or relationships and personality types, why would other issues be so offensive?
> 
> Is anyone offended when type X is suggested to be a sports star while type Y is suggested to be an author?


I'm not offended by the idea, I'm simply mocking the idea.
I'm mocking it because combining two unrelated topics/concepts doesn't make it a relationship.

IQ scoring has very little to do with personality.
Personality have very little to do with IQ scoring.
So suggesting there to be a correlation is _lame_.

You could make a poll where you state your IQ score and your MBTI type to see if there is indeed a correlation,
however I much doubt it.

I suspect the thread to be only filled with people who have high IQ scores, since those will be the only people who _care_ about such.
So it's not like you're going to get fair results as the subject itself is biased.


----------



## KarlJay (Sep 9, 2016)

narcissistic said:


> I'm not offended by the idea, I'm simply mocking the idea.
> I'm mocking it because combining two unrelated topics/concepts doesn't make it a relationship.
> 
> IQ scoring has very little to do with personality.
> ...


Ok, fair enough I can see your point.

However, I once studied the correlation between religion and region of birth and region of birth ends up being the strongest factor in determining what religion someone is.

IQ and MBTI might simply mean that some people are drawn to certain activities more than others. Much like the theory that we tend to like things that we're naturally good at and both liking and being naturally good at something makes us do it more, which leads to more skills.

Either way, it would be a hard subject to ever prove.


----------



## BroNerd (Nov 27, 2010)

I think the MBTI and IQ correlate less than people of certain types would like to think ;-)
My type included..


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Drunk Parrot said:


> You strike me as the type of guy that calls others "sheeple"


Not my style. Too narrow-minded.


----------



## Michael82 (Dec 13, 2010)

KarlJay said:


> Maybe just a better understanding of it's meaning. Maybe like the LSAT vs GMAT or some other test, maybe IQ is more specialized that we think by placing a higher value on certain skills like logic.


Now I'm thinking about IQ and EQ. On IQ I score 120-130 so I'm confused as I'm an INFP. I'm thinking I may score 140-150 on EQ if it were equivalent?

Edit: stupid fucking EQ tests! I'm randomly checking some tests but at the first or second question I see they're nonsense! Questions like "i think i'm good in showing/expressing my feelings". Wtf? It's not a diagnostic for mental disorder!


----------



## Luminis (Aug 8, 2016)

narcissistic said:


> I'm not offended by the idea, I'm simply mocking the idea.
> 
> IQ scoring has very little to do with personality.
> Personality have very little to do with IQ scoring.
> So suggesting there to be a correlation is _lame_.


MBTI doesn´t study behavior, it studies way of thinking, so if you see intelligence as logical problem solving, I think there actually might be a correlation because certain types might get more insight into things. But all in all, results would always be statistical and would never he able to accurately determine the person´s potential IQ based on their type.



narcissistic said:


> I'm not offended by the idea, I'm simply mocking the idea.
> 
> You could make a poll where you state your IQ score and your MBTI type to see if there is indeed a correlation,
> however I much doubt it.
> ...


I actually did this here like a moth ago and it´s exactly what happened. Not only the overall sample of people was very small, also no-one with IQ below 125 commented, making it extremely unreliabe. I believe that for this to be objectively tested, it would have to be done by some instritute that has a proper way to get to a lot of people to asses their MBTI and IQ


----------



## Hulie (Jul 31, 2016)

Luminis said:


> I actually did this here like a moth ago and it´s exactly what happened. Not only the overall sample of people was very small, also no-one with IQ below 125 commented, making it extremely unreliabe. I believe that for this to be objectively tested, it would have to be done by some instritute that has a proper way to get to a lot of people to asses their MBTI and IQ


Definitely. You'd also run into the issue of whether or not people's self-reported IQs and MBTI types are actually accurate or just wishful thinking. I wouldn't think any institute would actually investigate such a thing. Pretty controversial, not to mention useless. But I suppose more pointless things have been studied...


----------



## emphatic (Sep 23, 2016)

*Q. Does the IQ determine the type or does the type determine the IQ or what is the relationship to this?
*
I would imagine, based on how the tests are designed, that those capable of extrapolating have an easier time scoring high on IQ tests. 
*
if this is the case, would you be a different type if you had a lower or higher IQ? Do people develop into a MBTI type based on their IQ?*

I have a rather high IQ and it does not impact my type because cognitive process =/= ability to understand, apply, and/or come up with solutions to a given answer.


*Q. What's the difference between two people with the same MBTI type with a 1 SD difference (15 points). So a person with 115 vs 130, what would the difference be? Do they think quicker? Handle more complex problems?*

I doubt the role that MBTI plays the most is, perhaps, the type of information they can extrapolate out and derive conclusions from But even this is shaky ground. Anyone with a higher IQ, regardless of type, is going to be able to solve "IQ related problems" more readily and with more ease than someone with a lower IQ.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

narcissistic said:


> I'm not offended by the idea, I'm simply mocking the idea.
> I'm mocking it because combining two unrelated topics/concepts doesn't make it a relationship.
> 
> IQ scoring has very little to do with personality.
> ...


Tables 11.5 and 11.6 of the 1998 MBTI Manual show the results of two collections of studies, one involving tests of _aptitude_ (IQ, SAT, ACT, etc.) and one involving _grades or class standing_. Each collection totals over 21,000 students. The Manual notes: "With only a few exceptions IN types consistently obtained ranks, as predicted from theory, as the highest four types for both academic aptitude and grades. ... Perceiving types tended to rank higher on aptitude and Judging types on achievement."

Here are the top 8 types (in rank order) from Table 11.5 (16 aptitude samples):

INTP
INFP
INTJ
INFJ
ENTP
ENFP
ENTJ
ENFJ​
And here are the top 8 types (in rank order) from Table 11.6 (15 samples involving grades or class standing):

INTJ
INFJ
INTP
INFP
ENTJ
ENFJ
ENTP
ENFP​
Both the aptitude and grades tables are in perfect order from the standpoint of a dichotomy-centric explanation that says:


For aptitude, the preference contributors (in order) were N, I, P and T.

For grades, the preference contributors (in order) were N, I, J and T.

------------------------------------------------------------

Consistent with those results, here's a study of 5,700 gifted adolescents — actually a review of 14 previous studies, involving 19 independent samples — where the self-selection ratios for the types (i.e., the ratio of their percentage among the gifted population to their percentage of the general population) were as follows:

INTP 3.4
INTJ 2.87
INFP 2.68
INFJ 2.67
ENTP 2.32
ENFP 2.03
ENTJ 1.49
ENFJ 1.26
ISTJ 0.99
ISTP 0.78
ESTP 0.49
ISFJ 0.40
ISFP 0.40
ESFP 0.28
ESTJ 0.26
ESFJ 0.24

As with the samples in the Manual, an N preference made the biggest difference, and introversion was the second-largest contributor.


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

@reckful

Nice information.

It would seem Ne users = more likely to be gifted.


----------

