# Why are we looking at MBTI/Enneagram instead of the Big 5?



## ukinfj

This isn't a criticism in any way, it's a genuine query.

Is there any reason that this site is split up into cognitive functions, enneagram, MBTI, Keirsey etc. but no mention of the Big 5? This is the theory that is generally preferred by the academic community, I believe. 

So just wondering. What do people think of the big five? Is there a reason why it hasn't become a big thing on this site?

Big Five personality traits - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## TheWaffle

The Big 5 isn't as personal. When you take an online test for it, it gives you percentages and tells you some traits. The casual test taker doesn't know what to do with this information, so despite the scientific validity, it's discarded and forgotten.

The MBTI and Enneagram seem more user-friendly. Resources are easy to find, and there's a practical side to it (typing, understanding yourself and others). Also, because it's broken down into types, people gravitate toward their own; there's a sense of belonging. It becomes a refuge for people to have some laughs, take out their frustrations, and say what they can't say in real life.


----------



## ukinfj

I was thinking along the same lines about not being able to categorise as easily. Thanks for your reply.


----------



## Naama

because jungian typology works with reasons why people act the way they do, while big 5 just shows the results of the internal processes.

also neuroticism in big 5 is the only scale that doesent correlate with MBTI. big 5 E = MBTI E. agreeableness = F. conscientiousness = J. Openness = N. its not 100% correlations, because MBTI has N and F in I and E attitude, while big 5 just mixes the both in one, and the rating scales arent 100% the same, like 40% openness might still come out as N in MBTI test.

big 5 is good for scientific work, like when looking at heritability of personality by twin studies, because the system is well simplified and if for example both twins were close 50% on openness, other bit under and other bit over, they might come off as different types in MBTI, but the correlation is seen on big 5


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis

The Big 5 is a load of shit. It links extroversion with outgoingness and happiness. It also links introversion with being closed-minded. Therefore, according to it, all INTP's (and I-types) are unhappy narrow-minded assholes.


----------



## Naama

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> It links extroversion with outgoingness and happiness. It also links introversion with being closed-minded.


i never heard about that I thing and there is alot more to E than just outgoingness and happiness is not part of E, but some studies has shown that Es tend to be more happy in general, but its not an E trait. i did quite alot of looking into big 5 on/for our personality psychology course.

scoring low on openness(to experience) and high on conscientiousness is what could be seen as being close minded. low O would correlate with S and high C would correlate with J and SJ types do tend to be more close minded compared to NPs for example.

our professor listed these traits for E: energetic, enthusiastic, dominant, sociable and talkative. but those E traits doesent always come hand in hand, someone could be really high on other of those E traits, but not be dominant at all.

it sounds that you dont really know big 5 at all and just think its crap because you dont know what you are judging..


----------



## ukinfj

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> The Big 5 is a load of shit. It links extroversion with outgoingness and happiness. It also links introversion with being closed-minded. Therefore, according to it, all INTP's (and I-types) are unhappy narrow-minded assholes.


I'm not sure about that. They did a programme on it over here and they just described extroverts as preffering stimulation from the outside world and introverts being more able to create their own stimulation in their minds (thus feeling overstimulated when in stimulating external circumstances). I haven't seen any suggestion that extroversion was seen as happiness - in fact one of the kids used as a case study was seen as having developed an extroverted side to deal with his troubled childhood.

Introversion was quite often linked with openness as well - an artsy side, basically.


----------



## Jennywocky

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> The Big 5 is a load of shit. It links extroversion with outgoingness and happiness. It also links introversion with being closed-minded. Therefore, according to it, all INTP's (and I-types) are unhappy narrow-minded assholes.


Actually, the Big Five is the most quantifiable system out there; the same basic traits show up in the work of multiple researchers, rather than it being someone's "pet theory" like many other systems. Other theories have less external data to support their existence and focus more on internal consistency within the theory itself as a means of justification. 

Some traits in the MBTI, at least, can be mapped to Big Five; Enneagram is even worse, it's just a bunch of arbitrarily determined archetypes, even if some people can identify with aspects of them. Then again, MBTI is probably more useful in terms of sheer detail than Big Five, in terms of communication and such.

As far as introversion being linked to "close-minded," well, how do you think that lines up with Jung's supposition that all introverted functions are subjective and thus not anchored directly in the external data but in the individual *perception* of such data?


----------



## RobynC

SLOAI or SCOAI: In most aspects of life I have varying degrees of anxiety (I have OCD). Yet in emergencies, I'm usually calm, quick acting. Weird huh?


----------



## Up and Away

Naama said:


> because jungian typology works with reasons why people act the way they do, while big 5 just shows the results of the internal processes.
> 
> also neuroticism in big 5 is the only scale that doesent correlate with MBTI. big 5 E = MBTI E. agreeableness = F. conscientiousness = J. Openness = N. its not 100% correlations, because MBTI has N and F in I and E attitude, while big 5 just mixes the both in one, and the rating scales arent 100% the same, like 40% openness might still come out as N in MBTI test.
> 
> big 5 is good for scientific work, like when looking at heritability of personality by twin studies, because the system is well simplified and if for example both twins were close 50% on openness, other bit under and other bit over, they might come off as different types in MBTI, but the correlation is seen on big 5


My thoughts on the Big Five

Openness
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Neuroticism

Honestly, I find it hard to not look at Openness and neuroticism as a dichotomy.

How can we be both open and neurotic at the same time? Someone help me with that please.

Agreeableness, I'd say is Fe only, not F.

Conscientiousness really seems like J for sure.

Openness I think is then P.

I think the neurotic scale shows us the probability that we are using shadow survival functions. I think we should use it more often.

Good stuff

All in all, the big 5 uses 5 traits, and doesnt link them together, where as the MBTI uses 8, and links them together. The MBTI just gives more information, however, Big 5 is different, and can definitely be used at the same time.

I'd like to see a subforum for that test as well.


----------



## ukinfj

Souled In said:


> My thoughts on the Big Five
> 
> Openness
> Conscientiousness
> Extraversion
> Agreeableness
> Neuroticism
> 
> Honestly, I find it hard to not look at Openness and neuroticism as a dichotomy.
> 
> How can we be both open and neurotic at the same time? Someone help me with that please.
> 
> Agreeableness, I'd say is Fe only, not F.
> 
> Conscientiousness really seems like J for sure.
> 
> Openness I think is then P.
> 
> I think the neurotic scale shows us the probability that we are using shadow survival functions. I think we should use it more often.
> 
> Good stuff


Neuroticism literally means worrying in this sense. Openness is openness to experience, how much you like art, how much you like travelling. I have high scales of neuroticism and openness when I take the test. If you were going to try and look at J/P then you'd probably be looking at conscientiousness. I have medium conscientiousness and I am a J - it just means I've got a really good work ethic but I don't tidy that often. Most Js would have high conscientiousness. Agreeableness is simply how much you care about looking after the feelings of others. Fi isn't a naturally selfish trait, there are many very nice Fis (And many horrible Fes!) so it's either really. It's just about how much you take the feelings of others into account.

So, I'm an INFJ and my scores are:


Openness to Experience/Intellect
High scorers tend to be original, creative, curious, complex; Low scorers tend to be conventional, down to earth, narrow interests, uncreative.
You enjoy having novel experiences and seeing things in new ways. (Your percentile: 95)

Conscientiousness
High scorers tend to be reliable, well-organized, self-disciplined, careful; Low scorers tend to be disorganized, undependable, negligent.
You are neither organized or disorganized. (Your percentile: 58)

Extraversion
High scorers tend to be sociable, friendly, fun loving, talkative; Low scorers tend to be introverted, reserved, inhibited, quiet.
You probably enjoy spending quiet time alone. (Your percentile: 9)

Agreeableness
High scorers tend to be good natured, sympathetic, forgiving, courteous; Low scorers tend to be critical, rude, harsh, callous.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)

Neuroticism
High scorers tend to be nervous, high-strung, insecure, worrying; Low scorers tend to be calm, relaxed, secure, hardy.
You are a generally anxious person and tend to worry about things. (Your percentile: 96)


----------



## Up and Away

ukinfj said:


> Neuroticism literally means worrying in this sense. Openness is openness to experience, how much you like art, how much you like travelling. I have high scales of neuroticism and openness when I take the test. If you were going to try and look at J/P then you'd probably be looking at conscientiousness. I have medium conscientiousness and I am a J - it just means I've got a really good work ethic but I don't tidy that often. Most Js would have high conscientiousness. Agreeableness is simply how much you care about looking after the feelings of others. Fi isn't a naturally selfish trait, there are many very nice Fis (And many horrible Fes!) so it's either really. It's just about how much you take the feelings of others into account.
> 
> So, I'm an INFJ and my scores are:
> 
> 
> Openness to Experience/Intellect
> High scorers tend to be original, creative, curious, complex; Low scorers tend to be conventional, down to earth, narrow interests, uncreative.
> You enjoy having novel experiences and seeing things in new ways. (Your percentile: 95)
> 
> Conscientiousness
> High scorers tend to be reliable, well-organized, self-disciplined, careful; Low scorers tend to be disorganized, undependable, negligent.
> You are neither organized or disorganized. (Your percentile: 58)
> 
> Extraversion
> High scorers tend to be sociable, friendly, fun loving, talkative; Low scorers tend to be introverted, reserved, inhibited, quiet.
> You probably enjoy spending quiet time alone. (Your percentile: 9)
> 
> Agreeableness
> High scorers tend to be good natured, sympathetic, forgiving, courteous; Low scorers tend to be critical, rude, harsh, callous.
> You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
> 
> Neuroticism
> High scorers tend to be nervous, high-strung, insecure, worrying; Low scorers tend to be calm, relaxed, secure, hardy.
> You are a generally anxious person and tend to worry about things. (Your percentile: 96)


Like I said in the post you quoted, I think openness is P!  I should take this test lol. Wow neurotic yet open. I wonder how that works. I will take this test soon and post


----------



## ukinfj

Souled In said:


> Like I said in the post you quoted, I think openness is P!  I should take this test lol. Wow neurotic yet open. I wonder how that works. I will take this test soon and post


Openness means open to experience/abstract thinking. It doesn't really have anything to do with the perceiving function. It's more like N.


----------



## NekoNinja

Naama said:


> scoring low on openness(to experience) and high on conscientiousness is what could be seen as being close minded. low O would correlate with S and high C would correlate with J and SJ types do tend to be more close minded compared to NPs for example.


Low openness might correlate to Si but certainly not Se.

And agreeableness is probably more to do with Fe rather than Fi.


----------



## Up and Away

ukinfj said:


> Openness means open to experience/abstract thinking. It doesn't really have anything to do with the perceiving function. It's more like N.


Well, N is a Perceiving function  

The quality of opennes you are using to describe N, is only one of the qualities listed in the definition.

Also, open to experience doesn't mean abstract thinking. I can be open to Si Se Ne Ni, however, I will be less open to experience, if I employ my J values. That is why P is "more open."

It is not completely open, it is just more open than J. 

Open to variety. Open to spontinaeity, all things that are the opposite of structure and scheduling seen with J.

That's the J/P dichotomy.


----------



## Naama

Souled In said:


> Honestly, I find it hard to not look at Openness and neuroticism as a dichotomy.
> 
> How can we be both open and neurotic at the same time? Someone help me with that please.
> 
> Agreeableness, I'd say is Fe only, not F.
> 
> Conscientiousness really seems like J for sure.
> 
> Openness I think is then P.


openness is bit like openness to possibility of considering the alternative of what is. its called openness to experience because this way of thinking gives a good stand point to new experiences not considered earlier. more openness correlates to N in this sort of way, N isnt just a big picture and pattern viewing, its openness to alternative ways in same way as openness in big 5, but there is more to openness than just this, thats why they dont correlate 100%. low on openness looks at what is, instead of what could be. our personality psychology professor stated these traits as an example for low openness: shallow, plain, simple. and high on openness: imaginative, witty, original, artistic.

agreeableness is bit like agreeing to things even tho they may not be 100% explainable in logical sense, its not just agreeing of doing things for others, also i think 100% agreeable people could be seen bit naive, in the same way as Fi types tend to be, and agreeing to others needs(or systems created by others) in the same way as Fe is. examples for low agreeableness: cold, quarrelsome, unkind. high agreeableness: friendly, cooperative, trusting, warm

high neuroticism is basically emotional imbalance. maybe you see all S people as neurotic easily, because they seek details in a way that seems neurotic for you, but thats not what neuroticism scale in big 5 is about. some examples for low neuroticism: calm, contented. high: nervous, high-strung, tense, worrying.

high conscientiousness: lack of impulsivity, cautious, dependable, organized, responsible. low: impulsive, careless, disorderly, undependable. so yeah, its pretty close to J-P, but its not 100% correlation, but in general tey tend to correlate, especially people who are strong J are pretty sure 50%+ on conscientiousness


----------



## Up and Away

Naama said:


> openness is bit like openness to possibility of considering the alternative of what is. its called openness to experience because this way of thinking gives a good stand point to new experiences not considered earlier. more openness correlates to N in this sort of way, N isnt just a big picture and pattern viewing, its openness to alternative ways in same way as openness in big 5, but there is more to openness than just this, thats why they dont correlate 100%. low on openness looks at what is, instead of what could be. our personality psychology professor stated these traits as an example for low openness: shallow, plain, simple. and high on openness: imaginative, witty, original, artistic.
> 
> agreeableness is bit like agreeing to things even tho they may not be 100% explainable in logical sense, its not just agreeing of doing things for others, also i think 100% agreeable people could be seen bit naive, in the same way as Fi types tend to be, and agreeing to others needs(or systems created by others) in the same way as Fe is. examples for low agreeableness: cold, quarrelsome, unkind. high agreeableness: friendly, cooperative, trusting, warm
> 
> high neuroticism is basically emotional imbalance. maybe you see all S people as neurotic easily, because they seek details in a way that seems neurotic for you, but thats not what neuroticism scale in big 5 is about. some examples for low neuroticism: calm, contented. high: nervous, high-strung, tense, worrying.
> 
> high conscientiousness: lack of impulsivity, cautious, dependable, organized, responsible. low: impulsive, careless, disorderly, undependable. so yeah, its pretty close to J-P, but its not 100% correlation, but in general tey tend to correlate, especially people who are strong J are pretty sure 50%+ on conscientiousness


Ya man thats cool thanks. I see what you mean how P looks like N. I just think that, Se also looks for new experiences, its just different data, but still, they dont want to get bored ya know? Big picture though, i understand is definitely an N thing. Thanks for the help.


----------



## NekoNinja

Naama said:


> openness is bit like openness to possibility of considering the alternative of what is. its called openness to experience because this way of thinking gives a good stand point to new experiences not considered earlier. more openness correlates to N in this sort of way, N isnt just a big picture and pattern viewing, its openness to alternative ways in same way as openness in big 5, but there is more to openness than just this, thats why they dont correlate 100%. low on openness looks at what is, instead of what could be. our personality psychology professor stated these traits as an example for low openness: shallow, plain, simple. and high on openness: imaginative, witty, original, artistic.


Then ISFPs would have a very high openness, and yet they are an S type? I don't see the correlation. 



> agreeableness is bit like agreeing to things even tho they may not be 100% explainable in logical sense, its not just agreeing of doing things for others, also i think 100% agreeable people could be seen bit naive, in the same way as Fi types tend to be, and agreeing to others needs(or systems created by others) in the same way as Fe is. examples for low agreeableness: cold, quarrelsome, unkind. high agreeableness: friendly, cooperative, trusting, warm


Fi types seem naive? I have never heard this stereotype.


----------



## TechnoViking

I think it's only because the MBTI test ended up being more popular.


----------



## Naama

NekoNinja said:


> Then ISFPs would have a very high openness, and yet they are an S type? I don't see the correlation.
> 
> 
> 
> Fi types seem naive? I have never heard this stereotype.


ISFPs also use Ni, some more, others less. you dont seem very open to what i wrote, instead you are using what you already know as a basis for how you perceive this.

yes Fi(and Fe) dom/aux people tend to be more naive compared to Ti/Te dom/aux types, it kinda depends how developed the F persons T is and their past experiences. its not really a stereotype, its just something that Fs are prone to unless they learn to do this differently.

based on how you replied, it seems like you dont really understand what i wrote or basics of MBTI/jungian typology.


----------



## NekoNinja

Again, I can see how it might correlate to Si but not Se. You are simply lumping them together as if they are the same. And agreeableness would have to do more with Fe and not Fi. Fi dominant users are not necessarily very "agreeable." It really depends on how well established their Fe is, which suggests that it really has nothing to do with Fi at all. 

I don't see why you needed to result to an ad hominen when I was questioning you.


----------



## Naama

NekoNinja said:


> Again, I can see how it might correlate to Si but not Se. You are simply lumping them together as if they are the same. And agreeableness would have to do more with Fe and not Fi. Fi dominant users are not necessarily very "agreeable." It really depends on how well established their Fe is, which suggests that it really has nothing to do with Fi at all.
> 
> I don't see why you needed to result to an ad hominen when I was questioning you.


dig deeper and keep your eyes open for possibilities that something might be different than what you perceive it to be, maybe you get how these two things correlate later, i cba to educate about this more. also read what i wrote earlier and try to lose the "things are as i perceive them to be" attitude(thats the opposite of openness in big 5) that you seem to have.


----------



## NekoNinja

Naama said:


> dig deeper and keep your eyes open for possibilities that something might be different than what you perceive it to be, maybe you get how these two things correlate later, i cba to educate about this more. also read what i wrote earlier and try to lose the "things are as i perceive them to be" attitude(thats the opposite of openness in big 5) that you seem to have.


Sounds more like a case of "Idk wtf I'm talking about, so I'm just going to fall back on ad hominens to make me sound smart."

Suit yourself. If you don't feel like having a intelligent conversation about personality on a personality forum, then I suppose this is a hopeless cause. I do believe this conversation is over.


----------



## Naama

NekoNinja said:


> Sounds more like a case of "Idk wtf I'm talking about, so I'm just going to fall back on ad hominens to make me sound smart."
> 
> Suit yourself. If you don't feel like having a intelligent conversation about personality on a personality forum, then I suppose this is a hopeless cause. I do believe this conversation is over.


i already wrote more than enough about the subject to get you started. try searching google scholar for more info and maybe after that we can discuss about that. i dont think it would be an intelligent conversation, if i would be just teaching you and you not being open enough to take new info in..


----------



## RRRoooaaaRRR

> Mutati NOmenis: The Big 5 is a load of shit. It links extroversion with outgoingness and happiness. It also links introversion with being closed-minded. Therefore, according to it, all INTP's (and I-types) are unhappy narrow-minded assholes.


Aah initially my intention was to go do the Big 5 but with the Extrovert Introvert seen as your comment says then I wouldn1t trust the rest of the results. This definition of E and I is severely flawed.


----------



## DouglasMl

I may have posted something like this elsewhere; if I did, it still bears repeating here.

One good reason why we don't talk so much about the Big Five is that there appears to be a significant disagreement among advocates for the Berkeley Big Five about what the Big Five traits are and how to describe them. I've seen posts in this thread using the OCEAN acronym (Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism) to describe the Big Five. On the other hand, some online personality tests (click here for one example) based on the Big Five describe the traits in terms of SLOAN (Social, corresponding to Extroversion on the OCEAN Big Five; Limbic, corresponding to Neuroticism; Orderliness, corresponding to Conscientiousness; Accommodation, corresponding to Agreeableness; and Non-curiousity, the negative of Openness to experience). From this cursory examination of the parallels between different statements of the Big Five personality traits, the general public may be led to conclude that the Agreeableness or Accommodation dimension is the only trait that Big Five theorists and researchers can agree upon--an unimpressive statement about personality traits, to put it mildly.

To express it another way, the general public may not have time for an investigation that finds the parallels between OCEAN and SLOAN statements of the Big Five personality traits. Instead, the public may simply look at the different terminology used by various authorities on the Big Five; once they do so, they could easily conclude that Big Five psychologists don't have anything understandable to say about their new way of typing personality (I mean _typing _in the same sense that Myers-Briggs uses typing, namely a composite of trait scores). 

I hope this helps you.


----------



## MCRTS

I remember taking this test, but I forgot my result. I THINK it's 

*Openness* – consistent/cautious. (If I'm not wrong, this was a borderline result.)
*Conscientiousness* – efficient/organized. 
*Extraversion* – solitary/reserved 
*Agreeableness* – friendly/compassionate 
*Neuroticism* – secure/confident). 

I think it matches with my ISFJ-ness. Seriously, there are just so many personality types out there.


----------



## TheOwl

I prefer MBTI because the distinctions are more clear, yet the categories are more broad. In the big 5, I'm borderline between RCUAI and RCUEI (with correct notation, I'm Rc|U|xI). In the MBTI, it's impossible to be borderline anything because of cognitive functions. 

I also think you get more out of MBTI. With the Big Five, I take a test and tell it that I'm reserved, calm, open, etc. and then in return it gives me a bunch of letters that tell me I'm reserved, calm, open, etc. With the MBTI, I tell the test my characteristics, and in return it gives me a cognitive function order. Before I found MBTI, I was introspective enough to know that I'm introverted, I prefer abstract thinking, I make decisions based on logic, and I prefer to keep options open. But cognitive functions bring up a lot of aspects of my personality I sometimes missed.


----------



## RobynC

With the SLOAN test, one issue I have is that I'm generally listed as "limbic" due to the fact that I have various OCD issues, however in emergencies I'm usually fairly calm compared to everybody else.


----------



## Karen

I didn't have time to read through all responses on this thread, so maybe someone has brought this up already. This is from Wiki:

Openness – inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious
Conscientiousness – efficient/organized vs. easy-going/careless
Extraversion – outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved
Agreeableness – friendly/compassionate vs. cold/unkind
Neuroticism – sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident

MBTI and other personality typing methods that I enjoy studying treat all types equally. N is valued as much as S, Enneagram 5s are seen as equally emotionally healthy/neurotic as Enneagram 3s and 9s. The Big 5 doesn't seem to know what it wants to do. It has Extraversion, with the opposite being Introversion, both equal when it comes to mental health, then they have Agreeableness, with the opposite as an unhealthy trait, and of course Neuroticism as the negative pole with the opposite pole being positive. It's hard to tell exactly what they're trying to do. Find someone's mental health? Then get rid of Extraversion. Sort out people's equally healthy but different traits? Then get rid of Neuroticism and phrase the other traits differently. And why have Agreeableness, a positive pole, and Neuroticism, a negative pole? Putting these 5 categories together they way they have doesn't make sense. IMO, academic psychology should have taken lessons on how to set up categories before declaring themselves the trait/personality experts.


----------



## LibertyPrime

ukinfj said:


> This isn't a criticism in any way, it's a genuine query.
> 
> Is there any reason that this site is split up into cognitive functions, enneagram, MBTI, Keirsey etc. but no mention of the Big 5? This is the theory that is generally preferred by the academic community, I believe.
> 
> So just wondering. What do people think of the big five? Is there a reason why it hasn't become a big thing on this site?
> 
> Big Five personality traits - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The big 5 is awesome and reliable, plus my test results have been consistent so far on it....but there is a problem:

*Problem: * In the big 5 extroverted means sociable and introverted means reclusive. How the cognitive model views E and I differs from this. You can be introverted and score high on sociable and extroverted and score high on reclusive. Jung's I and E depends on the functions used while the big 5 decides this based on behavior. Also the higher you score on anxiety in the big 5 the lower you score on sociable. The correlation between big 5 and MBTI here is flawed so you are not and E in the MBTI if you are and extrovert in the big 5 and vice verso. It can simply mean you are unhealthy .


----------



## Up and Away

Rim said:


> The big 5 is awesome and reliable, plus my test results have been consistent so far on it....but there is a problem:
> 
> *Problem: * In the big 5 extroverted means sociable and introverted means reclusive. How the cognitive model views E and I differs from this. You can be introverted and score high on sociable and extroverted and score high on reclusive. Jung's I and E depends on the functions used while the big 5 decides this based on behavior. Also the higher you score on anxiety in the big 5 the lower you score on sociable. The correlation between big 5 and MBTI here is flawed so you are not and E in the MBTI if you are and extrovert in the big 5 and vice verso. It can simply mean you are unhealthy .


No doubt. Yea its interesting that in the MBTI i can be an extrovert but live in a cave as a hermit lol  

Or even more weirdly, I can be schizophrenic, and perhaps have no inner thoughts that aren't expressed in the outside world.

I mean, what if everytime we thought something, the thought manifested in the outside world.

OR, what if we believe that currently, like those of the mystical faith in that book the "Secret" do lol.

What then?

Just kidding though. Despite mysticism, disorders, or caves, it depends on someones personal definition of what they consider "themself" and "not themself."

Anyway end rant haha


----------



## AmberJorr

From what I recall, the Big Five doesn't really have a measure for Intuition. Because only, what, 20% of the population is Intuitive, it doesn't really show up on this test. To me it seemed that the test was better at looking at Sensors. MBTI on the other hand is very good at revealing the tiny dichotomies in the Intuitive portion of the population.

Also, the Big Five isn't really as user friendly in terms of helping one know how to handle various types of people.


----------



## Emerson

TechnoViking said:


> I think it's only because the MBTI test ended up being more popular.


I'd agree, we can rationalise in hindsight as to why the SLOAN isn't as good for the layman but ultimately its just because the MBTI took off and the other didn't.


----------



## DouglasMl

Emerson said:


> I'd agree, we can rationalise in hindsight as to why the SLOAN isn't as good for the layman but ultimately its just because the MBTI took off and the other didn't.


I mentioned this is in an earlier post, but it's well worth repeating:

One good reason why we don't talk so much about the Big Five is that there appears to be a significant disagreement among advocates for the Berkeley Big Five about what the Big Five traits are and how to describe them. I've seen posts in this thread using the OCEAN acronym (Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism) to describe the Big Five. On the other hand, some online personality tests (click here for one example) based on the Big Five describe the traits in terms of SLOAN (Social, corresponding to Extroversion on the OCEAN Big Five; Limbic, corresponding to Neuroticism; Orderliness, corresponding to Conscientiousness; Accommodation, corresponding to Agreeableness; and Non-curiousity, the negative of Openness to experience). 

To present the correspondences in something like a table, and thus make them easier to read:

SLOAN = OCEAN
Social = Extraversion
Limbic = Neuroticism
Orederliness= Conscientiousness
Accommodation = Agreeableness
Non-curiosity = -(Openness to experience)

I want to emphasize the following points, because they bear so decisively on why the general public continues to resist the Berkeley Big Five as a measure of personality traits:
_*From this cursory examination of the parallels between different statements of the Big Five personality traits, the general public may be led to conclude that the Agreeableness or Accommodation dimension is the only trait that Big Five theorists and researchers can agree upon--an unimpressive statement about personality traits, to put it mildly.

To express it another way, the general public may not have time for an investigation that finds the parallels between OCEAN and SLOAN statements of the Big Five personality traits. *_

_*Instead, the public may simply look at the different terminology used by various authorities on the Big Five; once they do so, they could easily conclude that Big Five psychologists don't have anything understandable to say about their new way of typing personality (I mean typing in the same sense that Myers-Briggs uses typing, namely a composite of trait scores). *_

_*The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator benefits from standardized terminology across all its variations, a public relations success that the Berkeley Big Five cannot yet match.
*_


----------



## EonsInTheNight

I used to have a bad opinion on the Big 5 because I found it dehumanizing, but now that I think about it..., both MBTI and The Big Five have their pros and cons.

MBTI: 
+ helps people understand themselves and others; 
- not based in empirical evidence enough to be trully scientific
Big 5: 
-doesn't help people understand anything about themselves more than surface level;
+linked to empirical evidence

*I mean, the only think that seems useful about the Big 5 is the neuroticism scale, in the sense of making people who score high on it look for further research on the issue, but I'm pretty sure someone who would score high on it, would already know that they are neurotic without the Big 5 to tell them.

So, if we could corelate the theory behind MBTI and the data of the Big 5 more, we could improve the field of personality research, by giving it both depth and scientific validity.


----------



## p55carroll

I recently took the Big Five test again, at a couple places, and yeah--Neuroticism was about the only thing that meant much of anything, and of course I knew it'd stand out. (I also hate the name of it; a more positive-sounding term would be welcome.) Anyhow, that led me to take a test on Oldham types and explore that again--and "Sensitive" showed up at the top there. That led me to reconsider my Enneagram type, and I now see myself as a Six rather than a One. So, in a roundabout way, the Big Five was something of a help.


----------



## Laughmore

The reason the big 5 are used in psychometrics is because it is the model that has the most reliably repeatable results in an individual. In clinical trials, MBTI tests' consistency is lacking in comparison. The 5 traits in the model and their subcategories are considered to be the most comprehensive _so far_, general as they are. MBTI is too specific for how dynamic a person is, whereas big 5 addresses general temperament, giving it an advantage in repeatability, and consequently, usefulness in statistics and social sciences.

I still love MBTI but from a personal development perspective, but it's application in thinking about populations of types is lacking.


----------



## Aluminum Frost

Naama said:


> dig deeper and keep your eyes open for possibilities that something might be different than what you perceive it to be, maybe you get how these two things correlate later, i cba to educate about this more. also read what i wrote earlier and try to lose the "things are as i perceive them to be" attitude(thats the opposite of openness in big 5) that you seem to have.


You're rather hypocritical, you seem convinced that you're right and wont listen to your opponent. But expect them to listen to you it seems


----------



## Aluminum Frost

Openness isn't necessarily N in Big 5 so much as it's "Not Si" I think people with more Se traits than Ni traits would score higher on openness but Ne should score highest.


----------

