# Which Type Do You Think is Most Prone to Depression?



## thecatlady (Mar 2, 2016)

I'm an INFP (technically test equally ISFP, ISFJ, INFP, & INFJ - I do identify very strongly with all of these, but the most with INFP) and I have fairly severe depression and was wondering if there's any MBTI type that is the most prone to it. Thoughts?


----------



## Syvelocin (Apr 4, 2014)

I mean, off the bat the NFPs totally. My sister appears ISFP and she's got the same issues as my mom and I have, so I'm thinking an Fi connection. But when I was symptomatic, I was extremely introverted and once I started getting better, the difference was night and day. 

Two of my friends have issues, the INTJ is doing really well now actually and he's still pretty INTJ. He met a girl, heh, so things are going better because of her. My best friend is an ISFJ and she still struggles a lot with her depression and self-image.


----------



## thecatlady (Mar 2, 2016)

@Syvelocin I was thinking NFs, too. Mostly because of the idealism and that never being realised because nothing can be as perfect as you build it up in your head, which leads to a lot of disappointment. I've heard that INFP's tend to be pretty 'go with the flow', but I am definitely not, so that doesn't help either. I am so sorry for you and your family and your friends. I definitely have first hand experience on how hard depression and self image issuses are. It seems like (from what you said) you're doing better now and I'm glad about that


----------



## bremen (Apr 25, 2016)

Infps, usually the consensus among the community.


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

> Which Type Do You Think is Most Prone to Depression?


Only those with depression; remember that correlation doesn't imply causation.


----------



## jaderose23 (Feb 11, 2017)

thecatlady said:


> I'm an INFP (technically test equally ISFP, ISFJ, INFP, & INFJ - I do identify very strongly with all of these, but the most with INFP) and I have fairly severe depression and was wondering if there's any MBTI type that is the most prone to it. Thoughts?



I've been pretty down. For almost a year on my lifestyle. I think that's why I did the test and got more of istp when a few years back I was equally estp and istp 50/50 I am more introverted when I'm depressed I guess. I was 80/20 istp/estp respectively.


----------



## Falling Foxes (Oct 19, 2016)

Or is the question what type do depressed people more identify? I thought I was an INFP in my deepest of depression. My dad's depressed, I typed him as an INFP until I realised he's an INTP. I know these are poor examples... just one letter difference but still...


----------



## AW10 (Apr 9, 2012)

I think that "being prone to depression" is reverse proportional to "social defaultness of the type". In other words, more unaligned some type is to what is socially default, more prone that type is to depression.

When you add inner factor into the above equation, you will get that even if you are totally unaligned with what is socially default, how you handle it tells whether or not "you as your type" is prone to depression.

That does not mean that all introverts should be prone to depression since extroversion is more socially default; it is impossible to know "most prone to depression" based on "type viewed outside of the context".


----------



## heymoon (Nov 26, 2016)

I think any type can be prone to depression, really, mental illness doesn't just pick a type. But I think Fi-users might be more prone overall...


----------



## Witch of Oreo (Jun 23, 2014)

Of course it has to INFP. Always the whiny weak useless INFP.


Jokes aside, depression is an actual disease, rather than just a "state of mind" that a certain personality profile could be prone to, which is why people can be depressed for no good apparent reason.
But if you mean inclination towards sadness - then Fi-dom and aux. take the crown. Not because "Fi" is emo function - from my observation, it approaches life experiences, emotions and such, in the same way Ti approaches logical subject matters. Curiosity and longing for depth of understanding truly can make one wander into... some wild territories, including but not limited to those invoking sadness and such. INFP in that regard may go further than ISFP because of Ne usage.


----------



## BranchMonkey (Feb 23, 2017)

What I've read, fairly extensive, multiple sources including from various Personality Theories, is how depression can and does hit every type of person. In my birth family, I have several suicides, all male--no INFPs; all suffered from depression; all came from abusive homes; all over-used alcohol and other drugs, and only one was not drunk or high when he killed himself.

The women in my family, again no INFPs, who suffered from major depression, ranged from ESFPs to ISTJs, and included ENFPs. 

Some had situational depression, e.g. an aunt who had three miscarriages, then went on to lose two sons in their early adulthood (one to AIDS and another to suicide). She suffered from depression off and on throughout her life. 

My birth father used alcohol and almost constant work to cope with his depression; it didn't go away but he kept it at bay: 

He was an ISTJ (same as my aunt who lost her children).



As for what I've read, the book that covers it more than any other I've read so far is Personality Types by Don Richard Riso, and he lists all enneagram types with wings as healthy, average, and unhealthy, writing about the movement from integrated to average to disintegrated--the last being the worst--as possibilities for any type; however, a 2w3, for instance--and other outward oriented types-- may be able to lift more readily out of depression by being among other people.

So, any introvert may be more likely to succumb to bouts of debilitating depression, "generally speaking" (everything else being relatively equal) than extraverts.

It does seem that INFPs, if they don't move back toward integration soon enough--and instead move further inward--are more prone (along with a few other types) to have nervous breakdowns and suffer from psychosis, because they're already in touch with a deeper, internal place as their go-to.

Just some thoughts...


----------



## Santa Gloss (Feb 23, 2015)

All of them.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

I think anyone can get depressed as many mentioned.

Those who seem more prone tho...
1. IxFPs
2. IxFJs
3. ENFxs

I think just because so many are mentioning NFP its worth bringing up my sis INFJ and my boss ENFJ both suffer from depression. Personally I think its paired in their cases with neuroticism and compulsive stuff. I have an ENFJ friend who I would place a bet is delusional paired with her depression. Just saying NFJs can get depressed and be really hard on themselves. Like a cup falling symbolizes an entire event is ruined and then everything is ruined. And your still standing there wondering WTF just happened from the outside looking in. Just saying Nfps seem more eeyore and melancholy with their depression. Nfjs can turn an event into the end of the world.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Psychosis is much more biologically based than any other mental illness. While it can be triggered by external forces like drugs or hyper-religiosity, it's much more complicated than this type= this group of mental illnesses. One could argue that Fi types are more resistant to melancholy since they are entirely comfortable exploring their feelings and sitting with an uncomfortable feeling whereas T types might not explore their feelings as much. 

Clinical Depression that requires medical intervention, technically, is the absence of feeling. So, an Fi type would definitely have more problems with depression than someone who isn't as oriented toward their feelings. They would probably more likely to seek help since restoring themselves to their default state would be a huge priority.

I have noticed that certain types tend to be more prone to anxiety, but it doesn't matter which type; I don't want to perpetuate any stereotypes. 

The correct answer is all of them.


----------



## HolyMoony (Mar 11, 2021)

thecatlady said:


> I'm an INFP (technically test equally ISFP, ISFJ, INFP, & INFJ - I do identify very strongly with all of these, but the most with INFP) and I have fairly severe depression and was wondering if there's any MBTI type that is the most prone to it. Thoughts?


Fi dom is more prone to dive into dark emotions and that's what increases their depression rate. But depression is most related to Big Five high neuroticism.


----------



## goodvibe (Aug 23, 2013)

I think it depends on your environment too. For instance; high Se and Fe users and more extraverted types, in general, might be facing higher depression rates today, when compared to introverted types, due to the effects of the pandemic.

Introverts may suffer depression and withdrawal when they are confined to places that are more extraverted in nature, esp school and work-type environments when they have to socialize and play politics to survive.


----------



## 8080 (Oct 6, 2020)

*Big Five Aspects of Personality Interact to Predict Depression *

_Timothy A. Allen, Bridget E. Carey, Carolina McBride, R. Michael Bagby, Colin G. DeYoung, Lena C. Quilty _


*Objective:* Research has shown that three personality traits—Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness—moderate one another in a three-way interaction that predicts depressive symptoms in healthy populations. We test the hypothesis that this effect is driven by three lower-order traits: withdrawal, industriousness, and enthusiasm. We then replicate this interaction within a clinical population for the first time.

*Method:* Sample 1 included 376 healthy adults. Sample 2 included 354 patients diagnosed with current major depressive disorder. Personality and depressive tendencies were assessed via the Big Five Aspect Scales and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in Sample 1, respectively, and by the NEO-PI-R and Beck Depression Inventory-II in Sample 2.

*Results:* Withdrawal, industriousness, and enthusiasm interacted to predict depressive tendencies in both samples. The pattern of the interaction supported a “_best two out of three_” principle, in which low risk scores on two trait dimensions protects against a high risk score on the third trait. Evidence was also present for a “_worst two out of three_” principle, in which high risk scores on two traits are associated with equivalent depressive severity as high risk scores on all three traits.

*Conclusions:* These results highlight the importance of examining interactive effects of personality traits on psychopathology


*Introduction*

[…] Previous studies indicate that the trait dimensions of the FFM are differentially associated with the onset, severity, and course of many psychiatric illnesses, including major depression (Klein, Kotov, & Bufferd, 2011). Three traits in particular—*high Neuroticism, low Extraversion, and low Conscientiousness*—have been linked to depressive symptoms in both healthy and patient populations (Kotov et al., 2010). Neuroticism and Extraversion encompass broad tendencies toward negative and positive emotionality, respectively, whereas Conscientiousness reflects variation in inhibitory control and rule following. Meta-analyses indicate these three traits are associated with increases in depressive illness both concurrently and prospectively (Hakulinen et al., 2015; Kotov et al., 2010). Nonetheless, each trait has been linked to other forms of psychopathology as well (Kotov et al., 2010), and as a result, more research is needed to understand how these dimensions are linked specifically to depression.

Examining *narrower personality traits* may provide one mechanism by which to identify the specific effects of personality on depression. Research on the structure of personality has shown that traits can be arranged hierarchically, with those at the top of the hierarchy accounting for patterns of covariation among those at the bottom. The Big Five reside at a level near the top of the hierarchy, often referred to as the *domain** level*. Each domain can be deconstructed into a number of *facets*, which reflect relatively specific patterns of thought, emotion, motivation, and behavior. In recent years, an *intermediate hierarchical level has been proposed* as well, based on both behavior-genetic and factor-analytic studies showing that each of the five factors comprises *two correlated but distinct* *subfactors*, dubbed *aspects* *(DeYoung, Quilty, & Peterson, 2007; Jang, Livesley, Angleitner, Riemann, & Vernon, 2002).*

Empirical studies of the aspects have shown that they differentially predict diverse forms of psychopathology, including depression (DeYoung, Carey, Krueger, & Ross, 2016). For example, *Neuroticism* comprises *two aspects*, *withdrawal and volatility*. Whereas volatility is associated with externalized negative emotionality like anger and irritability, withdrawal captures internalized negative affect that is more characteristic of depression, including sadness and anxiety. Two additional aspects, *enthusiasm and assertiveness*, constitute the *Extraversion* domain. Assertiveness reflects tendencies toward dominance, leadership, and boldness, whereas enthusiasm reflects positive emotionality and sociability. Facets of Extraversion that load on enthusiasm show a negative relation with depressive symptoms, whereas facets loading on assertiveness are unrelated to depression (Naragon-Gainey, Watson, & Markon, 2009). Finally, the *two aspects of Conscientiousness*, labeled *industriousness and orderliness*, might also be differentially related to depression. *Industriousness* reflects tendencies toward reliability, persistence, and achievement striving, whereas *orderliness* captures variation in scrupulousness, tidiness, and meticulousness. In past studies, industriousness has been negatively related to withdrawal, the trait most closely associated with depression, whereas withdrawal and orderliness are unrelated (or even positively related when controlling for industriousness; DeYoung et al., 2007). *Taken together, these findings suggest that links between Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and depression might be driven by specific lower-order factors within each of these domains*. To this point, a recent investigation of 275 patients with a lifetime history of mood disorder found that industriousness, enthusiasm, and withdrawal were all significantly associated with severity of depressive symptoms, whereas there was no relation between depression and orderliness, assertiveness, orvolatility (Quilty, Pelletier, DeYoung, & Bagby, 2013).

Previous research on personality and depression has predominantly focused on main effects of the Big Five—despite research showing that traits sometimes interact to predict outcomes (e.g., Quilty et al., 2008; Shoss & Witt, 2013), including depression (for a review, see Vasey et al., 2013). For instance, Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness appear to moderate one another’s influence on depression via several two-way interactions (e.g., Joiner & Lonigan, 2000; Verstraeten, Vasey, Raes, & Bijttebier, 2009).

More recently, Vasey and colleagues hypothesized that each respective two-way interaction between Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness might also be moderated by the third trait dimension, suggesting the effect of any *two-way interaction between traits* (e.g., Neuroticism *x* Extraversion) might be contingent upon whether the third trait (e.g., Conscientiousness) is low or high. In the original test of this hypothesis, Dinovo and Vasey (2011) found that the proposed three-way interaction predicted internalizing psychopathology. The robustness of this early finding was then tested in a series of follow-up studies. Vasey and colleagues (2013) first replicated the three-way interaction in four of five healthy independent samples, using an array of trait measures. In addition, they showed that the interaction effect is specific to depression, as it did not extend to outcomes that assessed only symptoms of anxiety. Subsequently, Vasey and colleagues (2014) found that the three-way interaction not only predicts symptoms concurrently, but also prospectively, in a sample that was selectively recruited to include an adequate number of participants at more extreme ranges of each trait dimension.

*Taken together, there is now well-replicated evidence showing that a Neuroticism x Extraversion x Conscientiousness (NxExC) interaction significantly predicts depressive symptoms in healthy populations*. There is also growing consensus regarding the pattern of this interaction, with Vaseyand colleagues (2014) proposing that results adhere to a *“best two out of three” principle*, wherein falling at the low-risk end on two of the three trait dimensions is sufficient to protect against risk conferred by the third dimension. More limited evidence also supports a *“worst two out of three” principle*, in which high risk scores on two traits are associated with equivalent symptom severity as high risk scores on all three traits (Vasey et al., 2014). Despite these developments, however, several questions remain. First, it is unclear whether the domain level is the most appropriate level of analysis by which to examine the NxExC interaction, especially in light of the research we review above, suggesting that the relationship between these FFM traits and depression is likely driven by *lower-order aspect traits*. Showing that the interaction is driven by aspect-level traits could have important implications for treatment development, as growing evidence supports at least partially distinct neurobiological foundations for each of the aspects (Allen & DeYoung, 2017). Second, the translational value of the NxExC interaction remains unknown, as it has yet to be tested within a currently depressed sample.

In the present study, we test whether the previously reported NxExC interaction can be accounted for by a *lower-order interaction between withdrawal, enthusiasm, and industriousness*. We expect that the hypothesized aspect-level interaction will adhere to a “best two out of three” principle, such that individuals scoring at the low-risk end of two of the trait dimensions will be protected from depressive risk typically conferred by the third trait dimension. Given inconsistent findings for the “worst two out of three” principle in previous investigations, we make no formal hypotheses about its presence at the aspect level. Finally, we examine whether the interaction holds any clinical utility by exploring whether it replicates in a sample of patients diagnosed with current major depression. […]

*Discussion*

[…] Results of our analysis confirm the hypothesis that the previously reported NxExC interaction is in fact driven by the interaction of lower-order personality traits at the aspect level. Indeed, we found that the *Withdrawal x Enthusiasm x Industriousness *interaction significantly predicted depressive tendencies in both healthy volunteers and patients diagnosed with current major depression. Moreover, the effect was robust across two different measures of depression (the PID-5 and BDI-II, which differ in the extent to which they map onto DSM-5 criteria) and was not evident for the three other aspect-level traits of relevance—namely, volatility, assertiveness, and orderliness. Subsequent probing of the conditional two-way interactions associated with the Withdrawal x Enthusiasm x Industriousness interaction depicted a pattern of findings that closely adheres to previous reports, in which the anticipated conditional two-way interactions are observed at the low-risk end of the third dimension (e.g., Vasey et al., 2013, 2014). For example, across both samples, we found a *significantly negative Withdrawal x Enthusiasm interaction when industriousness was high*, *a significantly negative Withdrawal x Industriousness interaction when enthusiasm was high*, and *a significantly positive Enthusiasm x Industriousness interaction when withdrawal was low*. Taken together, this pattern of findings *supports the “best two out of three” principle* posited by Vaseyand colleagues (2014), and it reaffirms the notion that scores on the low-risk end of two traits can protect individuals from the increase in symptoms typically associated with high risk scores on the third dimension.

Our results also corroborate previous findings showing that the conditional two-way interactions associated with the broader Withdrawal x Enthusiasm x Industriousness interaction are reversed at the high-risk end of the third trait dimension. For instance, across both samples, we found a significantly positive Withdrawal x Enthusiasm interaction when industriousness was low and a significantly negative Withdrawal x Industriousness interaction when enthusiasm was low. In Sample 1, we similarly found a significantly negative Enthusiasm x Industriousness interaction when withdrawal was high, though this latter interaction did not reach significance in Sample 2. Nonetheless, the general pattern of the interaction was as expected. Overall, our results provide *some* *cautious evidence for the “worst two out of three” principle*, which holds that when one is already high risk on two dimensions, one’s standing on the third will have no additional impact on depression levels. The one exception appears to be for withdrawal in the healthy sample, in which low risk scores on withdrawal were protective and high risk scores on withdrawal were detrimental, regardless of one’s standing on enthusiasm and industriousness (see Figure 1). This pattern of findings is indicative of a strong main effect of withdrawal in healthy samples, which would be consistent with its status as the trait that makes the strongest contribution to depressive risk. Overall, our results add to a complicated literature surrounding the “worst two out of three” principle. As Vasey and colleagues (2014, p. 145) note, only six of 27 previous tests have found that risk conferred by the third trait dimension is diminished when the other two traits are high (the present results would make it 11 of 32). Nonetheless, five of the six prior tests that do offer support for the “worst two out of three” principle were conducted in a sample that was recruited to include more people at the extreme ends of each trait dimension (Vasey et al., 2014). Given our own findings, it is possible that the “worst two out of three” principle is most apparent within samples that include individuals scoring at the extremely high-riskend of the three trait dimensions. […]

*Conclusions*

The results of the present study replicate and extend previous research showing that personality traits interact to predict depressive symptoms. Our results indicate that the previously reported *three-way interaction between Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness is actually driven by traits located at a level of the personality hierarchy below the five factors*. Moreover, this three-way interaction appears to be present within clinical populations, suggesting that it may inform basic research into the etiology of major depression as well as translational science aimed at improving diagnostic precision and treatment planning.

DOI: 10.1111/jopy.12352


----------

