= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Peter_Lambert-Cole comments on Five-minute rationality techniques - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (231)
I think we should probably be very wary of taking anything based on the Myers Briggs classifications seriously. They seem to be based almost entirely on Forer Effect type predictions and almost impossible to falsify.
If I remember correctly, the Big Five tests are slightly more robust (eg, a Big Five profile has fairly high predictive power, and is fairly stable over time).
I think skeptical people are too quick to say "Forer Effect" when they first do Myers-Briggs. They notice that their type only partially describes them and assume that something fishy is going on. But if you switch all the letters and read the description of the exact opposite type, there is almost nothing that could apply to you. That in itself means that there is some non-trivial classification going on. San Francisco may not be LA, but it sure isn't Moscow.