Reading the Chart

This is a Karnaugh map, arranging the 16 temperament types so that each type is surrounded by the four types that most closely resemble it (by having three letters in common). Note that when you go off the edge it "wraps around" to the other side. So for example, INTP is surrounded by its four nearest neighbors ENTP, ISTP, INFP, and INTJ.

Each temperament has one exact opposite. This opposite is always located two squares away in a diagonal direction — go whichever direction you need so you stay on the grid. For example, ESTP and INFJ are opposites.

The most common temperaments (those that include S and J) are positioned in the center, for convenience.

The T types (more common among men) occupy the left half of the chart and the F types (more common among women) occupy the right.

X Types

The thirty-two types that have a single "X" are placed midway between the two types whose combination they embody. Only a few of these have links to descriptions. Eight of them have characteristic names (like "engineer") given by Kiersey.

X-X Types

For the record, there are 24 types that have two X's; 16 of these are represented by the little squares with a two-letter label like "et", and the other eight comprise the four rows (ep, ej, ij and ip) and the four columns (nt, st, sf and nf).

The Four Archetypes

The four "archetypes" described in Kiersey's books, that have been known by various names for over 2000 years, are NT "Rational", SP "Artisan", SJ "Guardian" and NF "Idealist". They are arranged like this on the chart:

Some readers (NT's in particular) will notice that this division is "non-symmetrical" — two columns a square and two "half-squares", rather than four squares or four columns. This results from the fact that the population is being divided into four groups based on their two most significant dimensions. For all people, the S-N dimension is the most significant. However, the second-most significant dimension depends on whether the individual is an S or an N. For S types, the P-J dimension is the second-most significant, and for N types it is the T-F dimension.

Distribution of the Types in the General Population

A 1964 study by David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates concluded that the population is:

75% E, 25% I
75% S, 25% N
50% T, 50% F     (but 60% T among men and 60% F among women)
50% J, 50% P

Based on that, and assuming completely orthagonal distribution, the statistics would be:

and within each type, the T types (the left two columns) would be 60% men, and the F types (the right two columns) 60% women.

I based an earlier version of this web page on those stastics, with the IP row along the top rather than the bottom, and the ES types in the center 4 squares. However, the 3-to-1 distribution of E-vs-I is not shown in any of the more recent sources, so I have deprecated it.

In Please Understand Me II by Keirsey⁴, most of the articles on the specific temperament types include a comment like "comprising no more than, say, two percent of the population". Those statements are summarized here:

In the 1998 edition of MBTI Manual the following statistics are given¹. They are also quoted on the Wikipedia page for MBTI, which mentions that a form of "inferential statistics" was used to estimate them:

Based on that, one can get the following derived statistics:

E-vs-I: 49.3% is E, 50.7% is I
S-vs-N: 73.2% is S, 26.8% is N
T-vs-F: 40.3% is T, 59.7% is F
J-vs-P: 54.1% is J, 45.9% is P

The 4 archetytpes of Plato (with their Galen, Spränger and Myers names):

SP Artisans (Sanguine, Aesthetic, Probing): 27.0%
SJ Guardians (Melancholic, Economic, Scheduling): 46.4%
NF Idealists (Choleric, Religious, Friendly): 16.5%
NT Rationals (Phlegmatic, Theoretic, Tough-minded): 10.4%

The 4 rows: EP: 24.1%    EJ: 25.3%    IJ: 29.0%    IP: 21.9%

The 4 columns: NT: 10.4%    ST: 30.0%    SF: 43.4%    NF: 16.5%

The 16 2x2 "quad"s:

ET: 18.0%    ES: 33.8%    EF: 31.4%    EN: 15.6%
TJ: 24.2%    SJ: 46.4%    FJ: 30.1%    NJ: 7.9%
IT: 22.4%    IS: 39.6%    IF: 28.5%    IN: 11.3%
TP: 16.2%    SP: 27.0%    FP: 29.8%    NP: 19.0%

Keirsey has a website you can go to and take a test to determine your own type. It collects statistics, which are also available to anyone interested. As of June 2006, the statistics were⁵:

Please note that these statistics are biased because they only count people who go to a website and take a personality test! In general any activity that requires agreement to participate will have self-selection bias, but websites are notoriously poor in that regard.

For example, an Enneagram-related site keeps statistics of how many women and men take their survey. The women outnumber the men by a ratio of about 3 to 1. (It is believed that the website attracts women and theories include the notion that women are more interested in personality types.) There might be type-correlated bias (such as an "expressive bias") affecting who is likely to use the Internet as a whole, or to be curious enough about personality types to find their way to the Keirsey site.

It is based on the above two sources (Kiersey and Myers) that I have assigned the percentages in the main table at the top of this page, but rather than copying or averaging the figures, I computed arbitrary figures based on the model: S:N = 3:1, J:P = 3:1, and T-F is 3:2 among men and 2:3 among women.

Type E Versus Type I

This distinction goes back to Jung; by the time Myers-Briggs got to it they were called "extraverted" and "introverted". Over time these words developed clear (and often negatively judgmental) stereotypes. Possibly to address this, Kiersey has come to calling them "expressive" and "attentive".

Type J Versus Type P

When looking over the attributes in the two columns, I'd like you to consider two pairs of archetypes that are near and dear to me and many of my generation: Felix versus Oscar of "The Odd Couple", and the Establishment versus the Hippies of American culture during the period that TV show was popular.

In each column are the negatively-biased names that were typically used against that type. For example, Felix was called "uptight" by Oscar and Oscar was called "lazy" by Felix.

The 1960's and 1970's was the most recent Elightenment period in United States history. As in all Enlightenments, the raging debate is fundamentally one between the dominant J-type philosophy that achieved so much progress during the preceding Boom, and the P-type philosophy that had been squelched. The cultural struggle that became obvious and prevalent during the 1960's, and continued to rage during the 1970's, was one of P-type philosophy saying "it's time for new insights and fresh communication".

Perhaps the largest conflict of P versus J in any cultural history is seen in the debate over wars and foreign policy. I have already mentioned the Vietnam debate of the 1960's and 1970's in the United States. The J types (the war protesters) marched in Washington and cities across the country protesting that the P types (those in charge of the war action decisions) were "wearing blinders", "rigid and inflexible", and blindly committed to the point of blatant irresponsibility. The ultimate goal (seeing an end to the Cold War and the domination of much of the world by Communism) was achieved years later — but not by J-types (or for that matter P-types) working alone.

INTP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other INTPs!

Opposite: ESFJ
Most similar: ISTP, ENTP, INFP, INTJ
corresponding Socionics type: ILI

ISTP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ISTPs!

Opposite: ENFJ
Most similar: INTP, ESTP, ISFP, ISTJ
corresponding Socionics type: SLI

ISFP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ISFPs!

Opposite: ENTJ
Most similar: ISTP, INFP, ESFP, ISFJ
corresponding Socionics type: SEI

INFP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other INFPs!

Opposite: ESTJ
Most similar: ISFP, INTP, INFJ, ENFP
corresponding Socionics type: IEI

ENTP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ENTPs!

Opposite: ISFJ
Most similar: ENFP, ESTP, INTP, ENTJ
corresponding Socionics type: ILE

ESTP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ESTPs!

Opposite: INFJ
Most similar: ENTP, ESFP, ISTP, ESTJ
corresponding Socionics type: SLE

ESFP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ESFPs!

Opposite: INTJ
Most similar: ESTP, ENFP, ISFP, ESFJ
corresponding Socionics type: SEE

ENFP
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ENFPs!

ENFP HAVEN

Opposite: ISTJ
Most similar: ESFP, ENTP, INFP, ENFJ
corresponding Socionics type: IEE

ENTJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ENTJs!

Opposite: ISFP
Most similar: ENFJ, ESTJ, ENTP, INTJ
corresponding Socionics type: LIE

ESTJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ESTJs!

Opposite: INFP
Most similar: ENTJ, ESFJ, ESTP, ISTJ
corresponding Socionics type: LSE

ESFJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ESFJs!

Opposite: INTP
Most similar: ESTJ, ENFJ, ESFP, ISFJ
corresponding Socionics type: ESE

ENFJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ENFJs!

Opposite: ISTP
Most similar: ESFJ, ENTJ, ENFP, INFJ
corresponding Socionics type: EIE

INTJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other INTJs!

Opposite: ESFP
Most similar: INFJ, ISTJ, ENTJ, INTP
corresponding Socionics type: LII

ISTJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ISTJs!

Opposite: ENFP
Most similar: INTJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTP
corresponding Socionics type: LSI

ISFJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other ISFJs!

Opposite: ENTP
Most similar: ISTJ, INFJ, ESFJ, ISFP
corresponding Socionics type: ESI

INFJ
Profile on Wikipedia
speak with other INFJs!

Opposite: ESTP
Most similar: ISFJ, INTJ, ENFJ, INFP
corresponding Socionics type: EII

I have written a couple "profiles" for "X-types", the types that include one dimension that is halfway between its extremes. These profiles are based loosly on the format of the well-known profiles written by Joe Butt and Marina Margaret Heiss. Those are available on their website, TypeLogic.

xNTP

by Robert Munafo mrob (at) mrob.com

Often quiet and reserved, but often stimulating company, alert and outspoken. Usually interested mainly in ideas. Often enjoys parties and small talk — may argue for fun on either side of a question. Enjoys theoretical and scientific pursuits. Tend to have sharply defined interests. Enjoys solving problems with logic and analysis. Quick, ingenious, good at many things. Apt to turn to one new interest after another. Resourceful in solving new and challenging problems, but may neglect routine assignemnts. Need careers where some strong interest can be used and be useful. Skillful in finding logical reasons for what they want.

Some XNTP's I've found:

Ralph

Mark Peters

Chris McLaren

Amos

Extraverted ---X--- Thinking Judging

by Robert Munafo mrob (at) mrob.com

ExTJs promote concepts that are logical and objective, planned and organized, and they advertize these concepts to other people. They are equally likely to develop these concepts on their own as they are to take them from others. As a result, an ExTJ placed in a position of leadership will perform well, implementing/enforcing existing rules when they seem applicable, and creating his own solutions when the rules do not apply or when information is not readily available. They excel at taking an existing system and modifying/improving it until it works better.

Other EXTJs I've found:

Byron S. Lape

[Leila Dolan|mailto:Leila_Dolan (at) ccmail.com]

msg

John W. Connelly

footnotes

1 : Myers, I.B., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. and Hammer, A.L., MBTI Manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press (1998).

2 : Total does not add to 100% due to roundoff error in the individual figures.

3 : Fitzgerald, C. (1997) (three papers, I'm not sure which was the original source of the data — the titles are "The MBTI and Leadership Development: Personality and Leadership Reconsidered in Changing Times"; "Type Development and Leadership Development: Integrating Reality and Vision, Mind and Heart"; and "Applying Type Dynamics to Leadership Development".)

4 : Kiersey, David, Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar California: Prometheus Nemesis Books (1998).

5 : http://keirsey.com/cgi-bin/stats.cgi "Keirsey Temperament Distribution", web page by David Keirsey, 2006 June 28.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® and MBTI® are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

Robert Munafo's home pages at Pair Networks

Men Core Values

© 1996-2008 Robert P. Munafo. Email the author

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.

Back to my main page s.13