FASE II La naturaleza del impulso nervioso (Ver Tabla 2)

Two American women, Katharine Cook Briggs (1875-1968) and her daughter Isabel Myers (1897-1980) were interested in human personality. As a consequence, they recognised the potential of Jung’s theory of Personality and Psychological Type and began applying this knowledge in “type watching” their friends and families over a 20 year time span. During this time, they operationalised Jung’s theory and developed the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI®). At first, the focus was on creating a practical application of Jung’s theory and therefore the eight Jungian Functions described above formed the basis of the instrument. Soon, Briggs and Myers Briggs found that the eight functions did not sufficiently explain personality differences. Based on the findings of their longitudinal study, a fourth dichotomy was added. Grounded in Jung’s understanding of Judging and Perceiving processes, as described earlier, their fourth dichotomy expresses how an individual prefers to deal with the external world and whether they rely on judging processes or perceiving processes.

Individuals with a Judging preference are said to have an ordered approach to life and to be guided by a desire to achieve closure. This desire is reflected in the way daily activities are approached, particularly in their sequential way of dealing with tasks. The

Perceiving preference, on the other hand, involves the desire to remain open to alternative options and opportunities. This preference may be reflected in an ‘unordered’ approach to tasks and may be perceived as ‘chaotic’ because tasks are not necessarily completed in a sequential and orderly manner.

The addition of the fourth function doubles the original number of Jungian types and leads to sixteen types which can be used to explain personality. Table 2.1 (page 25) provides an overview of the four dimensions and the key characteristics associated with each pole of the dimensions.

Table 2.1: Myers-Briggs dimensions and key characteristics

Focus and Energy

Extraversion (E) Introversion (I) Energised and stimulated by other people

Turn outwards for ideas Prefer action

Focus on the outer world

Energised by solitude Turn inward for ideas

Prefer introspection/reflection Focus on the inner world

Information Gathering

Sensing (S) Intuition (N)

Focus on present/status quo Observant

Likely to be a deductive reasoner

Impatient with wild and creative schemes Reality is important

Focus on future/potential Imaginative

Likely to be inductive reasoner Impatient with details and routine Possibilities are important

Decision Making

Thinking (T) Feeling (F)

Objective and logical

Not likely to consider impact of decision on other people

Are offended by someone’s perceived inability to think logically

Subjective and situational

Very likely to consider how everyone feels about a decision

Are offended by someone’s perceived lack of sensitivity

Organisation and Closure

Judging (J) Perceiving (P)

Tend to be inflexible Like things settled Do not like loose ends

Concerned with being correct

Will make schedule or list and stick to it Are driven to organise and regulate Like to see issues as black or white

Tend to be adaptable Like things open

Do not mind loose ends

Less concerned with being correct

May make schedule or list but have difficulties sticking to it

May be perceived as unorganised Accept shades of grey for solutions

adapted from Briggs Myers, McCaulley, Quenk and Hammer (1999)

Much of the popularity of the MBTI® may probably be attributed to its apparent simplicity and use of the four letter code (E/I-S/N-T/F-J/P) which can be easily understood by a wide range of people. Hence, most users employ these to explain

individual differences. However, in spite of its attractiveness, this may be too simplistic an approach to personality and disregards the complexity of Jung’s theory.

As Berens (2000) points out, the popularity of the MBTI® has been accompanied by confusion with the underlying theory and she argues that many practitioners misinterpret the MBTI®. Most of the MBTI® applications today seem to be driven by a desire to label and stereotype. Whilst classifications and taxonomies can be useful for understanding individual differences, it should be remembered that Jung was not an advocate of classification. Indeed he described a classification of human beings into psychological types as inadequate (Jung 1971), with reference to his understanding of type dynamics, or development. Thus, it is suggested that the appeal of the MBTI® should lie in its applicability to different contexts and the fact that classifying individuals can enhance self awareness as well as being a catalyst for developing an understanding of others. The fact that Myers and Briggs (Briggs Myers 1999), developed the Judging-Perceiving

dichotomy to help access the dynamics of cognitive processes not to label individuals further supports this argument.

Therefore, many of the current conceptual criticisms of the MBTI® may be caused by a deficient understanding of Jungian theory and an inappropriate use of the instrument (Harvey 1996). If the results from the MBTI® are interpreted in the way Myers and Briggs intended, the type code represents a pattern of how the eight cognitive processes are used: extraverted sensing, introverted sensing, extraverted intuition, introverted intuition, extraverted thinking, introverted thinking, extraverted feeling and introverted feeling. It would appear that, in order to create a complete, yet dynamic picture of a person’s personality, an understanding of the individual processes is vital. Only then can the dynamics and roles the processes play in everyday life be fully understood.