Jungian Typology

In the Beginning

“Know Thyself”

Learning what makes me and others unique individuals has always interested me. My local public high school did not offer a class in psychology. As a result, I participated in National Science Foundation summer program in psychology at Western Michigan University between my junior and senior years. Aside from determining that behavioral psychology and operant conditioning were not for me, I did not settle on a particular field of interest until I had completed my undergraduate education and embarked on a doctoral program. At that time I was introduced to Carl Jung (not personally, of course) and his Psychological Types.

Focusing My Fascination

In the early 1970s Dr. Morrel Clute, one of my professors in the College of Education at Wayne State University, introduced us to the Jungian model of perception-judgment styles and speculated on how each might respond to various teaching styles. At that time, I took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and learned that I was an ENFP. I was so intrigued with the idea of matching teaching methods to students’ perception-judgment styles that I designed the experiment for my doctoral dissertation on this foundation.

Initial Application

When I began my teaching career, I administered the MBTI to my high school students and did my best to develop instructional activities that I believed would best suit their personality types. I had only limited success with this method and eventually abandoned it. It was only after many years that I would discover the reason for the failure of both my doctoral experiment and my efforts to apply typology to teaching to yield the results I expected.

Haunted by Carl Jung


I am not exactly sure what prompted the intense revival of my interest in Jung’s personality styles earlier this year. I began to search for online tests and found a number of websites which offered them. The first was the infamous 16Personalities. I was surprised to learn that nearly all of the ones I took typed me as an INFJ (although the preference strengths varied from test to test).

Seeking further information about myself, I also looked for online cognitive function tests on the web. One that I found was the “Jungian Functions Test” at SimilarMinds.com. The results of the test are presented below. Apparently they were so strange that my “type” could not be determined from them. I was not sure what to make of this!

NeExtraverted Intuition50%
NiIntroverted Intuition85%
SeExtraverted Sensing5%
SiIntroverted Sensing50%
TeExtraverted Thinking30%
TiIntroverted Thinking35%
FeExtraverted Feeling55%
FiIntroverted Feeling85%

I found a number of other tests on the SimilarMinds site. One was called a “Jung Word Test,” and its results were consistent with those I got on other sites.

INFJ – “Author.” Strong drive and enjoyment to help others. Complex personality. 1.5% of total population.

~ Jung Word Test

I found a site called Personality Max, which offered testing that provided information not only on my personality type and cognitive functions, but also on my temperament, types of intelligence, learning style, and brain hemisphere preference. The results were quite detailed, as one can see by clicking on the image below.



I finally decided to invest in a retake of the (updated since the 70s) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which indicated that I am an INFJ; and then the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Level II, which labeled me an “Emergent INFJ.” The Level II was interesting because it broke down the dichotomies into components, revealing both typical-of-type and atypical traits. Result summaries are shown below:

MBTI II Overview
MBTI II Interpreter's Summary

I began to find MBTI aficionados on Twitter and Facebook, and followed many of them. One of them even designed a 29-question personality test that I found interesting…and accurate. Take the “Find Your Personality Type” quiz at psychologyjunkie.com.

My search for self-understanding continues.

The Suspense Is Killing

Socionics: A “New” (to Me) Approach to Jungian Typology

In my search for greater understanding of myself, I discovered that the Myers-Briggs understanding of typology was not the only-–or even necessarily the best–-approach. “Type Twitter” introduced me to Socionics, a Russian take on Jung’s psychological types. I learned that there is not a one-to-one correspondence of MBTI type to Socionics type, because the cognitive functions, or information metabolism (IM) elements as they are called in Socionics, are not defined the same way in both.

I began to read about Socionics on several websites and found some online quizzes. Unfortunately, the results were inconsistent: am I an IEI or an EII? Or maybe something else entirely?

Potential Solution: A Live Interview

One of the helpful “type” people on Twitter recommended that I arrange an interview with Jack Oliver Aaron of the World Socionics Society and ask him to identify my type. I watched several public interviews Jack did and was impressed, so I decided to follow that advice. My interview was last night, and the time sped quickly by. At the close of the interview, I anticipated the results of Jack’s analysis with bated breath…only to learn that I will have to wait a week or so for his findings. I feel like a child waiting for Santa Claus to come.