-SimilarMinds Personality Descriptions are TOO Negative!?
I occasionally get angry missives from people complaining about how negative some of the personality descriptions on SimilarMinds are.
All the personality type descriptions on this site are entirely composed of personality items each type self rated highest on compared to the average. To clarify further, one of the descriptions on the RLUEI page is "not usually happy". The source of the description is the personality item "I am unhappy". 645 test takers that scored as RLUEI had a self rating average of 2.34 (on a 0-4 likert scale) on that item. The average of all test takers was 1.32, so RLUEIs scored significantly higher on that item.
In fact that item had one of the highest type vs. average differences (D-score), hence it's inclusion at the beginning of the description. (The order of descriptions is entirely determined by D-scores.) This can mean that an item with a seemingly average score of 2.0 for example could show up first, if the D-score is sufficiently high. On the personality item "I don't like happy people" RLUEIs self rate as 1.51. That number could be described as low, but the average score on that item is .7, much lower, resulting in a D-score of .81. So despite a seemingly low score, that is a very meaningful RLUEI item.
The highest scoring item for RLUEIs is "I love music". The average score is 3.58 on that item. That undoubtedly is very high. It's not included in the RLUEI description though. The reason is every one else apparently also likes music. The average score overall on that item is 3.62, so the RLUEI D-score of that item is very low. Liking music is just not very descriptive of the unique personality of RLUEIs.
I've added a note on the description pages to hopefully minimize confusion and I'll try to make sure when transcribing description items that they reflect both the D-score and the raw score (i.e. that when an item has a large D-score but a low raw score that is conveyed). Based on the D-score, RLUEIs are not huge fans of happy people, but as the raw score reflects, they don't, on average, dislike happy people.
Additionally, recently I've been working on a new personality system which profiles people's perceived reward drives, what they think makes them happy. One of the drives involves having a sense of identity. Interestingly, I've found that people who score high on introversion (or Reserved on the SLOAN test) are more likely to have a weak sense of identity and are more likely to hate themselves. They are also more likely to be bitter, defensive, and self deceive. This alone would account for both the more negative introvert self descriptions and the vitriol I occasionally get about that.
As an introvert myself historically, I have to admit to my own history of self uncertainty and self hatred. Of course the MBTI offered self hating introverts a more positive sense of identity, your money is as good as any other client and they want it (also the MBTI developers were probably Feelers/Irrational who value what feels right over what makes sense so they are unlikely to criticize even a serial killer if doing so would make them feel sad). So they tell introverts - you are just different, you recharge alone, you are just pickier about who to be friends with, it's perfectly normal to have anxiety in a crowded area.
Unfortunately, based on the actual evidence, I have to conclude that many aspects traditionally associated with introversion are in fact serious psychological dysfunctions (not that excessive extroversion isn't also rife with issues). For example, being private can mean being afraid to show others who you really are (often because you don't even know who you are). How anyone could spin that as a positive is testimony to the marketing greed of personality test companies or good intentioned people pleasing of the Accommodating disposition.
Which brings up another flaw regarding introversion (and extroversion as well). It's not a distinct type, it's, at best, a classification of a superficial shared behavioral pattern. A useful personality type has one shared motive, a classification is merely a grouping of superficially similar behaving people who lack a shared motive for that superficial behavior.
The introvert 'class' behave the way they do (quiet, shy, private, etc.) because they...
A. don't know who they are
and/or
B. intentionally want to hide who they are from others (because who they are is unattractive/offensive/etc. to others in perception and/or in reality AND/OR because they perceive some tactical advantage over others by not revealing their 'hand')
and/or
C. are afraid of / don't trust others
Some are A, some are B, some are C, and some are a combo of the three. This is just another reason why no introversion description is likely to satisfy many of the people who score as introverts.
Typology flaws aside, it's unlikely for an individual to ever improve as a person or respond well to criticism about who they are if they've religiously embraced the notion that...
A. Personality type is fixed/unchangeable
B. Their personality type is healthy (when it's actually not)
This site is devoted to objective research and honest deconstruction of human personality. I'm interested in helping people to become happier in an honest way. Informing someone they are great when they are troubled is a good way to make money as a personality consultant or author, but I really don't see any other benefit to it long term (for them or the world). Most personality type descriptions you read on the web are not compiled in any remotely scientific way. They are based on and/or borrowed from books which themselves are based on a lot of subjective personal opinion or insufficiently small sample size personality testimonials, not to mention the inherent flaws in many of the personality systems themselves (Enneagram, Jung/MBTI, and even the Big 5).
Beyond the above, personality descriptions are never going to be one hundred percent accurate for each person (at best, they are pretty accurate for most people). Not everyone reads items to mean the same thing and not everyone is honest (consciously or unconsciously) about who they are. Also, the more you score between types the less accuracy you are going to find in the Jung and SLOAN descriptions.
Relevant Links:
March 10th, 2010 - 12:01
I took it 4 times and got the same thing… and i agree with the results.. pretty damn accurate..
May 29th, 2010 - 07:59
They are too negative. Saying what someone isn’t without saying what they are says little.
May 30th, 2010 - 07:01
Those who claim there’s too much negativity in the descriptors are whiners. I felt a little uncomfortable with them not because they were negative, but because they were strikingly accurate for my type. It’s better to be reminded we have a tendency to act without thinking at times. It might afford that extra second to think first the next time we’re tempted to do something we might regret later. Dominant feeling is a difficult thing to learn to keep in check and, ultimately impossible to do in a complete way, but being aware of it can only be helpful in my view.
July 11th, 2010 - 06:25
The INFP description make us look like obsessively weepy dorks and overall weirdos. :c
September 30th, 2010 - 13:56
The test was very accurate. Thanks for offering it. I’m not concerned about the negative aspects. Like the positive, I accept and acknowledge them.
October 3rd, 2010 - 05:53
I read my Myers-Briggs profile after getting the results – I’m an ENTP. Then I found the SimilarMinds site. It gave me real and helpful insight on who I am. So many of the ENTP careers listed actually appeal to me. And, my least favored careers are like only my family might guess, but extremely truthful. I didn’t see the description as negative. It was just what it was. I am so different from other women that I’m a puzzle to myself. How did SimilarMinds come up with something that just nails who I am? I had to think about assassin. I have a strong respect for human life but that said, there are degrees of personality type – I’m nearer the edge of eNTp on some points, not so extreme, so I’ll give you that one. Dictator, I had to smile about. I’m sure it would be a benign dictatorship on some tropical island.
October 11th, 2010 - 08:43
I am an INTP, and I agree with with the INTP description, at least for me. I don’t know for sure if other INTP’s are “familiar with the dark side” or could be good assassins, but it may be true. It fit me perfectly, or at least I think it does. Do we truly understand our whole personalities? I don’t think so, but I think that INTP comes close.
October 27th, 2010 - 09:25
I loved it. I’m an INFP so i’m “attracted to sad things” but all these other websites tell you all the happy things about you and quite frankly its just not realistic to think that there are only good sides to everyone. I think it was very accurate and I’m dying to find a website where the talk about the bad parts of a personality bc you meet someone like a friend and every meeting is all peaches and cream in the beginning, and then they flip the script and its like whoa, where did this knife in my back come from! so yeah id like to see what i’m dealing with. the closest i got to this was “things they can do to irritate a group” or “under extreme stress” but no, i know people say “all people are inherently good…blah blah blah make me puke” no all people ALL people have a dark side and it dominates there actions in guarding themselves and their loved ones when push comes to shove. So i’d like to know what to watch out for in other types bc i know what i’m capable of. I may have the same personality of princess diana and mary the mother of jesus but i can def do some damage if something sacred to me is being attacked(that’s in my discription) but people don’t ever see the claws come out unless i’m pushed beyond my limit….seems to me other personality types are far more willing to break the harmony for lesser reasons.
November 4th, 2010 - 17:18
Very accurate, short test. I have tried many and almost without exception get the same results (eNTp). Many people (but never eNTps!) are uninterested in spending a lot of time on tests like this, so this one is concise and accurate, including result description, great job.
November 23rd, 2010 - 04:10
Love it. ENFP. Proud of the positives and learning to manage the negatives, which I ultimately see as my true educators.
November 29th, 2010 - 06:22
I am an INTJ and the description is….well, negative. Very negative, but the thing is, that most of the descriptors fit me, despite how much I don’t like some of them. My Big 5 type is RLOEI as well. I am a loner. Mainly because I just can’t identify with the groups I am in all day(I am a High school student.).
December 9th, 2010 - 09:40
Are all the other commenters “Extroverted” and/or “Calm” people according to the test? Have they read the descriptions of “Reserved, Limbic” personalities? According to the test, I am one (a RLUAI), and there is NOT ONE positive personality trait in the description. Not I do not recognize myself in the description, mind you, I do. But I feel that it should end with the line “Now stop wasting food, oxygen and space and go kill yourself,” for apparently there is nothing positive or redeemable about being a RL*. Then I laughed at the list of suggested careers: come on guys, how can someone fitting the RLUAI description hold a job, let alone do a creative profession like those suggested? Thanks God I am not a RLUEN!
December 26th, 2010 - 08:50
Im an INTJ, believe or not i have dark side, and all people around me now knows about me really bad things, they usually hate me, because im “out of all of laws and order”, and somtimes i want to kill myself.Im alone, so alone that nobody can imagine…
December 27th, 2010 - 09:44
ENTP? Clever? Innovative? Nahhhh! More like sinister, sociopathic, paranoid, and schemer.
December 31st, 2010 - 04:45
As an ISFP on the extreme end, I was disheartened and freaked-out by the results because they were so accurate. I want to be an entrepreneur or investor (I need self-control–I prefer not to be controlled), but the results suggest that such career options would be impossible. This is funny (or maybe not) because, before coming across this website, I had done some self-reflection that revealed that I needed to work on everything that this website listed. It’s a freaking tall order, but it must be done.
January 21st, 2011 - 05:18
I am a INFJ type. It described me to a T. “Almost” everything was correct about me. I think everyone needs to take a test like the one i took. I learned more about who i am. I am I-Introverted, N-Intuitive, F- Feeling, J-Judging. I now know more about myself, and can work on what i think needs to be worked on for my personal self.
January 25th, 2011 - 08:57
I’m RCOEN and was not surprised at my type description ( I thought of them all as virtues) except for: “not known for generosity”, I am known as a very good tipper, sometimes 100% of the bill, but if you mean generosity to my fellow human being, some might say spot on and “avoids difficult reading material” I have read almost all the ancient and modern classics and astronomy and archeology are two my favorite reading subjects. My “Stumble!” readings are almost all scientific. Lastly, I admit to some annoyance that I even took the time to respond.
February 10th, 2011 - 23:57
INFP – I love it. Kinda negative, sure, but that is not a bad thing at all! Actually, that’s what attracted me more than the other descriptions I got – it mentioned a lot that the others didn’t and was shockingly accurate. It pointed out traits that I have attributed to myself as my own personal quirks and I was amazed. I applaud the creator of this. Pretty much everything was accurate.
February 26th, 2011 - 13:15
As an INFP, I found that I have traits of both RCUAI and RLUAI, but mainly RCUAI. While most of the descriptions I can agree with most of the types, they are too absolute and ‘black-and-white’; for instance has no confidence is a bit of an overstatement. The descriptions could also depend on where the person is with each of the individual traits. Also, there needs to be some more positive traits in some of the descriptions, because honestly if people with those types had all of those characteristics, the world would not function.
April 2nd, 2011 - 09:32
As an “INFP,” I was astounded at the accuracy of the traits described. I found this to be most interesting, thank you.
May 1st, 2011 - 12:11
i am very surprise at the result that INFJ are always lonely that is very true its describe who really i am.
May 22nd, 2011 - 11:02
Your questions seem to describe introverts negatively and extraverts more positively. How can that not be biased?
Maybe if there were more options on your quiz for negative E traits such as, controlling, un self aware, self promoting, self aggrandizing, insensitive, Conformist,
narcissistic, manipulative, uses people, domineering etc then it would show the darker side of all the types more equally. After all, people can only choose what is available to choose, and E types may not be as aware of their dark side as introverts!
Also more positive introvert qualities to select for would help balance things out so the test is not skewed towards a negative view of introverts: creativity, spirituality, devotion, self awareness, intellect, connection to nature etc.
Just a thought
Zach (intp)
May 22nd, 2011 - 12:36
I agree with Jay, they weren’t negative, and those that were- I would agree were true. Those who say they are negative aren’t very in tune with themself.
June 1st, 2011 - 02:29
LOve it!!!!
Suits me really well!
N Yup!! Its OBVIOUSLY TRUE that im an ENFP!!!
Whatever personalities, just be OURSELVES!
Appreciate it! CHEERS!!!
June 6th, 2011 - 06:10
INTJ–was kind of hurt by the description that was given of me…but let’s face it, it’s pretty accurate. i just haven’t met anyone who shares the same personality type in face to face..but i do see a few pople who share my personality over here.
June 17th, 2011 - 08:00
infp, one of best short descriptions…esp some of the quirks…
i don’t really by the whole”healer” happy view of the type…
the description is our outward view towards society, not necessarily our inward view of what *could be*
which is quite grand… and why we are led to write/film/theatre…
it’s just that our huge ideals don’t match up to society… but we don’t really think current society, whatever we were handed, is something that necessarily needs to be dealt with, we can live in our own worlds.
June 19th, 2011 - 18:46
I think your Jung Type description pretty accurate.
but i don’t like your global 5 type.
it’s seemed RLUEN is the worst and SCOAN is the best personality.
read Please understand me by kiersey, good book about jung type.
just curious what’s the type of the article writer?
I’m INFP by the way.
July 23rd, 2011 - 14:35
Wow – a lotof INFPs here and I have to admit – the results are spot on. Maybe because we are a small number in the population pool – others (and you have to admit as evidenced by the above comments) are rather hard on ourselves. I just go with who I am now – I am 57 and it is time to start being me and after so many years trying to figure out who I am – my family is still trying – I am happy to know my light and dark sides in order to do the best I can in my career (not assassin though – that is rather gruesome for my nature), treat my small (very small) group of friends with my better side.
August 3rd, 2011 - 11:03
I was evaluated as INFJ @ 1.5% of population. Although I found the description slightly morose, I compared it with all the others and have to say it’s accurate … except for INTP being the most relatable, I feel. Although I may just like that one better because I’ve always wanted to be an assassin, heh.
What personality type are you, Mr. Flynn?
August 12th, 2011 - 20:56
It was incredibly accurate, even down to the career choice. I’m planning on, after a long line of hard work and Air Force reqs to NASA, being an astronaut.
Also, I seriously do hate happy people. Mostly relationship happy people. And it even pegged me for a science fiction lover.
I think most people think it’s ‘negative’ because the truth hurts. Luckily, I already knew the truth. i’m FAMILIAR WITH THE DARK SIDEEEE. Ngl, I Darth Vadered after that.
September 7th, 2011 - 05:22
wow, a lot of INFP’s and heres another, spot on discription I was v impressed…
I felt it knew me!
September 20th, 2011 - 09:09
I found the results of my test extremely accurate, kind of like my life story. I took it twice and got the same thing. The description I found on the similarminds test described me pretty well, as did some of the happier ones on other sites. (:
September 27th, 2011 - 11:35
I took this 3 times and i am INTJ all over, it pretty much describes me accurately. BTW they aren’t saying what you literally are like just some personality traits you have. If you answered honestly i don’t see a problem.
October 14th, 2011 - 09:54
Another INFP here. I don’t think that all their descriptions apply to me, personally, like:
low self confidence (As a kid, maybe. But not now, in my 20’s)
Can feel defective? (hmm… not sure about that one)
wounded at the core (I dunno what they quite mean by that one… they callin’ me bleeding hearted or something?)
prone to crying (again, as a kid maybe. But not since middle school)
prone to pessimism? (I’m not sure about pessimism. But not optimism either)
Still, these descriptions might be spot on for quite a number of INFP’s out there.
Sure as HELL beats the saccharine, hyper-sensitive, overly empathetic, obsessive, weepy, people-pleasing, crybaby pansy-ass description of us that other websites use to caricaturize our personalities. Just cause Mr. rogers was an INFP doesn’t mean all INFP’s have to be Mr. Rogers; We’re not always so nice.
Hell, some people even seem to belive that the only believable ways that an INFP could make a good villain in a work of fiction is if they’re an obsessed stalker or the worlds’ doormat looking for revenge. The only people who could really understand how an INFP could make a good villain were other INFP’s. I think other people tend to get us wrong a lot.
So I still think the general description of us on this website is one of the better one’s you’ll be more likely to find on the internet. I especially like the ones:
“attracted to sad things”
“daydreams about people to maintain a sense of closeness”
“more likely to support marijuana legalization” “can sabotage self”
“likes the rain” “likes esoteric things”
and “sometimes can’t control fearful thoughts”
Those are some pretty interesting and accurate descriptions that you might not be so likely to think of!
October 25th, 2011 - 21:04
I think it is great fun, I’m a SCUAN and it was quite acurate, the only thing that maybe didnt fit was it said I was a high energy type, now I truly wish I was but dont think I qualify, unless you can count where I would like to be and mentally,but the physical energy ..not there, And the stuff I might call negative…On the nose!! Overall though… I’m happy to report I a pretty good person to know. LOL Good day all!
October 28th, 2011 - 08:54
I’m an INFP, (Took the test a few years ago, took it again more recently, same results) and I found this description very accurate~ I was disappointed there weren’t any more sinister or entertaining career options, though there was a guy a friend of mine thought was an INTJ, and we would always joke about him being the next world dictator. Plus he offered me China… C: (Only because it was to polluted for anyone else though.)