<p>If you look more into the history of the creators of the Myer's Briggs, you will notice that it is loosely based off Jungian archetypes. It was not created with 16 types initially. Actually, the Jungian theory is only in a few scales (I-E, S-N, T-F), and one of the criticisms of this test is that the theoretical basis really was not preserved.</p>

<p>The combinations you have discussed might not be available, because statistically, it would not have a lot of strength. I would worry about intercorrelated scales, because there is some evidence out there that they are currently, and that does not provide a lot of statistical strength for an actual assessment. </p>

<p>You could further investigate the manual and gain more insight through some of these readings:</p>

<p>Myers, I. Briggs. (2003). MBTI manual: a guide to the development and use of    the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd ed. Mountain View, Calif.: CPP.</p>

<p>Capraro, R. M, &amp; Capraro, M. M. (2002). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator score   reliability across: Studies a meta-analytic reliability generalization  study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 590-602. doi:     10.1177/0013164402062004004</p>

<p>Pulver, C. A., &amp; Kelly, K. R. (2008). Incremental validity of the Myers-Briggs type indicator in predicting academic major selection of undecided university students. Journal of Career Assessment, 16(4), 441-455. doi: 10.1177/1069072708318902</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-06T12:46:36.693Z
2016-08-06T12:46:36.693Z
J. L. Ever
<p>I'm reading about Myer Briggs personality types and Jung cognitive functions for the first time.   Based on my understanding, it seems like each of the 16 MB personality profiles attempt to map to some combination of the 8 Jung cognitive functions.</p>

<p>But I can't seem to find an MB profile that maps to the following Jung cognitive function combination</p>

<ul>
<li>Primary function - Introverted Intuition</li>
<li>Auxillary function - Introverted Thinking</li>
<li>Tertiary function - Introverted Feeling</li>
<li>Inferior function - Extroverted Sensing</li>
</ul>

<p>Is it because the Jung cognitive function combination I stated is a theoretically and/or practically impossible?  If so, why is that the case?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-06-03T04:04:35.263Z
Its because its supposed to alrernate between introverted and extraverted types in this 16 type nomenclature. But even i believe i am exactly the configuration u mentioned.
Ikshul
<cognitive-psychology><jung>
Myer Brigg type for Ni > Ti > Fi > Se
learningtech
# Myer Brigg type for Ni > Ti > Fi > Se

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-08-05)

I'm reading about Myer Briggs personality types and Jung cognitive functions for the first time. Based on my understanding, it seems like each of the 16 MB personality profiles attempt to map to some combination of the 8 Jung cognitive functions.

But I can't seem to find an MB profile that maps to the following Jung cognitive function combination

* Primary function - Introverted Intuition
* Auxillary function - Introverted Thinking
* Tertiary function - Introverted Feeling
* Inferior function - Extroverted Sensing

Is it because the Jung cognitive function combination I stated is a theoretically and/or practically impossible? If so, why is that the case?

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, jung

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Its because its supposed to alrernate between introverted and extraverted types in this 16 type nomenclature. But even i believe i am exactly the configuration u mentioned.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-08-06. Score: 2

If you look more into the history of the creators of the Myer's Briggs, you will notice that it is loosely based off Jungian archetypes. It was not created with 16 types initially. Actually, the Jungian theory is only in a few scales (I-E, S-N, T-F), and one of the criticisms of this test is that the theoretical basis really was not preserved.

The combinations you have discussed might not be available, because statistically, it would not have a lot of strength. I would worry about intercorrelated scales, because there is some evidence out there that they are currently, and that does not provide a lot of statistical strength for an actual assessment.

You could further investigate the manual and gain more insight through some of these readings:

Myers, I. Briggs. (2003). MBTI manual: a guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd ed. Mountain View, Calif.: CPP.

Capraro, R. M, & Capraro, M. M. (2002). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator score reliability across: Studies a meta-analytic reliability generalization study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 590-602. doi: 10.1177/0013164402062004004

Pulver, C. A., & Kelly, K. R. (2008). Incremental validity of the Myers-Briggs type indicator in predicting academic major selection of undecided university students. Journal of Career Assessment, 16(4), 441-455. doi: 10.1177/1069072708318902


---

