SoulTraceSoulTrace

MBTI: The 16 Personality Types Framework Explained

Table of Contents

By

- 12 min Read

MBTI: The 16 Personality Types Framework Explained

MBTI—the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator—is a personality framework that sorts people into 16 types based on four dichotomies. It's the most widely used personality assessment in the world, with an estimated 50 million people taking some version of it annually.

It's also one of the most criticized frameworks in personality psychology. Researchers have questioned its validity for decades while corporations, coaches, and millions of individuals continue using it daily.

This tension defines MBTI: popular and useful for many, scientifically questionable, yet persistent. Here's what you need to know about how it works, where it came from, and why it matters.

The Four Dichotomies

MBTI sorts people on four binary dimensions. Your position on each gives you a four-letter type code.

Extraversion (E) vs. Introversion (I)

Where you direct and receive energy.

Extraverts orient toward the external world—people, activities, things. Social interaction energizes them. Extended solitude drains them.

Introverts orient toward the internal world—ideas, reflection, depth. Solitude energizes them. Extended social interaction drains them.

This isn't about social skill or preference for people. Introverts can be highly social; extraverts can enjoy alone time. The question is what replenishes your energy.

Sensing (S) vs. Intuition (N)

How you prefer to take in information.

Sensors focus on concrete, present reality. Facts, details, direct experience. They trust what can be observed and verified.

Intuitives focus on abstract patterns and possibilities. Meanings, connections, future implications. They trust impressions and hunches.

Sensors aren't unimaginative; intuitives aren't impractical. It's about where attention naturally goes and what feels like "real" information.

Thinking (T) vs. Feeling (F)

How you prefer to make decisions.

Thinkers decide based on logical analysis. They prioritize consistency, fairness as impartiality, and objective criteria.

Feelers decide based on values and impact on people. They prioritize harmony, fairness as individual circumstances, and emotional considerations.

Both types can be caring or analytical. The question is what framework guides decisions—logic-first or values-first.

Judging (J) vs. Perceiving (P)

How you prefer to structure your outer life.

Judgers prefer closure, planning, and structure. They like decisions made and plans set. Open-ended situations feel uncomfortable.

Perceiving types prefer flexibility, spontaneity, and adaptability. They like options open and plans fluid. Premature closure feels constraining.

This dimension often confuses people because the names are misleading. Judging doesn't mean judgmental. Perceiving doesn't mean perceptive. It's about your relationship with structure and closure.

The 16 Types

Combining four dichotomies creates 16 possible type combinations:

Analysts (NT types):

  • INTJ – Strategic, independent, long-range planners
  • INTP – Logical, abstract, theory-driven thinkers
  • ENTJ – Commanding, decisive, natural executives
  • ENTP – Innovative, argumentative, idea generators

Diplomats (NF types):

  • INFJ – Insightful, principled, humanitarian visionaries
  • INFP – Idealistic, empathetic, value-driven dreamers
  • ENFJ – Charismatic, empathetic, natural mentors
  • ENFP – Enthusiastic, creative, possibility-seekers

Sentinels (SJ types):

  • ISTJ – Responsible, thorough, duty-focused realists
  • ISFJ – Supportive, reliable, tradition-honoring caregivers
  • ESTJ – Organized, principled, community-minded administrators
  • ESFJ – Caring, sociable, harmony-seeking supporters

Explorers (SP types):

  • ISTP – Practical, observant, hands-on troubleshooters
  • ISFP – Gentle, sensitive, present-focused artists
  • ESTP – Energetic, pragmatic, action-oriented doers
  • ESFP – Spontaneous, playful, experience-seeking entertainers

Each type has extensive descriptions of characteristic behaviors, strengths, weaknesses, compatible careers, relationship patterns, and more. The depth of type profiles is one reason MBTI persists—there's always more to explore.

Cognitive Functions

Beyond the four dichotomies lies a deeper theoretical layer: cognitive functions. This is where MBTI gets complicated.

Jung's original theory proposed that personality types use mental processes (functions) in different ways. MBTI systematized this into eight functions:

Perceiving functions (how you take in information):

  • Se (Extraverted Sensing): Present-moment awareness, physical engagement
  • Si (Introverted Sensing): Memory, past experience, internal sensations
  • Ne (Extraverted Intuition): Possibilities, connections, brainstorming
  • Ni (Introverted Intuition): Vision, insight, future-focused synthesis

Judging functions (how you make decisions):

  • Te (Extraverted Thinking): External logic, systems, efficiency
  • Ti (Introverted Thinking): Internal logic, frameworks, precision
  • Fe (Extraverted Feeling): Social harmony, others' emotions
  • Fi (Introverted Feeling): Personal values, authenticity, inner ethics

Each type supposedly uses these functions in a specific order—a "function stack" with dominant, auxiliary, tertiary, and inferior positions.

For example, INTJ's stack is Ni-Te-Fi-Se:

  • Dominant Ni: Led by internal intuition and vision
  • Auxiliary Te: Supported by external logical systems
  • Tertiary Fi: Developing internal values
  • Inferior Se: Weakest in present-moment physical engagement

The function theory adds psychological depth beyond dichotomies but also adds complexity and controversy. Many MBTI practitioners ignore functions entirely; others consider them the true heart of the system.

For more on how cognitive functions work, the theory goes deeper than this overview.

Where MBTI Came From

MBTI wasn't developed by psychologists. Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers created it based on their reading of Carl Jung's Psychological Types (1921).

Jung's original work described psychological types as a theoretical framework for understanding how people differ in perception and judgment. He explicitly warned against using types as fixed categories.

Briggs and Myers systematized Jung's ideas into a practical assessment instrument during World War II, motivated by helping women entering the workforce find suitable jobs.

The first MBTI form was published in 1962. Over subsequent decades, it became the world's most popular personality assessment, used in corporate training, career counseling, personal development, and team building.

This history matters because MBTI's theoretical foundations are unorthodox. It wasn't developed through the standard psychological research process of construct development, validation studies, and peer review. It was built by enthusiastic amateurs adapting a clinical theorist's speculative framework.

The Scientific Criticism

Personality researchers have criticized MBTI for decades. The main issues:

Poor Test-Retest Reliability

People often get different types when retaking the test. Studies show 40-50% type change on retest over intervals as short as five weeks. A stable personality measure should give stable results.

Bimodal Distribution Doesn't Exist

MBTI assumes people cluster into distinct types—you're either E or I, not in between. But actual score distributions are normal (bell-curved), not bimodal. Most people score near the middle of each dimension, not at the poles.

This means the binary sorting is artificial. Someone who scores 51% on extraversion gets typed as E, while someone at 49% gets typed as I—even though they're virtually identical.

Function Stacks Lack Support

The cognitive functions theory is elegant but unvalidated. Research hasn't confirmed that functions exist as described, that they stack in the proposed order, or that the stacks predict behavior better than dichotomies alone.

Predictive Validity Questions

MBTI predicts some outcomes (career preferences, certain relationship patterns) but less strongly than scientifically validated frameworks like the Big Five. It explains less variance in behavior than its popularity suggests.

The Forer Effect

MBTI type descriptions are often vague enough that multiple types could fit the same person—a phenomenon called the Barnum or Forer effect. When descriptions apply broadly, they feel accurate without actually distinguishing between types.

For a deeper dive into why MBTI faces criticism, the problems are substantial.

Why It Persists

Given these criticisms, why do 50 million people take MBTI-style tests annually? Several reasons:

Intuitive Framework

Four dichotomies make sense. E/I is immediately graspable. The preference-pairs feel real because they describe genuine personality variations that people observe in daily life.

Rich Community Content

Decades of type development have created detailed descriptions, memes, subreddits, and discussions for each type. Finding your type gives you instant community and endless content to explore.

Non-Judgmental Framing

MBTI explicitly positions all types as equal. No type is better—just different. This makes it feel safer than assessments that measure things like neuroticism or intelligence where high/low has evaluative implications.

Practical Applications

Even if type categories are imperfect, the framework provides useful vocabulary. Discussions about E/I differences, or T/F decision-making, can improve communication and understanding without requiring perfect typological accuracy.

Fun and Engaging

Let's be honest: personality tests are entertaining. Learning about your type, comparing with friends, exploring compatibility—it's enjoyable, which drives engagement regardless of scientific validity.

Institutional Momentum

MBTI is embedded in corporate training, coaching certifications, and counseling programs. This institutional adoption creates ongoing demand even as researchers critique the framework.

Using MBTI Wisely

If you're going to engage with MBTI, do it with appropriate calibration:

Hold types loosely. Your type is a hypothesis, not a diagnosis. If the description doesn't fit, maybe the test got it wrong, or maybe you don't fit cleanly into one type—which is true for most people.

Focus on dimensions, not categories. Instead of "I'm an INTJ," think "I lean introverted, strongly intuitive, moderately thinking, and moderately judging." The continuous position matters more than the binary label.

Don't use it for high-stakes decisions. MBTI shouldn't determine hiring decisions, career choices, or relationship compatibility. It's too unreliable for consequential uses.

Explore multiple types. If you test as INTP, also read INTJ, ISTP, and ENTP. Often a "wrong" type resonates more than your test result.

Remember the goal is insight, not identity. MBTI is a tool for reflection, not a permanent label. Your personality is more complex and fluid than any four letters capture.

MBTI vs. Other Frameworks

vs. Big Five (OCEAN)

Big Five measures five continuous dimensions: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism. It's the most scientifically validated personality framework.

MBTI measures four dichotomies and sorts into 16 types.

Big Five is stronger scientifically; MBTI is stronger culturally. For validated measurement, use Big Five. For community and discussion, MBTI has more content.

There's substantial overlap—MBTI's E/I correlates with Big Five's Extraversion, for example. But Big Five measures Neuroticism (emotional stability) which MBTI ignores entirely.

For more on MBTI vs. Big Five, the comparison is worth understanding.

vs. Enneagram

Enneagram describes nine types based on core fears and motivations. It's popular in spiritual and therapeutic contexts.

MBTI describes types based on cognitive preferences. It's popular in corporate and self-development contexts.

Enneagram offers deeper motivational insight but less measurement rigor. MBTI offers clearer cognitive description but less depth on why you behave as you do.

For more on Enneagram vs. MBTI, different purposes favor different frameworks.

vs. DISC

DISC measures four behavioral styles focused on workplace communication: Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, Conscientiousness.

MBTI measures broader personality preferences across all life domains.

DISC is simpler, more actionable in professional contexts. MBTI is more comprehensive, richer in personal insight. Different tools for different purposes.

Finding Your Type

If you want to explore your MBTI type:

Free tests: 16Personalities is the most popular, though it adds a fifth dimension not part of original MBTI. Sakinorva measures cognitive functions. Michael Caloz uses forced-choice function pairs.

Official test: The Myers-Briggs Company offers the official MBTI assessment for $49.95. It's not necessarily better than free alternatives, just officially licensed.

Self-typing: Many MBTI enthusiasts recommend studying the functions and types, then typing yourself through reflection rather than test-taking. Tests measure how you answer questions; self-study measures how you actually think.

For more on free MBTI tests, options abound.

Beyond Type

MBTI offers a vocabulary for personality differences. That's valuable even if the specific type assignments are imperfect.

But if you want personality insight grounded in stronger methodology—measurement that adapts to you and produces probability distributions rather than binary categories—consider different frameworks.

The SoulTrace assessment measures five psychological drives directly:

  • White: Structure, fairness, responsibility
  • Blue: Understanding, mastery, precision
  • Black: Agency, achievement, strategy
  • Red: Intensity, expression, authenticity
  • Green: Connection, growth, belonging

Twenty-four adaptive questions using Bayesian active learning. Results map to 25 archetypes—not as forced categories, but as patterns you match with varying probability.

No dichotomies to argue about. No function stacks to debate. Just measurement of what actually drives you, presented clearly.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does MBTI stand for?

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, named after creators Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers.

How accurate is MBTI?

Test-retest reliability is moderate—many people get different types on retest. Predictive validity is lower than scientifically validated frameworks like Big Five. "Accurate" depends on what you expect from it.

How many MBTI types are there?

16 types, from all combinations of four dichotomies: E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P.

What's the rarest MBTI type?

INFJ is often cited as rarest at about 1-2% of the population, though prevalence estimates vary across studies and populations.

Can your MBTI type change?

MBTI assumes type is stable, but test results often change between administrations. Whether "true type" changes or tests just measure imperfectly is debated.

Is MBTI scientific?

MBTI has some research behind it but doesn't meet the standards of well-validated psychological instruments. It's more popular than rigorous.

Should I put my MBTI type on my resume?

No. Most hiring managers either don't know MBTI or know enough to find it irrelevant. It signals interest in pop psychology more than anything useful.

What's the difference between MBTI and 16 Personalities?

16 Personalities is a website offering a free MBTI-style test. It uses the same 16 types but adds a fifth dimension (Assertive/Turbulent) and uses its own terminology (Architects, Mediators, etc.).

Try a Different Approach

MBTI gives you a type, a community, and endless content to explore. If that's what you want, dive in.

But if you want personality insight that measures what you actually are rather than sorting you into predetermined categories—try the SoulTrace assessment.

Adaptive methodology. Five measurable drives. Twenty-five archetypes with probability distributions. Results that show you not just which box you fit in, but how your psychological drives actually combine.

Twenty-four questions. Free. A different way to understand yourself.

Soultrace

Who are you?

Stay in the loop

Get notified about new archetypes, features, and insights.