What Is My MBTI Type? How to Figure It Out for Real
You took the test. Got INFJ. Took it again a week later. INFP. Tried a third site and landed on INTJ. Now you're sitting there wondering "what is my MBTI type, actually?" and whether the whole thing is broken.
You're not alone, and the test isn't exactly broken. But it might not be the best way to figure out your type.
The dirty secret of MBTI testing is that roughly half of people get a different result on a retest. The binary scoring system means that a tiny shift in how you answer two or three questions can flip an entire letter. If you're anywhere near the middle on even one dimension, your four-letter code becomes unstable.
So if the test keeps giving you different answers, the problem isn't you. The problem is that a 93-question forced-choice instrument isn't great at capturing something as messy as human personality. The good news: you can get closer to your actual type by understanding the system and doing some honest self-observation.
Why Test Results Feel Wrong
Before trying to self-type, it helps to understand why the test might have steered you wrong in the first place.
Mood contamination. MBTI questions ask about preferences, but people answer based on how they feel right now. Bad week at work? You'll answer differently than after a vacation. The MBTI personality test measures preferences, but your current state bleeds into every response.
Aspirational answering. Most people unconsciously answer as the person they want to be, not the person they are. You might select "I prefer deep one-on-one conversations" because that sounds more thoughtful, even though you actually spend most weekends bouncing between three different social events.
Context dependency. You behave differently at work than at home than with close friends. Which version of you is answering? The corporate-you who plans everything two weeks ahead might be a J, while the weekend-you who can't commit to dinner plans until 6pm is pure P.
Question ambiguity. "Do you prefer to follow a plan or go with the flow?" Compared to whom? In what situation? People with strong opinions about this question probably do sit near the poles. Everyone else is essentially flipping a coin.
Cognitive Functions: The Real Typing Tool
The four-letter code is the surface layer. Underneath sits cognitive functions, the theoretical engine that actually distinguishes the types from each other.
Quick version: Jung proposed eight mental functions. Four deal with perceiving information (Se, Si, Ne, Ni) and four deal with making judgments (Te, Ti, Fe, Fi). Each MBTI type uses these eight functions in a specific priority order, with the top two doing most of the heavy lifting.
Why does this matter for self-typing? Because two types can share three out of four letters and operate completely differently under the hood.
Take INTP and INTJ. Both introverted, intuitive, thinking. But an INTP leads with Ti (building precise internal logical frameworks) supported by Ne (exploring every possible angle). An INTJ leads with Ni (converging on a singular vision of how things will play out) supported by Te (organizing the external world to execute that vision).
In practice, the INTP wants to understand the system perfectly. The INTJ wants to build the system that works. Same three letters, fundamentally different people.
You don't need to memorize all eight functions and sixteen stacks. But knowing your top two functions gives you a much more stable foundation than any test can provide.
Finding Your Dominant Function
Ask yourself one question: what does your mind do when nobody needs anything from you? Not what you wish it did. What it actually does when the demands stop and you're left alone with your thoughts.
If you naturally catalog and compare present experiences against past ones, looking for what's familiar and reliable, that's Si. If you scan the environment looking for new things to engage with physically, that's Se. If your mind immediately starts generating possibilities and connections between unrelated ideas, that's Ne. If you find yourself narrowing toward a singular "knowing" about how something will unfold, that's Ni.
On the judging side: if you instinctively evaluate whether things are logically consistent within your internal framework, that's Ti. If you immediately think about how to organize and optimize what's around you, that's Te. If you check experiences against your personal values and sense of authenticity, that's Fi. If you read the room and orient toward maintaining group harmony, that's Fe.
Your dominant function is the one that feels like breathing. You don't choose to do it. It just runs.
Behavioral Shortcuts That Narrow It Down Fast
Cognitive functions can feel abstract. Here are concrete behavioral patterns that cut through the noise faster than any questionnaire.
Energy Patterns (E vs. I)
Forget "do you like parties." Instead: after a full day of social interaction with people you genuinely enjoy, do you feel energized and want more, or do you feel satisfied but need to recharge alone? The key word is "need." Introverts can love socializing. They just hit a wall eventually. Extraverts hit a wall from too much alone time.
Also look at your thinking style. Do you process by talking things through with others, or do you need to think it through internally before you can articulate it? Extraverts often don't know what they think until they say it. Introverts often can't say it until they've thought it through.
Information Processing (S vs. N)
When someone tells you about a new project, where does your mind go first? Straight to "what are the specific steps and concrete details" suggests Sensing. Straight to "what could this become and what does it connect to" suggests Intuition.
Another tell: how do you give directions? Sensors tend to give turn-by-turn instructions with landmarks. Intuitives tend to describe the general area and assume you'll figure it out. Neither approach is better, but they reveal fundamentally different relationships with concrete detail.
Decision Architecture (T vs. F)
This one trips people up because both types think they're being rational. They are. They're just optimizing for different things.
When a friend makes a bad decision, what's your first internal response? If you immediately see the logical flaw and want to point it out, that's T. If you first feel what the situation means for your friend emotionally and want to support them, that's F. Thinkers can be empathetic. Feelers can be analytical. The difference is what fires first, before you've had time to moderate yourself.
Pay attention to what frustrates you in meetings. If it's people making decisions based on feelings when the data clearly points somewhere, you lean T. If it's people steamrolling human concerns in the name of efficiency, you lean F.
Structure Preferences (J vs. P)
The cleanest test for this dimension: how do you feel about open loops? A Judger who has three unresolved decisions hanging over them feels genuine stress. A Perceiver in the same situation might not even notice the loops are open.
Look at your relationship with deadlines. Judgers tend to finish early or on time because the unfinished task causes low-grade anxiety. Perceivers tend to start late because they're waiting for more information (or inspiration) and the deadline is what creates the productive pressure they need. Both get the work done. The internal experience is completely different.
Common Mistyping Patterns
Certain mistypes happen so frequently they're practically predictable. See if any of these apply to you.
Social INTJs typing as ENTJs. INTJs who've developed strong social skills often test as extraverts. The giveaway: do you strategically choose social engagement because it serves your goals (INTJ with good Te), or do you genuinely draw energy from leading and organizing groups of people (actual ENTJ)? If networking exhausts you even when you're good at it, you're probably an introvert with a polished exterior.
Anxious ENFPs typing as INFPs. ENFPs going through a rough patch often withdraw and score as introverts. But their natural mode is still Ne-dominant, bouncing between ideas and people and possibilities. The question isn't whether you're currently withdrawn. The question is whether your default setting, when things are going well, involves reaching outward or inward.
Turbulent INFPs typing as INFJs. The INFJ is the rarest type and comes with a mystique that's attractive to identity-seeking Fi-dominant types. Real test: INFJs lead with Ni (convergent pattern recognition, a sense of "knowing" where things are headed). INFPs lead with Fi (intense personal values, deep emotional authenticity). If you're more focused on what's true for you versus what's going to happen, you're probably the INFP.
Structured ISTPs typing as ISTJs. ISTPs with demanding jobs often develop J-like habits. But under the surface, Ti-Se (ISTP) operates very differently from Si-Te (ISTJ). Do you follow procedures because they make sense and you've verified they work? Or because they're the established way things are done? The first is ISTP compliance. The second is ISTJ preference.
Feeler men typing as Thinkers. Cultural pressure is real. Men who lead with Fi or Fe often test as T types because they've been socialized to suppress or intellectualize their feeling function. If your decisions consistently come back to values and people even though you frame them in logical terms, consider that F might be your natural orientation.
When Your Type "Changes"
You took the test in college and got ENFP. Now at 35 you test as ENTJ. Did your personality change?
Probably not. A few things are more likely happening.
Function development. Jung's model predicts that people develop their lower functions as they mature. An ENFP's tertiary function is Te (extraverted thinking). As you gain life experience and professional responsibility, Te develops and becomes more prominent. You haven't changed type. You've grown into more of your stack.
Context shift. The test you took at 19, surrounded by college friends, captured a different context than the one you took at 35 in a management role. Your underlying preferences may be identical. Your environment has changed what gets exercised.
Better self-knowledge. At 19, most people have limited self-awareness. They answer based on who they think they are or who their social circle reflects back to them. By 35, you've had enough varied experiences to answer with more accuracy. The later result might simply be more honest.
The MBTI framework assumes type is innate and stable. Whether that's true is debatable. What's clear is that your four-letter code can shift without your core personality moving at all.
The Limits of Typing Yourself
Self-typing has a fundamental problem: you're using the instrument to calibrate itself.
Confirmation bias runs deep. Once you've tentatively identified as a type, you'll notice evidence that confirms it and dismiss evidence that doesn't. Read an INTJ profile? Suddenly every strategic thought you've ever had feels like proof. But you'd have a similar experience reading three other type profiles.
Aspirational typing is pervasive. People gravitate toward types they admire. The brooding INTJ architect. The charismatic ENFJ leader. Honest self-assessment means accepting that your type might be less dramatic than the one you find appealing.
Blind spots are invisible by definition. Your inferior function, the one you use least skillfully, is also the one you're least equipped to evaluate. An ENTP's inferior Si means they might genuinely not notice how inconsistent their daily habits are, making it hard to accurately assess that dimension.
The best approach is triangulation. Take a couple of different tests. Read about cognitive functions. Ask people who know you well where they'd place you on each dimension. Pay more attention to what you actually do under stress than what you do when performing for others.
And hold the result loosely. Your type should be a useful lens, not an identity prison.
Beyond the Four Letters
The fundamental tension with MBTI self-typing is that you're trying to sort yourself into one of sixteen boxes when you might not cleanly fit any of them. Personality research consistently shows that people distribute on bell curves, clustering near the center of each dimension rather than at the poles. Forcing a binary classification onto continuous traits creates an inherent precision problem, whether the sorting is done by a test or by you.
The SoulTrace assessment takes a different approach entirely. Instead of sorting you into a type, it measures five psychological drives as continuous dimensions, each one reflecting how much a particular motivation shapes your behavior. Structure, Understanding, Agency, Intensity, Connection. You get a probability distribution across 25 archetypes, not a single label.
The technical difference matters: the assessment uses Bayesian active learning, selecting each question based on your previous answers to maximize information gain. Twenty-four questions, fully adaptive, no forced choices between artificial dichotomies. Your result is a nuanced profile showing how your drives actually combine, not which of sixteen boxes you landed closest to.
If you've spent hours trying to figure out whether you're INFJ or INFP, that frustration might be the system telling you that the question itself is too narrow. Personality is more than four letters, and the tools you use to measure it should reflect that.