Information

DISC vs MBTI personality types research

DISC vs MBTI personality types research

I Wanted to know whether there has been any research on mbti and disc personalty mapping and the correlations between them.If so can anyone link to some research papers


8 Types of Personality Tests in Psychology

In today’s business environment, companies aren’t merely looking for candidates who possess certain skills, competencies or expertise. Increasingly, they’re also looking for candidates who’ll complement and enhance their culture by working productively, creatively and collaboratively in a team environment. In pursuit of candidates with the right disposition, businesses are looking for those who fit a certain personality profile.

One way for hiring managers to screen for this fit is to employ personality assessments, which offer a general overview of a candidate’s character traits. Many types of personality tests in psychology exist, and knowing the differences between them can be crucial for hiring managers striving to make sound decisions about staffing and team building.

Those who wish to deepen their understanding of the types of personality tests in psychology may wish to consider a formal degree in psychology or a related field. Enrolling in a formal program can be a good way to gain knowledge of what personality tests are, how they work and how to accurately administer them.


Myers-Briggs, DISC, StrengthsFinder and the Core Values Index Psychometric Assessments Share:

In this article, we compare four of the top psychometric assessments on the market today, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the DISC, StrengthsFinder, and the Core Values Index.

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are the two keystone ways to measure the value and quality of a psychometric assessment. Test-retest consistency is the standard for reliability, and is fairly straightforward to understand. How similar are results from one assessment to another? A 100% reliability rating would indicate results are exactly the same between different assessments for a given individual over time.

Validity is a bit more difficult to measure. Validity refers to the accuracy of the assessment to measure the psychometric traits of the individual. It can also measure the ability of the assessment to predict the performance or behavior of the individual, such as in a new job or career track.

The value of a psychometric assessment can also be viewed by how easily the results can be deliberately or unintentionally skewed by the individual.

The way a psychometric assessment functions has a big impact on its validity. There are two types of assessment methodologies, question types and cue types.

Assessments that use phrased questions, such as asking the individual to rate how much they agree or disagree with the statement, "I am a natural-born leader," can easily be skewed because the intent of the question is clear.

Cue-type assessments use other feedback mechanisms that hide the intent or meaning behind the available options.

Essentially any psychometric assessment that uses phrased questions or discernible context can be skewed, thus reducing their reliability and validity. Only the Core Values Index of the four assessments we reviewed uses the cue-type mechanism &mdash simple word choices. Results are nearly impossible to skew.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

  • Reliability: 5/10
  • Validity: 2/10
  • Cost: $50
  • Time: 45 minutes

The MBTI is a test that aims to identify where an individual falls on four different dichotomies&mdashsensing or intuition, introversion or extroversion, thinking or feeling, and judging or perceiving&mdashand comes up with 16 different personality types labelled by combinations of initials.

MBTI is based on eight hypothetical assumptions and until this day there has been no scientific proof to support the claims of the method.

According to Myers-Briggs' own literature, their Type Indicator assessment has an overall repeat reliability ranging between 75% and 90%. However, many studies and anecdotal reports indicate the actual repeat reliability rating of the MBTI would struggle to reach 70%.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator was originally created by two individuals in the early 1900s that had no formal education or training in psychology. It was inspired by the work of Carl Jung, who admitted the basis of his research was anecdotal and has not been subjected to any control study.

Furthermore, despite the fact that it is estimated more than 75% of Fortune 500 companies use psychometric testing in recruitment:

Many traditional assessments [other than the Core Values Index] have been debunked by psychologists, such as the infamous Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

For these reasons, we rate the validity of the MBTI at just 2 out of a possible 10 points.

The MBTI takes about 45 minutes to complete and costs $50.

  • Reliability: 4/10
  • Validity: 4/10
  • Cost: $29
  • Time: 20 minutes

DISC is another personality assessment tool that is gaining fast popularity amongst the human resource professionals. DISC as a behavior assessment tool was developed by industrial psychologist Walter Vernon Clarke and is based on the theory of psychologist William Moulton Marston.

As an assessment tool it focuses on identifying four different behavioral traits: dominance, inducement, submission and compliance. Based on these behavior traits, the individuals may be categorized as either task-oriented or people-oriented.

In the case of DISC assessments, the repeat reliability and validity of the results are both in question because the meaning behind the possible answers are obvious. The individual taking the assessment can choose to answer the questions honestly and without intent to skew the outcome, but their answers would still be subject to their mood and mindset at the time.

The DISC assessment takes about 20 minutes to complete and costs $29.

StrengthsFinder / CliftonStrengths 34 Assessment

  • Reliability: 4/10
  • Validity: 4/10
  • Cost: $50
  • Time: 45+ minutes

Created by Donald Clifton, a former chairman of Gallup (the polling company), StrengthsFinder is a combination of a self-help book written by Marcus Buckingham and Donald O. Clifton, first published in 2001, and an online personal assessment test that attempts to outline the user's strengths.

StrengthsFinder, now called CliftonStrengths 34, asks the user 177 questions and takes about 35-45 minutes to complete. The associated book takes much longer to read. Because the questions reveal the nature of what is being assessed, it is very easy for the individual to skew their results toward a desired outcome.

It is perhaps most telling when we review what one person commented on Quora.com about the validity and reliability of StrengthsFinder:

"Some people don't resonate with their [StrengthsFinder] results, which makes me wonder if . those people aren't good at assessing personality (including their own)."

This implies that the person taking the assessment is somehow responsible for its results through deliberate will. Conversely, if an assessment is reliable and valid, it shouldn't be possible for the individual to influence the results.

The CliftonStrengths assessment itself takes about 45 minutes to complete, and the associated book takes much longer to read. The book and online assessment cost $50.

Discover your personality's DNA with the Core Values Index psychometric assessment.

Core Values Index (CVI)

  • Reliability: 10/10
  • Validity: 9/10
  • Cost: $50
  • Time: 10 minutes

The Core Values Index is the newest psychometric assessment of the four reviewed here, created in the early 1990's by Lynn Ellsworth Taylor. Unlike the MBTI, DISC, and CliftonStrengths assessments, the CVI is cue-based rather than asking proper questions. This prevents the individual from gleaning the intent of the available choices and skewing their assessment toward a desired result.

Of the four assessments reviewed, the CVI has the highest repeat reliability. Longitudinal studies have confirmed the CVI has a 97.7% average repeat reliability rating, the highest of any psychometric assessment on the market today.

The predictive validity of the Core Values Index psychometric assessment is unmatched. The CVI is often used as part of the pre-hiring screening process. The characteristics of the role are analyzed into a set of scores. Candidate CVI scores are compared against the role to determine a predictive level of fit. Individuals with highly matched profiles to a role often have 200% or higher productivity than their unmatched peers, and 50% or lower turn-over.

The Core Values Index presents the user with several sets of words in groups of four. They are asked to choose two of the four that resonate with them the most. This makes it nearly impossible to intentionally or unintentionally skew the assessment toward a particular result because the connection between the available words and their resultant outcome is indeterminable.


Christians Don’t Take Personality Tests

I discovered the following post, written by Jessica Pickowicz, on Michelle Lesley’s blog. I’ve written on this subject myself in Carl Jung: Psychologist or Sorcerer? In it I examined Carl Jung’s and Isabel Briggs Myers’ typological approach to personality. The Myers-Briggs test is designed to see what makes people tick. Christians should not take part in this sort of testing for several reasons, which I explain in my piece. For one thing,

Jung was deeply involved with his mother and two female cousins in hypnotically induced séances. He was also involved in alchemy, fortune telling, and channeling spirits. All are occult practices. Involvement in any of this sort of thing is going against God.

And as Jessica reminds us “secular psychology and man’s wisdom can seem very smart and very alluring,” so we scour the Internet for advice. Why do Christians bother when we know that “there is no wisdom of man that can beat-out the Wisdom of God found in Scripture (1 Cor. 1:18-31). His ways are perfect (Psalm 18:30).”

Even though Jessica entitled her piece “Daughters of the King Don’t Take Personality Tests,” men will gain insight from what she says. So continue reading, brother!

Scrolling through my Facebook news feed this week I must have come across at least half a dozen personality tests all calling to me — all begging me to answer their questions so each one could tell me who I really am. Am I an introvert or an extrovert? Am I emotional or intellectual? Am I an Anna or an Elsa? (Okay, broke down and took that one!)

One test analyzed finger lengths by having the reader match her hand to various images of hands each hand shape was assigned a different personality type.

Another test was ready to label its curious victim as a lion, golden retriever, otter, or other mammal.

And there are always those zodiacs lurking around ready to tell you exactly who you are and how you are feeling today.

So what’s the draw? Why are we (I’m speaking to women specifically) so eager to have some secular psychology test, some dim-witted computer algorithm, or some pagan superstition profile our personalities and define our character?

It’s been said that “the greatest human desire is to be KNOWN.” We just want to be known. In our broken flesh, we want to be honored, accepted, validated, and loved. And for a person who is godless, these tests are downed like painkillers. They are momentary relief, momentary security, in a world of pain, bewilderment, and fear — a world of feeling unknown.

I’ve been there myself. Before Christ, I was a junkie for this stuff. I loved my daily “horror-scope” and was especially eager to read the “love and romance” section. Why? Because when you’re lonely, when you don’t know a thing about God, His providence, sovereignty, sufficiency, and most of all His love, you reach for these things to soothe. It was a comfort to believe, even for a moment, that someone or something was steering my ship that fate, chance, astrology, or even science could give me some direction and navigation through this life.

But here is the BIG trouble. The inexcusable rebellion is when churches pander to this. It is when churches administer these personality tests in a veiled attempt to help believers discover their spiritual gifts, identity, and purpose. It is when churches look anywhere but to His divine power for anything pertaining to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3).

As Christians, ladies, we must reject this false teaching. Say it with me, “I am a daughter of royal birth. My Father is King of Heaven and Earth.” What more, in Heaven and Earth, do we need when our Father is the Most High God?! We must not search anywhere but Scripture for our purpose, calling, gifting, and direction. For “all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Nothing about these personality tests are biblical or God-glorifying. And here are some reasons why.

1. Personality tests put the focus on self-identity and not on our chief end. Essentially, personality tests are egocentric. When we are self-focused we don’t see or appreciated the greater scope of God’s mighty, sovereign, and providential work in our lives. It’s a form of pride to be preoccupied with self-identification, covertly seeking one’s own glory. However, when I look beyond myself and I realize God’s plan for me isn’t really about me it’s about Him and His glory, then my striving in this life should only be this: to be less like myself (or whatever best version of myself I am aspiring to be) and more like Christ (John 3:30 1 Corinthians 11:1 Ephesians 5:1) because I love Him. Once we realize that creation, salvation, and consummation, are all to be “to the praise of His glory” (Ephesians 1:6a, 12, 14), then a personality test will just look like a ridiculous waste of time.

This truth should bring you a great sense of peace, dear sister. The heavy yoke of “finding yourself” is off your shoulders, because you have already been found! Rest in this. Meditate on it. Continue reading


The following statements generally apply to me:

  • I remember events by what I read "between the lines" about their meaning.
  • I solve problems by leaping between different ideas and possibilities.
  • I am interested in doing things that are new and different.
  • I like to see the big picture, then to find out the facts.
  • I trust impressions, symbols, and metaphors more than what I actually experienced
  • Sometimes I think so much about new possibilities that I never look at how to make them a reality.

Adapted from Looking at Type: The Fundamentals
by Charles R. Martin (CAPT 1997)


DISC vs. MBTI Assessments

I am often asked about the difference between DISC and MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® ) and if there’s an advantage in using one over the other.

Both DISC and MBTI are assessment tools that provide insight into personality and behavior. Both are widely respected and used by individuals, organizations, institutions and corporations worldwide. There are, however, a few notable differences between DISC and MBTI:

  • The DISC assessment is shorter in length than MBTI (typically 24-30 questions for DISC versus up to 90 questions for most MBTI tests).
  • MBTI sorts individuals into 16 four-letter types. According to Wikipedia:
    • Extraversion (E)/ Introversion (I) – Extraverted types learn best by talking and interacting with others. Introverted types prefer quiet reflection and privacy.
    • Sensing (S)/ Intuition (I) – Sensing types enjoy a learning environment where the material is presented in a detailed, sequential manner. Intuitive types prefer a learning atmosphere where an emphasis is placed on meaning and associations.
    • Thinking (T)/ Feeling (F) – Thinking types desire objective truth and logical principles and are natural at deductive reasoning. Feeling types place an emphasis on issues and causes that can be personalized while they consider other people’s motives.
    • Judging (J)/ Perceiving (P) – Judging types will thrive when information is organized and structured, and they will be motivated to complete assignments in order to gain closure. Perceiving types will flourish in a flexible learning environment in which they are stimulated by new and exciting ideas.
    • DISC focuses primarily on four dominant behavioral types:
      • Dominance – These are forceful, take-charge people: direct, decisive, determined and often domineering. They’re born leaders who are neither shy nor subtle.
      • Influence – The friendly, enthusiastic High “I” styles want to be in the middle of the action, whatever and wherever it is. They most value admiration, acknowledgement and applause.
      • Steadiness – Steady styles are the most people-oriented of the four styles. Having close, friendly relationships is one of their highest priorities.
      • Conscientiousness – “C” styles are analytical, persistent, independent and well organized. They prefer to work quietly alone, emphasizing accuracy and “correctness.”
      • MBTI assumes that personality is fixed and unlikely to change, while DISC is more open to the possibility that different situations and environments might bring out different behavioral traits in an individual.
      • MBTI is largely an indicator of how people think internally. DISC measures how personality translates to external behavior.

      Generally speaking, MBTI is a good assessment tool for the individual looking for self-knowledge. MBTI results tend to be very personal and typically reveal a great deal about an individual’s inner self. Although this may sound like an advantage over DISC, this can, in fact, also be a weakness. Because MBTI is so deeply personal and is based on a large amount of revealing data from the extensive MBTI questionnaire, people who take the MBTI may often feel uncomfortable sharing their results with others. This could make MBTI unsuitable or difficult to use in a public environment such as a business, organization or corporation where team building exercises, corporate retreats, staff training and sales meetings take place.

      Also, with 16 different personality types and acronyms that are often confusing, MBTI language often fades from the memory of the casual user very quickly. MBTI test-takers are often unable to retain useful information from their personality profile. DISC, on the other hand, offers all of the advantages of MBTI, but with a more user-friendly interface. The simple acronym “DISC” is easy to remember, and, therefore, makes a much more lasting impression on users. It’s typical for individuals taking the DISC assessment to remember their results years after taking the initial assessment.

      Because the DISC assessment is specific to whatever environment you have in mind when taking the assessment, results tend not to be as intimate or personal as MBTI. It’s easier for individuals taking the DISC assessment to share their results, confident that though the assessment results might reveal their work personality, their private self can remain protected.

      Major advantages for DISC over MBTI for most situations:

      • People remember DISC long after they hear about it.Other models, such as MBTI, are more difficult to recall. It is hard to apply what you cannot remember.
      • DISC is easy to apply and is less theoretical than Both are solid and widely used. It’s not a matter of which model is right, but which one best suits the intended use.
      • DISC can easily be visualized and explained in a circular or quadrant diagram.MBTI may be helpful, but difficult to diagram in a simple manner. DISC can be illustrated in a way that even young children can understand. However, DISC is not so simplistic that it cannot yield in-depth insights.
      • DISC is not just for self-understanding it provides a framework to understand others and adjust how you relate to them.MBTI is also helpful in this regard. However, to effectively apply the MBTI model for two people, you would then need to remember the right combination of eight letters for both individuals and then attempt to figure out the implications on your relationship. DISC can be as practical as helping a Guarded person learn to be a little more aware and Open when the situation calls for it.

      Tony Alessandra

      Dr. Tony Alessandra earned his PhD in marketing in 1976 and has authored 30 books and over 100 audio/video programs. He was inducted into the NSA Speakers Hall of Fame in 1985 and the Top Sales World Hall of Fame in 2010. He is the CEO of Assessments24x7.com, a company that allows ICF coaches to resell multiple assessments to their clients such as DISC, Motivators, and Hartman HVP.

      The views and opinions expressed in guest posts featured on this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of the International Coach Federation (ICF). The publication of a guest post on the ICF Blog does not equate to an ICF endorsement or guarantee of the products or services provided by the author.

      Comments (12)

      This is a thorough and useful comparison of tools. In my coaching practice, I use both instruments, as they each achieve different objectives. Thank you for sharing!

      Hi Shelli,
      Congratulations, as a successful coach you do need flexibility in what you use to achieve maximum coaching performance with your client engagements. Not only is it important to see the value in DISC or your clients, but Dr. Alessandra recognizes DISC is important for you as ICF member coach as well. Dr. Alessandra supports your re-certification needs as a coach in addition to helping you with your coaching engagements. You can earn 7 CORE credits for your CCE by taking his on demand virtual approved courses available 24/7 at XTRAcredits.com/ICF/

      Would it be possible to reproduce this post on my blog, about self-develpment and writen in Portuguese, mentionking expressly the source, the link of the original article, and bio of the author?

      Hello Sergio, Yes, if you mention all of things you stated, especially the link back to this page. Thank you!

      Thanks for the attention and promt reply. I really appreciated it.

      […] artigo publicado no site do ICF – International Coach Federation (publicação original aqui), o Dr. Tony Alessandra, PHD em Marketing, autor de mais de 30 livros sobre o assunto, e criador do […]

      Thank you for this post. I appreciate that it is on the ICF site as well, since that increases the credibility.

      May I publish this as well as one of my blogs? Like the previous request, I would clearly state the resource. Most likely, I will write an introductory section, which I will mark as clearly my words, then provide an obvious reference to your post.

      Biased evaluation in favour of DISC. Clearly demonstrates inadequate understanding of personality psychology. All personality based instruments talk about typical behaviours of individuals. This distinction of inner self and outer self in artificial. In MBTI, there are extraverted functions and introverted functions. DISC is like any other trait tool. Any distinction made is totally artificial and baseless.

      Shirshendu, a very interesting point indeed. Can you please expand on your thoughts regarding relevant differences between DISC vs. MBTI? That is, if you feel there are any?

      @Matic. It is hard to say because there are at least a dozen different DISC instruments. Some claiming to be behavioural measures, others that of personality, some ipsative and others noramtive (trait). I would recommend reading Emotions of Normal People, the book on which DISC is based. The book provides no clarification about theory, why the four point circumflex model has been proposed. Any instrument predicting behaviour should be able to predict performance at work. Saville’s study called Epsom project compared 20 odd instruments and their predictive power at work, DISC was found to predict no competency adequately(no corrected correlations higher than 0.30). DISC is a trait instrument which doesn’t do justice to measurement of personality. I would recommend using Big Five should you need a trait instrument. MBTI is a type instrument and should be used according to Jungian principles (non evaluative, non analytical and non-decisive environments).

      DiSC and especially the most modern forms of this instrument like Everything DiSC are designed to be simple and memorable without being simplistic.
      Rather than read Emotions of Normal People, published in 1928, a more useful read is the excellent Everything DiSC Manual published in 2015 by Wiley, available from Amazon. This brings the reader up to date with the development of the instrument and the research that validates it as one of the most effective tools for looking at an individual’s tendencies and priorities (behaviours) given situations and most importantly takes into account the Interpersonal Psychology so useful in dynamic, changing and complex organisational and social groupings.
      For the academic, this book also offers insights into correlation and validity of psychological constructs with other instruments. The erroneous statement above as to competency (the Saville study states that “0.30 is a useful degree of validity”) does not take into account that Saville’s products are designed for different purposes (mainly recruitment, selection and career planning – personality trait) where the Everything DiSC tool is excellent at assessing the needs of leadership development, sales training, conflict management and team building (behavioural change).
      DiSC is undoubtedly one of the most widely used and successful tools to be included quite rightly in the Coaches toolkit. What is more individuals use it and remember it long after they have been introduced to DiSC.


      Contents

      Marston was a lawyer and a psychologist he also contributed to the first polygraph test, authored self-help books and created the character Wonder Woman. He generated the DISC characteristics of emotions and behavior of normal people (at the time, 'normal' had the meaning of 'typical' rather than an antonym for 'abnormal'). Marston hypothesised that our behaviour is influenced by ‘psychonic energy’ that is transferred through a web of nerve cells he named ‘psychons’. [ citation needed ]

      He published his findings in his 1928 book called Emotions of Normal People in which he explained that the four personality types (yellow, green, blue and red) arise as variations between people. According to Marston, people illustrate their emotions using four behavior types: Dominance (D), Inducement (I), Submission (S), and Compliance (C). He argued that these behavioural types came from people's sense of self and their interaction with the environment. [1] He based the four types on two underlying dimensions that influenced people's emotional behaviour. The first dimension is whether a person views their environment as favourable or unfavourable. The second dimension is whether a person perceives themselves as having control or lack of control over their environment. [ citation needed ]

      Although Marston contributed to the theory of the DISC itself, he did not create the DISC self-assessment. In 1956, Walter Clarke, an industrial psychologist, constructed an self-assessment based on Marston's theory. Clarke created the Activity Vector Analysis, a self-checklist of adjectives on which he asked people to indicate descriptions that were accurate about themselves. [2] This self-assessment was intended for use in businesses needing assistance in choosing qualified employees.

      Merenda, Peter F. and Clarke published their findings on a new instrument in the January 1965 issue of the Journal of Clinical Psychology." [3] Instead of using a checklist, the "Self Description" test forced respondents to make a choice between two or more terms. Factor analysis of this assessment added to the support of a DISC-based instrument. "Self Description" was used by John Geier to create the Personal Profile System in the 1970s. [4] Geier's DiSC assessment would eventually become Everything DiSC which is now owned by John Wiley & Sons.

      DISC has been used to help determine a course of action when dealing with problems as a leadership team—that is, taking the various aspects of each type into account when solving problems or assigning jobs. [5]

      Researcher and personality expert, Merrick Rosenberg, extended Marston's research pertaining to the DISC model by applying it to positive organizational leadership and teambuilding. In his books, Taking Flight [6] and The Chameleon, [7] Rosenberg symbolizes the DISC model into a series of bird characters. He captures the D in the DISC Model to be like an eagle or dominant, decisive, direct, and driven. He captures the I in the model to be symbolized by a parrot who represents the I qualities of being interactive, imaginative, intuitive, and inspirational. He then captures the S to be represented by a dove who is supportive, steadfast, sympathetic, and satisfied. Finally, he represents the C to be a compliant owl who is critical, cautious, and consistent. Rosenberg's findings and application of the DISC model can be found across many companies in the Fortune 100 who utilize his work to develop their culture, organizational cohesion, and leadership strategies. In his book, Personality Wins: Who will Take the White House and How We Know, [8] Rosenberg applies the DISC assessment, and his own methodology, to the personalities of presidential candidates through critical analysis of their campaign rhetoric and leadership communication. His most notable discovery is that leaders are most successful when they adjust their personality communication to comply with the style of their listener.

      In 2014, Thomas Erikson wrote a book titled Surrounded by Idiots describing the DISC model and aiming at popularizing it. The book sold over 1.5 million copies worldwide. [9]

      There are various representative bodies for psychology and psychologists that are responsible for the promotion of excellence and ethical practice in science, education, and application of the discipline, such as the British Psychological Society. None of these speak to the use of DISC. [10]

      Licensed psychologist and psychotherapist Dan Katz, criticised the lack of scientific basis for the model: 'despite the fact that [DISC] has existed for over fifty years and is quite widely spread there is no scientific study published about it. Even according to the test’s representative in Sweden, the Institute for personal development or IPU, no scientific articles have been published about the test.' [11]

      R. Wendell Williams, member of American Psychological Association and The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology with PhD in industrial psychology, criticises the practice of using DISC in employee recruitment process. [12] In his criticism Wendell argues that a good job performance test should be well constructed, have test-retest reliability, have Criterion Validity for criteria of job performance, and incorporate the theory of job performance in the test's design. DISC matches none of these criteria, as it was never designed to be a job performance predictor. Discprofile, one of the vendors of DISC based tests also advises against using the method in employee recruitment. [13]

      Journalist Emma Goldberg compares tests like DISC with astrology. [14]

      Thomas Erikson used the DISC concept as the basis for in his international best-selling book Surrounded By Idiots. He was given the Fraudster of the Year award in 2018 by a critical group Swedish Skeptics. [15] Swedish Skeptics is part of the European Council of Sceptical Organisations (ESCO), a volunteer interest community which "aims to co-ordinate activities of European organisations and individuals that aim at critically investigating pseudoscientific statements and claims regarding observations of paranormal phenomena, and to make the results of its investigations known to the broad public." ECSO's psychologist Dan Katz criticizes Erikson for misleading his audience with unsubstantiated claims of scientific basis for his theory and author's qualifications in the field (Erikson isn't a behavioral scientist his publisher claims him to be). [16]


      Difference Between MBTI and DISC

      MBTI and DISC are two psychometric instruments that allow the prediction and evaluation of an individual. Both tests are used in many organizations and institutions all over the world.

      The older of the two is the MBTI or Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It is a standard instrument to determine and profile a person’s personality type, perception, thinking process, and viewpoint. It was developed by a mother-and-daughter team, Katharine Cook Briggs and daughter Isabel Briggs Myers in 1943. It has been a standard instrument in its field. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is based on the work of Carl Jung.

      The instrument uses four pairs of patterns: perception vs. judgment (dealing with the outer world), extraversion vs. introversion (orientation to the world), thinking vs. feeling (decision making) and sensing vs. intuitive (ways of gathering information).

      Perception vs. judgment deals with one’s attitude sensing vs. intuitive and thinking vs. feeling are associated with function. The last pair, extraversion vs. introversion, is linked to lifestyle.

      The results are in the form of a variation of letters with 16 possible letter combinations.
      They are often used for personal or academic purposes. Myers-Briggs is a lengthy and complex questionnaire form with over 100 questions.

      On the other hand, DISC is an instrument that measures a person’s behavior and behavioral process. DISC is the abbreviation of its patterns “D” for “Dominance,” “I” for “Influence,” “S” for “Steadiness,” and “C” for “Compliance.” In DISC, the approach or response of the individual is given emphasis. Dominance measures the individuals’ approach to problems Influence is a person’s approach to people Steadiness places an importance on the approach to the pace of work, and Compliance measures the approach to procedures.

      The Dominance and Influence factors reveal the extrovert characteristic of the person. Meanwhile, the introvert traits are the Steadiness and Compliance factors of the same individual. DISC will yield two letters as the results. The first letter represents the dominant trait while the second letter stands for the main secondary trait.

      DISC is designed for the workplace. It is simpler and shorter compared to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It only comprises 24 questions. An individual’s behavior can be determined among 284 behavioral traits. DISC is developed from the work of William Moulton Marston.

      1.Both psychometric instruments are in questionnaire form. Both tests can be conducted with each other. The aim of both tests is to provide a profile or assessment of an individual.
      2.“MBTI” stands for “Myers-Briggs Type Indicator” while “DISC” represents the four approaches of the test. The letters are stand for Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Compliance. The first test is named after its developers while the second one is named after four patterns used in the tests.
      3.Myers-Briggs is based on the work of Carl Jung while William Marston’s work gave way to DISC.
      4.The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator uses four pairs of trait patterns which are each other’s opposite. On the other hand, DISC also has four points of approach.
      5.The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is longer and a more complex test. It has over 100 questions. Meanwhile, DISC only has 24 questions. It is characterized as simpler.
      6.The focus of DISC is on a person’s behavior inside the workplace while Myers-Briggs is centered on the individual’s personality type.
      7.The result of DISC is represented by two letters while the Myers-Briggs’ result is expressed in a variation of letters. 8.DISC results are easier to remember compared to the results of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
      9.DISC is a model designed for the workplace environment. The same locale is also applicable to using Myers-Briggs in addition to personal or academic purposes.


      The Rarest Male MBTI® Type

      It’s a Tie! INFJs and ENFJs are the Rarest Male Personality Types

      Men who value Intuition, Feeling, and Judging only make up 2.8% of the male population combined! Insightful and empathetic, these types have a desire to draw their communities towards progress and change. Because of their future-oriented, abstract focus, they aim to motivate people towards a vision or picture of how they want the future to be. They have a knack for understanding how to move people on an emotional level.

      You can find out more about these two personality types here: 10 Talents of the INFJ and ENFJ Personality Types


      The Attractiveness Of Personality Type

      People love trying to make sense out of chaos. Which would explain so many of us are drawn to the idea of categorizing ourselves. We’re complicated beings and the MBTI, much like our zodiac sign, seems to offer insights about others and ourselves — our habits, preferences, and the way we move through the world. Another attractive element is the flattering spin MBTI puts on every personality type.

      Ronald Riggio, an organizational psychologist and Henry R. Kravis Professor of Leadership and Organizational Psychology at Claremont McKenna College, puts it down to the Barnum Effect. This is a psychological phenomenon where subjects who think they’ve been given a valid personality test (but haven’t) and are given a description of their supposed personality type, filled with a mix of positive traits, say the analysis is a good description. In other words, they believe it because it’s flattering and usually pretty general.


      8 Types of Personality Tests in Psychology

      In today’s business environment, companies aren’t merely looking for candidates who possess certain skills, competencies or expertise. Increasingly, they’re also looking for candidates who’ll complement and enhance their culture by working productively, creatively and collaboratively in a team environment. In pursuit of candidates with the right disposition, businesses are looking for those who fit a certain personality profile.

      One way for hiring managers to screen for this fit is to employ personality assessments, which offer a general overview of a candidate’s character traits. Many types of personality tests in psychology exist, and knowing the differences between them can be crucial for hiring managers striving to make sound decisions about staffing and team building.

      Those who wish to deepen their understanding of the types of personality tests in psychology may wish to consider a formal degree in psychology or a related field. Enrolling in a formal program can be a good way to gain knowledge of what personality tests are, how they work and how to accurately administer them.


      The Rarest Male MBTI® Type

      It’s a Tie! INFJs and ENFJs are the Rarest Male Personality Types

      Men who value Intuition, Feeling, and Judging only make up 2.8% of the male population combined! Insightful and empathetic, these types have a desire to draw their communities towards progress and change. Because of their future-oriented, abstract focus, they aim to motivate people towards a vision or picture of how they want the future to be. They have a knack for understanding how to move people on an emotional level.

      You can find out more about these two personality types here: 10 Talents of the INFJ and ENFJ Personality Types


      The Attractiveness Of Personality Type

      People love trying to make sense out of chaos. Which would explain so many of us are drawn to the idea of categorizing ourselves. We’re complicated beings and the MBTI, much like our zodiac sign, seems to offer insights about others and ourselves — our habits, preferences, and the way we move through the world. Another attractive element is the flattering spin MBTI puts on every personality type.

      Ronald Riggio, an organizational psychologist and Henry R. Kravis Professor of Leadership and Organizational Psychology at Claremont McKenna College, puts it down to the Barnum Effect. This is a psychological phenomenon where subjects who think they’ve been given a valid personality test (but haven’t) and are given a description of their supposed personality type, filled with a mix of positive traits, say the analysis is a good description. In other words, they believe it because it’s flattering and usually pretty general.


      DISC vs. MBTI Assessments

      I am often asked about the difference between DISC and MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® ) and if there’s an advantage in using one over the other.

      Both DISC and MBTI are assessment tools that provide insight into personality and behavior. Both are widely respected and used by individuals, organizations, institutions and corporations worldwide. There are, however, a few notable differences between DISC and MBTI:

      • The DISC assessment is shorter in length than MBTI (typically 24-30 questions for DISC versus up to 90 questions for most MBTI tests).
      • MBTI sorts individuals into 16 four-letter types. According to Wikipedia:
        • Extraversion (E)/ Introversion (I) – Extraverted types learn best by talking and interacting with others. Introverted types prefer quiet reflection and privacy.
        • Sensing (S)/ Intuition (I) – Sensing types enjoy a learning environment where the material is presented in a detailed, sequential manner. Intuitive types prefer a learning atmosphere where an emphasis is placed on meaning and associations.
        • Thinking (T)/ Feeling (F) – Thinking types desire objective truth and logical principles and are natural at deductive reasoning. Feeling types place an emphasis on issues and causes that can be personalized while they consider other people’s motives.
        • Judging (J)/ Perceiving (P) – Judging types will thrive when information is organized and structured, and they will be motivated to complete assignments in order to gain closure. Perceiving types will flourish in a flexible learning environment in which they are stimulated by new and exciting ideas.
        • DISC focuses primarily on four dominant behavioral types:
          • Dominance – These are forceful, take-charge people: direct, decisive, determined and often domineering. They’re born leaders who are neither shy nor subtle.
          • Influence – The friendly, enthusiastic High “I” styles want to be in the middle of the action, whatever and wherever it is. They most value admiration, acknowledgement and applause.
          • Steadiness – Steady styles are the most people-oriented of the four styles. Having close, friendly relationships is one of their highest priorities.
          • Conscientiousness – “C” styles are analytical, persistent, independent and well organized. They prefer to work quietly alone, emphasizing accuracy and “correctness.”
          • MBTI assumes that personality is fixed and unlikely to change, while DISC is more open to the possibility that different situations and environments might bring out different behavioral traits in an individual.
          • MBTI is largely an indicator of how people think internally. DISC measures how personality translates to external behavior.

          Generally speaking, MBTI is a good assessment tool for the individual looking for self-knowledge. MBTI results tend to be very personal and typically reveal a great deal about an individual’s inner self. Although this may sound like an advantage over DISC, this can, in fact, also be a weakness. Because MBTI is so deeply personal and is based on a large amount of revealing data from the extensive MBTI questionnaire, people who take the MBTI may often feel uncomfortable sharing their results with others. This could make MBTI unsuitable or difficult to use in a public environment such as a business, organization or corporation where team building exercises, corporate retreats, staff training and sales meetings take place.

          Also, with 16 different personality types and acronyms that are often confusing, MBTI language often fades from the memory of the casual user very quickly. MBTI test-takers are often unable to retain useful information from their personality profile. DISC, on the other hand, offers all of the advantages of MBTI, but with a more user-friendly interface. The simple acronym “DISC” is easy to remember, and, therefore, makes a much more lasting impression on users. It’s typical for individuals taking the DISC assessment to remember their results years after taking the initial assessment.

          Because the DISC assessment is specific to whatever environment you have in mind when taking the assessment, results tend not to be as intimate or personal as MBTI. It’s easier for individuals taking the DISC assessment to share their results, confident that though the assessment results might reveal their work personality, their private self can remain protected.

          Major advantages for DISC over MBTI for most situations:

          • People remember DISC long after they hear about it.Other models, such as MBTI, are more difficult to recall. It is hard to apply what you cannot remember.
          • DISC is easy to apply and is less theoretical than Both are solid and widely used. It’s not a matter of which model is right, but which one best suits the intended use.
          • DISC can easily be visualized and explained in a circular or quadrant diagram.MBTI may be helpful, but difficult to diagram in a simple manner. DISC can be illustrated in a way that even young children can understand. However, DISC is not so simplistic that it cannot yield in-depth insights.
          • DISC is not just for self-understanding it provides a framework to understand others and adjust how you relate to them.MBTI is also helpful in this regard. However, to effectively apply the MBTI model for two people, you would then need to remember the right combination of eight letters for both individuals and then attempt to figure out the implications on your relationship. DISC can be as practical as helping a Guarded person learn to be a little more aware and Open when the situation calls for it.

          Tony Alessandra

          Dr. Tony Alessandra earned his PhD in marketing in 1976 and has authored 30 books and over 100 audio/video programs. He was inducted into the NSA Speakers Hall of Fame in 1985 and the Top Sales World Hall of Fame in 2010. He is the CEO of Assessments24x7.com, a company that allows ICF coaches to resell multiple assessments to their clients such as DISC, Motivators, and Hartman HVP.

          The views and opinions expressed in guest posts featured on this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of the International Coach Federation (ICF). The publication of a guest post on the ICF Blog does not equate to an ICF endorsement or guarantee of the products or services provided by the author.

          Comments (12)

          This is a thorough and useful comparison of tools. In my coaching practice, I use both instruments, as they each achieve different objectives. Thank you for sharing!

          Hi Shelli,
          Congratulations, as a successful coach you do need flexibility in what you use to achieve maximum coaching performance with your client engagements. Not only is it important to see the value in DISC or your clients, but Dr. Alessandra recognizes DISC is important for you as ICF member coach as well. Dr. Alessandra supports your re-certification needs as a coach in addition to helping you with your coaching engagements. You can earn 7 CORE credits for your CCE by taking his on demand virtual approved courses available 24/7 at XTRAcredits.com/ICF/

          Would it be possible to reproduce this post on my blog, about self-develpment and writen in Portuguese, mentionking expressly the source, the link of the original article, and bio of the author?

          Hello Sergio, Yes, if you mention all of things you stated, especially the link back to this page. Thank you!

          Thanks for the attention and promt reply. I really appreciated it.

          […] artigo publicado no site do ICF – International Coach Federation (publicação original aqui), o Dr. Tony Alessandra, PHD em Marketing, autor de mais de 30 livros sobre o assunto, e criador do […]

          Thank you for this post. I appreciate that it is on the ICF site as well, since that increases the credibility.

          May I publish this as well as one of my blogs? Like the previous request, I would clearly state the resource. Most likely, I will write an introductory section, which I will mark as clearly my words, then provide an obvious reference to your post.

          Biased evaluation in favour of DISC. Clearly demonstrates inadequate understanding of personality psychology. All personality based instruments talk about typical behaviours of individuals. This distinction of inner self and outer self in artificial. In MBTI, there are extraverted functions and introverted functions. DISC is like any other trait tool. Any distinction made is totally artificial and baseless.

          Shirshendu, a very interesting point indeed. Can you please expand on your thoughts regarding relevant differences between DISC vs. MBTI? That is, if you feel there are any?

          @Matic. It is hard to say because there are at least a dozen different DISC instruments. Some claiming to be behavioural measures, others that of personality, some ipsative and others noramtive (trait). I would recommend reading Emotions of Normal People, the book on which DISC is based. The book provides no clarification about theory, why the four point circumflex model has been proposed. Any instrument predicting behaviour should be able to predict performance at work. Saville’s study called Epsom project compared 20 odd instruments and their predictive power at work, DISC was found to predict no competency adequately(no corrected correlations higher than 0.30). DISC is a trait instrument which doesn’t do justice to measurement of personality. I would recommend using Big Five should you need a trait instrument. MBTI is a type instrument and should be used according to Jungian principles (non evaluative, non analytical and non-decisive environments).

          DiSC and especially the most modern forms of this instrument like Everything DiSC are designed to be simple and memorable without being simplistic.
          Rather than read Emotions of Normal People, published in 1928, a more useful read is the excellent Everything DiSC Manual published in 2015 by Wiley, available from Amazon. This brings the reader up to date with the development of the instrument and the research that validates it as one of the most effective tools for looking at an individual’s tendencies and priorities (behaviours) given situations and most importantly takes into account the Interpersonal Psychology so useful in dynamic, changing and complex organisational and social groupings.
          For the academic, this book also offers insights into correlation and validity of psychological constructs with other instruments. The erroneous statement above as to competency (the Saville study states that “0.30 is a useful degree of validity”) does not take into account that Saville’s products are designed for different purposes (mainly recruitment, selection and career planning – personality trait) where the Everything DiSC tool is excellent at assessing the needs of leadership development, sales training, conflict management and team building (behavioural change).
          DiSC is undoubtedly one of the most widely used and successful tools to be included quite rightly in the Coaches toolkit. What is more individuals use it and remember it long after they have been introduced to DiSC.


          The following statements generally apply to me:

          • I remember events by what I read "between the lines" about their meaning.
          • I solve problems by leaping between different ideas and possibilities.
          • I am interested in doing things that are new and different.
          • I like to see the big picture, then to find out the facts.
          • I trust impressions, symbols, and metaphors more than what I actually experienced
          • Sometimes I think so much about new possibilities that I never look at how to make them a reality.

          Adapted from Looking at Type: The Fundamentals
          by Charles R. Martin (CAPT 1997)


          Difference Between MBTI and DISC

          MBTI and DISC are two psychometric instruments that allow the prediction and evaluation of an individual. Both tests are used in many organizations and institutions all over the world.

          The older of the two is the MBTI or Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It is a standard instrument to determine and profile a person’s personality type, perception, thinking process, and viewpoint. It was developed by a mother-and-daughter team, Katharine Cook Briggs and daughter Isabel Briggs Myers in 1943. It has been a standard instrument in its field. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is based on the work of Carl Jung.

          The instrument uses four pairs of patterns: perception vs. judgment (dealing with the outer world), extraversion vs. introversion (orientation to the world), thinking vs. feeling (decision making) and sensing vs. intuitive (ways of gathering information).

          Perception vs. judgment deals with one’s attitude sensing vs. intuitive and thinking vs. feeling are associated with function. The last pair, extraversion vs. introversion, is linked to lifestyle.

          The results are in the form of a variation of letters with 16 possible letter combinations.
          They are often used for personal or academic purposes. Myers-Briggs is a lengthy and complex questionnaire form with over 100 questions.

          On the other hand, DISC is an instrument that measures a person’s behavior and behavioral process. DISC is the abbreviation of its patterns “D” for “Dominance,” “I” for “Influence,” “S” for “Steadiness,” and “C” for “Compliance.” In DISC, the approach or response of the individual is given emphasis. Dominance measures the individuals’ approach to problems Influence is a person’s approach to people Steadiness places an importance on the approach to the pace of work, and Compliance measures the approach to procedures.

          The Dominance and Influence factors reveal the extrovert characteristic of the person. Meanwhile, the introvert traits are the Steadiness and Compliance factors of the same individual. DISC will yield two letters as the results. The first letter represents the dominant trait while the second letter stands for the main secondary trait.

          DISC is designed for the workplace. It is simpler and shorter compared to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It only comprises 24 questions. An individual’s behavior can be determined among 284 behavioral traits. DISC is developed from the work of William Moulton Marston.

          1.Both psychometric instruments are in questionnaire form. Both tests can be conducted with each other. The aim of both tests is to provide a profile or assessment of an individual.
          2.“MBTI” stands for “Myers-Briggs Type Indicator” while “DISC” represents the four approaches of the test. The letters are stand for Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Compliance. The first test is named after its developers while the second one is named after four patterns used in the tests.
          3.Myers-Briggs is based on the work of Carl Jung while William Marston’s work gave way to DISC.
          4.The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator uses four pairs of trait patterns which are each other’s opposite. On the other hand, DISC also has four points of approach.
          5.The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is longer and a more complex test. It has over 100 questions. Meanwhile, DISC only has 24 questions. It is characterized as simpler.
          6.The focus of DISC is on a person’s behavior inside the workplace while Myers-Briggs is centered on the individual’s personality type.
          7.The result of DISC is represented by two letters while the Myers-Briggs’ result is expressed in a variation of letters. 8.DISC results are easier to remember compared to the results of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
          9.DISC is a model designed for the workplace environment. The same locale is also applicable to using Myers-Briggs in addition to personal or academic purposes.


          Contents

          Marston was a lawyer and a psychologist he also contributed to the first polygraph test, authored self-help books and created the character Wonder Woman. He generated the DISC characteristics of emotions and behavior of normal people (at the time, 'normal' had the meaning of 'typical' rather than an antonym for 'abnormal'). Marston hypothesised that our behaviour is influenced by ‘psychonic energy’ that is transferred through a web of nerve cells he named ‘psychons’. [ citation needed ]

          He published his findings in his 1928 book called Emotions of Normal People in which he explained that the four personality types (yellow, green, blue and red) arise as variations between people. According to Marston, people illustrate their emotions using four behavior types: Dominance (D), Inducement (I), Submission (S), and Compliance (C). He argued that these behavioural types came from people's sense of self and their interaction with the environment. [1] He based the four types on two underlying dimensions that influenced people's emotional behaviour. The first dimension is whether a person views their environment as favourable or unfavourable. The second dimension is whether a person perceives themselves as having control or lack of control over their environment. [ citation needed ]

          Although Marston contributed to the theory of the DISC itself, he did not create the DISC self-assessment. In 1956, Walter Clarke, an industrial psychologist, constructed an self-assessment based on Marston's theory. Clarke created the Activity Vector Analysis, a self-checklist of adjectives on which he asked people to indicate descriptions that were accurate about themselves. [2] This self-assessment was intended for use in businesses needing assistance in choosing qualified employees.

          Merenda, Peter F. and Clarke published their findings on a new instrument in the January 1965 issue of the Journal of Clinical Psychology." [3] Instead of using a checklist, the "Self Description" test forced respondents to make a choice between two or more terms. Factor analysis of this assessment added to the support of a DISC-based instrument. "Self Description" was used by John Geier to create the Personal Profile System in the 1970s. [4] Geier's DiSC assessment would eventually become Everything DiSC which is now owned by John Wiley & Sons.

          DISC has been used to help determine a course of action when dealing with problems as a leadership team—that is, taking the various aspects of each type into account when solving problems or assigning jobs. [5]

          Researcher and personality expert, Merrick Rosenberg, extended Marston's research pertaining to the DISC model by applying it to positive organizational leadership and teambuilding. In his books, Taking Flight [6] and The Chameleon, [7] Rosenberg symbolizes the DISC model into a series of bird characters. He captures the D in the DISC Model to be like an eagle or dominant, decisive, direct, and driven. He captures the I in the model to be symbolized by a parrot who represents the I qualities of being interactive, imaginative, intuitive, and inspirational. He then captures the S to be represented by a dove who is supportive, steadfast, sympathetic, and satisfied. Finally, he represents the C to be a compliant owl who is critical, cautious, and consistent. Rosenberg's findings and application of the DISC model can be found across many companies in the Fortune 100 who utilize his work to develop their culture, organizational cohesion, and leadership strategies. In his book, Personality Wins: Who will Take the White House and How We Know, [8] Rosenberg applies the DISC assessment, and his own methodology, to the personalities of presidential candidates through critical analysis of their campaign rhetoric and leadership communication. His most notable discovery is that leaders are most successful when they adjust their personality communication to comply with the style of their listener.

          In 2014, Thomas Erikson wrote a book titled Surrounded by Idiots describing the DISC model and aiming at popularizing it. The book sold over 1.5 million copies worldwide. [9]

          There are various representative bodies for psychology and psychologists that are responsible for the promotion of excellence and ethical practice in science, education, and application of the discipline, such as the British Psychological Society. None of these speak to the use of DISC. [10]

          Licensed psychologist and psychotherapist Dan Katz, criticised the lack of scientific basis for the model: 'despite the fact that [DISC] has existed for over fifty years and is quite widely spread there is no scientific study published about it. Even according to the test’s representative in Sweden, the Institute for personal development or IPU, no scientific articles have been published about the test.' [11]

          R. Wendell Williams, member of American Psychological Association and The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology with PhD in industrial psychology, criticises the practice of using DISC in employee recruitment process. [12] In his criticism Wendell argues that a good job performance test should be well constructed, have test-retest reliability, have Criterion Validity for criteria of job performance, and incorporate the theory of job performance in the test's design. DISC matches none of these criteria, as it was never designed to be a job performance predictor. Discprofile, one of the vendors of DISC based tests also advises against using the method in employee recruitment. [13]

          Journalist Emma Goldberg compares tests like DISC with astrology. [14]

          Thomas Erikson used the DISC concept as the basis for in his international best-selling book Surrounded By Idiots. He was given the Fraudster of the Year award in 2018 by a critical group Swedish Skeptics. [15] Swedish Skeptics is part of the European Council of Sceptical Organisations (ESCO), a volunteer interest community which "aims to co-ordinate activities of European organisations and individuals that aim at critically investigating pseudoscientific statements and claims regarding observations of paranormal phenomena, and to make the results of its investigations known to the broad public." ECSO's psychologist Dan Katz criticizes Erikson for misleading his audience with unsubstantiated claims of scientific basis for his theory and author's qualifications in the field (Erikson isn't a behavioral scientist his publisher claims him to be). [16]


          Myers-Briggs, DISC, StrengthsFinder and the Core Values Index Psychometric Assessments Share:

          In this article, we compare four of the top psychometric assessments on the market today, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the DISC, StrengthsFinder, and the Core Values Index.

          Reliability and Validity

          Reliability and validity are the two keystone ways to measure the value and quality of a psychometric assessment. Test-retest consistency is the standard for reliability, and is fairly straightforward to understand. How similar are results from one assessment to another? A 100% reliability rating would indicate results are exactly the same between different assessments for a given individual over time.

          Validity is a bit more difficult to measure. Validity refers to the accuracy of the assessment to measure the psychometric traits of the individual. It can also measure the ability of the assessment to predict the performance or behavior of the individual, such as in a new job or career track.

          The value of a psychometric assessment can also be viewed by how easily the results can be deliberately or unintentionally skewed by the individual.

          The way a psychometric assessment functions has a big impact on its validity. There are two types of assessment methodologies, question types and cue types.

          Assessments that use phrased questions, such as asking the individual to rate how much they agree or disagree with the statement, "I am a natural-born leader," can easily be skewed because the intent of the question is clear.

          Cue-type assessments use other feedback mechanisms that hide the intent or meaning behind the available options.

          Essentially any psychometric assessment that uses phrased questions or discernible context can be skewed, thus reducing their reliability and validity. Only the Core Values Index of the four assessments we reviewed uses the cue-type mechanism &mdash simple word choices. Results are nearly impossible to skew.

          Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

          • Reliability: 5/10
          • Validity: 2/10
          • Cost: $50
          • Time: 45 minutes

          The MBTI is a test that aims to identify where an individual falls on four different dichotomies&mdashsensing or intuition, introversion or extroversion, thinking or feeling, and judging or perceiving&mdashand comes up with 16 different personality types labelled by combinations of initials.

          MBTI is based on eight hypothetical assumptions and until this day there has been no scientific proof to support the claims of the method.

          According to Myers-Briggs' own literature, their Type Indicator assessment has an overall repeat reliability ranging between 75% and 90%. However, many studies and anecdotal reports indicate the actual repeat reliability rating of the MBTI would struggle to reach 70%.

          The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator was originally created by two individuals in the early 1900s that had no formal education or training in psychology. It was inspired by the work of Carl Jung, who admitted the basis of his research was anecdotal and has not been subjected to any control study.

          Furthermore, despite the fact that it is estimated more than 75% of Fortune 500 companies use psychometric testing in recruitment:

          Many traditional assessments [other than the Core Values Index] have been debunked by psychologists, such as the infamous Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

          For these reasons, we rate the validity of the MBTI at just 2 out of a possible 10 points.

          The MBTI takes about 45 minutes to complete and costs $50.

          • Reliability: 4/10
          • Validity: 4/10
          • Cost: $29
          • Time: 20 minutes

          DISC is another personality assessment tool that is gaining fast popularity amongst the human resource professionals. DISC as a behavior assessment tool was developed by industrial psychologist Walter Vernon Clarke and is based on the theory of psychologist William Moulton Marston.

          As an assessment tool it focuses on identifying four different behavioral traits: dominance, inducement, submission and compliance. Based on these behavior traits, the individuals may be categorized as either task-oriented or people-oriented.

          In the case of DISC assessments, the repeat reliability and validity of the results are both in question because the meaning behind the possible answers are obvious. The individual taking the assessment can choose to answer the questions honestly and without intent to skew the outcome, but their answers would still be subject to their mood and mindset at the time.

          The DISC assessment takes about 20 minutes to complete and costs $29.

          StrengthsFinder / CliftonStrengths 34 Assessment

          • Reliability: 4/10
          • Validity: 4/10
          • Cost: $50
          • Time: 45+ minutes

          Created by Donald Clifton, a former chairman of Gallup (the polling company), StrengthsFinder is a combination of a self-help book written by Marcus Buckingham and Donald O. Clifton, first published in 2001, and an online personal assessment test that attempts to outline the user's strengths.

          StrengthsFinder, now called CliftonStrengths 34, asks the user 177 questions and takes about 35-45 minutes to complete. The associated book takes much longer to read. Because the questions reveal the nature of what is being assessed, it is very easy for the individual to skew their results toward a desired outcome.

          It is perhaps most telling when we review what one person commented on Quora.com about the validity and reliability of StrengthsFinder:

          "Some people don't resonate with their [StrengthsFinder] results, which makes me wonder if . those people aren't good at assessing personality (including their own)."

          This implies that the person taking the assessment is somehow responsible for its results through deliberate will. Conversely, if an assessment is reliable and valid, it shouldn't be possible for the individual to influence the results.

          The CliftonStrengths assessment itself takes about 45 minutes to complete, and the associated book takes much longer to read. The book and online assessment cost $50.

          Discover your personality's DNA with the Core Values Index psychometric assessment.

          Core Values Index (CVI)

          • Reliability: 10/10
          • Validity: 9/10
          • Cost: $50
          • Time: 10 minutes

          The Core Values Index is the newest psychometric assessment of the four reviewed here, created in the early 1990's by Lynn Ellsworth Taylor. Unlike the MBTI, DISC, and CliftonStrengths assessments, the CVI is cue-based rather than asking proper questions. This prevents the individual from gleaning the intent of the available choices and skewing their assessment toward a desired result.

          Of the four assessments reviewed, the CVI has the highest repeat reliability. Longitudinal studies have confirmed the CVI has a 97.7% average repeat reliability rating, the highest of any psychometric assessment on the market today.

          The predictive validity of the Core Values Index psychometric assessment is unmatched. The CVI is often used as part of the pre-hiring screening process. The characteristics of the role are analyzed into a set of scores. Candidate CVI scores are compared against the role to determine a predictive level of fit. Individuals with highly matched profiles to a role often have 200% or higher productivity than their unmatched peers, and 50% or lower turn-over.

          The Core Values Index presents the user with several sets of words in groups of four. They are asked to choose two of the four that resonate with them the most. This makes it nearly impossible to intentionally or unintentionally skew the assessment toward a particular result because the connection between the available words and their resultant outcome is indeterminable.


          Christians Don’t Take Personality Tests

          I discovered the following post, written by Jessica Pickowicz, on Michelle Lesley’s blog. I’ve written on this subject myself in Carl Jung: Psychologist or Sorcerer? In it I examined Carl Jung’s and Isabel Briggs Myers’ typological approach to personality. The Myers-Briggs test is designed to see what makes people tick. Christians should not take part in this sort of testing for several reasons, which I explain in my piece. For one thing,

          Jung was deeply involved with his mother and two female cousins in hypnotically induced séances. He was also involved in alchemy, fortune telling, and channeling spirits. All are occult practices. Involvement in any of this sort of thing is going against God.

          And as Jessica reminds us “secular psychology and man’s wisdom can seem very smart and very alluring,” so we scour the Internet for advice. Why do Christians bother when we know that “there is no wisdom of man that can beat-out the Wisdom of God found in Scripture (1 Cor. 1:18-31). His ways are perfect (Psalm 18:30).”

          Even though Jessica entitled her piece “Daughters of the King Don’t Take Personality Tests,” men will gain insight from what she says. So continue reading, brother!

          Scrolling through my Facebook news feed this week I must have come across at least half a dozen personality tests all calling to me — all begging me to answer their questions so each one could tell me who I really am. Am I an introvert or an extrovert? Am I emotional or intellectual? Am I an Anna or an Elsa? (Okay, broke down and took that one!)

          One test analyzed finger lengths by having the reader match her hand to various images of hands each hand shape was assigned a different personality type.

          Another test was ready to label its curious victim as a lion, golden retriever, otter, or other mammal.

          And there are always those zodiacs lurking around ready to tell you exactly who you are and how you are feeling today.

          So what’s the draw? Why are we (I’m speaking to women specifically) so eager to have some secular psychology test, some dim-witted computer algorithm, or some pagan superstition profile our personalities and define our character?

          It’s been said that “the greatest human desire is to be KNOWN.” We just want to be known. In our broken flesh, we want to be honored, accepted, validated, and loved. And for a person who is godless, these tests are downed like painkillers. They are momentary relief, momentary security, in a world of pain, bewilderment, and fear — a world of feeling unknown.

          I’ve been there myself. Before Christ, I was a junkie for this stuff. I loved my daily “horror-scope” and was especially eager to read the “love and romance” section. Why? Because when you’re lonely, when you don’t know a thing about God, His providence, sovereignty, sufficiency, and most of all His love, you reach for these things to soothe. It was a comfort to believe, even for a moment, that someone or something was steering my ship that fate, chance, astrology, or even science could give me some direction and navigation through this life.

          But here is the BIG trouble. The inexcusable rebellion is when churches pander to this. It is when churches administer these personality tests in a veiled attempt to help believers discover their spiritual gifts, identity, and purpose. It is when churches look anywhere but to His divine power for anything pertaining to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3).

          As Christians, ladies, we must reject this false teaching. Say it with me, “I am a daughter of royal birth. My Father is King of Heaven and Earth.” What more, in Heaven and Earth, do we need when our Father is the Most High God?! We must not search anywhere but Scripture for our purpose, calling, gifting, and direction. For “all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Nothing about these personality tests are biblical or God-glorifying. And here are some reasons why.

          1. Personality tests put the focus on self-identity and not on our chief end. Essentially, personality tests are egocentric. When we are self-focused we don’t see or appreciated the greater scope of God’s mighty, sovereign, and providential work in our lives. It’s a form of pride to be preoccupied with self-identification, covertly seeking one’s own glory. However, when I look beyond myself and I realize God’s plan for me isn’t really about me it’s about Him and His glory, then my striving in this life should only be this: to be less like myself (or whatever best version of myself I am aspiring to be) and more like Christ (John 3:30 1 Corinthians 11:1 Ephesians 5:1) because I love Him. Once we realize that creation, salvation, and consummation, are all to be “to the praise of His glory” (Ephesians 1:6a, 12, 14), then a personality test will just look like a ridiculous waste of time.

          This truth should bring you a great sense of peace, dear sister. The heavy yoke of “finding yourself” is off your shoulders, because you have already been found! Rest in this. Meditate on it. Continue reading