Bradley T. Erford, Xi Zhang, Elizabeth L. Sweeting, Mia Russo, Anna Rashid, Martin F. Sherman, Emily L. Bradford, Xinran Wang, Allison Gao, Xinlei Huang, Ziyi Liu, Allie Haskew, Erin MacInerney, Ellery Moore, Daryn Thompson, Stephanie Barboza, Xinran Huang, Anqi Zhou, Yikai Xu, Yuxin Liu, Shagyuan Xu, Lingxiao Chen, Xianya Yang, Mengxuan Tong, Jieyi Ding, Xinya Yang
{"title":"A 25-Year Review and Psychometric Synthesis of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) – Form M","authors":"Bradley T. Erford, Xi Zhang, Elizabeth L. Sweeting, Mia Russo, Anna Rashid, Martin F. Sherman, Emily L. Bradford, Xinran Wang, Allison Gao, Xinlei Huang, Ziyi Liu, Allie Haskew, Erin MacInerney, Ellery Moore, Daryn Thompson, Stephanie Barboza, Xinran Huang, Anqi Zhou, Yikai Xu, Yuxin Liu, Shagyuan Xu, Lingxiao Chen, Xianya Yang, Mengxuan Tong, Jieyi Ding, Xinya Yang","doi":"10.1002/jcad.70006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator – Form M (MBTI-M) is the most popular personality assessment used by professional counselors and taught in counselor education programs. Still, little is known about MBTI-M score reliability and validity beyond what is published in the test manual. This psychometric synthesis aggregated the results across 193 studies from 1999 to 2024 using the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Form M. Internal consistency was 0.845–0.921 across subscales and total scores. Convergent evidence with similar constructs were robust across six personality instruments. Proportions of types and subtypes were aggregated from 178 articles with an aggregated <i>n</i> of 57,170 participants and compared to the normative proportions (<i>n</i> = 3009) published in the manual. Structural validity and test-retest studies were absent from the 25-year literature sampling.</p>","PeriodicalId":48104,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Counseling and Development","volume":"103 4","pages":"403-417"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jcad.70006","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Counseling and Development","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcad.70006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator – Form M (MBTI-M) is the most popular personality assessment used by professional counselors and taught in counselor education programs. Still, little is known about MBTI-M score reliability and validity beyond what is published in the test manual. This psychometric synthesis aggregated the results across 193 studies from 1999 to 2024 using the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Form M. Internal consistency was 0.845–0.921 across subscales and total scores. Convergent evidence with similar constructs were robust across six personality instruments. Proportions of types and subtypes were aggregated from 178 articles with an aggregated n of 57,170 participants and compared to the normative proportions (n = 3009) published in the manual. Structural validity and test-retest studies were absent from the 25-year literature sampling.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Counseling & Development publishes practice, theory, and research articles across 18 different specialty areas and work settings. Sections include research, assessment and diagnosis, theory and practice, and trends.