Any ENTP psychiatrists here? How do you like your job?

[deleted201857]

The argument you're pretending I'm making is certainly logical. The argument I actually made is not.

Good, glad we agree that your argument is not logical!

This is ridiculous. You are arguing with people with doctorates in this field. I don't think he's relying on things he read on the Internet. There's a deeper understanding of this material to be had.

Yeah...and the deeper understanding is found in those books...which he hasn't read!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WisNeuro]

Repeat after me: MBTI was never designed for clinical applications. And yes, if it is actually true as you say it is that MBTI is no better than astrology, then I would think that on an internet forum such as this, you would rise to the occasion and point people in the right direction. I'm not a corporation. That is the best part about the internet after all, exchange of information. I've given you my evidence. What's yours?

If it were a quick, 5 minute lesson I could teach you, I'd jump on it. But, I don't have the time to teach you 5 years worth of statistics and psychometrics in that time frame. I used to get paid to do this, I don't intend to do it for charity. I've offered you a chance to engage someone in the field with even greater expertise than I in these matters, you declined.

 

[hamstergang]

Good, glad we agree that your argument is not logical!



Yeah...and the deeper understanding is found in those books...which he hasn't read!

So I said it backwards when typing quickly. Your original point is still wrong regardless. I never said that many people doing something makes it wrong. I said many people doing something doesn't make it right. Those are very different things.

No, I'm not talking of these books. I'm talking of a broader education which you clearly don't have. And you shouldn't expect to have it at this point in your life, but you should at least recognize this.

 

[deleted201857]

If it were a quick, 5 minute lesson I could teach you, I'd jump on it. But, I don't have the time to teach you 5 years worth of statistics and psychometrics in that time frame. I used to get paid to do this, I don't intend to do it for charity. I've offered you a chance to engage someone in the field with even greater expertise than I in these matters, you declined.

It shouldn't take 5 years to be able to inform someone about why a psychometric test is "not reliable." I mean, I know statistics can get complicated, but not by that much. I don't really know what you've accomplished here except to be a naysayer. Why did you even bother joining the discussion and derailing the thread if it's not to add anything of substance? I'm not going to lie, I'm disappointed. Oh well...

 

[WisNeuro]

People have already posted research about it's dubious reliability, more recent research has shown that actually up to 75% change classifications between test administration. You don't want to listen, you just keep posting industry webpages. I'd suggest you look up the Forer effect for some basic education as to why you like this instrument as well as your daily horoscope. As I said, if you'd like to pay a consulting fee, myself or someone else would love to put together a bibliography that stretches into the hundreds, of articles posted in actual peer-reviewed journals, for you to peruse.

 

[deleted201857]

So I said it backwards when typing quickly. Your original point is still wrong regardless. I never said that many people doing something makes it wrong. I said many people doing something doesn't make it right. Those are very different things.

Yes, but by the same token if many people do something, the probability is very low that it is worthless. It must have some value. So my original point still stands. In any case, the evidence is clear that MBTI =/= astrology.

No, I'm not talking of these books. I'm talking of a broader education which you clearly don't have. And you shouldn't expect to have it at this point in your life, but you should at least recognize this.

This thread has gotten sooooo many detractors, way more than I ever expected. Every single one of them, when challenged, has been completely incapable of raising any valid objections to the MBTI except to say that it's unreliable, invalid, and has no predictive power. Not one person on this thread has cited a single shred of evidence in support of their beliefs. This has honestly left me with a very low opinion of trained psychologists and psychiatrists!

 

[deleted201857]

People have already posted research about it's dubious reliability, more recent research has shown that actually up to 75% change classifications between test administration. You don't want to listen, you just keep posting industry webpages. I'd suggest you look up the Forer effect for some basic education as to why you like this instrument as well as your daily horoscope. As I said, if you'd like to pay a consulting fee, myself or someone else would love to put together a bibliography that stretches into the hundreds, of articles posted in actual peer-reviewed journals, for you to peruse.

*shrugs*

The Forer effect and reliability were both addressed in previous posts...your offer is noted, but declined.

 

[WisNeuro]

Just an FYI, the "meta-analysis" you posted pulled most of its articles from "The Journal of Personality Type." This is a journal that was specifically created to hype the MBTI. You actually haven't presented much in the way of empirical evidence, you simply want people to spend a ton of time trying to show you why you're wrong so you can post a MBTI webpage and say "nuh uh." I doubt any of the professionals on here give any ****s about your opinion of them, they've already earned their accolades, and they are used to ill-informed students making preposterous arguments.

 

[thoffen]

I am having trouble with this. At first I thought you weren't consciously intentionally trying to pick a fight with us about the MBTI.

To answer the original question, I have only minimal experience with it and it's theory, and mostly personal. I felt it was personally interesting and somewhat useful. I do have some concerns:
1. It measures the most common approach someone takes to life, not their aptitude or their flexibility
2. It is likely predictive of who may be drawn to a particular field, but I'm not sure it inherently says anything about who will be successful or satisfied by it

My personal experience is that my satisfaction and success depends on my ability to be functional within the aspects of my job that aren't natural fits for my personality style, and on my attitude toward those things.

If you are the type to shrug off responsibilities which don't align with your view of yourself or to focus on how much bull you have to put up with instead of the value you get from your job, then no field of healthcare is right for you.

 

[deleted201857]

I am having trouble with this. At first I thought you weren't consciously intentionally trying to pick a fight with us about the MBTI.

To answer the original question, I have only minimal experience with it and it's theory, and mostly personal. I felt it was personally interesting and somewhat useful. I do have some concerns:
1. It measures the most common approach someone takes to life, not their aptitude or their flexibility
2. It is likely predictive of who may be drawn to a particular field, but I'm not sure it inherently says anything about who will be successful or satisfied by it

My personal experience is that my satisfaction and success depends on my ability to be functional within the aspects of my job that aren't natural fits for my personality style, and on my attitude toward those things.

If you are the type to shrug off responsibilities which don't align with your view of yourself or to focus on how much bull you have to put up with instead of the value you get from your job, then no field of healthcare is right for you.

Thank you so much for this post! Finally! I am so grateful someone posted an actual response to the OP.

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, and I'm still not. But when it's a virtual pile-on, you have to defend yourself. In any case, what type do you identify most closely with?

1. Correct. Jung's typology is psychodynamic, and not behavioral, but aptitude may or may not be correlated. Very tough to measure this in any case. Personally I think that aptitude and type are strongly related, but obviously interest/passion is more important.

2. Correct. There is no evidence that MBTI predicts job performance. As for career satisfaction, it's another story. I have several massive official MBTI datasets (422,000 and 3+ million) where the average worker is employed full-time, has been in his/her occupation for >= 2 years, and is largely satisfied (self-reported) with said occupation. Looking at the self-selection ratio (SSR) of a given type for a given occupation, it is then possible to draw some conclusions about which occupations any given type might find most satisfying. The SSR is the percentage of an occupational sample of a given type divided by the percentage of the general population that is that type. So for example, if an occupational sample of psychiatrists is 6% ENTP, and the general population is 3.2% ENTP, then the SSR would be 6/3.2 or ~1.88. This means that among psychiatrists, ENTPs are 1.88x more highly represented than expected. I don't think it's too far-fetched to then claim that psychiatry is a better fit in general for ENTPs, than say secretarial work, where the SSR is way, way below 1.0.

I think the last part of your post is spot-on. That said, the reason I started this thread in the first place is because I do believe that type determines to a large extent the suitability of any given occupation. Now in all the data I've seen, psychiatry for ENTPs has an SSR significantly higher than 1.0. Nevertheless, I am concerned that it might be too taxing in terms of dealing with other people's emotions. This is why I believe NF types are generally more numerous in this field. I wanted to get the input of other ENTPs specifically in this regard.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Thank you so much for this post! Finally! I am so grateful someone posted an actual response to the OP.

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, and I'm still not. But when it's a virtual pile-on, you have to defend yourself. In any case, what type do you identify most closely with?

1. Correct. Jung's typology is psychodynamic, and not behavioral, but aptitude may or may not be correlated. Very tough to measure this in any case. Personally I think that aptitude and type are strongly related, but obviously interest/passion is more important.

2. Correct. There is no evidence that MBTI predicts job performance. As for career satisfaction, it's another story. I have several massive official MBTI datasets (422,000 and 3+ million) where the average worker is employed full-time, has been in his/her occupation for >= 2 years, and is largely satisfied (self-reported) with said occupation. Looking at the self-selection ratio (SSR) of a given type for a given occupation, it is then possible to draw some conclusions about which occupations any given type might find most satisfying. The SSR is the percentage of an occupational sample of a given type divided by the percentage of the general population that is that type. So for example, if an occupational sample of psychiatrists is 6% ENTP, and the general population is 3.2% ENTP, then the SSR would be 6/3.2 or ~1.88. This means that among psychiatrists, ENTPs are 1.88x more highly represented than expected. I don't think it's too far-fetched to then claim that psychiatry is a better fit in general for ENTPs, than say secretarial work, where the SSR is way, way below 1.0.

I think the last part of your post is spot-on. That said, the reason I started this thread in the first place is because I do believe that type determines to a large extent the suitability of any given occupation. Now in all the data I've seen, psychiatry for ENTPs has an SSR significantly higher than 1.0. Nevertheless, I am concerned that it might be too taxing in terms of dealing with other people's emotions. This is why I believe NF types are generally more numerous in this field. I wanted to get the input of other ENTPs specifically in this regard.

So you are talking about I/O psychology and not clinical. That helps to clarify. I don't know much about this application other than to say that it was noticeably absent from the licensure exam info on I/O psych and that Wisneuro who is right about 99% of the time even though I like to argue with him 50% of the time has a real life I/O psychologist who says it is not used by the real professionals who are experts in the field. That's good enough for me for my purposes since it is not something that I need to know and have the time to delve into the research. When I am treating real patients with real issues then I spend my time finding the scientific evidence.

Also, the reason I dismissed that paper you posted is that showing that it corresponds to another measure of personality traits still does not mean that the measure is predictive of anything.

 

[thoffen]

Thank you so much for this post! Finally! I am so grateful someone posted an actual response to the OP.

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, and I'm still not. But when it's a virtual pile-on, you have to defend yourself. In any case, what type do you identify most closely with?

1. Correct. Jung's typology is psychodynamic, and not behavioral, but aptitude may or may not be correlated. Very tough to measure this in any case. Personally I think that aptitude and type are strongly related, but obviously interest/passion is more important.

2. Correct. There is no evidence that MBTI predicts job performance. As for career satisfaction, it's another story. I have several massive official MBTI datasets (422,000 and 3+ million) where the average worker is employed full-time, has been in his/her occupation for >= 2 years, and is largely satisfied (self-reported) with said occupation. Looking at the self-selection ratio (SSR) of a given type for a given occupation, it is then possible to draw some conclusions about which occupations any given type might find most satisfying. The SSR is the percentage of an occupational sample of a given type divided by the percentage of the general population that is that type. So for example, if an occupational sample of psychiatrists is 6% ENTP, and the general population is 3.2% ENTP, then the SSR would be 6/3.2 or ~1.88. This means that among psychiatrists, ENTPs are 1.88x more highly represented than expected. I don't think it's too far-fetched to then claim that psychiatry is a better fit in general for ENTPs, than say secretarial work, where the SSR is way, way below 1.0.

I think the last part of your post is spot-on. That said, the reason I started this thread in the first place is because I do believe that type determines to a large extent the suitability of any given occupation. Now in all the data I've seen, psychiatry for ENTPs has an SSR significantly higher than 1.0. Nevertheless, I am concerned that it might be too taxing in terms of dealing with other people's emotions. This is why I believe NF types are generally more numerous in this field. I wanted to get the input of other ENTPs specifically in this regard.

As you say, I believe that it is likely correlated with satisfaction, but my thought is that this correlation is related to measurement of self beliefs, and not attributes inherent to a person's actual performance. This nuance is likely untestable. Essentially, the difference here between a dependent or independent variable, and on a population level not important to the validity of the test.

However, since your question is about applying what the MBTI says about you personally to a potential career, it is a critical distinction.

It does seem it has guided you to an important self question. Will you struggle with the volume of emotionality in your career? Generation of that question seems the right application of this instrument, not answering it.

I will say that psychiatry is highly diverse in career opportunity, which will offer any personality type opportunity to succeed and be satisfied so long as they have the tools to identify and create that role.

 

[sloop]

MBTI is to astrology as carpe diem is to YOLO.

 

[SeniorWrangler]

Psychiatry is a pretty diverse field. Particularly if you want to do a fellowship, you can end up doing very different things all day long, from psychoanalysis at one end of the spectrum to things like psychosomatics and C/L at the other.
You do need to be able to talk to a wide variety of people in distress.

By the way, after spending a lot of time with the MBTI in occupational settings, I have found that the social style matrix, which just uses two of the four MBTI variables, seems to capture most of the interesting distinctions in interpersonal style and work preferences. I don't know if it's been validated and don't really care, it's a handy personality typology.

 

[deleted201857]

Psychiatry is a pretty diverse field. Particularly if you want to do a fellowship, you can end up doing very different things all day long, from psychoanalysis at one end of the spectrum to things like psychosomatics and C/L at the other.
You do need to be able to talk to a wide variety of people in distress.

By the way, after spending a lot of time with the MBTI in occupational settings, I have found that the social style matrix, which just uses two of the four MBTI variables, seems to capture most of the interesting distinctions in interpersonal style and work preferences. I don't know if it's been validated and don't really care, it's a handy personality typology.

Which 2 MBTI variables are the most useful? Are you a psychiatrist btw?

 

[SeniorWrangler]

Which 2 MBTI variables are the most useful? Are you a psychiatrist btw?

Roughly , extraversion vs. intraversion and thinking vs. feeling, although they're called something else. It was developed by Merrill and Reid.
And yes, I am.

 

[sunlioness]

The enneagram is way more fun. It's not any more VALID, but it's way more fun.

So says this 4w3 Sx/So, tritype: 469


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk