o_19kdfsn0q18e31dfraas1esh19vta.pdf

ESTP 0.49
ISFJ 0.40
ESTJ 0.26
ESFJ 0.24
As a cautionary note, there is some test bias at work here: aptitude tests are often used for admission
purposes into gifted programs.
Discussion
Among the gifted students, the math-gifted group was high in Thinking, while the verbally-gifted
group was high in Intuition. (Remember how reading increases with intuition?) Gifted females
were more extraverted and feeling than gifted males. Gifted males favored perceiving more than
gifted females.
The high prevalence of INs in this population creates an interesting effect: the very definition of
giftedness has evolved to describe certain groups of personalities, including the INTJ personality.
(More generally, the definition has molded itself to the NT/NF temperaments. One sees the latter
temperament's influence in definitions that emphasize the “sensitivity” of the gifted.) Because
giftedness is a personality phenomenon as much as an intelligence phenomenon, all INTJs are to
some extent “gifted”--sheerly because of the way the term has become defined.
This presents some interesting opportunities. For example, studies of the best educational methods
for gifted students can teach us about the ways INTJs would prefer to be educated, regardless of
whether the INTJ in question is gifted or not. It would be interesting to review the literature,
reading in “INTJ” for “gifted.”
Types of Reasoning
Another study (read here) of 4,758 (3,720 male, 819 female) job applicants who were tested by an
assessment center revealed that I, N, T, and P traits led to the best performance on an intelligence
test. In this case, the test was the Critical Reasoning Test Battery 2, a timed 28 minute long test.
The Jung Type Indicator (JTI) was used rather than the MBTI. What's the difference? The Jung
Type Indicator (JTI) is not quite the same test as the MBTI in the same sense that the Keirsey
Temperament Sorter isn't quite the same test as the MBTI. However, the JTI is extremely well
correlated with the MBTI and can be considered an acceptable "brand X" version. So there actually
isn't a real difference.
One of the findings that I found interesting was that I, T, and P traits tended to correlate with higher
scores on numerical, verbal, and abstract reasoning, but N improved only verbal reasoning. Verbal
reasoning was a measurement of "basic vocabulary, verbal fluency, and the ability to reason using
words." On one level this isn't surprising, given that increasing intuition is correlated with
increasing reading, which naturally results in a larger vocabulary. On the other hand, it's odd that
intuition wasn't correlated with abstract reasoning, since intuition by its very nature favors the
abstract. It may be that we are looking at two differing definitions of the word "abstract" here.
Page 9 of this study also provides a painful yet amusing example of type bias, namely the theory
that "Judgers have to learn to be organized because they're not smart enough to get by without it,
like perceivers are." Considering that there are numerous examples of judging geniuses, I find this
theory to be rather dubious.