From: H. Susie Coddington [mailto:
susiecoddington@comcast.net]
Greetings all,
For some reason I have again started receiving messages for this list.
While Im clearly several days behind in reading them I have been enjoying
them. This MBTI discussion seems to be a rehash of many similar MBTI
discussions posted on the ODN (Organization Development Network) list over
the years. Im curious about how one instrument can generate so much
conversation and disagreement.
I also want to say that, as a certified MBTI administrator and trainer, I am
careful to note that it is not the MBTT (test) nor Inventory as discussed
previously. Going back many years to my initial MBTI training, I was taught
that it was an Indicator. It indicates the takers preference at the time
he or she takes it. Maybe I should point out that I also tell trainees that
regardless of how much familial love I may have for one of my siblings, it
doesnt not correlate to horoscope or auraeven though my sister does indeed
believe that. So, yeah, it does have the rather wacky going for it.
I am curious why instruments such as DiSC or Indra do not generate this
kind of discussion? At least I havent seen this amount of discussion on
any list for those. DiSC requires no training, no certification, or no
credentialing but is used (misused?) in many of the same training and
development situations as the MBTI.
In some MBTI circles there is the expression about resistance to be typed
as being an indicator of type. I wonder if some of that is what we are
seeing in these discussions? Im not sure what the MTBI reference was to
but being dyslexic it didnt jump out at me.
A different question or observation: it appears this is a predominately
male listyes?
Cheers,
Susie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
H. Susie Coddington, Ph.D.
Coddington Learning Co. ~ A certified MBE/DBE
www.coddingtonlearning.net
410-992-9563
learning never ends...
________________________________________
From Lance Seberhagen <
sebe@erols.com>
Rusty Rae:
I think you missed my point. I didn't say that no one should use the MBTI.
I didn't say that only people with professional training should be allowed
to use the MBTI. My complaint was that the MBTI is often misused and abused
because most MBTI test users seem to have little or no professional training
in testing, except for the 3-day MBTI Certification Workshop. MBTI test
users who do have professional training in testing normally use the test
properly. Thus, my point was that much of the misuse and abuse of the MBTI
could be prevented if the MBTI test publisher provided better guidance in
the MBTI Certification Workshop and the MBTI test manual. Sorry if I did
not make myself clear. BTW, I would also say that professional standards
for good test use apply to the MBTI, regardless of whether the test is used
for individual counseling, group training, or competitive assessment.
Signature - Seberhagen & Associates Lance Seberhagen, Ph.D.
Seberhagen & Associates
9021 Trailridge Ct
Vienna, VA 22182
Tel 703-790-0796
rustyrae@COMCAST.NET wrote:
Lance,
What about all the folks who are using MTBI who do have appropriate
psychological training, who have written doctoral papers, and who know and
understand the AERA/APA/NCME Testing Standards. Are they all wrong too?
And just because there is a testing procedure in place and something has not
been tested does not invalidate it.
Any treatment can be used improperly if the motivation is not properly
motivated (around the improvement of the individual). So I am not sure what
your point really is, other than to pound on your chest and let everyone
kknow that you can type out AERA/APA/NCME.
Rusty Rae
-------------- Original message --------------
Dear Jack:
You make my point that Certified MBTI Administrators need better training in
testing. I am sure that you have had a long and distinguished career as an
enginerer/manager/trainer, but I doubt that you have ever read the
AERA/APA/NCME Testing Standards (1999) or the APA Ethics Code (2003). If
you had read these generally accepted professional standards, you would
understand why Myers & Briggs make no claims about complying with
professional standards, and it seems odd that you would consider that to be
a good reason for using the MBTI. The fact that the MBTI was developed long
ago does not grandfather or exempt the MBTI, or its users, from current
legal and professional standards, either. I hope you don't give that kind
of advice to your clients!
I never said that lack of formal education i! n psychological testing,
psychological measurement, and/or employee selection would "disqualify" or
prevent someone from "accurately perceiving personality types." Untrained
people do that everyday. I was talking about the proper use of a
psychological instrument. My point was that the MBTI is often misused and
abused by people who have little or no formal education in testing, except
for the 3-day MBTI training course that is given by the MBTI test publisher.
Under professional standards, test users have primary responsibility for
the validity and ethical use of a test, but test publishers have
responsibility for providing guidance about proper test use and for warning
against common or likely misuses/abuses of the test, particularly when test
users are likely to have little or no formal training in testing. I said
that the MBTI test publisher had made some effort to do this but wished that
they had done more.
It may not be clear to you t! hat the AERA/APA/NCME Testing Standards and
APA Ethics Code represent generally accepted professional standards for good
practice, but that does not mean that you are correct, and everybody else in
the testing profession is wrong, particularly when you have provided no
authority, except for your personal opinion, to support your statements.
Your final point was, "To bad mouth MBTI for misusage by others beyond the
author's control smacks of MTBI." Judging by your other comments, one can
safely assume that "MTBI" was not a typo on your part but a deliberate
reference to "Mild Traumatic Brain Injury" (commonly abbreviated as MTBI),
as if name-calling would help your case.
Cheers,
Lance Seberhagen, Ph.D.
Seberhagen & Associates
9021 Trailridge Ct
Vienna, VA 22182
Tel 703-790-0796
Jack Ring wrote:
Good gracious, Fred, look what you have stirred up!
I cannot find any evidence that Myers or Briggs claimed to have complied
with AERA/APA/NCME Testing Standards (1999) or the APA Ethics Code (2003).
that were written decades after the MBTI was published.
I cannot find any evidence that "little or no formal education in
psychological testing, psychological measurement, and/or employee selection"
disqualifies anyone from accurately perceiving personality types. In fact,
a claim of requisite assessor competency indicates subjectivity in the
assessment.
Although critics abound it is not at all clear that all those with formal
education have devised a way of assessing a human being with respect to the
behaviors he or she is likely to exhibit, especially if coupled with one or
more other human beings in various situations. That is, having APA-approved
ways of examining oxygen and hydrogen says very little about the
characteristics of water.
To bad mouth MBTI for misusage by others beyond the author's control smacks
of MTBI.
cheers,
Jack Ring
----- Original Message -----
From: Lance Seberhagen <mailto:
sebe@erols.com>
To:
MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: MBTI & Mgt Ed & Dev
Chris:
A rose by any other name.... Calling the MBTI an "inventory" does not
change anything under the AERA/APA/NCME Testing Standards (1999) or the APA
Ethics Code (2003). The fact is that most "Certified MBTI Administrators"
have little or no formal education in psychological testing, psychological
measurement, and/or employee selection, except for the 3-day MBTI training
course, and I wish the publishers of the MBTI would do more to ensure that
their "inventory" is used in a responsible and ethical manner. Improvements
have been made but more needs to be done.
Lance Seberhagen, Ph.D.
Seberhagen & Associates
9021 Trailridge Ct
Vienna, VA 22182
Tel 703-790-0796
Chris Poulson wrote:
The MBTI is not at test it's an inventory......that make it easy for
psychometricians to attack as a "test"...
CP
The MBTI is OK as a training exercise (like a party game), if it is not
taken too seriously. The test is fairly transparent and reflects whatever
the test-taker wants it to reflect. Test security is minimal because the
scoring key is readily available and many people have taken the test dozens
of times. Thus, it's not surprising that the MBTI has no useful reliability
or validity for predicting behavior or work performance. Even the MBTI test
manual says that the test should not be used a basis for employment
decisions. Another problem with the MBTI is that it is commonly used in an
unethical manner (mostly in training programs) where the test is
administered to program participants and then the individual test results
are announced publicly to everyone, without the proper informed consent of
the test-taker. To make matters worse, MBTI test administrators often lead
test-takers and others to believe that the MBTI is a highly reliable a! nd
valid predictor of everything under the sun, causing more damage after the
training session is over. My comments are based on personal observations,
but there are many published critiques that say the same thing, including a
report by the National Academy of Sciences for DOD.
Lance S.
nickols@att.net wrote:
I'm looking for some general comments and views about the credibility the
Myers-Briggs has in management education and development circles. It is most
definitely a popular instrument but it is also one that has been sharply
criticized by some highly regarded psychometricians. How do list members
view the MBTI?
--
Fred Nickols
nickols@att.net
www.nickols.us <http://www.nickols.us/>