Jung Typology Test Paper

A third assessment offered is the quantitative top down constructed The Jung Typology Test that is used for prediction. Individual obtain their four letter type formula according to Carl Jung’s and Briggs-Myers’ typology approach to personality. It is a shorter version of the MBTI, providing the same information on the 16PF on a much smaller scale. The JTT has a closed end question format that forces participants to choose their answer on a Likert-scale. There is a reduction in error because there is no proctor present and the instructions are easy to read.
Compared with the MBTI is has a convergent validity, they both measures the same construct or concept but uses different methods. The JTT also has face validity but lacks accurate predictive validity. However, because of its subjective scoring there is a large chance for error. In addition, the last assessment offered is the Personal Values Assessment (PVA). The PVA structure is a simple survey that takes a
The MBTI has been subjected to many criticisms due to transparency, lack of objectivity and readability. The subjective accuracy of the current MBTI depends on the participant being honest during their self-reporting. The most common bias is from the individual taking the test. For example if the person knows that this results will be looked at by future employers then will try to make themselves seem more outgoing and responsible than they really are. As a result, individuals are highly motivated to fake their response. A second criticism and problem with the MBTI is that it either seems extremely transparent and other times the wording is very vague. Although the questions are very transparent, the data reported can be very vague and generalize, so much so that it can be applied to any personality type. Therefore, participants end up rating their descriptions highly. Lastly, the MBTI lacks predicative