Typealyzer says my blog is INTJ

Typealyzer says that this blog appears to be of the Myer-Briggs type INTJ.

The analysis indicates that the author of http://blog.jackvinson.com is of the type:

INTJ - The Scientists

The long-range thinking and individualistic type. They are especially good at looking at almost anything and figuring out a way of improving it - often with a highly creative and imaginative touch. They are intellectually curious and daring, but might be physically hesitant to try new things.

The Scientists enjoy theoretical work that allows them to use their strong minds and bold creativity. Since they tend to be so abstract and theoretical in their communication they often have a problem communicating their visions to other people and need to learn patience and use concrete examples. Since they are extremely good at concentrating they often have no trouble working alone.

I assume you can point Typealyzer at just about any website.  Google.com doesn't have enough text to analyze.  I tried several blogs that I happened to have in local memory, and many fall in the INTJ bucket.

[found via David Snowden, who dislikes any kind of categorization, but it's the weekend]

7 Comment(s)

That's interesting Jack, thanks. I couldn't resist and typed mine in. Apparently my blog is INTP. Heh!
The logical and analytical type. They are especialy attuned to difficult creative and intellectual challenges and always look for something more complex to dig into. They are great at finding subtle connections between things and imagine far-reaching implications. They enjoy working with complex things using a lot of concepts and imaginative models of reality. Since they are not very good at seeing and understanding the needs of other people, they might come across as arrogant, impatient and insensitive to people that need some time to understand what they are talking about.

Peter Marshall Author Profile Page said:

Mine's INTP too. Damn I was hoping for INTJ. Those guys sound a little cooler... although that "physically hesitant to try new things" isn't very James Bondish.

No wonder I hate categorization. If it's right then I hate fitting into a 1/16 one size fits all box and if it's wrong then I hate fitting into the wrong box. But I still want to be in the cool box.

Mary Abraham Author Profile Page said:

Jack -

I guess we're all suckers for pop psychology. I tried Typealyzer -- in fact, I couldn't resist trying. My blog was in the INTJ box as well. But, here's the odd part -- when I've done the Myers-Brigg test myself, I've never ever been categorized as INTJ. I would note, however, that I do work in a profession (the law) that is overwhelmingly ITJ.

It would be interesting to see what sorts of blogs actually fall in the other quadrants. On the other hand, maybe type testing is as suspect as some believe?

- Mary

I write for several different sites and analyzed them. My professional weblog (http://www.manasclerk.com/blog/) comes up INTP. I think that any idea-oriented professional weblog would come out like this, regardless of what your actually type of thinking is.

My old personal blog types as ESTP. Which, if you have ever been a consistent reader or know me in meatspace, is ROFL funny.

But it's not like the Myers-Briggs typology is particular insightful to begin with. There are serious problems with the underlying theory. Four may be structurally important but not particularly useful. [Disclosure: I use a different psychometric in my own work.]

Brett Miller said:

Like Forrest, I typealyzed several different sites that I'm involved with (or used to write). What I found was that the blogs that are personal in nature are of the same basic type I get when I take one of the tests myself, and that the sites I write for an 'external' audience are of the type you might expect for interactions with that particular audience.

I wrote more about it here.

btw Jack, I tried to leave a trackback from that post, but it hasn't shown up. Not sure if it is an issue with my WordPress setup or something on your end, just wanted to let you know.

Unfortunately, the MBTI, although very popular - is unreliable and invalid. That is - according to: "Snake Oil, Science, and Performance Products"
by Drs. Jeanne Farrington and Richard E. Clark from 2000 as published in ISPI's journal: Performance Improvement.

Here is a web site at the University of Southern California's Center for Cognitive Technology - chaired by Dr. Clark - with the article in PDF form - about halfway down the page:


Jack Vinson Author Profile Page said:

Wow, thanks for all the comments. It's amazing that these "random" posts generate more activity than my standard posts. But then this is one where you could actually _do_ something with what I posted. Something to consider.

Brett: I've basically turned off trackbacks due to all the junk. If you warn me about it quickly, I might be able to catch trackback before it gets junked. (I get about 100 junkers a day, so I just have them automatically purged.)

Leave a comment

Previous entry: Collaboration, or walk before you run

Next entry: The end of BlogWalk

About this Entry

This entry was published on November 30, 2008 6:11 PM and has 7 comment(s).

Related Entries

Find recent content on the main index, explore the full tag cloud, or look in the archives to find all content.

Syndication Options

Subscribe to Entry

Powered by MT-Notifier

Powered by Movable Type 4.35-en
Picture a steaming coffee cup. Better yet, grab one and have a read!

KJolt Memberships

Follow jackvinson on Twitter

View Jack Vinson's profile on LinkedIn