think again losers
- Local time
- Tomorrow, 04:08
- Mar 17, 2011
~ My lecturer for organisational psychologyThese ideas around reliability and validity, item-response theory... very well established. That's what we're looking for in a measure. But you'd be surprised by how many organisations use measures that don't have reliability and validity evidence for them. A classic example of this is the Myer-Briggs Typology inventory, which you might have heard of before. You can apparently figure out whether your introverted or extroverted, if you use judgement or intuition... I can't even remember what the other things are. You end up with one of 16 different types I think it is, and that measure of personality has no evidence of reliability or validity. It's one of the worst wastes of time that you can actually use, but people use it within organisational settings all the time. They use it when people are applying for jobs, they use it in terms of career development. It's just awful. So even though we say organisational psychology is said to use the science-practitioner model, there are a lot of measures out there that people are using that have no evidence behind them...
I've heard a few bits and pieces about how MBTI is seen in academic circles, but this is the most direct statement I've found so far (it's consistent with everything else I've heard). The lecturer in question is extremely competent (though I don't like her much, I respect her a lot). I haven't done much research into how reliable/valid MBTI is myself, and so don't have a strong opinion either way other than what I've read/heard from others.