Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.

Weber

Women Dissatisifed with Marriage to IXXP Men

52 posts in this topic

http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/article/myers-briggs-types

Men who were INFPs, INFJs and INTPs most often married a female with the same psychological type.

(...)

Women were dissatisfied with the marriage most often (33 percent) when they were married to a man who was an INTP; 31 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an INFP; and 22 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an ISFP.

Do IXXPs simply lack the backbone that many women require in a man? Are females of a similar type less likely to find it important?

Discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would more helpful if they had broken down people by type in comparing satisfaction. It could be that most women are ISFJ and ESFJs and that these types were more dissatisfied with IXXPs, whereas the smaller number of women who were NTs, for example, were very satisfied with IXXPs. By sorting people into type and then disregarding the sorting and sorting by gender alone, we lose some valuable insights. Do you know where the full statistics on this study can be found?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/article/myers-briggs-types

Men who were INFPs, INFJs and INTPs most often married a female with the same psychological type.

(...)

Women were dissatisfied with the marriage most often (33 percent) when they were married to a man who was an INTP; 31 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an INFP; and 22 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an ISFP.

Do IXXPs simply lack the backbone that many women require in a man? Are females of a similar type less likely to find it important?

Discuss.

Hm. I don't think so. I don't know a HUGE number of IXXPs (probably around 4-5?) but I would say that they do have a backbone, it's just more non-verbally expressed. My hesitant guess would be that the dissatisfaction is from those types being more locked in their heads and not being as attentive as some women would like. As Storm mentioned, it would be nice to know the type breakdown of the partners.

Edit: I found the citation for the study but I haven't found the actual paper yet...

Journal: Journal of Psychological Type

Vol/Issue: 36, Date: Jan 1, 1996, Page: 16

Article: Attraction, satisfaction, and psychological types of couples.

Author(s): Marioles, Nancy S.;Strickert, Donald P.;Hammer, Allen L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It could be that most women are ISFJ and ESFJs

I believe this is already known to be the case; at the very least, most women are SFs. It would be interesting to see the types of both parties when measuring satisfaction, yes, but...

Do you know where the full statistics on this study can be found

as far as I could tell it was part of the MBTI Manual, to which I do not have access, and it doesn't seem to be available anywhere on the net for free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without the types of women included, considering that INTJf has more NT women than other types, how can anyone have any kind of educated discussion about it?

How can you draw a backbone conclusion without any evidence?

As an ENTJ woman who's drawn to NT type men, particularly INTPs, my past negative experiences had nothing to do with backbone. More emotional communication styles, values and consistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without the types of women included, considering that INTJf has more NT women than other types, how can anyone have any kind of educated discussion about it?

So unless the topic revolves around NT women in particular, it is impossible to have an "educated discussion"?

How can you draw a backbone conclusion without any evidence?

Perhaps you'll notice that sentence took the form of a question rather than an assertion. However...

As an ENTJ woman who's drawn to NT type men, particularly INTPs, my past negative experiences had nothing to do with backbone. More emotional communication styles, values and consistency.

You'd claim the two bolded parts are entirely unrelated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So unless the topic revolves around NT women in particular, it is impossible to have an "educated discussion"?
No. Your Ni has drawn an inaccurate conclusion. Without the data, NT women can only discuss their personal experiences. If they have no personal experiences, they can't discuss anything since they're not part of the majority of SF women.

In essence, the foundational blocks to this study are missing.

Perhaps you'll notice that sentence took the form of a question rather than an assertion. However...

You'd claim the two bolded parts are entirely unrelated?

Consistency might or might not have anything to do with backbone. In my experiences, it had nothing to do with backbone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. Your Ni has drawn an inaccurate conclusion. Without the data, NT women can only discuss their personal experiences.

But there is already data in the study, just not some additional information that you'd personally like to see.

If they have no personal experiences, they can't discuss anything since they're not part of the majority of SF women.

You are already making the assumption that there is significant variance between the types of females. Maybe there isn't. Also, I fail to see how the lack of personal anecdotes should exclude one from a discussion.

Consistency might or might not have anything to do with backbone. In my experiences, it had nothing to do with backbone.

Heat might or might not have anything to do with fire. In my experiences, it had nothing to do with fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So unless the topic revolves around NT women in particular, it is impossible to have an "educated discussion"?

Without the data as to type, we don't know if all types of women are dissatisfied with IXXPs in high proportions OR if the dissatisfied women are overly represented by SFs (or other group) compared to the general population. If the former, something about IXXPs in general makes them unattractive to women in general. If the latter, something about IXXPs make them unattractive in general to women of that over-represented type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But there is already data in the study, just not some additional information that you'd personally like to see.
Nonsense. Ask me how a skydiver feels about freefall versus twin jump without pertinent supporting data and most would say "hell if I know".
You are already making the assumption that there is significant variance between the types of females. Maybe there isn't. Also, I fail to see how the lack of personal anecdotes should exclude one from a discussion.
Refer to this quote. Assumption...yours.
I believe this is already known to be the case; at the very least, most women are SFs. It would be interesting to see the types of both parties when measuring satisfaction, yes, but...

It's fact that different MBTI types are...different. Also, there are different SF types.

Heat might or might not have anything to do with fire. In my experiences, it had nothing to do with fire.
Awful analogy since it assumes causation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nonsense. Ask me how a skydiver feels about freefall versus twin jump without pertinent supporting data and most would say "hell if I know".

Except that has nothing to do with this case at all. Here, you've been told that a high percentage of skydivers don't enjoy freefall and refuse that this has any meaning whatsoever unless you're given their MBTI types.

It's fact that different MBTI types are...different. Also, there are different SF types.

And there are differences within each type, and they wear different types of shoes and eat a different cereal for breakfast. There are already two attributes in common for all of the participants: they are married and female. It seems you're just denying the statistical significance because of your personal preferences; hardly grounds for assumed generalisations.

Awful analogy since it assumes causation.

No, it does not. Claiming that, and I'm quoting the dictionary here, "strength of character; resolution" has nothing to do with consistency is about as absurd as claiming that things being on fire has nothing to do with rapid movement of particles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Except that has nothing to do with this case at all. Here, you've been told that a high percentage of skydivers don't enjoy freefall and refuse that this has any meaning whatsoever unless you're given their MBTI types.
This type of thinking leads to poor conclusions which has been greatly evidenced by "backbone" conclusions. Waving the generalized magic wand doesn't work for most NTs.
And there are differences within each type, and they wear different types of shoes and eat a different cereal for breakfast. There are already two attributes in common for all of the participants: they are married and female. It seems you're just denying the statistical significance because of your personal preferences; hardly grounds for assumed generalisations.

I've assumed nothing. You've made generalized assumptions about backbone, females and marriage, etc. I'm looking for foundational data.
No, it does not. Claiming that, and I'm quoting the dictionary here, "strength of character; resolution" has nothing to do with consistency is about as absurd as claiming that things being on fire has nothing to do with rapid movement of particles.
Since you have no idea what my past relationships were all about and also, the INTP men that were involved with no understanding of who I am, perhaps waving the generalized magic wand works for you but from where I stand, being the person involved in the relationship, it doesn't work at all.

And with that, I'm tired of arguing against the generalized magic wand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time you retort with "NO U" instead of actually countering my points, it becomes an even fainter echo.

Since you have no idea what my past relationships were all about and also, the INTP men that were involved with no understanding of who I am, perhaps waving the generalized magic wand works for you but from where I stand, being the person involved in the relationship, it doesn't work at all.

Haha, you don't seem to realise that I'm only using your own words to make my point, and thus I don't have to pretend to know about the details of your personal relationships. You may have meant something different and used an inaccurate expression, but it doesn't take a genius to realise whose fault that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My INTP best friend married an ISFJ and it's not exactly smooth sailing for him. They have children, are pretty committed to one another, but I think a lot of her expectations are hurtful to him, and he more readily blames himself than he points the finger back at her. I think SFJ's (like my girlfriend of 3.5 years) are unknowingly extraordinarily imperial and assertive about their views on, well, everything. Nothing rubs an NT the wrong way quite so much as that.

My friend and I very obviously get along great, and our relationships have eerily similar problems (Me, ENTP/ESFJ. Theirs, INTP/ISFJ). It all comes down to your will to make it work, and your character. If you are both decent people and not doing something that is flagrantly asking for trouble, then it just comes down to perseverance and making a solid effort to provide what your partner needs in a way they will appreciate it. Again, not trying to rag on SFJ's, but I think a lot of them tend to have no "give" or desire to change. Fortunately my girlfriend is all into the MBTI stuff, we both acknowledge we have things to work on, and lately we've both had to make a renewed effort after being honest with ourselves about how hard we really try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read the article it pretty much states which conclusions could be drawn from the study. Perhapse we should go through the article rather than making wild ass guesses which mesh with confirmation biases and then fighting about it.

The authors found very little evidence that opposites marry. The only exceptions were ESTJ men married to INFP women and ESTP men married to INFJ women. These two types of men, said the authors, were also the two types who had been married the most often.

Very interesting as it contradicts some popularly held ideas on 'ideal type matchups'. A disscussion could be had on why this is.

Men who were INFPs, INFJs and INTPs most often married a female with the same psychological type. Women, on the other hand, who were ENFJs and INFJs married men with the same type.

More interesting things to note. A discussion could be had on why those types prefer a mates who mirror themselves.

The researchers also found that female feeling types (mostly ESFJs) were married the longest and that female thinking types (mostly INTP) were married the fewest number of years. Perceiving types were more likely to have divorced than judging types.

Not suprising to note that the traditionalists stay married longer than the nontraditional.

Extroverts tended to be more satisfied with their relationships than Introverts which didn't take into account their length of marriage or how many times they had been married.

Interesting. It could be because extroverts have a larger social support structure and thus might place less demand or social load on their marraige partner than an introverted couple would. That

"Our research and the overall trend," said Dr. Marioles,"supports the likelihood that people are more likely to be attracted to and marry someone of the same type then they are a person of the opposite type."

This is mostly just a reinteration of point #1 but doesn't really tell us much more. How 'same type' marraige rate stack up against 'different but not opposite type' rates might add more to the debate but they don't really tell us.

Women were dissatisfied with the marriage most often (33 percent) when they were married to a man who was an INTP; 31 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an INFP; and 22 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an ISFP.

This one seems to be what touched off this whole debate but lets review what we don't know here.

#1. While we know the top three 'dissatisfied', we don't know the percentages of any of the other types? These precentages would be very shocking if the were double the next highest rates or less shocking if they were only ahead by 5-10%, but because we have no context we can't really draw much from this.

#2. What were the criteria for dissatisfaction?

#3. How many of these couples were represented in this study? Doing basic math we can draw some small conclusions:

426 couples x 2 = 856 people.

INTP rates are 1-2% off the top of my head (lets use best case scenario of 2%) x 856 = 17 INTP's rounding down.

The study indicates the problem was with male INTP so we need to futher reduce that 17 into just INTP males. Off the top of my head I want to say that INTP males were slightly more common than INTP females so lets say 2 of every 3 INTP's is male. x 17= 11.3 INTP males.

11.3 x the factor of 33% dissatisfaction = 3.8 (4 rounding up) INTP males whose partner was dissatisfied with them.

Large enough sameple size to draw statistically relevant data from? I think not, and this holds largely true for the other two problematic types they listed as well.

Only 13 percent of the men were dissatisfied when the women were an ENFJ and 12 percent of the men were dissatisfied when the women were an ENFP. Myers-Briggs types give some insight into partner satisfaction.

How wonderfully vauge.

This information received from the American Psychological Association (APA), in Washington, DC.

In conclusion...not a lot to be learned from this article without seeing all the original data and how it was gathered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The authors found very little evidence that opposites marry. The only exceptions were ESTJ men married to INFP women and ESTP men married to INFJ women. These two types of men, said the authors, were also the two types who had been married the most often.

Very interesting as it contradicts some popularly held ideas on 'ideal type matchups'. A disscussion could be had on why this is.

Not really, the "ideal type matchups" from Keirsey, for example, are not complete opposites but rather only three letters are switched, like in the ENFP + INTJ matchup.

Men who were INFPs, INFJs and INTPs most often married a female with the same psychological type. Women, on the other hand, who were ENFJs and INFJs married men with the same type.

More interesting things to note. A discussion could be had on why those types prefer a mates who mirror themselves.

Indeed, and the fact that this information is juxtaposed with the results about dissatisfaction with marriages to IXXP males smells trouble for the suggestion that "only SF women are dissatisfied".

Extroverts tended to be more satisfied with their relationships than Introverts which didn't take into account their length of marriage or how many times they had been married.

Interesting. It could be because extroverts have a larger social support structure and thus might place less demand or social load on their marraige partner than an introverted couple would. That

Or it could be because most "introverts" are really just broken extroverts.

Women were dissatisfied with the marriage most often (33 percent) when they were married to a man who was an INTP; 31 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an INFP; and 22 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an ISFP.

This one seems to be what touched off this whole debate but lets review what we don't know here.

#1. While we know the top three 'dissatisfied', we don't know the percentages of any of the other types? These precentages would be very shocking if the were double the next highest rates or less shocking if they were only ahead by 5-10%, but because we have no context we can't really draw much from this.

But we do know that the top three types are all IXXPs, and that all other types are at least 11% below the INTP.

#2. What were the criteria for dissatisfaction?

Hm, I'm just making a wild guess here, but I'd say something along the lines of "not being satisfied".

#3. How many of these couples were represented in this study? Doing basic math we can draw some small conclusions:

426 couples x 2 = 856 people.

INTP rates are 1-2% off the top of my head (lets use best case scenario of 2%) x 856 = 17 INTP's rounding down.

The study indicates the problem was with male INTP so we need to futher reduce that 17 into just INTP males. Off the top of my head I want to say that INTP males were slightly more common than INTP females so lets say 2 of every 3 INTP's is male. x 17= 11.3 INTP males.

11.3 x the factor of 33% dissatisfaction = 3.8 (4 rounding up) INTP males whose partner was dissatisfied with them.

Large enough sameple size to draw statistically relevant data from? I think not, and this holds largely true for the other two problematic types they listed as well.

And here's the part where you pull numbers out of your ass that are completely off the charts. INTPs are actually 3-5% of the overall population and 4-7% of the males. They are the most common of all four NT types. This suddenly boosts the number to 30 males. I wonder what you were expecting; 500 of each type? The overall amount of participants is very close to what is considered appropriate for sociological studies/surveys, i.e. approximately 1000 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My speculation in the past on INTP men specifically and dissatisfaction in marriages compared to women of the same type is that INTP women tend to buck societal expectations of what a woman should be and report themselves as considerably less likely to settle in a relationship as they need someone to accept them as an independant women who will not bend to the pressure of others. INTP men are laid back, easy going, devoted and fit expectations better so are therefore more likely to end up married to their first girlfriend. Due to age/inexperience those relationships are more likely to end up in a divorce.

Imo.

Haven't speculated on ISFP or INFP men in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And here's the part where you pull numbers out of your ass that are completely off the charts. INTPs are actually 3-5% of the overall population and 4-7% of the males. They are the most common of all four NT types. This suddenly boosts the number to 30 males. I wonder what you were expecting; 500 of each type? The overall amount of participants is very close to what is considered appropriate for sociological studies/surveys, i.e. approximately 1000 people.

Pulling numbers out of his ass, as opposed to what? Pulling the assertion that Perceivers have no "backbone" out of your ass?

The overall number of participants is fine, but it is a problem if there is a small number of representatives of a particular group, especially if you're going to draw assumptions based on the limited amount of data that you have. I could have a million blue-eyed people and two brown-eyed people. If one of those two brown-eyed people committed a crime, it would be absolutely true to say that, "According to my study of the participants, half of brown-eyed people are criminals." But that doesn't mean anything because my study sucks.

It's even worse when you're trying to measure something as inherently subjective as satisfaction in a relationship. That means different things to different people. What constitutes satisfaction? Loving every minute of the relationship? Being content (define that term, too) with the relationship a majority of the time that you're consciously thinking of it? Considering the relationship better than the available alternatives? If it's just an emotional response to a question like, "Are you satisfied," then you have to admit that emotions don't lend themselves well to black-and-white distinctions applied universally across a spectrum of people.

But if we're going to pull assertions out of nowhere, why not mention that the top two dissatisfiers were intuitive types? Heaven forbid we besmirch the revered and holy name of the Intuitive, right? And the top two males types that women reported dissatisfaction with were also two that were mentioned as being more likely to marry someone similar to themselves. So maybe it's not that there's something intrinsically defective about INFPs and INTPs. Maybe the problem is that women become dissatisfied when they marry someone who is similar to themselves, and the INxPs just happen to be the most likely to make that "mistake"-- if ESTJs were the group most likely to marry themselves, maybe they would be report the highest levels of dissatisfaction.

I think the real point of the article, if there is one, is buried in the middle: "The couples, said Dr. Marioles, were most satisfied in their marriage if they both could confide in their mate, share outside interests, calmly discuss and exchange ideas." MBTI type is a cheap, bastardized, one-size-fits-all surrogate for the actual traits that make up a personality. The assumption is that people of the same type probably have some similar interests and habits and communication styles, and they probably do to some extent, but it's also practically made to force a confirmation bias. Despite all the serious and joking talk about how INTJs are and what "real INTJs" do, a five-minute look at this forum shows how wide the variation within a type can be. And likewise, there's no rule that says that people of different types are not allowed to have several things in common-- look at the non-INTJs here. They fit in well and they're well-liked and well-understood in their conversations. MBTI type isn't the be-all, end all of personality. Trying to understand people based only on their type is like trying to build a house using only a rubber mallet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The authors found very little evidence that opposites marry. The only exceptions were ESTJ men married to INFP women and ESTP men married to INFJ women. These two types of men, said the authors, were also the two types who had been married the most often.

Very interesting as it contradicts some popularly held ideas on 'ideal type matchups'. A disscussion could be had on why this is.

I think people commonly believe that opposites attract because it makes sense in a poetic way. It also upholds the belief that your spouse is suppose to balance you - that a married couple is "one unit" in a way. Ying-yang kind of stuff.

In reality, introverts don't need to be balanced by extroverts. Marriage isn't the merging of two people into one - it's two people remaining two people and trying to get along. It's a lot easier to get along with someone if they communicate in the same way and have the same needs as you. Not that every single letter needs to be the same - but like the study showed, "similar" types get along better on average.

The "ideal match" is based on the idea that a person needs balance in every category except the N/S area. But there is no reason to believe this besides romanticism. Some introverts might like an extrovert who goes out to party while they get to remain home, or an extrovert who "gets them out of their shell." Other introverts would hate someone whose always trying to talk to them and make them go do stuff they don't want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people commonly believe that opposites attract because it makes sense in a poetic way. It also upholds the belief that your spouse is suppose to balance you - that a married couple is "one unit" in a way. Ying-yang kind of stuff.

In reality, introverts don't need to be balanced by extroverts. Marriage isn't the merging of two people into one - it's two people remaining two people and trying to get along. It's a lot easier to get along with someone if they communicate in the same way and have the same needs as you. Not that every single letter needs to be the same - but like the study showed, "similar" types get along better on average.

The "ideal match" is based on the idea that a person needs balance in every category except the N/S area. But there is no reason to believe this besides romanticism. Some introverts might like an extrovert who goes out to party while they get to remain home, or an extrovert who "gets them out of their shell." Other introverts would hate someone whose always trying to talk to them and make them go do stuff they don't want to.

One of my favorite blogs written by a Psyd said that similar emotional style is the single most important thing to have in common in a relationship. I know that I get along much better with IxTx in romantic relationships, and I tend to find xNTx more interesting in general. My experience with ExFx's is that something becomes "wrong with you" and they start trying to change me or get me to "come out of my shell" which can be potentially damaging to the relationship. Most of my close friends are somewhere in the xNTx spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The overall number of participants is fine, but it is a problem if there is a small number of representatives of a particular group, especially if you're going to draw assumptions based on the limited amount of data that you have. I could have a million blue-eyed people and two brown-eyed people. If one of those two brown-eyed people committed a crime, it would be absolutely true to say that, "According to my study of the participants, half of brown-eyed people are criminals." But that doesn't mean anything because my study sucks.

Whoa, I'm now a racist as well! Thanks for enlightening me about my Nazi ways, Captain Godwin.

It's even worse when you're trying to measure something as inherently subjective as satisfaction in a relationship. That means different things to different people. What constitutes satisfaction? Loving every minute of the relationship? Being content (define that term, too) with the relationship a majority of the time that you're consciously thinking of it? Considering the relationship better than the available alternatives? If it's just an emotional response to a question like, "Are you satisfied," then you have to admit that emotions don't lend themselves well to black-and-white distinctions applied universally across a spectrum of people.

Oh no, people are subjective! Let's never perform any kind of social study again because obviously the results are completely useless no matter how many measures you take to increase objectivity.

But if we're going to pull assertions out of nowhere, why not mention that the top two dissatisfiers were intuitive types? Heaven forbid we besmirch the revered and holy name of the Intuitive, right? And the top two males types that women reported dissatisfaction with were also two that were mentioned as being more likely to marry someone similar to themselves. So maybe it's not that there's something intrinsically defective about INFPs and INTPs. Maybe the problem is that women become dissatisfied when they marry someone who is similar to themselves, and the INxPs just happen to be the most likely to make that "mistake"-- if ESTJs were the group most likely to marry themselves, maybe they would be report the highest levels of dissatisfaction.

It is entirely possible that INXX types are worse off than, say, ESXX, but the data clearly shows that IXXPs (with the possible exception of ISTPs) have the lowest satisfaction scores from their wives. Regarding the hypothesis about problems in same-type relationships, it is interesting to note that while INFJs are among the three types most likely to marry their own type, they are not among the top scorers in dissatisfaction.

I think the real point of the article, if there is one, is buried in the middle: "The couples, said Dr. Marioles, were most satisfied in their marriage if they both could confide in their mate, share outside interests, calmly discuss and exchange ideas." MBTI type is a cheap, bastardized, one-size-fits-all surrogate for the actual traits that make up a personality. The assumption is that people of the same type probably have some similar interests and habits and communication styles, and they probably do to some extent, but it's also practically made to force a confirmation bias. Despite all the serious and joking talk about how INTJs are and what "real INTJs" do, a five-minute look at this forum shows how wide the variation within a type can be. And likewise, there's no rule that says that people of different types are not allowed to have several things in common-- look at the non-INTJs here. They fit in well and they're well-liked and well-understood in their conversations. MBTI type isn't the be-all, end all of personality. Trying to understand people based only on their type is like trying to build a house using only a rubber mallet.

Beautiful, simply beautiful. People are all snowflakes, they cannot be categorized in any way, and type means nothing. Yet here you are, on a typology forum and with a type under your name, waving the banner of political correctness with delicious irony. I wonder why someone always feel compelled to give a long lecture on how different and unique everyone is. Growing up in modern society, everyone has heard it a million times before already.

Edited by cannotseethe
removed flaming/trolling (rule 1)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beautiful, simply beautiful. People are all snowflakes, they cannot be categorized in any way, and type means nothing. Yet here you are, on a typology forum and with a type under your name, waving the banner of political correctness with delicious irony. I wonder why someone always feel compelled to give a long lecture on how different and unique everyone is. Growing up in modern society, everyone has heard it a million times before already.

Sure, this is an MBTI forum, but there ARE people who stay on this forum because they know quite a few/a lot of people on this forum. While the person may still have the INTJ tag or any other MBTI tag, it may not be as prevalent in judging people, maybe a little bit.

Just because it is an MBTI forum doesn't mean it HAS to strictly be an MBTI forum.

Other than that, it seems to be hard to judge a group considering the general population would be XSXX types. There would be a lot more variants when it comes to judging an ESTJ versus judging an INXP just for the fact that ESTJ are greater in numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/article/myers-briggs-types

Men who were INFPs, INFJs and INTPs most often married a female with the same psychological type.

(...)

Women were dissatisfied with the marriage most often (33 percent) when they were married to a man who was an INTP; 31 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an INFP; and 22 percent were dissatisfied when they were married to an ISFP.

Do IXXPs simply lack the backbone that many women require in a man? Are females of a similar type less likely to find it important?

Discuss.

These statistics quotes are ridiculous and its delivery is atrocious. Who are these IXXP men married too? What are the MBTI of the women who divorced them? What are the MBTI of the women who didn't? What about other types? ESTJs were mentioned. What about other SJs? How am I suppose to make any sort of convincing conclusion or argument from this lacking data? This is sensationalism and a presentation of inadequate facts. Furthermore there is no mention of how this data was collected. What about multiple marriages with the stats quoted by Weber? This is such poor reporting and such a ludicrous exercise in statistics that I am sorry I even looked at that article. No offense to you, Weber! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.. My experience with ExFx's is that something becomes "wrong with you" and they start trying to change me or get me to "come out of my shell" which can be potentially damaging to the relationship. Most of my close friends are somewhere in the xNTx spectrum...

I so agree with this if one spends a lot of time with ExFx they keep trying to change you/ critise you etc.instead of just letting you be. I think the ExFx, can experience something somehwhat similar in an environment where the IxTx is the dominant person. There is a definite conflict there, even though on a casual friendly basis one can share a lot of feelings, ideas , since opposites do have similar functions, just in a different order. I mean extroverted feeling , introverted sensing, etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These statistics quotes are ridiculous and its delivery is atrocious. Who are these IXXP men married too? What are the MBTI of the women who divorced them? What are the MBTI of the women who didn't? What about other types? ESTJs were mentioned. What about other SJs? How am I suppose to make any sort of convincing conclusion or argument from this lacking data? This is sensationalism and a presentation of inadequate facts. Furthermore there is no mention of how this data was collected. What about multiple marriages with the stats quoted by Weber? This is such poor reporting and such a ludicrous exercise in statistics that I am sorry I even looked at that article. No offense to you, Weber! :)

The article is just written about a study it is not the whole study nor is the article even written by the authors of the study. This happens very frequently in academia - people who are educated and science savvy ready full reports (which are generally dozens or hundreds of pages) and condense it down to tiny nibbles for us outsiders.

Anyways, it quite clearly concludes that ENFx women are the best choice... sort of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now