Queensland University of Technology...Queensland University of Technology ®1 Words and phrases used in written communication by eight personality types as measured by the Myers-Briggs

Queensland University of Technology

®1

Words and phrases used in written communication by eight personality types as measured by the

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®: A contribution to the theory

Elizabeth Anne Short

M.Ed.St., B.Ed., Dip.T.

Centre of Innovation in Education Faculty of Education

Queensland University of Technology

Doctor of Education

2005

1 Registered trade mark of Elizabeth Short

®

WORDS USED BY EIGHT DIFFERENT PERSONALITY TYPES

Doctor of Education Elizabeth Short

i

Keywords

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, MBTI, psychological type, personality type,

management, managers, business communication, written communication,

communication channels, words and phrases, descriptive research, content analysis,

NUD.IST Vivo (NVivo).

®



ii

Abstract

Written communication is an integral part of any organisation regardless of size or the

nature of its business. The writer chooses words that should be understood by the

readers. However, these words have been chosen based on a variety of factors, one of

which is personality type, and the writer’s personality type may differ from that of the

readers. The research question underpinning this study is - In what ways, if at all, do

personality types (as determined by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI) and

most frequently found in management positions), select and use different words and

phrases when writing business communication? To investigate this question, the

psychological type theory of Jung, the personality type theory of Briggs and Myers,

and organisational communication theory are applied. The methodology used is

descriptive research with the documents analysed using content analysis, employing

NUD.IST Vivo in conjunction with manual assessment. The research findings

confirm that each personality type does use different words, validating personality

type theory and therefore, making a contribution to the expanding body of research in

this field. The knowledge gained from this study has significance in areas related to

organisations as well as education and communication theory.

®



iii

Table of contents Keywords ..................................................................................................................i

Abstract ................................................................................................................... ii

Table of contents .................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables and Figures..................................................................................... vii

Statement of Original Authorship ...........................................................................ix

Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................x

Chapter 1: Business writing and personality type....................................................1

1.0 Introduction................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Identifying a problem in context ................................................................... 2

1.2 Overview of the study ................................................................................... 6

1.3 Why this study is important .......................................................................... 9

1.4 The research question.................................................................................. 10

1.5 Summary ..................................................................................................... 11

Chapter 2: ...............................................................................................................12

Understanding psychological and personality type................................................12

2.0 Introduction................................................................................................. 12

2.1 The development of psychological type theory .......................................... 12

2.2 Jung’s psychological type theory................................................................ 14

2.2.1 Jung’s attitudes.................................................................................... 14

2.2.2 Jung’s functions .................................................................................. 15

2.2.3 Primary and auxiliary functions .......................................................... 18

2.3 Psychological type: biological or learned? ................................................. 20

2.4 Development of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ..................................... 21

2.4.1 Four preferences of type...................................................................... 22

2.4.2 Mental processes not behaviours ........................................................ 26

2.5 Dynamic interaction of the preferences ...................................................... 26

2.6 Summary ..................................................................................................... 32

Chapter 3: Reviewing the literature .......................................................................33

3.0 Introduction................................................................................................. 33

3.1 Reliability and validity of the MBTI........................................................... 34

®



iv

3.1.1 Assessing the reliability of the MBTI ................................................. 35

3.1.2 Validity of the MBTI .......................................................................... 38

3.1.3 Validating dynamics theory ................................................................ 41

3.1.4 Dilemma of isolating functions and attitudes...................................... 42

3.2 Comparing the MBTI with other assessment instruments .......................... 45

3.2.1 MBTI and Trait Theory....................................................................... 46

3.2.2 MBTI, KAI, LAI and MPG ................................................................ 47

3.3 Communication and organisations.............................................................. 50

3.4 Personality type of managers ...................................................................... 52

3.4.1 NTJs and STJs in management ........................................................... 56

3.4.2 Impact of dynamics of personality type .............................................. 59

3.5 Personality type and communication research............................................ 62

3.5.1 Verbal communication........................................................................ 62

3.5.2 Written communication....................................................................... 65

3.6 Summary ..................................................................................................... 68

Chapter 4: Communication and organisations .......................................................69

4.0 Introduction................................................................................................. 69

4.1 The learning organisation............................................................................ 69

4.2 Communication principles .......................................................................... 71

4.3 A model of communication......................................................................... 72

4.3.1 Sender or writer................................................................................... 73

4.3.2 Receiver or reader ............................................................................... 75

4.3.3 Message or text ................................................................................... 75

4.3.4 Organisational communication channels ............................................ 76

4.4 A way of seeing the world .......................................................................... 78

4.5 Importance of improving communication skills ......................................... 80

4.6 Writing versus speaking.............................................................................. 81

4.7 Summary ..................................................................................................... 83

Chapter 5: Methodology ..................................................................................84

5.0 Introduction................................................................................................. 84

5.1 The research approach................................................................................. 84

5.1.1 Reliability and validity of written data................................................ 88

®



v

5.1.2 Why not other methodologies? ........................................................... 89

5.2 Identifying participant groups ..................................................................... 90

5.2.1 Selecting the subjects .......................................................................... 90

5.3 Procedure .................................................................................................... 92

5.3.1 Data collection .................................................................................... 93

5.4 Data analysis ............................................................................................... 95

5.4.1 Ranking the words and phrases......................................................... 100

5.4.2 Words used by each personality type................................................ 103

5.5 Summary ....................................................................................................... 105

6. Results ..........................................................................................................107

6.0 Introduction............................................................................................... 107

6.1 “Information”: used by seven personality types ....................................... 109

6.2 “Ensure/s”: used by six personality types ................................................. 110

6.3 “Experience/s/d”: also used by six personality types................................ 112

6.4 Documents examined ................................................................................ 114

6.5 Frequency of word usage .......................................................................... 114

6.5.1 Selecting the most and least words in common ................................ 116

6.6 Comparing differences between personality type groups ......................... 119

6.6.1 Comparing Extraverted and Introverted personality types ............... 120

6.6.2 Comparing Sensing and Intuitive personality types ......................... 123

6.6.3 Comparing Thinking and Feeling personality types ......................... 126

6.6.4 Comparing Judging with Perceiving personality types..................... 126

6.7 Examination of the ISTJs .......................................................................... 129

6.8 Summary ................................................................................................... 131

7. Discussion ....................................................................................................133

7.0 Introduction............................................................................................... 133

7.1 “Information” and different uses of the word ........................................... 135

7.2 “Ensure/s” and different uses of the word................................................. 140

7.3 “Experience/s/d” and different uses of the word....................................... 144

7.4 Use of words in the literature .................................................................... 148

7.5 Word selection differences........................................................................ 150

7.5.1 Most and least word differences ....................................................... 151

®



vi

7.5.2 Words used by only one personality type ......................................... 154

7.5.3 Words divided by dichotomy............................................................ 156

7.6 Repetition of words ................................................................................... 160

7.7 Summary of the results.............................................................................. 163

7.8 Limitations ................................................................................................ 166

7.9 Further research......................................................................................... 167

7.10 Summary ................................................................................................... 168

Appendix A: Interactions of dominant and auxiliary functions...........................170

Appendix B: Personality types in management ...................................................173

Appendix C: Australian and New Zealand personality types of managers .........174

Appendix D: Ethics Procedures ...........................................................................175

D1: Project Description......................................................................................... 175

D2: Statement of consent ...................................................................................... 179

D3: Information sheet ........................................................................................... 180

D4: Personal information ...................................................................................... 183

Appendix E: Two hundred words and phrases ....................................................184

Appendix F: Words by dichotomy Tables F1 – F7...........................................190

References ............................................................................................................197

®



vii

List of Tables and Figures Table Title

Table 2.1 Jung’s attitude-function pairs 18

Table 2.2 Jung’s primary-secondary combinations 19

Table 2.3 Function sequence 20

Table 2.4 The four dichotomies of the MBTI 23

Table 2.5 Type table 25

Table 2.6 Adapting Jung’s terminology 26

Table 2.7 Priorities and direction of functions in each type 30

Table 3.1 Collation of numbers of management personality types in North

America, Australia and New Zealand from the literature

54

Table 3.2 Collation of the number of Australian and New Zealand management

personality types from the database

55

Table 3.3 The dominant and auxiliary functions of the TJs 60

Table 5.1 Age range and personality type of the subjects 92

Table 5.2 Type of documents provided by personality type 93

Table 5.3 Total number of documents and words 94

Table 5.4 Total words provided by each personality type 95

Table 5.5 Example of word ranking by all INTP subjects 102

Table 5.6 Words used by all subjects in eight personality types in frequency of

usage

104

Table 5.7 Words used by each personality type 105

Table 6.1 Words used by only one personality type 115

Table 6.2 ESTJ and ENTJ word and ranking comparison 117

Table 6.3 Comparison between personality types and most word in

common

118

Table 6.4 Comparison between personality types and least words in

common

119

Table 6.5 Number of words used in common and not in common

from 35 words used by the different personality types

120

®



viii

Table Title

Table 6.6 Summary of words used by Extraverted and Introverted

personality types

121

Table 6.7 Summary of words used by Sensing and Intuitive

personality types

124

Table 6.8 Summary of words used by Judging and Perceiving

personality types

127

Table 6.9 Words in common between dichotomous splits 129

Table 6.10 Word ranking and usage by the ISTJs 131

Table F1 Words used by Extraverted personality types 190

Table F2 Words used by Introverted personality types 191

Table F3 Words used by Sensing personality types 192

Table F4 Words used by Intuitive personality types 193

Table F5 Words used by Thinking and Feeling personality types 194

Table F6 Words used by Judging personality types 195

Table F7 Words used by Perceiving personality types 196

Figure Title

Figure 2.1 The attitude polarities 15

Figure 2.2 The functional polarities 16

Figure 2.3 The J-P dichotomy 27

Figure 2.4 Order of preference: Extraverted function 28

Figure 2.5 Order of preference: Dominant function 28

Figure 2.6 Order of preference: Auxiliary, tertiary and inferior functions 29

Figure 4.1 Communication (after Shannon and Weaver) 73

Figure 5.1 Flow chart of data analysis process 96

Figure 5.2 NVivo word search of 200 words identified 97

Figure 5.3 Reduction of words to 176 used by a minimum of one subject 99

Figure 5.4 Reduction to words used by all subjects of a personality type 100

Figure 5.5 Ranking of 35 words used by all subjects of a personality type 101

®



ix

Statement of Original Authorship

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or

diploma at any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and

belief, the thesis contains no material previously submitted or written by another

person except where due reference is made. The referencing and citing system used in

the thesis follows the procedures outlined in the American Psychological Association.

(2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.).

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. I undertake to retain the

original collated data on which this thesis is based for a minimum of five years, in

accordance with University ethics guidelines.

Signed:

Date:

®



x

Acknowledgements

I wish to express my thanks and appreciation to those people who provided

invaluable assistance in the development and completion of this dissertation.

Firstly, to Dr Susan Danby and her team in the Centre of Innovation in Education for

their knowledge, direction and support provided during the life of this project. In

particular I thank Dr Fiona Spencer for her invaluable critique and Associate

Professor Sandra Taylor for her feedback and supervision.

Secondly, I thank my supervisors who willingly read each draft and provided

numerous comments and suggestions: Associate Professor John Lidstone, Dr Marilyn

Campbell and Dr Anne Russell.

Thirdly, my thanks go to all the participants who willingly edited their written

business communications to provide me with the data to examine even though at

times, it was time consuming and difficult for them to do so. Without their assistance

this research could not have been conducted.

Finally, my deepest thanks go to my friend, mentor and partner-in-life, Peter Coleman

to whom I shall forever be indebted. Without his love, unselfish support and

unswerving belief that I could achieve this long-held dream, this dissertation would

not have been completed.

®



1

Chapter 1: Business writing and personality type 1.0 Introduction Written communication is an integral part of any organisation regardless of size or the

nature of its business. Concepts are developed and exchanged in writing, changes are

issued using memoranda, congratulations are written, poor performance is noted,

newsletters are posted, and policies, procedures and work instructions are

documented. Consultants’ reports are examined; proposals, tenders and submissions

are prepared and submitted. All this material is written by a person or sender and read

by other people or receiver(s). The assumption made by the writers is that the words

and phrases they have selected are ones that will be understood by their readers.

However, these words and phrases have been chosen based on a variety of factors.

One of these factors is personality type, and the writer’s personality type may differ

from the type of the readers.

There are personality differences observed in normal healthy people. For this research

the differences that form the individual’s personality are considered to be, “… our

natural gifts and strengths. [that] … influence the way we behave, communicate and

interact in many daily situations in the workplace and at home” (McGuiness, 2004, p.

3). Although every individual is unique, the doctrine of uniqueness does not provide

an insight into how the writer will select words or how the reader will interpret or

understand the material presented to him or her to read (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk &

Hammer, 1998). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®2 (MBTI®) is an instrument that

can provide an insight into how writers gather information and then make their word

usage decisions. The MBTI has been selected for this research project in order to

determine the words and phrases used by different personality types.

The MBTI personality inventory or questionnaire is based on Jung’s (1921/1971)

theory of psychological types and was developed to validate his theory and to allow it

®



2

to be put to practical use. The MBTI categorises individuals into 16 distinctive

personality types that result from the interactions of how individuals prefer to use

their perception and judgement. It is anticipated that knowing the personality type of

a person, specific differences will be expected and effective coping strategies can be

implemented. The theory underlying the MBTI states that, “much seemingly chance

variation in human behaviour in fact is not due to chance; it is the logical result of a

few basic, observable preferences” (Myers et al., 1998, p. 21).

This current research project seeks to find the logic in the words and phrases

commonly found in business communications, and written by different personality

types as defined by the MBTI. The assumption underpinning this current research is

that each personality type will use words and phrases that are different from those

used by other types but the same as those selected by the same type. Other research-

conducted to-date has not addressed these issues as evidenced by the literature review

in Chapter 3.

This research is intended to contribute to the body of work on personality type theory,

by addressing the gap perceived currently to exist in understanding the words and

phrases used by personality types when writing. The information obtained can then be

applied to business communication, and educational and communication theory and

practice. A theoretical basis can be provided for training in business writing skills

based on personality type as determined by the MBTI.

1.1 Identifying a problem in context During the researcher’s time as the national training manager for a medium-sized

Australian organisation it became apparent that understanding the theory of

personality type and communication principles alone was insufficient to ensure

effective communication. On employment the researcher was asked to develop a two-

day communications-training program to introduce all 1,000 employees to the soon-

2 Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI are registered trademarks of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust in the US and other countries.

®



3

to-be-revised vision and values of the company. How this information was to be

imparted in the program was entirely at the discretion of the new training manager.

This program was to begin as soon as the senior managers of the company had

attended an off-site workshop to agree on the vision and values.

Having returned from this workshop, the training manager was expected to

commence designing and conducting this new program. However, the training

manager wanted first of all to prepare a training plan, where the two-day

communications-training program was one component of an organisation-wide

training and development plan. For two months the training manager conducted a

training needs analysis (TNA) and travelled around Australia interviewing the

managers, supervisors, team leaders and trainers. The result of this research was a

comprehensive training and development plan that was 70 pages in length. During

this time the general managers were asking questions as to why the communications-

training program had not commenced. They did not seem interested that a TNA was

being completed to provide a platform from which to launch the training program.

Two months after being employed a presentation was scheduled where the training

manager explained the plan in detail to the general managers. Although the brief had

been to develop a two-day communications-training program, the training manager

delivered a plan with 16 different programs ranging from interpersonal skills to

executive development. Within these programs more than 50 individual workshops

were designed with $400,000 anticipated to be the overall cost. After the two-hour

presentation, there was silence. The eight general managers eventually asked a few

questions and approval was given to proceed. Despite being given permission and the

budget to implement the plan, the training manager wondered about the silence and

the reasons for the few questions. However, the training manager did not ask the

general managers any questions to find out what they actually thought.

The training manager was an accredited user of the MBTI having applied it

extensively and successfully in her previous organisation. She believed that

understanding one’s personality type facilitated communication in organisations

providing an insight into an individual’s thinking and decision-making processes.

®



4

Further, she had found that understanding personality type through the use of the

MBTI was an excellent team-building tool. Consequently, this two-day

communications–training workshop was based on personality type as determined by

the MBTI. During the first workshop the general managers had their personality type

identified as part of the workshop. Eventually every employee attended this two-day

program.

After this first workshop and knowing the personality types of the general managers,

the training manager started to understand the aforementioned silence. In the

language of personality type as determined by the MBTI, the general managers and

the training manager had the Thinking function in common (see Chapter 2 for a

description of personality type theory). However, the training manager, as an ISTJ

preferred Sensing, as did only one of the general managers, an ESTJ. It was then

realised that of the nine people present at the training plan presentation there were six

different personality types. The principal difference was that the other seven general

managers preferred Intuition: one INTJ, two INTPs, two ENTPs and two ENTJs.

Intuitives are known to be conceptual, future-oriented, and interested in patterns and

the relationship of factors to make decisions. The personality types preferring Sensing

are detail-focused and interested in the present and the relationship of factors between

what was known or had been experienced (McGuiness, 2004; Myers & Kirby, 1994).

(See Appendix A for a description of the different personality types.) The training

manager had written a plan consistent with her personality type as, “The language of

ISTJs is usually detailed, logical and literal. … they tend to explain things logically

and provide factual information to support their view. They like to give a full and

detailed explanation” (McGuiness, 2004, p. 30).

Whilst the general managers have different communication styles based on their

particular personality type, the chief executive officer and the chief financial officer

were ENTJs. The language of the ISTJ must have been difficult for them to

appreciate as their preference is to, “see patterns and connections and want the

framework first and details later. … their language tends to be global, dealing with

®



5

concepts and ideas” (McGuiness, 2004, p. 24). The differences in communication

styles were apparent.

The general managers commented that the training plan was lengthy with too much

detail. Consequently the plan was relegated to the bookcase and if training

information was required the general managers would telephone for the details

required. When the first year of training had been successfully completed, the

training manager decided that this second plan should reflect the language used by the

Intuitive general managers. Without conferring with the general managers, the

training manager changed the author and format of the plan. The senior trainer was

asked to devise this second plan. However, the senior trainer, while sharing the

Intuitive preference with seven of the general managers, was an ENFP, a different

personality type again. The senior trainer produced an eight-page plan that was

conceptually different, for example the session “problem solving” was called

“brainastics” and minimal detail was provided. Instead of relating to this document

intuitively, the general managers found the second plan confusing with its lack of

information, minimal word usage and unusual titles.

It became apparent to the training manager that communication problems were

arising from the way different personality types used the same words and also from

the dissimilar words preferred. However, selecting the words that were preferred by

other managers proved to be challenging when these managers were of a different

personality type to the training manager. Turning to the personality type literature

provided some answers regarding the behaviours that could be expected by each of

the personality types. The words that were found and suggested as being used by

different types were words not normally associated with business language and

therefore were of minimal assistance (Myers & McCaulley, 1985). It was this paucity

of useful information in the personality type literature that began the journey that has

led to this current study.

The concept of the learning organisation (Marsick & Watkins, 1996; Schön, 1971;

Senge, 1990) was introduced in a series of workshops to the managers in this

®



6

organisation, always with personality type theory underpinning the discussion. As

with the written documentation the researcher found that knowing the words and

phrases used by other personality types affected the successful integration of these

concepts. It is anticipated that confirming what these different words and phrases are

can ultimately assist with the successful implementation of the principles of a

learning organisation.

1.2 Overview of the study Jung’s (1921/1971) psychological type theory and the subsequent development of the

Myers-Briggs personality inventory provided the theoretical basis for the current

research. Two terms used throughout the study are psychological type and

personality type. Jung used the term “psychological” type and where reference is

made to Jung’s work, this term is also used. Briggs and Myers (Myers & Myers,

1980) who developed the Indicator used the term “personality” type rather than

psychological type. Therefore, whenever the reference is to the type preferences

selected through the use of the MBTI then the term personality type is used. Chapter

2: Understanding psychological and personality type explains both of these theories

in depth.

In Chapter 3 the literature is reviewed in five particular areas. The first of these areas

is the research conducted on personality type reliability and validity (Boyle, 1995;

Carlyn, 1977; Carskadon, 1977; Gardner & Martinko, 1996; Hammer, 1996; Myers &

McCaulley, 1985; Myers et al., 1998; Schweiger, 1985; Thorne & Gough, 1991;

Tzeng & Ware, 1991). The difference between the forms or inventories most

commonly used to indicate personality type preferences is explained (Myers et al.,

1998). The importance of functions and attitudes of type is reviewed (Myers et al.,

1998). Also identified is a concern that most of the research conducted has not been

with the whole type but rather by dividing the subjects into subsets of personality

type such as Sensing and Thinking, Sensing and Feeling, Intuition and Feeling, and

Intuition and Thinking (Nutt, 1986b; Ruble & Cosier, 1990). Alternatively, some

subjects were divided into one function only such as Thinking or Feeling, Intuition or

®



7

Sensing (Atwater & Yammarino, 1993; Boreham, 1987; Kerin & Slocum,

1981).When type preferences were split, the research results obtained generally were

unsatisfactory and inconclusive. The reasons why participants for the current research

were selected based on whole personality type and not subsets of type are

substantiated in this chapter.

The second section of the literature review identifies how other assessment

instruments compare with the MBTI tool and to further validate the inventory (Berr,

Church & Waclawski, 2000; Church & Waclawski, 1998; Fitzgerald, 1997; Fleenor,

1997; Gryskiewicz & Tullar, 1995; Kirby, 1997; Kirton, 1994; Myers et al., 1998).

Organisational communication literature is reviewed in the third section (Curtis,

Floyd, & Winsor, 1997; Klauss & Bass, 1982; Noble, 1999).

The fourth part of the literature review focuses on the most common personality types

found in management. When the literature reviewed provides statistics on the number

of the different personality types participating in any management study, the numbers

are collated and are presented in Appendices B and C (Ball, 2003; Bennett, Pietri, &

Moak, 1998; Craig & Sleight, 1990; Craig, Craig, & Sleight, 1988; Gardner &

Martinko, 1990; Gryskiewicz & Tullar, 1995; Myers et al., 1998; Roach, 1986). It is

from these statistics garnered from North America, Australia and New Zealand that

the most appropriate subjects (or personality types) for this research are selected. The

literature on the impact of dynamics of personality type is also explored in this

section with its importance in communication practice identified (Yeakley, 1983).

®



8

In section five the literature on personality type and communication is reviewed.

Predominately, the verbal communication interaction styles of being assertive,

managing conflict, oral communication anxiety and interpersonal communication

effectiveness are identified (Carey, Hamilton, & Shanklin, 1985; Craig & Sleight,

1990; Loffredo & Opt, 1998; Opt & Loffredo, 2000; Percival, Smitheram, & Kelly,

1992; Williams & Bicknell-Behr, 1992).

The relatively few books and articles that address written communication and

personality type are then examined. Systematic research is not evident in the books

and articles reviewed. The focus seems to be on how to write while understanding

your own personality type rather than understanding the reader’s type preferences

(DiTiberio & Jensen, 1995; Gladis, 1993; Loomis, 2002; Loomis, 2004; Luzader,

1990; Shumate, 2002; Thompson, 1997). The conclusion reached is that research into

the words and phrases different personality types select has not been conducted

previously. There appears to be a significant gap in knowledge about how personality

type impacts on any written communication and specifically on business written

communication.

In Chapter 4 the principles of the learning organisation and business communication

theory are presented in support of psychological type and personality type theory. The

fundamental problem of communication is considered to be the difficulty of

reproducing at one point, exactly or nearly exactly the message selected at another

point (Shannon and Weaver, 1949). Shannon and Weaver (1949), the originators of

communication theory, believed that meanings reside in human understanding, not in

the signals transmitted. In this chapter, the four principal components of Shannon and

Weaver’s model of communication are examined: the sender, receiver, message and

channel. Each component is related to written communication, as consistent with the

current study.

Chapter 5 details the descriptive research methodology used, the selection of the

participants, the procedure used to collect the data and the analysis of the data.

Content analysis is selected as the most appropriate method for analysing the

®



9

documents obtained (Neuman, 2003; Silverman, 2001). The software package,

NUD.IST Vivo (NVivo) is used to calculate the number of actual words and phrases

used in conjunction with validation by the researcher (Richards, 1999; Welsh, 2002).

Thirty-five words are isolated as being used by all subjects within a personality type

and these words are then analysed in-depth to obtain relevant results.

Chapter 6 presents the results of the content analysis, identifying the 35 words used

by all subjects within a personality type and then providing a detailed examination of

the three most commonly used words. The different documents provided for analysis

are then examined to ascertain if any particular written format was of more use for the

purpose of this current research than another. The frequency of word usage between

personality types is then compared and differences noted. The data are examined in

various ways to compare the differences between personality types and the use of the

words selected.

In Chapter 7 the results are discussed at length and the primary differences presented.

The three most commonly used words are compared to personality type theory and

then words used by only one personality type are examined. The words found in the

personality type literature are compared with the words isolated from the documents.

Word selection differences are discussed in detail. Limitations of the current research

are identified and suggestions for future research are offered.

1.3 Why this study is important There is a need to improve written business communication and reduce the

misunderstandings that occur when reading a document written by another person

(DiTiberio & Jensen, 1995). Jung’s (1921/1971) psychological theory underlying the

MBTI provides a model for anticipating specific differences in people. If it is known

or expected that people will respond differently in any given situation, then effective

communication can be facilitated through the preparation of an appropriate response.

Understanding differences and having the skills to accommodate other behaviours

minimises the risk that the communicator will assume that the other person is being

®



10

contrary or difficult. It is therefore possible to conclude that variation in human

behaviour is the result of a few basic, observable preferences and not due to chance

(Myers et al. 1998). As Pearman (1998) stated, “the meaning of any message is in the

receiver of the message, and the meaning that is created is based on the receiver’s

habit of mind” [author’s italics] (p. 50). Presumably also, the initiator of the message

presented the communication according to his or her “habit of mind”, and it may be

different from that of the receiver.

As identified in the literature review, most of the research conducted into

communication and personality type has examined subsets of type, not whole

personality type. The focus has also been within the context of verbal communication

practices with minimal systematic research performed on personality type and writing

skills. What literature is available focuses on how each personality type, or subset of

personality type, writes and validates that position, rather than assisting the reader to

write for other personality types. The results of this research will contribute to

personality type theory, as there is an identified gap in this area. In addition, the

information gained from this current research study can be used to facilitate written

communication in organisations and contribute to educational and communication

theory.

1.4 The research question The desire to explore and understand what is occurring in the context of written

communication and different personality types led to the following research question

being formulated:

In what ways, if at all, do personality types (as determined by the MBTI and

most frequently found in management positions), select and use different

words and phrases when writing business communication?

®



11

1.5 Summary This chapter has provided the background and rationale for the current research where

with the isolation and analysis of the words and phrases used by different personality

types in written business communication is examined.

Providing the theoretical basis for this research are the psychological type theory of

Jung (1921/1971), the personality type theory of Briggs and Myers (Myers et al.,

1998) the learning organisation premise (Senge, 1990) and the communication theory

of Shannon and Weaver (1949).

Chapter 2 provides an explanation of the complex theoretical work of Jung

(1921/1971) and the life work of Briggs and Myers (Myers & Myers, 1980; Myers et

al., 1998; Saunders, 1991). The insights of Briggs and Myers resulted in the

development of the MBTI and an extensive series of research endeavours of which

this study is one.

®



12

Chapter 2:

Understanding psychological and personality type

2.0 Introduction The intent of the current research is to examine differences in the words and phrases

used in the business or organisational context. The view taken is that the personality

type of the writer makes a critical difference to the words and phrases selected. The

theoretical underpinning for this aspect of the current research is Swiss physician and

psychologist, Carl Gustav Jung’s (1921/1971) psychological type theory that was

extended by Katharine Cooke Briggs and further developed into personality type

theory by Isabel Briggs Myers (Myers et al., 1998). This chapter presents in detail the

historical development of psychological type theory and the subsequent development,

theoretical framework and application of the MBTI.

2.1 The development of psychological type theory From the time of Hippocrates circa 450 B.C. and his determination of four

temperaments, countless attempts have been made to categorise human behaviour

into a typology system (Pearman & Albritton, 1997). The American Plains Indians

also used a quadratic model. They had a tradition of using a medicine wheel that

assumed each person was born into a particular way of seeing the world: buffalo,

logical and analytical; eagle, seeing patterns and flying above the details; bear,

rational and connected to the environment; and mouse, grounded and close to the

details of life (Pearman & Albritton, 1997). Berens, Nardi, and Keirsey continued the

study of temperament typologies using a basic quadratic model to explain and

illustrate personality differences and communication processes (Berens, 1996, 1997,

2000, 2002; Berens & Nardi, 1998; Keirsey, 1998; Nardi & Berens, 1998).

Jung (1921/1971) developed a theory of 16 different psychological types although he

only described eight types. Briggs and Myers (Myers et al., 1998) modelled their

work on Jung’s (1921/1971) psychological types and expanded the definitions to

®



13

include all 16-personality types. They developed a practical and easily administered

method of measuring personality types using a questionnaire named after them, the

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or as more commonly known, the MBTI.

Jung (1921/1971) developed his theory of psychological type from twenty years of

observation in practical psychology. He made acute observations of men and women

of all social levels, drawing from his studies of both primitive and developed societies

and working with his individual clients. He also included a critique of his own

psychological peculiarity ( Hall & Nordby, 1999; Jung, 1921/1971).

In his autobiography, Jung (1961/1995) said that when he developed his theory of

psychological types, he was attempting to deal with the individual’s relationship to

the world, people and things. He was motivated by the need to differentiate his work

from that of Freud and Adler. During his patients’ analyses, Jung came across the

problem of differences between types, “for it is one’s psychological type which from

the outset determines and limits a person’s judgment” (Jung, 1961/1995, p. 233).

Jung’s (1921/1971) typology was not intended to be a method for character analysis

nor a labelling mechanism. Common criticism of type theory is that it labels people

and puts them in boxes. In its simplest form Jung’s typology is a tool for orientating

oneself in a psychological sense, just as a compass might be used to orientate oneself

in a physical sense. Jung used the word “type” as an abbreviation of “typical” not

“stereotype” or “typecast” (Pearman & Albritton, 1997, p. 2).

Jung (1961/1995) believed that, “every judgment made by an individual is

conditioned by his [sic] personality type and that every point of view is necessarily

relative” (p. 234). Hall and Nordby (1999) considered that Jung’s work was of

twofold importance. Firstly, Jung identified and described a number of basic and

practical psychological processes. Secondly, he showed how these processes merged

in various combinations to determine an individual’s character. Even when people

were placed into the same category, it was not meant to suggest that they showed

®



14

identical personality patterns but rather that they received information and made

decisions in a similar way (Hall & Nordby, 1999).

2.2 Jung’s psychological type theory Knowledge of Jung’s (1921/1971) theory of psychological type enables the

personality types identified by the MBTI and the theory underlying it to be

understood. Jung commenced his observations of psychological types by noting

differences in attitude and then combined this with four functions to arrive at the

beginning of the theory known today.

2.2.1 Jung’s attitudes

Jung’s (1921/1971) typology is a dynamic, systematic approach to a psychology of

consciousness that deals with the problem of opposites, that is, psychological

opposites not logical opposites. Jung centred his typology around the individual’s

psyche, that is, all cognitive processes both conscious and unconscious. This psychic

energy or libido was capable of morphing into many different forms. Jung

(1921/1971) termed this energy flow attitude, and defined it as, “a readiness of the

psyche to act or react in a certain way … having an attitude is synonymous with an a

priori orientation to a definite thing” (p. 414).

For example, Jung (1921/1971) observed that, at times, the psychic energy flowed out

of the psyche to the objective outer world of objects, people and things. Jung referred

to a person who habitually directed his or her energy outwards as an, “extraverted

type” (p. 427). At other times Jung noted that this psychic energy appeared to move

inward to the subjective world of ideas, thoughts and feelings. Jung referred to people

who habitually directed their energy inwards as, “introverted types” (p. 453).

Extraverts and Introverts switch back and forth between these two attitudes

continually (see Figure 2.1). Extraverts do not exist exclusively in the outer world and

Introverts do not spend all their time on reflection. It is this cycling that refreshes the

psyche and maintains balance (Pearman, 1998).

®



15

Figure 2.1. The attitude polarities

2.2.2 Jung’s functions

As Jung (1921/1971) continued his studies and observations over the next 10 years he

expanded his typology by adding four functions: Thinking, Feeling, Sensation and

Intuition. Jung defined a function as, “a particular form of psychic activity that

remains the same in principle under varying conditions” (p. 436). He chose to

distinguish these functions because he deduced that they could not be, “related or

reduced to one another” (p. 437). Briggs and Myers (Myers et al., 1998), during their

research, altered Jung’s order of the functions to begin with perceptions that are

attuned to the flow of events, such as, Sensing (Sensation) and Intuition. These

perceptions were followed by Thinking and Feeling, functions that can be,

“personally directed and are in accord with the laws of reason” (Myers et al., 1998, p.

24). Like attitudes, functions are polar opposites and provide a means for the psyche

to adapt to the outer and inner worlds.

Consequently, Sensation and Intuition must be represented on opposite poles, as must

Thinking and Feeling (see Figure 2.2). This bipolar depiction was intentional because

Jung (1921/1971) postulated that the flow of psychic energy could only be in one

direction at a particular time and both cannot be controlled at the same instant. For

example, a person cannot be active or initiating (Extraverted) at the same time as he

or she is being reflective or receiving (Introverted). Nor can this person be using his

or her perception of a “physical stimulus” (Sensation) at the same time as his or her

“instinctive apprehension” (Intuition) (Thompson, 1996, p. 6).

Introverted Extraverted

®



16

Figure 2.2. The functional polarities

Jung (1921/1971) believed that only one of each dipole could be in consciousness at a

time, and only one of the four functions or mental processes could be in control of

consciousness at any particular instant. Using only one function at one time did not

mean that a person could not use the other functions. Jung considered that although

all four functions were essential for daily living they could not be used

simultaneously.

To further explain the bipolar relationships between the functions, Jung (1921/1971)

described Sensation and Intuition as perceiving (or irrational) functions because they

were the only functions capable of perceiving stimuli. Irrational referred to that

function being beyond or outside of reason and not the more commonly accepted

usage of being illogical or unreasonable.

Thinking and Feeling he described as judging (or rational) functions because they

judged all perceptions. Rational functions were so-called because they were based on

a reflective, linear process that united into a particular judgement (Sharp, 1987). As

part of the rational Thinking function Jung (1921/1971) referred to “ideation” (p.

481), an objective process applied to, “form an idea” (Moore, 2002, p. 655). In

contrast to the Thinking function, Jung considered that when using the Feeling

rational function, a subjective value judgement either accepting or rejecting the

content was made.

Thinking

Intuition Sensation

Feeling

®



17

Jung (1921/1971) defined the two irrational functions of Sensation and Intuition:

Sensation is the psychological function that mediates the perception of a

physical stimulus (p. 461). … sensation is sense perception – perception

mediated by the sense organs and “body-senses” (kinaesthetic, vasomotor

sensation, etc.) (p. 462).

Intuition … mediates perceptions in an unconscious way. … In intuition a

content presents itself whole and complete, without our being able to

explain or discover how this content came into existence (p. 453).

Jung (1921/1971) also defined the two rational functions of Thinking and Feeling:

Thinking is the psychological function which, following its own laws,

brings the contents of ideation into conceptual connections with one

another (p. 481).

Feeling is primarily a process that takes place between the ego (q.v.) and a

given content … that imparts to the content a definite value in the sense of

acceptance or rejection (“like” or “dislike”). Feeling, therefore, is an

entirely subjective process … (p. 434).

Like the attitudes, if a person habitually used one of the functions over another, he or

she was said to have differentiated that function above the others. That person was

then identified by that function as, for example, a Sensing or a Feeling type

(Thompson, 1996).

Combining his attitudes and functions Jung (1921/1971) created eight attitude-

function types as illustrated in Table 2.1.

®



18

Table 2.1. Jung’s attitude-function pairs

Extraversion Introversion

Extraverted Thinking Introverted Thinking

Extraverted Feeling Introverted Feeling

Extraverted Sensation Introverted Sensation

Extraverted Intuition Introverted Intuition

2.2.3 Primary and auxiliary functions

Jung’s (1921/1971) typology was considered a dynamic system, due to interaction

amongst the components of the system. That is, Jung found that a person might have

a habitual attitude, such as Introversion and a habitual function, such as Thinking.

This interaction resulted in an Introverted Thinking type (see Table 2.1).

Each function has an associated attitude. Jung (1921/1971) only gave behavioural

descriptions to each of the eight pairings of these attitude-function types but created

16 psychological types from the associated pairings. Jung discovered that if the

primary or most differentiated function had an extraverted attitude, for example,

Extraverted Sensing, then the secondary function had the opposite attitude, for

example, Introverted Thinking. From each of these pairings specific, identifiable

decision making processes were evident (Thompson, 1996). These pairings are

illustrated in Table 2.2. Note that the primary function-attitude is listed first in each

pair.

®



19

Table 2.2. Jung’s primary-secondary combinations

(Thompson, 1996, p. 9)

Another key component of Jung’s (1921/1971) typology was his concept of the

inferior function. He believed that when a function became differentiated to the

degree that it became superior to the others and therefore became the primary

function, it did so at the expense of its polar opposite. For example, when Intuition

became differentiated to the degree that it was superior to the other functions,

Sensation became the least differentiated and therefore the inferior function. The

more Intuition was used, the less Sensation was developed (see Table 2.3). The less

Sensation was used, the less proficient a person became at using it.

As described in Thompson (1996) and illustrated in Table 2.3, Jung (1921/1971)

defined the primary function as the most differentiated, the secondary function as the

next most differentiated and the inferior as the least differentiated. In a bipolar model

the remaining function, the tertiary function, must be the opposite of the secondary

function. It then followed that all four functions were based on a differentiation and

developmental sequence.

This table is not available online. Please consult the hardcopy thesis available from the QUT Library.

®



20

Table 2.3. Function sequence

Primary

Secondary Tertiary Inferior

Most differentiated

Next most differentiated

Opposite of secondary Least differentiated

E.g., Intuition

E.g., Thinking E.g., Feeling E.g., Sensation

2.3 Psychological type: biological or learned? Jung (1921/1971) observed that type distribution was random as the different types

were to be found in all ranks of society regardless of education or gender. He noted

that even children in families with the same parents, environment, education and

expectations, exhibited contrary attitudes. He concluded that as, “a general

psychological phenomenon, therefore, the type antithesis must have some kind of

biological foundation” (Jung, 1921/1971, p. 331). Jung qualified his statements with

the note that he was considering normal cases. In situations where abnormal

behaviour was forced upon the individual, for example, caused by parental influence,

the individual, “becomes neurotic later, and can be cured only by developing the

attitude consonant with his nature” (Jung, 1921/1971, p. 332). Jung continued by

stating that when the individual was required to behave in a manner contrary to his or

her natural psychological type, acute exhaustion and physical illness could be

experienced.

The belief that psychological type is biological has formed the basis for the

continuing work of personality theory practitioners such as Myers et al. (1998) (and

also Myers & Myers, 1980; Thompson, 1996). The most common example given to

explain the biological nature of type is the equation to ‘left- or right-handedness’.

Each person is born with a preference to use one hand over the other and does so

naturally. However, over time, and if there are other circumstances such as injury,

religious or cultural requirements, the non-preferred hand may become the hand used

primarily or at least with nearly equal dexterity. Relating this example to type theory,

®



21

each person as with handedness, has a preference for one of the two opposite

functions and attitudes on each of the scales. Both preferences are used but at

different times and not usually with equal confidence (Myers, Revised by Kirby &

Myers, 1998).

When the preferred functions and attitudes are used, the person is not exposed to the

stressors that Jung (1921/1971) referred to and consequently retains his or her

competence and energy. As the individual matures and adapts to her or his

environment, the less-preferred functions are developed adding new perspectives and

experiences that were not of interest or considered fulfilling at an earlier age (Grant,

Thompson & Clarke, 1983; Myers & Kirby, 1994). Therefore while aspects of one’s

personality expand, “type theory assumes that type does not change over the life

span” (Myers et al., 1998, p. 27). The results of two communication studies

conducted by Loffredo and Opt also support the assumption that personality type is

biologically based (Loffredo & Opt, 1998; Opt & Loffredo, 2000).

2.4 Development of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator In 1923 Jung’s (1921/1971) book Psychological Types was published in English and

read by Briggs. Briggs had already spent some years observing her friends and their

differing behaviours. She studied Jung’s book and began the development of the

MBTI involving her daughter, Myers, in the process (Saunders, 1991). From 1923 to

the early 1940s, Briggs and Myers studied and applied Jung’s theory to their

understanding of individuals. At this time their work had not been published.

Neither Briggs nor Myers had qualifications in psychology, one of the factors that

caused their work to be dismissed. The corollary was that intensive research was

performed to validate the instrument and through this effort it was administered to

thousands of people before being released for public use (Kirby, 1997; Myers et al.,

1998). By 1941 Myers and Briggs had begun developing and testing questions that

they hoped would assist people in identifying their own Jungian type preferences.

Their goal was to construct an instrument that would assist people in developing their

®



22

self-understanding whilst simultaneously increasing their understanding and

appreciation of others (Saunders, 1991).

By late 1943 Myers, with advice from Briggs, had completed the first version (Form

A) of the Indicator. Over the next five years Myers tested her questions on thousands

of people: high school students, university students, servicemen, employees in

organisations, medical and nursing school students. By 1944 the third version of the

Indicator (Form C) had been completed and was being extensively used in

organisations (Myers & McCaulley, 1985).

The eventual result was the MBTI personality inventory named after Briggs who

began the research and Myers who developed the inventory and continued the

research. The MBTI instrument facilitated a practical application of Jung’s

(1921/1971) theory making it easily accessible to a wide range of people from diverse

cultures, backgrounds and professions. Internationally known, the Indicator has been

translated into 16 different languages (Myers et al., 1998). There are an estimated 2 to

3 million administrations in the United States alone each year (Bayne, 1999; Gardner

& Martinko, 1996; Gladwell, 2004).

2.4.1 Four preferences of type

The outcome of completing the MBTI is that each individual is identified as having a

preference for one of each of four separate dichotomies and therefore given a “type”.

These dichotomies are Extraversion versus Introversion (E-I), Sensing versus

Intuition (S-N), Thinking versus Feeling (T-F), and Judging versus Perceiving (J-P).

The four preferences direct how the individual will characteristically use perception

and judgement, how information is absorbed and then how conclusions are made

about those perceptions. The first and fourth dichotomies are known as attitudes or

orientations and the middle two dichotomies as functions or processes (Myers et al.,

1998) (see Table 2.4).

®



23

Table 2.4. The four dichotomies of the MBTI

(Myers et al., 1998, p. 6)

To ensure that an understandable and useful typology would be developed Myers and

Briggs (Myers & McCaulley, 1985) created a truncated version of each dichotomy to

represent the Type code. They replaced the attitude and function names with letters,

for example, “E” for Extraversion, “I” for Introversion, “S” for Sensing (Sensation),

hallaThis table is not available online. Please consult the hardcopy thesis available from the QUT Library

®



24

“N” for Intuition, “T” for Thinking and “F” for Feeling. To ensure clarity for the

reader the attitude and function names will begin with a capital, e.g. Extraversion.

Lower case will be used when the referring to the dynamic interaction of preferences,

e.g. extraverted Thinking, introverted Sensing.

This simplification of type code enabled the functional pairs to be represented by

using only two letters and always written in the perceiving-judging sequence, that is,

ST, SF, NT and NF (Thompson, 1996). Briggs and Myers (Myers & McCaulley,

1985) replaced Jung’s (1921/1971) term for the function of “Sensation” with

“Sensing”.

To identify the primary function Myers et al. (1998) began their type code with its

attitude, Extraversion (E) or Introversion (I) because Jung (1921/1971) considered

attitude to be so important. He considered Extraversion and Introversion as,

“mutually complementary, and their differences generate the tension that both the

individual and society need for maintenance of life” (Jung, 1921/1971, p. 160). The

first letter in the type code identifies the attitude of the dominant function and the

direction of flow of psychic energy (Thompson, 1996, see Table 2.4).

The perceiving function (S or N) is the means by which information is taken in and

the judging function (T or F) is how the decision is made. Myers et al. (1998) were

concerned with how every personality type adapted to the outer world. To explain

this adaptation they developed an additional bipolar dimension to Jung’s (1921/1971)

model that became an orientation identifier, “J” for Judgement or Judging and “P” for

Perception or Perceiving. This J-P dichotomy described how every personality type

oriented to their outer or extraverted world (see Table 2.4). Common usage of these

words often results in misunderstanding and criticism of type theory. Perceiving types

were assumed to demonstrate “perceptiveness” rather than being, “attuned to

incoming information” (Myers et al., 1998, p. 27).

®



25

Judging types were often considered to be “judgmental” instead of the intended

meaning of referring to, “decision making, the exercise of judgment” (Myers et al.,

1998, p. 27).

Myers et al. (1998) defined these attitudes or orientations as:

Judgment means all the ways of coming to conclusions about what has

been perceived. It includes evaluation, choice, decision-making, and the

selection of a response after perceiving a stimulus (p. 24).

Perception means all the ways of becoming aware of things, people,

events, or ideas. It includes information gathering, the seeking of sensation

or of inspiration, and the selection of a stimulus to attend to (p. 24).

When attitudes and functions are combined, they form the familiar four-letter type

code identified after scoring the MBTI (see Table 2.5). This Type Table was

developed as a means of seeing all the types, “in relation to each other” (Myers &

Myers, 1980, p. 27).

Table 2.5. Type table

(Myers, Revised by Kirby & Myers, 1998, p. 7)

hallaThis table is not available online. Please consult the hardcopy thesis available from the QUT Library

®



26

2.4.2 Mental processes not behaviours

The essence of Jung’s (1921/1971) theory of psychological type consisted of four

innate mental processes or functions (S, N, T, F) considered essential for daily living

as everyone used them; simply not simultaneously. The MBTI inventory was

designed to sort people into pre-existing categories, to which, according to Jung’s

theory, they already belonged (Myers et al., 1998). Unlike trait-based instruments, the

MBTI does not directly measure behaviour nor give an indication as to how much a

person has of a particular mental process, for example, Thinking (Kirby, 1997). Trait

based instruments are based on normal distribution of a trait, such as honesty,

leadership or anxiety where scores around the mid-point indicate normalcy. Whereas

the MBTI with its bi-modal skewed distribution indicates normally distributed clarity

between two dichotomies or preferences, such as Extraversion and Introversion,

Sensing and Intuition, Thinking and Feeling and Judging and Perception (Myers et

al., 1998).

2.5 Dynamic interaction of the preferences Over time Jung (1921/1971) recognised the dynamic nature of his typology but only

elaborated on some of its aspects. He described the eight preference types as listed in

Table 2.1, but focused primarily on the dominant (or primary) function of each type

and the attitude (extraversion or introversion) in which the dominant was typically

used. He did not elaborate on the auxiliary (or secondary) function, “whose nature is

different from, but not antagonistic to, the primary function” (Jung, 1921/1971, p.

406).

Table 2.6. Adapting Jung’s terminology

Primary Dominant

Secondary Auxiliary

Tertiary

Inferior

E.g., Intuition

E.g., Thinking

E.g., Feeling

E.g., Sensing

®



27

Myers et al. (1998) altered some of Jung’s (1921/1971) terminology to reflect current

language practices. “Primary” was changed to “dominant” and “secondary” to

“auxiliary” (see Table 2.6).

Myers and Myers (1980) observed that people did not use their functions equally,

even the two functions (ST, SF, NF, NT) in the individual’s type code. They

hypothesised that by ordering the functions clarification of why each personality type

was so different from the others would be achieved. Jung (1921/1971) and Myers and

Myers (1980) considered that the human psyche was never in a state of stasis but was

constantly moving, using different functions but in a certain order. Adding the J-P

dichotomy enabled the functions to be placed in unique dynamic order for each

personality type (see Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3. The J-P dichotomy

(extraverted) (extraverted) (extraverted) (extraverted) Thinking Feeling Sensing Intuition

Based on Jung’s (1921/1971) writing, Myers et al. (1998) made the assumption that

each person would use a dominant function in their preferred attitude of extraversion

or introversion. An auxiliary function would then develop to provide balance between

extraversion and introversion. Through this auxiliary function a person would become

more comfortable living in both the outer world and the inner world. The auxiliary

function also provided a balance between perception and judgement. The opposite

function to the auxiliary was the tertiary, or third, function. Opposed to the dominant

function was the inferior function, typically the least-developed function. This

interaction between preferences known as, “dynamics of type” provides a more

accurate and three-dimensional picture of type (Myers & Kirby, 1994).

Judging (J) Perceiving (P)

®



28

To calculate the hierarchical and dynamic interaction of functions for each

personality type the following procedure is used. The illustration will use an ESTJ as

the example. The calculation begins with the fourth letter in the type code, that is, J or

P; in this example it is J. This identifies the function used to deal with the outer world

therefore Judging points to the judging function of T or F. If the fourth letter had been

Perceiving then it would point to the perceiving functions of S or N as being used to

deal with the outer world. This action identifies which function will be extraverted

therefore, in this example, T is in the extraverted attitude and written as Te (see Figure

2.4) (Myers et al., 1998; Myers & Myers, 1980; Myers & Kirby, 1994).

Figure 2.4. Order of preference: Extraverted function

Next the first letter is examined. If it is E (as in this example), then the preference

used to deal with the outer world is the dominant function. If it is I, then the

preference used to deal with the outer world is the auxiliary function. This means that

as the ESTJ’s attitude is Extraverted, Thinking must be the dominant function (see

Figure 2.5) (Myers et al., 1998; Myers & Myers, 1980; Myers & Kirby, 1994).

Figure 2.5. Order of preference: Dominant function

The remaining order is then calculated as follows. The other function letter in the type

code (S in this example) becomes either the dominant or the auxiliary depending on

E

S

Te

J

E

S

Te

J

Dominant Te

®



29

what is the opposite of the identified extraverted function. As the dominant has been

identified as T, the other letter in the type code (S) assumes the auxiliary position. If

the dominant is extraverted then the auxiliary is introverted. If the dominant is

introverted then the auxiliary is extraverted. This is intended to balance the dominant

function. The tertiary function is the opposite end of the same dichotomy as the

auxiliary. The inferior function is the opposite end of the same dichotomy as the

dominant function. Therefore for the ESTJ example, the dominant function is

Thinking and so the remaining function in the type code, Sensing, becomes the

auxiliary. The opposite dichotomy to Sensing is Intuition and so N becomes the

tertiary function. The opposite end of the Thinking dichotomy is Feeling therefore F

becomes the inferior function (see Figure 2.6) (Myers et al., 1998; Myers & Myers,

1980; Myers & Kirby, 1994).

Figure 2.6. Order of preference: Auxiliary, tertiary and inferior functions

Myers and Myers (1980) expanded Jung’s (1921/1971) typology by reasoning that

the auxiliary function was oriented to the less preferred attitude. They also concluded

from Jung’s writing that the tertiary and inferior functions were also oriented to the

less-preferred attitude. Therefore, an Introvert would experience their dominant

function as an introverted attitude and the other three functions as extraverted.

Conversely, an Extravert would then experience his or her dominant as extraverted

and the auxiliary, tertiary and inferior functions as introverted (Myers & Myers,

1980; Myers & Kirby, 1994) (see Figure 2.6 and Table 2.7).

Grant et al. (1983) do not subscribe to this theory and believe that the tertiary

function is experienced with the same attitude or energy as the dominant. Quenk

(1993) discussed Grant’s assertion with Myers in 1980, the last year of her life.

E

S

Te

J

Te

Si

Ni/e

Fi

Dominant

Auxiliary

Tertiary

Inferior

®



30

Myers thought the most likely position was that the tertiary, under less pressure than

either the dominant or the auxiliary, could take either attitude at different times.

Research is providing empirical support for Grant et al.’s (1983) hypothesis (Quenk,

1993). For the purpose of the current study, the tertiary function will be considered to

be either extraverted or introverted according to the required situation (see Figure

2.6).

Table 2.7. Priorities and direction of functions in each type

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ

#1

#2

#3

#4

Dominant

Auxiliary

Tertiary

Inferior

S

T

F

N

(I)

(E)

(E/I)

(E)

#1

#2

#3

#4