AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
50). Because of that we suppose that tender-mindedness could be
the overlapping component of agreeableness and TF.
EFA confirmed overlapping of conscientiousness and JP in
accordance with the assumption (Golden, 2005). Comparison
among types showed the lowest level of conscientiousness
in Introverted Perceiving types (IP), namely IT and IF. They
showed significantly lower degree of conscientiousness than
Judging types (IN, EF, IS). Extraverted perceiving types (EP)
did not significantly differed from Judging (J) types in
conscientiousness level. However, EP belong to adaptive
and flexible types, and in a case of ESP “long-term planning”
belongs to “the greatest challenges” (Dunning, 2001, p. 64). In a
case of ENP, for instance, “following the rules” is identified as a
“blind spot” (Dunning, 2001, p. 73). Planning and following the
rules are considerable parts of conscientiousness. In spite of that
our research results didn’t confirm the lower level of
conscientiousness among EP types. Correlation studies of the
MBTI and NEO questionnaires (Furnham, 1996; Furnham, et al.,
2003) showed the greatest connection of JP with sub-scales
order and deliberation. „Order, which makes them efficient in
work“(McCrae & Costa, 2006, s. 50). „Deliberation, making
plans in advance and thinking carefully before acting“(McCrae
& Costa, 2006, p. 50, 51). Because of stated we think that
overlapping of conscientiousness and JP can mean an autonomy
at defining aims and values. It could be said that EP are willing
to accommodate more and cooperate or follow social rules,
while IP rely more on their own rules. IT and IF reached the
lowest level of conscientiousness because they can refuse the
rules from either “non-logical” or “inhumane” reason. The ET
together with IS reached the highest level. They are often in
responsible positions where they monitor fulfilling the duties and
following the rules
(Čakrt, 2009).
Overlapping of Jungian preferences with the NEO dimensions
has been not always shown as a significant. For example
(Furnham, Jensen, & Crump, 2008) in a sample of 3000
managers did not confirm the relationship between NEO-PI-R
traits and SN, JP preferences. Similarly M. Kösegiová (2009) did
not confirm relationship between conscientiousness and P. As
for limits to our research we consider a proportionality of the
research sample and then an absence of ENTJ representatives in
ET. Another limit is the fact that the research sample was made
up by students, predominantly by women, while main
comparison studies were comprised of men in manager
positions. For further research we suggest examination of
differences between types at the level of NEO-PI-R sub-scales.
Sub-scales would allow more precisely define the overlapping of
the NEO dimensions and the types’ preferences. Furthermore, a
manifestation of type preferences depends on various factors, for
instance on a balance and maturity of the type (Lawrence, 1982)
as well as on a degree of emotional stability and currently
experiencing stress (Quenk, 2002). In further research it would
be therefore interesting to monitor relationships of the
personality traits and type preferences in a dependence on a
degree of experiencing stress, emotional stability or age.
5 Conclusion
Personality traits differences in this study indicated that types
differ in extraversion
the most, then mediumly in
conscientiousness and neuroticism, and weakly in agreeableness
and openness to experience. If we consider biological condition
of personality traits (McCrae & Costa, 2006), we could conclude
that EI preferences are the most temperamentally conditioned
from all type preferences and therefore less changeable over
time. JP preferences should be changeable more than EI, but less
than preferences of SN and TF. Weak relationship between
personality traits and SN, TF indicate a developmental potential
for these function preferences. Resulting from these findings we
could conclude relative stability of types attitudes (EI, JP), so-
called „attitude types“(Jung, 1921/1990, p. 330) and relatively
changeable nucleus of the type which is made from
psychological functions of SN and TF, so-called „function
types“(Jung, 1921/1990, p. 330). As to tence & calm preferences
authors (Bents & Blank, 2009) claim that the scale is not stabile
over time which should be confirmed by next research, regarding
the medium relationship with neuroticism trait.
Comparison of NEO traits among eight psychological types
confirmed several propositions of the theory (Jung, 1921/1990)
as well as the empirical characteristics of the types
(Čakrt, 2010;
Dunning, 2001). Differences in personality traits among types
showed the importance of attitude (introverted or extraverted)
for psychological function preferences manifestation.
Literature:
1. ARNAU, Randolph, C., GREEN, Bradley, A., ROSEN,
David, H., GLEAVES, D. H., & MELANCON, Janet, G. Are
Jungian preferences really categorical?: an empirical
investigation using taxometric analysis. Personality and
Individual Differences. 2003, 34(2), 233-251. ISSN: 0191-8869
2. BAILEY, R. HR Applications of Psychometrics. In CRIPPS,
Barry. Psychometric Testing: Critical Perspectives. Chichester:
John Wiley & Sons, 2017, p. 87-111. ISBN 9781119183013.
3. BENTON, Stephen. Psychometrics: The Evaluation and
Development of Team Performance. In CRIPPS, Barry.
Psychometric Testing: Critical Perspectives. Chichester: John
Wiley & Sons, 2017, p. 129-144. ISBN 9781119183013.
4. BENTS, Richard, BLANK, Reiner.
Typický člověk: Úvod do
typologie osobnosti. Praha: Hogrefe – Testcentrum, 2009. 121 p.
ISBN 9788086471365.
5. ČAKRT, Michal. Typologie osobnosti pro manažery. Praha:
Management Press, 2009. 306 p. ISBN 9788072612017.
6. ČAKRT, Michal. Typologie osobnosti - Volba povolání,
kariéra a profesní úspěch. Praha: Management Press, 2010. 217
p. ISBN 9788072612208.
7. DUNNING, Donna. What's Your Type of Career? Mountain
View, California: Davies-Black Publishing, 2001. 397 p. ISBN
9781857885538.
8. DUNNING, Donna. 10 career essentials: Excel at your career
by using your personality type. Boston: Nicholas Brealey
Publishing, 2010. 224 p. ISBN 9781857885422
9. FURNHAM, Adrian. The big five versus the big four: the
relationship between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
and NEO-PI five factor model of personality. Personality and
Individual Differences. 1996, 21(2), 303-307. ISSN: 0191-8869.
10. FURNHAM, Adrian. Personality and Intelligence at Work:
exploring and explaining individual differences at work. Hove:
Routledge, 2008. 432 p. ISBN 978-1841695860.
11. FURNHAM, Adrian, CRUMP, J., BATEY, M., &
CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC, T. Personality and ability predictors
of the "Consequences" Test of divergent thinking in a large non-
student sample. Personality and Individual Differences. 2009,
46(4), 536-540. ISSN: 0191-8869.
12. FURNHAM, Adrian, DISSOU, Georgia, SLOAN, Peter, &
CHAMORRO-PREMUZIC, Tomas. Personality and intelligence
in business people: A study of two personality and two
intelligence measures. Journal of Business and Psychology.
2007, 22(1), 99-109. ISSN 0889-3268.
13. FURNHAM, Adrian, JENSEN, Troy, & CRUMP, John.
Personality, Intelligence and Assessment Centre Expert Ratings.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 2008, 16(4),
356-365. ISSN: 1468-2389.
14. FURNHAM, Adrian, MOUTAFI, Joanna, & CRUMP, John.
The relationship between the Revised NEO-Personality
Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Social Behavior
and Personality. 2003, 31(6), 577-584. ISSN 1179-6391
15. GOLDEN, John, P. Golden Personality Type Profiler :
Preliminary Technical manual. USA: Harcourt Assessment,
2005. 63 p.
16. HOFFMAN, Edward. Psychological testing at work. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2002. 208 p. ISBN 9780071395434.
17. JUNG, Carl. G. Psychological Types. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1921/1990. 608 p. ISBN 0691018138.
18. KÖSEGIOVÁ, Marcela. Kriteriálna validita dotazníka
GPOP. Bratislava, 2009. Bakalárska práca. Fakulta sociálnych a
ekonomických vied Univerzity Komenského.
19. LAWRENCE, Gordon, D. People types and tiger stripes.
USA: CAPT, 1982. 190 p. ISBN 0935652086.
- 121 -