Analysis of MBTI type patterns in college scholars

College Student Journal, Dec, 2003 by Wendy A. Folger, Hugo E. Kanitz, Ann E. Knudsen, Sherene McHenry

In this study, the MBTI was administered to recipients of competitive scholarships (full tuition, room, board, and stipend) awarded to the brightest incoming freshmen at Central Michigan University (based on GPA, essay and interviews). The purpose was to assess where Thinking is expressed in the personalities of gifted and talented college students. A five year population of Centralis Scholars, N=93, was examined to see if and how it might differ from the CAPT Reference group, N= 28356. Fifty seven percent of the scholars had results with Thinking evenly split between being in the Inferior and Tertiary. The remaining scholars (43%) had thinking in their Dominate or Auxiliary. The results suggest that logic may be in the unconscious of gifted and talented individuals, which tends to defy conventional wisdom.

**********

Drawing on an investigation by Eick (1988), the authors reviewed the results of gifted and talented elementary students, as assessed using the Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children ([MMTIC] Meisgeier & Murphy, 1987). In this study of second and fifth grade gifted students, the results appeared to be very unusual. By taking the results of the MMTIC assessment and observing the Type Table, the tertiary and inferior aspects of the Types were 100% Thinking. Since this finding was taken from a small sample (N=26), no conclusions could be drawn. Thus, other studies over diverse populations with larger numbers would be required to assess where Thinking is expressed in the personalities of the gifted and talented among us. The authors of this research chose to use archival records of college scholars who were assessed using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), Form F (Myers & Briggs, 1990), for the years 1990-1994.

The Centralis Scholars Program at Central Michigan University is a competitive scholarship program for high school seniors and community college students with a grade point average (GPA) of 3.5 or higher Central Michigan University (Central Michigan University [CMU], 2000b). The candidates are invited to compete for these scholarships and are chosen on the basis of GPA and a written essay. If a student is granted a Centralis Scholar Award, the student will receive the full cost of tuition, fees, room and board, and a small stipend for books and supplies. These awards are renewable up to eight semesters as long as the student maintains at least a 3.25 GPA while attending the university (CMU, 2000a). Because of the very nature of these awards, The Centralis Scholars at Central Michigan University represent the very best and brightest of the student population.

Much of the work surrounding the clusters of subgroups who share common response patterns have given those using the MBTI tremendous insight into how these subgroups process information, make decisions, and solve problems. There seems to be enough evidence to lead most educators and others to assume that the gifted and talented among us score higher on tests of science and mathematics. Conventional wisdom gives logic a high priority in the learning process. Few would conclude that gifted learners do not employ Thinking as the rational process to utilize logical principles. Were the elementary gifted students an anomaly of some sort? How could they have Thinking, which is a preference for making decisions objectively, in their Inferior or Tertiary Function? Are the gifted learners, with their learning styles incorporating high motivation, high achievement and demonstrating exemplary aptitudes, actually using the valuing process Feeling to make their decisions?

Exploring the Tertiary and Inferior

Johnson (1991) urges, "Please remember that the shadow in Jung's early usage, was anything that lay in the unconscious part of one's personality" (p. 42). In theory, the gifted children that were discussed earlier are rejecting Thinking in their decision-making process. Thus, Thinking is in the unconscious.

Miller (1989) credits Jung for identifying four functions as opposite pairs in the personality.

   Each of us is predisposed to develop
   one or the other of each of these pairs
   of opposites and posit them in our
   personality, while the opposite functions,
   which are rejected, are relegated
   to shadow status as inferior functions.
   These, then, add to the potential of
   the undeveloped self along with the
   inferior attitude in the shadow. (p. 88)

The author then explains by example that Thinking types deny their opposite Feeling characteristics, and Feeling types likewise tend to hang on to their Feeling characteristics. Thus, the conclusion is drawn that the preferred function Feeling is sustained rather than drawing upon the undesirable function Thinking.

Quenk (1993) indicates that a lowered level of consciousness causes one to draw upon the unconscious, "The most different approach possible is likely to be the least familiar, most undeveloped, and unused aspects of the personality, which we now recognize as the inferior (and often the tertiary function as well)" (p. 49). In discussing the hidden aspects of personality, "Jung believed that the auxiliary and tertiary could achieve some degree of differentiation, but was quite clear that it was necessary that the inferior remain outside conscious control" (Quenk, 1993, pp. 53-54).