I am an INTP though was 1st deemed an ISTP. I’m sure this problem was a result of my inaccurate answers due to the time stress and aggrovation from excessive questions.

I would recommend those unsure of their type to read quick summaries of similar types and see if they are more accurate.

Oh, and when I say I’m a INTP, I mean I’m 80% INTP, 15% ISTP and 5% INFP.

Also, Finding this out about myself has ended a 3 year period of uncertainty in my life, convinced me to trade business degree for science, and hopefully will help me with women… hahah what a loser.

I think a preference method that allows you to rate how you are, and what you prefer would be more meaningful.

Also context can play a big role. When I’m writing php source code, I’m very analytical. When I communicate I tend to be more strategic. When I’m with my wife more emotional.

However I do still have a dominance for Strategic thinking, and Driver. Which was identified by HBDI, as well. And verified by my wife, when I argued the results. HBDI said I’m good at business, which is true. I am a natural entrepreneur.

I’ve had bosses before who were administrative, and I didn’t get on well with them. Which is predicted by HBDI.

So I do see validity, even though the Brain Science is a bit wonky, the principles can be easily empirically verified.

Came across your blog while I was trawling the web for info on brain profiling for a series of blog posts on mind myths. We seem to have some of the same concerns – and equine blog names! Mine is Occam’s Donkey.

I have blogged a number of times on brain profiling (and the HBDI), all of which I am very critical of. The neuroscience behind these ideas is very outdated and evidence for effectiveness in my field, education, limited.

I have taken the liberty of using your image of the brain profile inside the Zodiac, trust it’s OK – I have acknowledged you. The blog post was dated 24 September.

@Elias: thanks for your comments. I take your point that I’ve played a little fast and loose with the term “personality” and that HBDI do prefer the language “thinking styles”. Even so, I don’t think that saves it completely from some of my criticisms that it relies more on people eagerly finding themselves in the results than on a sound scientific basis. If you haven’t already read the latest post on the subject (link in the previous paragraph), I’d be interested in your reaction to the observations there.

@Jodie: Regardless of my criticisms, there is no doubt that many people enjoy the process just as you did. Also, even if my criticisms are valid (and I am prepared to accept that as a nay-saying skeptic I may go too far), that does not mean that HBDI and other tools cannot be value not so much in their own right, but as a catalyst for self-reflection. Whether or not we are honest with ourselves, is another question, of course!