One of the most exciting areas of research is the installation and interpretation of data based on each person’s personal qualities. Throughout history, researchers have tried to establish patterns by which each person in the world can be qualified. This thirst for systematization stems from the fact that despite the characteristics of each person since they are unique and different from each other. However, all people, at the same time, want to be similar to others and find their like-mindedness. Using different categorizations, many people can start from what kind of life companions they need to look for as well as what kind of personality they are similar to. The easiest way to determine the type of personality is to pass tests, based on which various categories are formulated, which describe the person from different points of view and allow you to find companions in the future. This paper will examine the effectiveness of such tests by personal example and will conclude at the end with a conclusion based on the results of the experiment conducted.
Speaking about the relevance of such tests, it is worth considering several aspects at once. The main ones may be regarded as dependent on the questions and conclusions that are made on their basis, as well as the truthfulness of the person who answers them. Each of these tests is created by experts in their field, so all questions are closely related to each other and have a significant impact on the result of even a minor deviation from the true answer (Jimenez‐Gomez et al., 2019). When talking about how truthful each person answers, it is essential to keep in mind that although the study can be deceived, it will directly affect the result, which will be significantly different from the person’s true character. In this study, I gave as truthful answers as possible and also analyzed how much the result confirms or disproves personal judgments about me as a person. The tests were used to determine the type of person as part of the team, the Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test, as well as IIP RIASEC Markers, which focus on the sphere of human interests. All of them are independent of each other, but consider the person from different points of view, which allows you to reveal the type of personality ultimately.
The first was the personality type test, which can be called one of the most detailed. The information he provides at the end is painted on more than 30 pages and is a complete infographic of a person’s character, personality type, strengths, and weaknesses, as well as comments worth paying attention to. It is also worth noting that despite the detail and detail of the data, this test is paid and requires a good knowledge of your personality to answer some questions. After analyzing the data, it was possible to conclude that despite minor inaccuracies, the result can be considered satisfactory and close to the truth. Judging by the findings, I am quite an energetic person with extraordinary abilities to communicate and build personal and working relationships, as well as to create a favorable working atmosphere.
The second test was to determine personality, according to Carl Jung. He is a very famous psychologist and one of the founders of the theory of behaviorism. His works are fundamental in the field of psychology, and many current experts consider him one of the best scientists in his field. Jung’s personality test is regarded as one of the most correct and has a minimal form of error, as the questions it contains are capable of fully revealing a person (Spoto, 2017). As for my personal use of this technique, I can say that it proved to be the most accurate, correctly identifying my personality type. Judging by it, I belong to the INFJ type, which stands for Introvert, Intuitive, Feelin, Judging. It is difficult to disagree with the results, as in a more extensive description of my character, although it is considered complex, in some ways specific, and with the proper use of it, can be successful in any field (Hutchinson, 2017). This describes me quite well as a person, which once again confirms the thesis of the validity of the data obtained during the study.
The third test focused on the aspect of career choice. There is a wide variety of occupations in the world, and such a list of questions helps to determine which of them a person is best suited for and can achieve significant success. This test also proved to be quite good in terms of the final result, but there are some minor inaccuracies. For example, it underestimated my social addiction quite a bit, making it the lowest-rated aspect, which I can’t fully agree with. The best aspect was determined to be creative, and this can be considered reliable information.
All three tests showed what kind of person I am and what strengths and weaknesses exist. It also gave me a rough idea of what I should work on and what difficulties others will face when working together. It is also worth noting that in addition to the information received, it was examined whether these tests provide reliable results. They all did an excellent job and showed how reliable they could be. All three tests demonstrated that they could be used to determine personality types and upsets that should be relied upon when working with a team or choosing a profession. First of all, it is vital to consider the results of the character test because it covers a large number of areas that I will have to work with in the future. In addition, the type of temperament that I have will influence my future opportunities in the workplace and a friendly atmosphere.
Because of the information established, we can conclude that despite the large amount of information requested and the need to devote a significant amount of time to take these tests, they are accurate. In addition, several other tests have been done throughout this study, which are of questionable quality, and this has affected the result. Thus we can say that not all such questionnaires have a reason to be reliable, and it is necessary to check their creator and scientific validity. In the end, I would also like to say that despite the reliability of the data obtained, one should not blindly trust these results. Each person should first of all be guided by his or her abilities and understanding of the character. The data obtained from the tests are only preliminary and are prone to change even after a small amount of time.
Hutchinson, T. (2017). Assessing the congruence of worker and workplace using the proximities of their RIASEC types. Australian Journal of Career Development, 23(3), 133–139.
Jimenez‐Gomez, C., McGarry, K., Crochet, E., & Chong, I. M. (2019). Training behavioral technicians to implement naturalistic behavioral interventions using behavioral skills training. Behavioral Interventions.
Spoto, A. (2017). Jung’s typology in perspective. Chiron Publications.