16 型人格能扩充成 64 型吗？

可以。而且只要扩充得正确，还能解决 4 字母类型最大的科学问题。

1. 这 4 个字母实际测量的是什么

研究者让同一群人同时做 MBTI 和五大人格测试，发现 MBTI 的 4 个指标分别对应到五大人格中的 4 项特质：E/I 和外向性、S/N 和开放性都高度对应；T/F 和宜人性、J/P 和尽责性则是中度对应。第 5 项五大人格特质“神经质”（情绪稳定性的反面），在 MBTI 中找不到对应的指标。[1] 换句话说，16 型人格是把 4 项真实存在的特质粗略地切开，而且漏掉了一项重要的特质。

2. 缺少的 2 个字母

情绪稳定性（C/R）是所有被测量的特质中影响最大的之一。它是最能预测身心健康与工作满意度的人格特质，也和焦虑、抑郁密切相关。[29][10][30]

诚实谦逊（M/A）是在许多语言的词汇研究中发现的第 6 个因素，并由此发展出 HEXACO 模型。[5] 它在五大人格之外，还能预测合乎伦理的行为、合作与职场偏差行为。[13][14][6]

把 6 项特质各分成高、低两边，就得到 2⁶ = 64 型。每一个字母背后，都有数十年的研究支持。

3. 解决“类型变来变去”的问题

对 4 字母测试一直以来的批评之一，是很多人重测后会得到不同的类型：分数集中在中间附近，只要一点点波动，字母就会翻转。[2] 64 Types 为每项特质都提供百分位，距离平均 10 分以内的特质会标注为临界，并同时列出可能出现的其他类型。

4. 题目与常模

62 道题目全部来自公有领域的国际人格题库（IPIP），包括商业用途在内都可以自由使用。其中 50 题是五大人格因素标记[3]，12 题是 IPIP-HEXACO 的诚实谦逊题目[4]，后者从 4 个子层面（真诚、公平、不贪婪、谦虚）各选 3 题，挑选的是题目与总分相关最高的题目。

特质题数常模样本 N信度（α）平均（1–5）SD
外向性1019,7180.893.010.92
开放性（智性）1019,7180.793.910.63
宜人性1019,7180.833.850.71
尽责性1019,7180.813.350.73
情绪稳定性1019,7180.872.900.86
诚实谦逊1222,7820.823.390.70

常模样本：Open Psychometrics 公开的在线受测者数据集（约 2012 年收集；五大人格 N = 19,718，IPIP-HEXACO N = 22,782）。诚实谦逊的常模原为 7 点量表，已线性转换为 5 点量表。在线自愿参加测试的样本偏向年轻群体（年龄中位数约 22 岁）和英语用户。我们计划日后以本站用户的数据重新建立常模，并公开结果。

5. 深度报告（29 个层面）

选购的深度测试使用公有领域的 IPIP-NEO-120，以每个层面 4 题的方式测量五大人格的 30 个层面（Johnson, 2014, Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78–89）。“自由主义”层面的题目询问是否投票给自由派或保守派候选人，内容以美国为中心且具政治性，所以予以排除。百分位根据 Johnson 公开的数据（410,376 份完整作答），层面在其中的信度为 α = 0.66–0.88。层面的精确度低于 6 项大范围特质，报告中也会清楚注明。

中文版的 116 题采用 IPIP 网站公开的 IPIP-NEO-120 中文（简体）翻译（Zhongyang Xu 等人，华东师范大学），原文就是简体中文，同时统一以“我”开头。与原文语意有出入的题目（例如“Take charge”原译“承担责任”、“Obstruct others’ plans”原译“给别人使坏”、“Love a good fight”原译“喜欢和别人比试”）已依原文修正；和免费测试相同的英文题目，大多直接沿用免费测试的中文版本，让全站用字一致。

请注意：深度报告的常模来自英文版的受测者，中文版题目并未以中文受测者另外建立常模。百分位请当作参考。计分方式和英文版完全相同。

6. 关于中文版

五大人格 50 题采用 IPIP 网站公开的繁体中文翻译（Sih-Ci Jhu，国立东华大学），由本站转为简体字，并把少数台湾用词改为大陆用词（例如“派对”→“聚会”）。其中 5 题的原译和原文语意有出入（“Leave my belongings around”“Start conversations”“Get upset easily”“Take time out for others”“Follow a schedule”），已依原文修正措辞。

诚实谦逊的 12 题查无已公开的中文翻译，由本站翻译。

请注意：计分常模来自英语受测者的数据。中文版题目并未以中文受测者另外建立常模。翻译和文化差异可能会改变作答的倾向，所以百分位请当作参考。分数的计算方式本身和英文版完全相同。

7. 清楚说明限制

  • 自评量表反映的是你如何看待自己。这不是临床、诊断或招聘用的测试。
  • 特质是连续的。类型只是摘要，代码相同的两个人，百分位也可能差很多。
  • 特质与结果的关联是真实的，但并不大（典型为 r ≈ .10–.30）。重复验证的成功率很高，但效果往往比最初的报告小。[37][34][38]
  • 人格会改变。人通常随着年龄变得更尽责、更随和、情绪更稳定，刻意的努力和心理治疗也能改变特质。[33][35][36]
  • 4 字母类型的名称是本站根据特质自行撰写的描述。本站不使用缺乏实证支持的“认知功能”，也不对它做任何主张。

全部参考文献

  1. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57(1), 17–40.
  2. Pittenger, D. J. (2005). Cautionary comments regarding the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 210–221.
  3. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26–42.
  4. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The IPIP–HEXACO scales: An alternative, public-domain measure of the personality constructs in the HEXACO model. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(8), 1515–1526.
  5. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 150–166.
  6. Zettler, I., Thielmann, I., Hilbig, B. E., & Moshagen, M. (2020). The nomological net of the HEXACO model of personality: A large-scale meta-analytic investigation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(3), 723–760.
  7. Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2005). Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism in the Five-Factor Model and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(7), 1571–1582.
  8. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26.
  9. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765–780.
  10. Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 530–541.
  11. Judge, T. A., Livingston, B. A., & Hurst, C. (2012). Do nice guys—and gals—really finish last? The joint effects of sex and agreeableness on income. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(2), 390–407.
  12. Larson, L. M., Rottinghaus, P. J., & Borgen, F. H. (2002). Meta-analyses of Big Six interests and Big Five personality factors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(2), 217–239.
  13. Pletzer, J. L., Bentvelzen, M., Oostrom, J. K., & de Vries, R. E. (2019). A meta-analysis of the relations between personality and workplace deviance: Big Five versus HEXACO. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 112, 369–383.
  14. Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. (2020). Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(1), 30–90.
  15. Zhao, H., & Seibert, S. E. (2006). The Big Five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 259–271.
  16. Grant, A. M. (2013). Rethinking the extraverted sales ideal: The ambivert advantage. Psychological Science, 24(6), 1024–1030.
  17. Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 528–550.
  18. Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 322–338.
  19. Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.
  20. Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Schutte, N. S., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2010). The five-factor model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 124–127.
  21. Dyrenforth, P. S., Kashy, D. A., Donnellan, M. B., & Lucas, R. E. (2010). Predicting relationship and life satisfaction from personality in nationally representative samples from three countries: The relative importance of actor, partner, and similarity effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 690–702.
  22. Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, method, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 3–34.
  23. Schmitt, D. P. (2004). The Big Five related to risky sexual behaviour across 10 world regions: Differential personality associations of sexual promiscuity and relationship infidelity. European Journal of Personality, 18(4), 301–319.
  24. Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict. Journal of Personality, 69(2), 323–362.
  25. Selfhout, M., Burk, W., Branje, S., Denissen, J., van Aken, M., & Meeus, W. (2010). Emerging late adolescent friendship networks and Big Five personality traits: A social network approach. Journal of Personality, 78(2), 509–538.
  26. Harris, K., & Vazire, S. (2016). On friendship development and the Big Five personality traits. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(11), 647–667.
  27. Lucas, R. E., & Fujita, F. (2000). Factors influencing the relation between extraversion and pleasant affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 1039–1056.
  28. Fleeson, W., Malanos, A. B., & Achille, N. M. (2002). An intraindividual process approach to the relationship between extraversion and positive affect: Is acting extraverted as "good" as being extraverted? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1409–1422.
  29. Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 138–161.
  30. Kotov, R., Gamez, W., Schmidt, F., & Watson, D. (2010). Linking "big" personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 768–821.
  31. Kern, M. L., & Friedman, H. S. (2008). Do conscientious individuals live longer? A quantitative review. Health Psychology, 27(5), 505–512.
  32. Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: A meta-analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130(6), 887–919.
  33. Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 1–25.
  34. Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(4), 313–345.
  35. Roberts, B. W., Luo, J., Briley, D. A., Chow, P. I., Su, R., & Hill, P. L. (2017). A systematic review of personality trait change through intervention. Psychological Bulletin, 143(2), 117–141.
  36. Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. (2015). Volitional personality trait change: Can people choose to change their personality traits? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(3), 490–507.
  37. Soto, C. J. (2019). How replicable are links between personality traits and consequential life outcomes? The Life Outcomes of Personality Replication Project. Psychological Science, 30(5), 711–727.
  38. Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.
  39. Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 621–652.
  40. Ng, T. W. H., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367–408.
  41. Wilmot, M. P., & Ones, D. S. (2019). A century of research on conscientiousness at work. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(46), 23004–23010.
  42. Solomon, B. C., & Jackson, J. J. (2014). The long reach of one’s spouse: Spouses’ personality influences occupational success. Psychological Science, 25(12), 2189–2198.
  43. Kelly, E. L., & Conley, J. J. (1987). Personality and compatibility: A prospective analysis of marital stability and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 27–40.
  44. Asendorpf, J. B., & Wilpers, S. (1998). Personality effects on social relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1531–1544.
  45. Connor-Smith, J. K., & Flachsbart, C. (2007). Relations between personality and coping: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 1080–1107.
  46. Stieger, M., Flückiger, C., Rüegger, D., Kowatsch, T., Roberts, B. W., & Allemand, M. (2021). Changing personality traits with the help of a digital personality change intervention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(8), e2017548118.