16 型人格能擴充成 64 型嗎？

可以。而且只要擴充得正確，還能解決 4 字母類型最大的科學問題。

1. 這 4 個字母實際測量的是什麼

研究者讓同一群人同時做 MBTI 和五大人格測驗，發現 MBTI 的 4 個指標分別對應到五大人格中的 4 項特質：E/I 和外向性、S/N 和開放性都高度對應；T/F 和親和性、J/P 和盡責性則是中度對應。第 5 項五大人格特質「神經質」（情緒穩定性的反面），在 MBTI 中找不到對應的指標。[1] 換句話說，16 型人格是把 4 項真實存在的特質粗略地切開，而且漏掉了一項重要的特質。

2. 缺少的 2 個字母

情緒穩定性（C/R）是所有被測量的特質中影響最大的之一。它是最能預測身心健康與工作滿意度的人格特質，也和焦慮、憂鬱密切相關。[29][10][30]

誠實謙遜（M/A）是在許多語言的詞彙研究中發現的第 6 個因素，並由此發展出 HEXACO 模型。[5] 它在五大人格之外，還能預測合乎倫理的行為、合作與職場偏差行為。[13][14][6]

把 6 項特質各分成高、低兩邊，就得到 2⁶ = 64 型。每一個字母背後，都有數十年的研究支持。

3. 解決「類型變來變去」的問題

對 4 字母測驗一直以來的批評之一，是很多人重測後會得到不同的類型：分數集中在中間附近，只要一點點波動，字母就會翻轉。[2] 64 Types 為每項特質都提供百分等級，距離平均 10 分以內的特質會標示為臨界，並同時列出可能出現的其他類型。

4. 題目與常模

62 道題目全部來自公眾領域的國際人格題庫（IPIP），包括商業用途在內都可以自由使用。其中 50 題是五大人格因素標記[3]，12 題是 IPIP-HEXACO 的誠實謙遜題目[4]，後者從 4 個子面向（真誠、公平、不貪婪、謙虛）各選 3 題，挑選的是題目與總分相關最高的題目。

特質題數常模樣本 N信度（α）平均（1–5）SD
外向性1019,7180.893.010.92
開放性（智性）1019,7180.793.910.63
親和性1019,7180.833.850.71
盡責性1019,7180.813.350.73
情緒穩定性1019,7180.872.900.86
誠實謙遜1222,7820.823.390.70

常模樣本：Open Psychometrics 公開的線上受測者資料集（約 2012 年蒐集；五大人格 N = 19,718，IPIP-HEXACO N = 22,782）。誠實謙遜的常模原為 7 點量表，已線性轉換為 5 點量表。線上自願受測的樣本偏向年輕族群（年齡中位數約 22 歲）和英語使用者。我們計畫日後以本站使用者的資料重新建立常模，並公開結果。

5. 深度報告（29 個面向）

選購的深度測驗使用公眾領域的 IPIP-NEO-120，以每個面向 4 題的方式測量五大人格的 30 個面向（Johnson, 2014, Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78–89）。「自由主義」面向的題目詢問是否投票給自由派或保守派候選人，內容以美國為中心且具政治性，所以予以排除。百分等級根據 Johnson 公開的資料（410,376 份完整作答），面向在其中的信度為 α = 0.66–0.88。面向的精確度低於 6 項大範圍特質，報告中也會清楚註明。

中文版的 116 題以 IPIP 網站公開的 IPIP-NEO-120 中文（簡體）翻譯（Zhongyang Xu 等人，華東師範大學）為基礎，轉換為繁體字並改用台灣慣用語，同時統一以「我」開頭。與原文語意有出入的題目（例如「Take charge」原譯「承擔責任」、「Obstruct others’ plans」原譯「給別人使壞」、「Love a good fight」原譯「喜歡和別人比試」）已依原文修正；和免費測驗相同的英文題目，大多直接沿用免費測驗的繁體中文版本。

請注意：深度報告的常模來自英文版的受測者，中文版題目並未以台灣或香港的受測者另外建立常模。百分等級請當作參考。計分方式和英文版完全相同。

6. 關於中文版

五大人格 50 題採用 IPIP 網站公開的繁體中文翻譯（Sih-Ci Jhu，國立東華大學）。其中 5 題的原譯和原文語意有出入（「Leave my belongings around」「Start conversations」「Get upset easily」「Take time out for others」「Follow a schedule」），已依原文修正措辭。

誠實謙遜的 12 題查無已公開的中文翻譯，由本站翻譯。

請注意：計分常模來自英語受測者的資料。中文版題目並未以台灣或香港的受測者另外建立常模。翻譯和文化差異可能會改變作答的傾向，所以百分等級請當作參考。分數的計算方式本身和英文版完全相同。

7. 清楚說明限制

  • 自陳量表反映的是你如何看待自己。這不是臨床、診斷或招募用的測驗。
  • 特質是連續的。類型只是摘要，代碼相同的兩個人，百分等級也可能差很多。
  • 特質與結果的關聯是真實的，但並不大（典型為 r ≈ .10–.30）。重複驗證的成功率很高，但效果往往比最初的報告小。[37][34][38]
  • 人格會改變。人通常隨著年齡變得更盡責、更親和、情緒更穩定，刻意的努力和心理治療也能改變特質。[33][35][36]
  • 4 字母類型的名稱是本站根據特質自行撰寫的描述。本站不使用缺乏實證支持的「認知功能」，也不對它做任何主張。

所有資料來源

  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.