Shin gwaje-gwajen hali suna da daidaito? Amincin awo, sake gwaji da tasirin Barnum
Ƙungiyar 64 Types · an sabunta 28 Oktoba, 2026 · karatun minti 7 · majiyoyi 18 da aka wallafa
Gwaje-gwajen sifofi da aka gina da kyau suna da daidaito gwargwado, amma ba ta hanyar da yawancin mutane suke zato ba. Ma’aunan Big Five da HEXACO na matakin bincike suna ba da maki masu daidaito, suna dacewa da kimantawar mutanen da suka san ku sosai, kuma suna hasashen sakamako na gaske kamar ƙwazon aiki, lafiya da gamsuwa a dangantaka, da ƙananan girman tasiri.[1][2][3] Daidaito yana raguwa idan gwaji yana rarraba mutane zuwa tsauraran nau’o’i (mutane da yawa suna kusa da layin rabuwa kuma suna juyawa idan aka sake gwaji),[4][5] kuma jin cewa sakamako “ya bayyana ku daidai” ba shaida mai kyau ba ce, saboda mutane suna saurin karɓar bayanai marasa takamaimai masu daɗin ji a matsayin nasu (tasirin Barnum).[6][7]
Ga yadda masana ilimin halayya suke yi wa gwaji hukunci, abin da shaida ta ce a kowane batu, da jerin abubuwan dubawa da za ku iya amfani da su a kowane gwajin intanet.
Abin da “daidaito” yake nufi ga gwajin hali
Masana ilimin halayya suna raba daidaito zuwa tambayoyi biyu:
- Amincin awo (reliability): shin gwajin yana auna da daidaito? Shin kalaman da aka nufa su auna sifa ɗaya suna yarda da juna (daidaiton ciki), kuma kuna samun maki mai kama idan kuka sake yin sa (amincin sake gwaji)?
- Inganci (validity): shin yana auna abin da ya dace? Shin maki suna dacewa da wasu shaidu game da ku, kamar kimantawar mutanen da suka san ku, kuma suna hasashen ɗabi’a da sakamakon rayuwa?
Gwaji zai iya zama mai amincin awo ba tare da inganci ba (sikelin banɗaki da kullum yake ƙara kilo biyu), amma ba zai iya zama mai inganci ba tare da amincin awo ba.
Amincin awo: shin maki suna da daidaito?
Daidaiton ciki yawanci ana ba da rahotonsa a matsayin Cronbach’s alpha (α), daga 0 zuwa 1. Ƙimomi kusan 0.80 ko sama da haka gabaɗaya ana ɗaukarsu masu kyau ga ma’aunan bincike. Ma’aunan IPIP na jama’a da 64 Types yake amfani da su suna da α tsakanin 0.79 da 0.89 a rukunonin kwatancinmu na kusan mutane 20,000 kowanne; cikakkun lambobi suna a shafinmu na kimiyya. Binciken MBTI da aka wallafa su ma suna ba da rahoton ƙarfin daidaiton ciki gabaɗaya ga ma’aunansa huɗu, ko da yake ƙimomin sun bambanta tsakanin bincike.[8]
Daidaiton sake gwaji a cikin shekaru yana da yawa amma nesa da cikakke. A cikin bincike 152 na dogon lokaci, alaƙar da ke tsakanin makin hali da aka auna da tazarar kusan shekaru 6.7 ta hau daga 0.31 a yarinta zuwa kusan 0.74 tsakanin shekaru 50 zuwa 70.[9] Wani ɓangare na wannan rashin daidaito sauyi ne na gaske: matsakaicin matakan sifofi suna sauyawa a tsawon girma.[10] Duba Shin nau’in halinku zai iya canzawa?
Dalilin da ya sa sakamakon nau’i kamar ba shi da amincin awo
Idan ma’aunai suna da amincin awo, me ya sa mutane da yawa suke samun nau’i dabam idan suka sake gwaji? Saboda abin da yake faruwa kusa da layin rabuwa. Makin hali suna da nauyi a tsakiya, yawancin mutane kusa da tsakiya, ba a raba su zuwa tuddai biyu ba.[4][11] Duk wanda yake kusa da tsakiya zai iya juya harafi saboda ƙaramin sauyi na yau da kullum. Da haruffa huɗu, yiwuwar aƙalla ɗaya ya juya tana taruwa. Nazarce-nazarcen MBTI sun nuna wannan rashin daidaiton rarrabuwa a matsayin babban dalilin yin taka-tsantsan.[5]
Ga wani misali mai sauƙi. Bisa ma’ana, kashi 20% na mutane suna tsakanin percentile na 40 da na 60 a kowace sifa. Da a ce sifofi shida a lambar nau’o’i 64 ba su da wata alaƙa ko kaɗan, kason mutanen da babu sifa ɗaya a wannan yanki zai zama 0.8⁶, kusan kashi 26%, don haka kusan uku cikin huɗu za su sami aƙalla harafi ɗaya na kan iyaka. (Sifofin suna da ɗan alaƙa da juna, don haka ainihin lambar ta ɗan bambanta, amma batun yana nan.)
Idan kuna karanta kowane sakamakon nau’i, ku nemi makin da ke ƙasa. Harafin da makin percentile na 90 yake goyon bayansa yana da ma’ana; wanda makin percentile na 52 yake goyon bayansa galibi yana nufin “kusan matsakaici”.
Inganci: shin wasu mutane suna ganin ku haka?
Wata hanya mai ƙarfi ta dubawa ita ce ko mutanen da suka san ku suna kimanta ku iri ɗaya. Wasu jerin nazarce-nazarce da suka ƙunshi mutane 44,178 da aka kimanta a samfurori 263 sun bincika yadda kimantawar masu lura suke dacewa da juna da kuma da kimanta kai. Daidaito ya ƙaru yayin da mai kimantawa ya ƙara kusanci da mutumin, musamman ga sifofi marasa bayyana kamar natsuwar zuciya. Kimantawar wasu kuma ta hasashi nasarar karatu da ƙwazon aiki fiye da kimanta kai nesa ba kusa ba, kuma ta ƙara a kansu.[1]
Kai da wasu kowanne yana da wuraren makanta. A wani bincike da ya kwatanta kimanta kai, ta abokai da ta baƙi da ma’aunan ɗabi’a, kai ne mafi kyawun alƙalin sifofi masu alaƙa da saurin damuwa, abokai ne mafi kyau ga sifofi masu alaƙa da hikima, kuma kowa yana da kusan daidaito ɗaya wajen yi wa son jama’a hukunci.[12]
Ku roƙi wanda ya san ku sosai ya karanta sakamakonku. Idan bai yarda sosai a wata sifa ba, musamman wadda wasu suke gani kamar son jama’a, rashin yarjejeniyar yana ba da bayani.
Inganci: shin maki suna hasashen rayuwa ta gaske?
Sifofin Big Five suna hasashen mutuwa, saki da nasarar sana’a kusan daidai da matsayin tattalin arziki da zamantakewa da basira.[2] Ƙwazo yana hasashen ƙwazon aiki a dukkan sana’o’i,[13] saurin damuwa yana hasashen cututtukan fargaba da baƙin ciki mai tsanani,[14] kuma hali yana hasashen sauran sakamako da yawa.[15]
Waɗannan sakamako sun tsaya daram. Wani aiki da aka yi wa rajista tun farko ya sake gwada alaƙoƙi 78 da aka wallafa tsakanin sifofi da sakamako da manyan samfurori kuma ya gano cewa kashi 87% sun maimaitu, ko da yake tasirin yawanci ya kai kusan kashi 77% na ƙarfin da aka ruwaito tun farko.[3] Don haka taƙaitaccen bayani da ya dace shi ne “gaskiya, mai daidaito, matsakaici”: alaƙoƙin sifofi da sakamako a manyan nazarce-nazarce galibi suna tsakanin kusan 0.10 da 0.30, misali 0.11 tsakanin ƙwazo da tsawon rai da 0.31 tsakanin son jama’a da shugabanci.[16][17] Wannan yana da amfani wajen fahimtar karkata a cikin mutane da yawa kuma yana da rauni sosai wajen hasashen abin da kowane mutum guda zai yi.
Tasirin Barnum: dalilin da ya sa kowane sakamako yake jin daidai
A 1949, masanin ilimin halayya Bertram Forer ya ba ɗalibansa gwajin hali kuma, bayan mako ɗaya, abin da kowanne ya ɗauka bayanin halinsa ne na musamman. A zahiri kowa ya sami rubutu iri ɗaya, wanda aka tattara galibi daga littafin taurari na kan titi, da layuka kamar “kuna da matuƙar buƙatar wasu mutane su so ku kuma su yaba muku”. A matsakaici ɗaliban sun kimanta shi a matsayin bayani mai daidaito sosai na kansu.[6]
Wani nazari na baya kan shekaru da dama na binciken bibiya ya gano cewa mutane sun fi karɓar irin wannan bayani idan yana da daɗin ji, idan yana da faɗi har ya dace da kusan kowa, kuma idan sun yarda an samo shi ne musamman don su.[7]
Bayanan nau’i sukan cika dukkan sharuɗɗan uku. Hakan ba ya sa su zama marasa amfani, amma yana nufin “wannan ya yi kama da ni daidai” ba zai iya bambanta gwaji mai inganci da hasashen taurari ba. Abubuwan dubawa na sama, daidaito, yarjejeniya da wasu da hasashe, za su iya.
Jerin abubuwan dubawa don yi wa kowane gwajin hali hukunci
- Shin ya faɗi inda tambayoyinsa suka fito? Gwaje-gwajen bincike suna amfani da tarin kalamai da aka wallafa, kamar IPIP na jama’a.[18]
- Shin yana kwatanta ku da mutane na gaske? Percentile bisa rukunin kwatanci da aka bayyana ya fi “mai yawa” ko “ƙarami” a ma’auni na kan-mai-uwa-da-wabi ma’ana.
- Shin yana ba da rahoton amincin awo? Ku nemi lambobi kamar Cronbach’s α.
- Shin yana nuna maki, ba alama kawai ba? Maki masu ci gaba suna nuna yadda sifofi suke rarrabuwa da gaske.[11]
- Shin yana faɗa idan kuna kusa da tsakiya? Sakamakon kan iyaka su ne babban dalilin juyawar nau’i.[4]
- Shin yana ambaton shaida ga da’awoyinsa game da sana’a ko dangantaka? Kuma shin yana ba da rahoton girman tasiri da gaskiya?
- Shin ya faɗi iyakokinsa? Gwajin rahoton kai ba gano cuta ta asibiti ba ne ko kayan aikin ɗaukar ma’aikata.
Yadda 64 Types ya cika waɗannan sharuɗɗa
Mun gina 64 Types a kewayen wannan jerin dubawa: kalaman IPIP na jama’a 62, percentile idan aka kwatanta da kusan amsoshi na gaske 20,000 ga kowane ma’auni, amincin awo da aka wallafa, alamomin kan iyaka tare da madadin lambobi, da da’awoyin da aka ambaci majiyarsu ko’ina. An kuma faɗi iyakokinsa a fili: rukunonin kwatanci masu sa kai ne na intanet waɗanda suka fi zama matasa da masu jin Turanci. Cikakken bayani a Yadda gwajin 64 Types yake aiki da kuma a shafinmu na kimiyya.
Tambayoyin da ake yawan yi
Shin gwaje-gwajen hali na intanet suna da daidaito?
Ya dogara da gwajin. Waɗanda aka gina a kan ingantattun tarin kalamai tare da ma’aunai na gaske suna ba da maki masu daidaito gwargwado waɗanda suke dacewa da yadda wasu suke ganin ku.[1] Gwaje-gwajen da ba su da kalamai, ma’aunai ko lambobin amincin awo da aka wallafa ba za a iya kimanta su ba.
Me ya sa nake samun sakamako dabam duk lokacin da na yi gwajin hali?
Yawanci saboda kuna kusa da tsakiya a sifa ɗaya ko fiye, don haka ƙananan sauye-sauye suna juya harafi.[4][5] Makinku na ƙasa wataƙila sun fi alamar nau’inku daidaito nesa ba kusa ba.
Majiyoyi
- Connelly, B. S., & Ones, D. S. (2010). An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and predictive validity. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1092–1122.
- 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.
- 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.
- Bess, T. L., & Harvey, R. J. (2002). Bimodal score distributions and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Fact or artifact? Journal of Personality Assessment, 78(1), 176–186.
- Pittenger, D. J. (2005). Cautionary comments regarding the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 210–221.
- Forer, B. R. (1949). The fallacy of personal validation: A classroom demonstration of gullibility. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44(1), 118–123.
- Furnham, A., & Schofield, S. (1987). Accepting personality test feedback: A review of the Barnum effect. Current Psychology, 6(2), 162–178.
- Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2002). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator score reliability across studies: A meta-analytic reliability generalization study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(4), 590–602.
- Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126(1), 3–25.
- 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.
- 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.
- Vazire, S. (2010). Who knows what about a person? The self–other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 281–300.
- Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26.
- 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.
- Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.
- Kern, M. L., & Friedman, H. S. (2008). Do conscientious individuals live longer? A quantitative review. Health Psychology, 27(5), 505–512.
- 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.
- Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26–42.
Yadda muke rubuta jagorori: kowace magana ta bincike tana ambaton majiyar da aka wallafa, ana ba da girman tasiri kamar yadda aka wallafa shi, kuma shawarar da ta wuce shaida ana kiranta shawarar aiki. Ku duba hanyoyin aikinmu. Kun ga kuskure? Ku aiko mana da imel a [email protected].
Jagororin da suka shafi wannan
Ma’aunai huɗu na MBTI suna auna sifofi na gaske, amma “nau’o’i” 16 ba haka ba ne. Nazari mai adalci tare da majiyoyi kan amincin awo, inganci, sake gwaji da abin da ya ɓace.
Yadda gwajin 64 Types yake aiki: kalamai, lissafin maki, ma’aunai da alamomin kan iyakaBayani a fili kan gwajin hali na 64 Types: inda tambayoyi 62 suka fito, yadda ake lissafa percentile, da abin da alamomin kan iyaka suke nufi.
Shin nau’in halinku zai iya canzawa? Abin da binciken dogon lokaci ya nunaHali yana da daidaito sosai amma ba kafaffe ba ne. Yadda sifofi suke sauyawa da shekaru, jinya da ƙoƙari na da gangan, da dalilin da ya sa lambar nau’inku za ta iya canzawa idan kuka sake gwaji.