Fara gwajin

INFP-CA · Mai Mafarki · Natsattse kuma Mai Fafutuka

Ƙarfi da raunin INFP-CA: damuwa da ci gaban kai

A taƙaice, INFP-CA: mai taushi, mai hasashe, mai jin abin da wasu suke ji, mara takura, kuma a ƙarin sifofi biyu, mai natsuwa da mai buri. A ƙasa: inda INFP-CA yakan yi fice, inda yakan yi tuntuɓe, yadda yake jure damuwa, da abin da bincike ya ce game da sauyin sifofi a tsawon lokaci.

Kuna da hasashe, kirki kuma kuna karkata ga cikin kanku, tare da wadataccen tunani na ciki. Kun fi son sassauci fiye da tsauraran tsare-tsare, kuma kuna yin aiki mafi kyau idan ya shafi wani abu da kuke kula da shi. Kuna kasancewa cikin natsuwa a ƙarƙashin matsi (natsuwar zuciya mai yawa) kuma matsayi, nasara da karɓuwa suna motsa ku (gaskiya da tawali’u ƙanana). Wannan yanayi ne na amincewa da kai da son gasa. Babban haɗarinsa yana kan aminci na dogon lokaci.

Bayanin INFP-CA, harafi bayan harafi

Yadda kowane harafi yakan bayyana. Waɗannan bayanin sifofin ne, ba sakamakon bincike ba.

Son jama’a
I · Mai son kaɗaici

Ikonku na mai da hankali dukiya ce. Haɗarinsa shi ne kyawawan ra’ayoyi su ɓoye saboda ba ku tura su gaba ba.

Buɗaɗɗen tunani
N · Mai hasashe

Son bincike yana sa koyo ya yi muku sauƙi. Ƙalubalen shi ne ku tsaya da ra’ayi har ya ratsa tsakiyarsa mara armashi.

Sauƙin kai
F · Mai tausayi

Kirki yana gina aminci da sauri. Ƙalubalen shi ne ku faɗi buƙatunku kafin ɓacin rai ya taru.

Ƙwazo
P · Mai sassauci

Saurin sabawa dukiya ce. Ƙalubalen shi ne gina tsari daidai wanda zai isa ku kammala abin da yake da muhimmanci a gare ku.

Natsuwar zuciya
C · Mai natsuwa

Natsuwa dukiya ce. Ƙalubalen shi ne lura da damuwar da wasu suke ciki, kuma lokaci-lokaci a kanku ma, wadda ba ku jin ta da ƙarfi.

Gaskiya da tawali’u
A · Mai buri

Himma tana kawo sakamako. Ƙalubalen shi ne kare amincin da nasara ta dogon lokaci take dogara da shi.

Ƙarfin INFP-CA

  • Kuna saurin sabawa idan tsare-tsare suka canza, kuma ba ku da takura wajen ƙirƙirar mafita nan take.
  • Manajoji marasa yawan son jama’a sun sami sakamako mafi kyau fiye da manajoji masu son jama’a lokacin da suke jagorantar ƙungiyoyi masu ƙwazo, saboda sun fi saurare da amfani da ra’ayoyin ’yan ƙungiya.[1]
  • Kuna jin daɗin dogon aiki mai zurfin mai da hankali da yin aiki ku kaɗai.
  • Mutane masu yawan sauƙin kai suna amfani da hanyoyi masu gina jiki a rikici, kuma ba kasafai suke ƙara rura shi ba.[2]
  • Ana yawan zaɓar mutane masu yawan sauƙin kai a matsayin abokai.[3]
  • Buɗaɗɗen tunani yana da alaƙa mai daidaito da nasarar ƙirƙira, a fasaha da kuma a kimiyya.[4]
  • Buɗaɗɗen tunani yana hasashen nasara a horo, wato koyo yayin aiki.[5]

Rauni da wuraren makanta na INFP-CA

  • Ƙarancin ƙwazo yana da alaƙa da jinkirta abubuwa da halaye masu haɗari ga lafiya (abinci, motsa jiki, shaye-shaye).[6][7]
  • A dukkan ayyuka, ƙarancin ƙwazo a matsakaici yana hasashen ƙarancin ƙwazon aiki.[5]
  • Wataƙila kuna buƙatar ƙoƙari da gangan don gina hanyar sadarwa da mutane da kuma a gan ku. Son jama’a yana da alaƙa da wanda yake fitowa a matsayin shugaba.[8]
  • A binciken rubutun yau da kullum (experience sampling), mutane sun ba da rahoton yanayi mafi kyau a lokutan da suka yi mu’amala kamar masu son jama’a. Haka ma ya kasance ga masu son kaɗaici. Kayan aiki ne da za ku iya amfani da shi, ba wajibi ba ne.[9]
  • Sauƙin kai yana da alaƙa ta kishiyar juna da samun kuɗi, kuma tasirin ya fi girma a wajen maza.[10]
  • Wataƙila kuna ganin yana da wuya ku ce a’a ko ku tsaya daram a tattaunawar ciniki. Ku shirya abin da kuke so ku nema tun da wuri.
  • Kuna iya rasa sha’awa idan abu ya zama na yau da kullum. Ku tsara matakin kula da ayyuka tun da wuri.

Yadda sifofin INFP-CA suke haɗuwa

Bayanan haɗe-haɗe suna sa sakamakon bincike dabam-dabam gefe da gefe. Ba bincike ne dabam a kan wannan nau’i kansa ba.

  • Yawan hasashe da ƙarancin tsari: wataƙila kuna da ra’ayoyi fiye da waɗanda kuke kammalawa. Buɗaɗɗen tunani yana da alaƙa da ƙirƙira, ƙwazo kuma yana da alaƙa da kammala aiki, don haka wani tsari ko mutumin da zai taimaka muku ku kammala abin da kuka fara zai ninka ƙarfinku.[4][5]

Abin da haruffan -CA suke ƙara wa INFP a ƙarfi da rauni

C = Mai natsuwa (natsuwar zuciya), A = Mai buri (gaskiya da tawali’u). Gwajin gargajiya na haruffa huɗu ba ya auna ko ɗaya daga cikinsu, amma duka biyu suna da muhimmanci a damuwa da ci gaba:

  • Natsuwar zuciya (ƙarancin saurin damuwa) ita ce alaƙa mafi ƙarfi tsakanin hali da gamsuwa da aiki.[11]
  • Ƙarancin saurin damuwa yana da alaƙa da ƙaramin haɗarin cututtukan fargaba da baƙin ciki mai tsanani (depression).[12]
  • Natsuwar zuciya tana da kyakkyawar alaƙa da shugabanci.[8]
  • Saboda yana da wuya a girgiza ku, wataƙila kuna yin watsi da damuwar wasu. Ya fi kyau ku tambaya maimakon ku yi zato.
  • Ci gaba yana ba ku ƙwarin gwiwa, kuma ba ku da takura a gasa, tallata kai da sakamakon da ake iya gani.
  • Abubuwan da suke motsa ku kamar matsayi da kuɗi (waɗanda bisa ma’ana suna cikin wannan sifa) sun dace da abubuwan ƙarfafawa kamar kamashon, hannun jari a kamfani ko hanyar hawa matakin gudanarwa.
  • Ƙarancin gaskiya da tawali’u yana haɗuwa sosai da “dark triad” (Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy).[13]
  • Ita ce sifa a tsarin HEXACO da ta fi alaƙa mai ƙarfi da halaye masu cutarwa a wurin aiki.[14]
  • Mutanen da suke ƙasa a wannan sifa ba sa yawan haɗa kai a wasannin tattalin arziki da suka dogara da aminci. Abin da ake rasawa shi ne kyakkyawan suna da aminci na dogon lokaci.[15]

INFP-CA a ƙarƙashin damuwa: walwala da jure damuwa

  • Natsuwar zuciya tana daga cikin abubuwan hali mafi ƙarfi wajen hasashen walwala.[16]
  • Mutanen da suke da ƙarancin saurin damuwa ba sa yawan janyewa ko dogara da fatan banza idan suna cikin damuwa.[17]
  • A matsakaici, masu son kaɗaici suna ba da rahoton ɗan ƙarancin jin daɗin rai fiye da masu son jama’a. Natsuwar zuciya tana da tasiri mafi girma a kan walwala.[16]
  • Ƙwazo yana da alaƙa da gamsuwa da rayuwa, don haka saka jari a tsarin waje yana da riba.[16]
  • Sauƙin kai yana da matsakaiciyar alaƙa da walwala.[16]
  • Gaskiya da tawali’u suna da alaƙa da sakamako da yawa masu amfani ga al’umma. Dangantakar da aka gina a kan adalci daga ɓangarorin biyu tana ƙara ɗorewa.[18]
  • Buɗaɗɗen tunani yana da raunanniyar alaƙa ne kawai da gamsuwa da rayuwa gabaɗaya.[16]

Shawarwarin ci gaban kai ga INFP-CA

  • Ku tsara taron zamantakewa da kuke jin daɗinsa da gaske, kuma ku ware lokacin hutawa bayansa.
  • Ku haɗa ƙirƙirar ra’ayoyi da ranar ƙarshe ko da wanda zai taimaka muku ku kammala.
  • Ku ɗauki tsayawa kan matsayinku a matsayin ƙwarewa. Kirki da faɗin abin da kuke buƙata a fili suna tafiya tare sosai.
  • Mutanen da suka kafa takamaiman manufofin sauya wata sifa sun nuna sauyi da ake iya aunawa cikin ’yan watanni.[19]
  • Ku saba da faɗin yadda kuke ji a fili. Wasu za su iya ɗauka cewa natsuwarku sanyin rai ne.
  • Ku zaɓi fanni ɗaya da za ku kasance cikakken mai bayyana gaskiya. Da lokaci, wannan yakan zama kyakkyawan suna.
  • Sifofi suna iya canzawa. A wani gwaji bazuwa na shirin horarwa ta wayar salula na watanni uku, mutanen da suka so sauya wata sifa sun sauya fiye da rukunin kwatanci zuwa gefen da suke so, kuma yawancin sauyin ya ɗore a lokacin bibiya.[20]
  • A matsakaici, mutane suna ƙara natsuwar zuciya, sauƙin kai da ƙwazo yayin da suke girma.[21]

Yaya ƙarfin waɗannan sakamako yake?

  • Haruffa huɗu na gargajiya suna daidai da huɗu daga cikin sifofin Big Five (son jama’a, buɗaɗɗen tunani, sauƙin kai, ƙwazo), shi ya sa binciken Big Five ya shafe su.[22]
  • Alaƙoƙin da ke tsakanin sifofi da sakamako gaskiya ne amma kowanne ƙarami ne: alaƙar da aka saba gani tana kusan 0.10 zuwa 0.30, don haka sifofi suna sauya yiwuwa ne maimakon su yanke sakamako. Wani babban aikin maimaita bincike ya tabbatar da yawancin alaƙoƙin da aka gwada, yawanci da tasiri ɗan ƙasa.[23][24]

Layukan da ba su da majiya shawarwarin aiki ne ko bayanin sifofi, ba sakamakon bincike ba.

Shin ku INFP-CA ne da gaske?

Gwajin kyauta yana auna dukkan sifofi shida a matsayin percentile. Tambayoyi 62, kusan minti 8, ba rajista.

Ku yi gwajin kyauta

Shafukan da suka shafi wannan

Majiyoyi

  1. 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.
  2. Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict. Journal of Personality, 69(2), 323–362.
  3. 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.
  4. Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.
  5. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26.
  6. Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65–94.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. (2020). Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(1), 30–90.
  16. Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 138–161.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.