Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in A Population

Western Michigan University
ScholarWorks at WMU
Dissertations Graduate College
6-1989
Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI

Preferences in a Population of Student Program
Managers
Ruth Elizabeth DeWald
Western Michigan University
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

Part of the Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons, and the Educational Assessment,
Evaluation, and Research Commons
Recommended Citation
DeWald, Ruth Elizabeth, "Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in a Population of Student Program Managers"
(1989). Dissertations. 2125.
https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/2125
This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access
by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks
at WMU. For more information, please contact maira.bundza@wmich.edu.
RELATIONSHIPS OF MBTI TYPES AND HBDI
PREFERENCES IN A POPULATION OF
STUDENT PROGRAM MANAGERS
by
Ruth E l i z a b e t h DeWald
A D issertatio n
S u b m itte d t o th e
F a c u l t y o f The G ra d u a te C o lle g e
in p a r t i a l f u lf il lm e n t of th e
r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r th e
Degree o f D o c to r o f E d u c a tio n
D epartm ent o f E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h ip
W e ste rn M ic h ig a n U n i v e r s i t y
Kalamazoo, M ich ig an
June 1989
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of th e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n p rohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

RELATIONSHIPS OF MBTI TYPES AND HBDI
PREFERENCES IN A POPULATION OF
STUDENT PROGRAM MANAGERS
Ruth Elizabeth DeWald, Ed.D.
W estern M ichigan U n i v e r s i t y , 1989
The p u rp o se o f t h i s s t u d y was t o e x p l o r e r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e tw e e n
two r e c o g n i z e d p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s , th e M y e rs -B rig g s
Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) and t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n D o m in a n c e I n s t r u m e n t
(HBDI), b o t h d e v e l o p e d f o r n o r m a l , h e a l t h y a d u l t s . The e x t e n t a nd
d i r e c t i o n o f t h e MBTI-HBDI r e l a t i o n s h i p s w e r e d e t e r m i n e d t h r o u g h
a n a l y s e s o f d a t a from a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f b o th i n s t r u m e n t s to t h e same
p o p u la tio n , 800 s t u d e n t p rogram m anagers a t t e n d i n g th e D efense S ys
tem s Management C o lle g e (DSMC), F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a , d u r i n g 1986-
1987.
The r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s , fo rm u la ted from p s y c h o l o g i c a l theory,
b r a i n dom inance r e s e a r c h , and e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e so u rces, p o stu
late d s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s and HBDI quad
ran ts. In a d d itio n , s ix re s e a rc h q u e s tio n s ad d ressed the s i m i l a r i t y
o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n to o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s and i n v e s t i
g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e MBTI and HBDI t o d e m o g r a p h i c c a t e g o
rie s: s e x o f p a r t i c i p a n t s , b r a n c h o f g o v e rn m e n ta l s e r v i c e , m i l i t a r y
or c iv ilia n s ta tu s , and management ran k .
A l l e x p e c te d r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s w ere s u b
sta n tia te d . The m a j o r i t y o f t h e s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n were MBTI s e n s i n g ,
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s , who w ere n o t o n l y d o u b le d o m in a n t i n HBDI Q u a d ra n ts
A and B, b u t m a n i f e s t e d " su p e rd o m in a n c e " (HBDI s c o r e s > 100) i n t h e s e
q u a d ran ts. The r e l a t i v e l y few MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s d e m o n s t r a t e d
dom inance i n HBDI Q u a d ra n t C. MBTI i n t u i t i v e s and p e r c e p t i v e s w ere
a l i g n e d w i t h HBDI Q u a d ra n t D and w ere AD d o u b le d o m in a n t.
An u n a n t i c i p a t e d f i n d i n g w as t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a s i g n i f i c a n t
r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n t h e MBTI e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n d i m e n s io n and
t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l HBDI Q u ad ran t C. High r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e m ost
p r e v a l e n t MBTI t y p e , IS T J, and t h e p r e d o m in a n t t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r fu n c
t i o n a l group c o n firm e d e x p e c te d s i m i l a r i t y w ith o th e r m a n a g e ria l
p o p u la tio n s. F e m a le s d e m o n s t r a t e d much g r e a t e r th a ii e x p e c te d s i m i
l a r i t y t o m a le s w i t h r e g a r d t o MBTI t y p e and HBDI q u a d r a n t r e p r e s e n
t a t i o n , a f in d in g a t t r i b u t e d to th e n o n s te r e o ty p i c a l n a tu r e o f th e
f e m a le s t u d e n t m a n a g e rs . No d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e MBTI and HBDI d i s t r i
b u tio n s w e r e f o u n d am ong t h e b r a n c h e s o f t h e a r m e d s e r v i c e s n o r
b e tw e e n m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n p a r t i c i p a n t s , a l t h o u g h h i g h - r a n k e d
c iv ilia n MBTI i n t u i t i v e s t e n d e d t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d ra n t D r e p r e s e n t a
tio n .
The f i n d i n g s e s s e n t i a l l y c o n f i r m e d t h o s e f r o m o t h e r s t u d i e s
r e g a r d i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e MBTI a nd t h e HBDI, th u s
p r o v i d i n g s u p p o r t f o r t h e t h e o r e t i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s f o r b o th i n s t r u
m ents .

INFORMATION TO USERS
The most advanced technology has been used to photo

graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm
master. UMI films the text directly from the original or
copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies
are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type
of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the
quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print,
colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs,
print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a
complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these
will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material
had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re

produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the
upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in
equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also
photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced
form at the back of the book. These are also available as
one exposure on a standard 35mm slide or as a 17" x 23"
black and white photographic print for an additional
charge.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have

been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher
quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are
available for any photographs or illustrations appearing
in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.
U n iversity M icrofilm s International

A Bell & H ow ell Inform ation C o m p a n y
3 0 0 N orth Z e e b R o a d , Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1 3 4 6 U S A
3 1 3 /7 6 1 - 4 7 0 0 8 0 0 /5 2 1 - 0 6 0 0

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
O rder N u m b e r 8921867
R elationships o f M B T I types and H B D I preferences in a

pop u lation o f student program m anagers
DeWald, Ruth Elizabeth, Ed.D.

Western Michigan University, 1989
C opyright © 1 9 8 9 by D eW ald, R u th E lizabeth . A ll righ ts reserved.
300 N. Zeeb Rd.

Ann Arbor, MI 48106

C o p y rig h t by
1989

DEDICATION
B ehind t h e s c e n e s , b u t e q u a l l y s u p p o r t i v e o f t h i s e n d e a v o r , have
b e e n lo v e d ones who have s h a r e d my t r i a l s and t r i b u l a t i o n s and k e p t
t h e f a r m a n d b u s i n e s s o p e r a t i o n s r u n n i n g s m o o t h l y so t h a t I c o u l d
d e v o t e my t i m e t o c o m p l e t e t h i s s t u d y . W ith p ro fo u n d g r a t i t u d e I
w is h t o d e d i c a t e my d i s s e r t a t i o n t o my e x te n d e d f a m i ly :
M rs. E l i z a b e t h R eid S e a r l e , my 93 y e a r o l d m o th e r ;
D a u g h te r , Sue Cook, and t h e Ronald Lee Cook, J r . , fam ily ;
The R onald Cook, S e n i o r , f a m i l y ;
D a u g h te r, D iana B e c k e t t , and t h e S t a n to n B e c k e tt f a m i ly ;
My s i s t e r , G l o r i a S e a r l e P u r e r , and t h e F r e d e r i c k F u r e r f a m i ly ,
My h u s b a n d 's b r o t h e r , George F. DeWald;
and D r. Jo h n E. DeWald, my d e v o t e d , p a t i e n t h u s b a n d .
R uth E l i z a b e t h DeWald

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n i s n o t t h e p r o d u c t o f o n l y one p e r s o n 's
e ffo rts. Many p e o p le c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e a c h ie v e m e n t o f t h e a u t h o r 's
g o a l. W hile i t would be f i t t i n g and p r o p e r to r e c o g n i z e a l l o f t h e s e
p e o p le , i t i s p r a c t i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e to do so. A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e few
have been s e l e c t e d i n to k e n o f my deep a p p r e c i a t i o n t o a i l f u r t h e i r
g u i d a n c e , e n c o u ra g e m e n t, and s u p p o r t .
Dr. Edgar A. K e l le y , D i s s e r t a t i o n C om m ittee C h a i r , and C om m ittee
Member Dr. Kenneth D i c k i e , o f t h e D e p a rtm en t o f E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r
sh ip , W e ste rn M ic h ig a n U n i v e r s i t y , and C om m ittee Member Dr. H e r b e rt
H. Dobbs, r e g i s te r e d p r o fe s s io n a l e n g in e e r, reco g n ized the v a lu e o f
t h i s s t u d y and c o n t r i b u t e d t h e i r e x p e r t i s e to w a rd i t s c o m p l e ti o n . My
g r a t i t u d e i s e x te n d e d t o my i n t e r i m c h a ir m e n , Dr. C a ro l S h e f f e r and
D r. R i c h a r d M u n ste rm a n , fo rm e rly of th e E d u c a tio n a l L e a d e rsh ip
D e p a rtm e n t, f o r t h e i r p a t i e n t p r e p a r a t o r y work; to Dr. Lana J. Ford,
o f t h e WMU O c c u p a tio n a l T herapy D e p a r tm e n t, f o r s h a r i n g h e r e x t e n s i v e
k n o w l e d g e o f t h e MBTI a n d t h e HBDI a s a q u a l i f i e d a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f
b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s ; a n d t o Dr. J e r r y H a m e l i n k , o f t h e WMU M e c h a n i c a l
E n g in e e rin g D e p a rtm e n t, f o r h i s h e l p i n t h e u s e o f t h e HBDI w i t h
e n g in e e rin g p erso n n el. Mrs. Siham F a r e s o f The G ra d u a te C o lle g e gave
p r a c t i c a l g u id a n c e i n t o t h e i n t r i c a c i e s o f th e d i s s e r t a t i o n fo rm at
r e q u i r e m e n t s d u r in g r e g u l a r l y s c h e d u le d s e m i n a r s .
A ccess t o t h e d a t a from t h e D efense S ystem s^ Management C o lle g e
(DSMC) was a u t h o r i z e d on December 3, 1986, by Navy C a p ta in George K.
ii

C o y n e , J r . , Dean o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f R e s e a r c h a nd I n f o r m a t i o n , i n
r e s p o n s e t o a s u g g e s t i o n b y A i r F o r c e B r i g a d i e r G e n e r a l C h a r l e s P.
C a b e ll, J r., C om m andant o f t h e DSMC d u r i n g 1 9 8 6 - 1 9 8 8 . A ir Force
o f f i c e r s , L t . C o l o n e l J o s e p h L a M a rc a and C a p t a i n J o h n W ard, j o i n e d
w i t h Dr. G e rry Weichmann to r e v i e w a l l d a t a p r i o r t o r e l e a s e i n o r d e r
to g u a r a n t e e p a r t i c i p a n t a n o n y m ity . The o p p o r t u n i t y t o u s e s u c h a
larg e number (800) o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n c r e a s e d th e l i k e l i h o o d o f s u c
c e s s im m e a s u ra b ly .
P r o f o u n d a d m i r a t i o n a n d a p p r e c i a t i o n i s du e r e t i r e d A i r F o r c e
L t . C o l o n e l G e o r g e J . E l l i s , J r . , p s y c h o l o g i s t a nd i n s t r u c t o r , who
f i r s t i n t r o d u c e d th e c o n c e p t o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s t o t h e C o lle g e
d u r i n g t h e e a r l y 1980s by a d m i n i s t e r i n g t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI t o t h e
s tu d e n ts, fa c u lty , and s t a f f o f t h e DSMC. H is v i s i o n and i n i t i a t i v e
i n r e c o g n i z i n g t h e v a l u e o f b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s a w a k e n e d me t o th e
p o t e n t i a l o f t h e MBTI and HBDI u se d i n c o n c e r t .
S i n c e c o m p l e t i o n o f a q u a l i f i c a t i o n t r a i n i n g c o u r s e i s now a
r e q u i r e m e n t b e f o r e a s t u d e n t may a d m i n i s t e r e i t h e r t h e MBTI o r th e
HBDI, I had th e p riv ile g e of in s tr u c tio n f r o m b o t h Dr. M ary H.
M c C a u lle y , p r e s i d e n t o f th e C e n te r f o r th e A p p l i c a t i o n s o f Psycho
l o g i c a l Type (CAPT) and c o - a u t h o r o f t h e MBTI Manual (1985), and from
Mr. Ned H e r r m a n n , d e v e l o p e r o f t h e HBDI. The i n s i g h t g a i n e d f ro m
t h e i r t u t e l a g e h a s proved i n v a l u a b l e .
At lo n g l a s t , I am a b l e t o pay a d e b t o f g r a t i t u d e to two l a d i e s
w i t h o u t w hose s t e a d y , d e p e n d a b l e , d a i l y w ork t h i s s tu d y w ould n o t
have been f i n i s h e d . As o f f i c e m anager f o r t h e E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h ip
D e p a r tm e n t, Mrs. N e l l i e S t e l l h a s c h e e r f u l l y m a i n t a i n e d c o n t i n u i t y i n
iii
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e c o pyright ow n er. F u r th e r re p r o d u c tio n proh ibited w ithout p e r m is s io n .

t h e f a c e o f a p r o c e s s i o n o f d e p a r t m e n t a l c h a i r s a nd t h e a t t e n d a n t
d isru p tio n i n h e r e n t i n f r e q u e n t command changes. Mrs. Lee Pakko i s
th e d i s s e r t a t i o n t y p i s t "p ar e x c e lle n c e ." I c o n sid e r m y self ex
t r e m e l y f o r t u n a t e t h a t she was a b l e t o p roduce h i g h l y r e a d a b l e t a b l e s
and t e x t from a s m a l l m o u n ta in o f ro u g h d r a f t s .
My h e a r t f e l t th a n k s t o a l l .
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................... ii
LIST OF T A B L E S ........................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ x i i i
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
P u rp o se o f t h e S t u d y ...................................................................... 1
R a t i o n a l e f o r t h e S t u d y ................................................................. 1
A ssum ptions and L i m i t a t i o n s o f th e S t u d y ........................ 3
The S p e c i a l i z e d P o p u l a t i o n ................................................... 3
The A sse ssm e n t I n s t r u m e n t s ................................................... 4
G e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f F i n d i n g s .............................................. 5
D i s s e r t a t i o n O verview ...................................................................... 5
II. MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AT THE DEFENSE SYSTEMS

MANAGEMENT COLLEGE .................................................................................... 6
The Role o f t h e Program M a n a g e r .............................................. 6
Im pact o f t h e Program M a n a g e r 's P e r s o n a l S k i l l s . . . 7
Program Management Course ............................................................ 8
C ourse O u t l i n e ............................................................................... 8
C r i t i c i s m o f B u s in e s s S chool T r a i n i n g ....................... 8
C u r r ic u lu m A d ju stm e n t by t h e D S M C ................................. 9
I n t e r p e r s o n a l S k i l l s Development ..................................... 10
S u m m a ry ...................................................................................................... 10

Table of Contents— Continued
CHAPTER
III. LITERATURE REVIEW OF PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIP

THEORIES.................................................................................................. 12
O u t l i n e o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e S e a rc h .......................................... 12
L e a d e r s h ip and P e r s o n a l i t y Theory I n t e r a c t i o n . . . . 13
L e a d e r s h ip T h e o r ie s ................................................................. 13
L e a d e r s h ip E x p re ss e d Through P e r s o n a l i t y ................... 15
P e r s o n a l i t y Theory and A ssessm ent .......................................... 15
F reud and His P s y c h i a t r i c o r C l i n i c a l

I n t e r v i e w ................................................................................ 16
R o r s c h a c h 's P r o j e c t i v e T e s t .............................................. 16
Jung and H is P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type T h e o r y ................ 19
E ysenck and His P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r i e s ................... 20
T hem atic A p p e r c e p tio n T e s t (TAT) ..................................... 20
E d w a rd s 's P e r s o n a l P r e f e r e n c e S c h edule (EPPS) . . 21
S tu d y o f V alues ( S V ) ......................................................... 22
B e n d e r-G e sta lt Instrum ent ................................................... 22
C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o l o g i c a l I n v e n t o r y (CPI) . . . . . 22
S ix teen P e r s o n a lity F a c to r Q u e stio n n a ire

( 1 6 P F Q ) .................................................................................... 23
M in n e s o ta M u l t i p h a s i c P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y
(MMPI) ......................................................................................... 23
Maslow . . . . . .......................................................................... 24
E v a l u a t i o n o f H ig h - F re q u e n c y -o f - U s e I n s t r u m e n t s . . . 24
S e l e c t e d A ssessm ent I n s t r u m e n t s .............................................. 26
M y e rs - B r ig g s Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) ................................ 26
vi

CHAPTER
Herrmann B r a in Dominance I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI) . . . . 30
Using t h e MBTI i n O r g a n i z a t i o n a l S e t t i n g s ....................... 36
S t u d i e s o f MBTI Manager T y p e s .......................................... 36
I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f t h e MBTI With th e H B D I ................... 41
S tu d y o f I n d u s t r y P r o f e s s i o n a l s ..... ..................................... 41
Study o f H e a l th Care P r o f e s s i o n a l s ................................ 43
P h y s i o l o g i c a l B a s i s f o r t h e M B T I ..................................... 46
Summary o f L i t e r a t u r e Review ................................................... 49
IV. METHODOLOGY........................................................... 52
R e s e a rc h H y p o th e s is .......................................................................... 52
D i s c u s s i o n ........................................................................................ 52
S ta te m e n t o f H y p o th e s is ....................................................... 53
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n s .......................................................................... 54
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n s 1 and 2 ................................................... 54
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n s 3, 4 , 5, and 6 ................................. 55
The I n s t i t u t i o n and t h e T a r g e t P o p u l a t i o n ....................... 57
The A ssessm ent I n s t r u m e n t s ....................................................... 58
R e s e a rc h P r o c e d u r e s .......................................................................... 59
D ata C o l l e c t i o n .......................................................................... 59
R e s e a rc h D esign .......................................................................... 60
D ata A n a l y s i s ............................................................................... 60
V. FINDINGS........................................................................................................... 62
MBTI Type D i s t r i b u t i o n ................................................................. 62
v ii

CHAPTER
HBDI P r o f i l e R e p r e s e n t a t i o n ........................................................ 64
F i n d i n g s R e l a t i n g t o t h e R e s e a rc h H y p o th e s is . . . . 64
HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s and MBTI T y p e s ................................. 67
HBDI Dominance and A voidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI

T y p e s ................................................................................................. 68
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI

E l e m e n t s ............................................................................................. 72
HBDI Dominance, Superdom inance, and Avoidance

by MBTI E l e m e n t s .......................................................................... 75
HBDI Dominance, S uperdom inance, and A voidance

by MBTI TJ T y p e s .......................................................................... 79
HBDI Q u a d ra n t Mean S c o r e s f o r MBTI Types and

E l e m e n t s ............................................................................................ 84
Summary o f F i n d i n g s f o r t h e R e s e a rc h H y p o th e s is . 87
F in d in g s R e la tin g to R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n 1 89
Com parison o f MBTI D i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r Two S e ts

o f DSMC C l - a s s e s .......................................................................... 89
Summary o f F i n d in g s f o r R e s e a rc h Q u e s tio n 1 . . . 89
F in d in g s R e la tin g to R e s e a rc h Q u e s tio n 2 91
MBTI Com parison f o r S tudy P o p u l a t i o n V ersus

O th e r M a n a g e r ia l P o p u l a t i o n s ............................................... 91
MBTI Com parison o f DSMC C i v i l i a n s V ersus O th e r

M a n a g e r ia l P o p u l a t i o n s ........................................................... 93
Summary o f F i n d in g s f o r R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n 2 . . . 95
F in d in g s R e la tin g to R e s e a r c h Q u e s t io n 3 96
MBTI Types and MBTI E lem ents f o r Males and

F e m a l e s ............................................................................................. 96
v iii

CHAPTER
HBDI Dominance and A voidance P a t t e r n s f o r

M ales and F e m a l e s ..................................................................... 96
HBDI Dominance, S upe rd o m in a n ce , and Avoidance

f o r M ales and F e m a l e s ................................................................. 99
Summary o fF in d in g s fo r R e s e a rc h Q u e s tio n 3 . . . 99
F i n d i n g s R e l a t i n g t o R e s e a rc h Q u e s tio n 4 101
D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and E lem ents f o r

Each Branch o f S e r v i c e ................................................................ 101
HBDI Dominance and A voidance P a t t e r n s f o r Each

Branch o f S e r v i c e ...................................................................... 103
HBDI Dominance, S u p e rd o m in a n ce , and A voidance

f o r S e r v i c e B ra n c h es ................................................................. 103
D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and E le m e n ts f o r

M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s ............................................................ 107
HBDI Dominance and A voidance P a t t e r n s f o r

M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s ............................................................ 109
HBDI Dominance, S upe rd o m in a n ce , and Avoidance

f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s ................................................... 109
D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI T y p e s, E le m e n ts , and TJs

f o r Each R a n k ............................................................................... 112
HBDI Dominance and A voidance P a t t e r n s f o r Each

R a n k ...................................................................................................... 115
HBDI Dominance, S upe rd o m in a n ce , and A voidance

f o r Each R a n k ................................................................................... 115
Summary o f F i n d in g s f o r R e s e a rc h Q u e s tio n 6 . . . 120
ix
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

VI. CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 122
Conclusions Relating to the Research Hypothesis . . . 123
Conclusions Relating to the Research Questions . . . 126
Research Question 1...... .............................................................. 126
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n 2 .............................................................. 127
Recommendations ................................................................................... 131
S u m m a ry ...................................................................................................... 131
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................... 133

LIST OF TABLES
1. M a t r i x o f P e r s o n a l i t y A sse ssm e n t I n s t r u m e n t s ............................. 17
2. The 16 MBTI Types W ith A s s o c i a t e d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . . . 28
3. HBDI Mean S c o re s f o r a Sample o f 7 ,9 8 9 Men and Women

From t h e Herrmann D ata B a n k ................................................................. 34
4. C o r r e l a t i o n M a tr ix o f HBDI Q u a d ra n t S c o re s f o r a
Sample o f 7 ,9 8 9 Men and Women From t h e
Herrmann D ata B a n k ........................................................................................ 35
5. P e r c e n t a g e s o f MBTI T h in k in g - J u d g in g Types and MBTI

E le m e n ts i n S e l e c t e d M a n a g e ria l P o p u l a t i o n s ............................ 38
6. R e l a t i o n s h i p o f S t r o n g MBTI and S tro n g HBDI P r e f e r e n c e s

i n a Sample o f 90 B ankers and Chem ical I n d u s t r y
P r o f e s s i o n a l s ......................................................................... 42
7. HBDI P r e f e r e n c e s f o r t h e Most F r e q u e n t MBTI Types and

S e l e c t e d MBTI E le m e n ts and Groups Among 51 Female
S t u d e n t O c c u p a ti o n a l T h e r a p i s t s ....................................................... 44
8. HBDI H e m isp h e ric P r e f e r e n c e s f o r t h e Most F r e q u e n t

MBTI Types and S e l e c t e d MBTIE le m e n ts and Groups
Among 51 Female S tu d e n t O c c u p a ti o n a l T h e r a p i s t s ................... 45
9. MBTI Type T a b le f o r a Sample o f 27 Male A t t o r n e y s and

Ceramic A r t i s t s ............................................................................................ 47
10. Temporal Lobe Mean A lpha R a t i o s f o r a Sample o f 27

A t t o r n e y s and Ceramic A r t i s t s C l a s s i f i e d by t h e
MBTI SN and TF S c a l e 3 ............................................................................... 48
11. MBTI Type T a b le f o r 811 DSMC S tu d e n t Program Managers . . 63
12. MBTI Type D i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e Most F r e q u e n t HBDI

Coded Q uadrant P r o f i l e s .......................................................................... 66
13. HBDI Dominant and A voidant Q uadrant P a t t e r n s by MBTI

T y p e s .................................................................................................................... 69
14. HBDI Dominant and A v o id an t Q uadrant P a t t e r n s by MBTI

E l e m e n t s ............................................................................................................... 73
xi

List of Tables— Continued
15. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d ra n t Dominance, S uperdom inance,

and A voidance by MBTI E l e m e n t s ..................................................... 76

and A voidance by MBTI TJ T y p e s ..................................................... 80
17. Mean HBDI Q u ad ran t S c o re s by MBTI Types and MBTI

E l e m e n t s ............................................................................................................... 85
18. Com parison o f MBTI Types and MBTI E lem ents f o r 1986-87
DSMC Program Manager S t u d e n t s and O th e r S e l e c t e d
M a n a g e r ia l P o p u l a t i o n s .................................................................................... 90
19. Com parison o f MBTI Types and MBTI E lem ents f o r 1986-87
DSMC C i v i l i a n Program Manager S t u d e n t s and O th e r
C i v i l i a n Managers and A d m i n i s t r a t o r s .................................................... 94
20. MBTI Types and MBTI E le m e n ts by S e x ................................................ 97
21. HBDI Dominant and A v o id a n t Q u ad ran t P a t t e r n s by Sex . . . 98

and A voidance by S e x ........................................................................................ 100
23. MBTI Types and MBTI E le m e n ts by Branch o f S e r v ic e . . . . 102
24. HBDI Dominant and A v o id a n t Q u ad ran t P a t t e r n s by

B ranch o f S e r v i c e ........................................................................................ 104
25. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d ra n t Dominance, Superdom inance,

and Avoidance by Branch o f S e r v i c e ....................................................... 105
26. MBTI Types and MBTI E le m e n ts by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n

S t a t u s ........................................................................................................................ 108
27. HBDI Dominant and A v o id a n t Q u a d ra n t P a t t e r n s by

M ilita ry or C iv ilia n S ta tu s ..................................................................... 110

and Avoidance by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S t a t u s ................................ Ill
2 9. MBTI Types and MBTI E le m e n ts by R a n k ................................................ 113
30. HBDI Dominant and A v o id a n t Q uadrant P a t t e r n s by Rank . . . 116
31. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d ra n t Dom inance, Superdom inance,

and A voidance by R a n k ................................................................................... 118
x ii

LIST OF FIGURES
1. Herrmann B r a in Dominance I n s t r u m e n t P r o f i l e s ............................ 32
2. Most F r e q u e n t HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s ........................................................ 65
x iii

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Study
The p u rp o se o f t h i s stu d y i s t o d e t e r m i n e th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f
t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) t y p e p r e f e r e n c e s w i t h t h e
m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n D o m in a n c e I n s t r u m e n t
(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a from t h r e e c la s s e s at th e D e fe n se S ystem s
Management C o lle g e (DSMC) p rogram m a n a g e r's c o u r s e (PMC) h e l d d u r i n g
1986-1987.
The DSMC i s a g r a d u a t e - l e v e l , U.S. Government e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i
t u t i o n a t F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a , a fe w m i l e s s o u t h o f W a s h i n g t o n ,
DC. The c o l l e g e was f o u n d e d i n 1971 f o r t h e p r i m a r y p u r p o s e o f
tra in in g f u t u r e p rogram m anagers i n th e i n t r i c a c i e s of the a c q u is i
t i o n and p r o c u r e m e n t p r o c e d u r e s f o l l o w e d by t h e U.S. Government. The
DSMC s e r v e s a ll branches o f th e arm ed s e r v i c e s as w ell as th e
m i l i t a r y - i n d u s t r i a l com plex (A cker, 1986). P s y c h o lo g ic a l assessm en t
o f t h e f a c u l t y an d t h e e n t i r e s t u d e n t b o d y u s i n g t h e MBTI a nd t h e
HBDI i s s t a n d a r d p r a c t i c e a t t h e DSMC.
R a t i o n a l e f o r t h e S tudy
Both t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI have been u se d i n s t u d i e s o f m anage
r i a l l e a d e r s h i p i n a wide v a r i e t y o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s e t t i n g s b e c a u s e
th e o rists have becom e in c re a sin g ly aw are of th e im p o rta n c e of

p e r s o n a l i t y as an i n d i c a t i o n o f l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s (A gor, 1986;
B a ss, 1981; K e r l i n g e r , 1973). The e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f l e a d e r s h i p t r a i n
in g t h e r e f o r e i s a t l e a s t somewhat d e p e n d e n t on t h e a b i l i t y to pro
duce u s e f u l p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t s o f p o t e n t i a l m anagers. One way
t o p r o v id e c r e d i b i l i t y f o r p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n s t r u m e n t s i s th ro u g h mea
s u r e m e n t c o n v e r g e n c e : t h a t i s , i f t h e tw o i n s t r u m e n t s u s e d i n t h i s
s t u d y p r o v id e a c o h e r e n t p e r s o n a l i t y p r o f i l e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l , th e
c r e d i b i l i t y o f e a c h i n s t r u m e n t i s enhanced. Knowledge o f t h e r e l a
t i o n s h i p o f t h e s e two i n s t r u m e n t s i s th u s e s s e n t i a l to t h e i r e f f e c
t i v e use. T h is does n o t im p ly t h a t one i n s t r u m e n t s h o u ld r e p l a c e t h e
o th er. Each p r o v i d e s its own u n iq u e p e r s p e c t i v e , and t o g e t h e r t h e y
p ro d u c e a c o n s i s t e n t , c o m p le m e n ta ry a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l .
The o p p o r t u n i t y t o s t u d y t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e MBTI w i t h t h e
HBDI may a l s o have p r o fo u n d im p a c t on p s y c h o l o g i c a l ty p e t h e o r y . The
c o n j o i n t m ea su rem e n t o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e b o t h e n r i c h e s a n d l e n d s
c r e d e n c e to i t s u s e f u l n e s s a s a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t .
However, v e r y few s t u d i e s have fo c u s e d on t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e
tw e e n t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI. Ford (1988a) and Jam es (1986) compared
t h e s e two i n s t r u m e n t s , b u t o n ly i n s m a l l groups w i t h h i g h l y s p e c i a l
ized o ccu p atio n s. Thus t h e r e a p p e a r s to be a need f o r a s t u d y u s in g
b o t h t h e MBTI a n d t h e HBDI on a l a r g e e n o u g h p o p u l a t i o n t o p r o v i d e
g e n e ra liz a b le r e s u lts . The 811 s t u d e n t program m anager s t u d y p o p u la
t i o n m eets t h i s r e q u ir e m e n t. M o re o v e r, th e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f dem o
g rap h ic d a ta f o r t h i s p o p u la tio n p e rm its the e x p lo r a tio n o f r e l a t i o n
s h i p s o f th e HBDI and t h e MBTI w i t h dem ographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

An a n c i l l a r y b e n e f i t from t h i s s t u d y i s t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r o
v i d e a d d i t i o n a l v a l i d a t i o n f o r t h e HBDI. One way t o v a l i d a t e a n e w ly
i n tr o d u c e d i n s t r u m e n t i s to com pare i t s m ea su rem e n t o f p a r t i c u l a r
c o n stru c ts w ith th a t o f b e t t e r known i n s t r u m e n t s ( K e r l i n g e r , 1973).
The MBTI h a s b e e n w e l l d o c u m e n t e d b y f a v o r a b l e r e v i e w s i n B u r o s
( 1 9 7 5 , 1 9 7 8 ) a nd b y i t s m a n u a l ( M y e r s & M c C a u l l e y , 1 9 8 5 ) . The MBTI
A t l a s o f T ype T a b l e s ( M a c d a i d , M c C a u l l e y , & K a i n z , 1 9 8 6 ) i n c l u d e s
ty p e t a b l e s f o r p r o f e s s i o n s and o c c u p a t i o n s draw n from an e x t e n s i v e
MBTI d a t a bank o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 250,000 i t e m s . By c o n t r a s t , t h e HBDI
m a n u a l h a s j u s t b e e n r e l e a s e d ( H e r r m a n n , 1 988) w i t h a c o n c u r r e n t
v a l i d a t i o n s tu d y by Bunderson (1988). Thus, c o m p a ris o n w i t h th e MBTI
may p r o v i d e f u r t h e r v a l i d a t i o n f o r t h e HBDI. MBTI d o c u m e n t a t i o n w i l l
be e n h a n ce d by t h e a d d i t i o n o f a s t u d e n t program m anager ty p e t a b l e
t o t h e At l a s .
A ssum ptions and L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e S tudy
The S p e c i a l i z e d P o p u l a t i o n
A l l o f th e 811 p a r t i c i p a n t s w ere s t u d e n t program m anagers a t t h e
DSMC. E a c h w as a m em ber o f one o f t h r e e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r c l a s s e s ,
P M C -8 6 -2 , 8 7 - 1 , o r 8 7 - 2 . A l l s t u d e n t s h a d b a c h e l o r ' s d e g r e e s and
ab o u t o n e - t h i r d had m a s t e r 's d e g re e s b e fo r e b e in g a c c e p te d by th e
DSMC (A cker, 1986). Mos l uad lu c i jo re d in the p h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s , e n g i
n e e rin g , or b u sin e ss a d m i n is t r a t io n . The p o p u l a t i o n w a s v i r t u a l l y
a l l m ale w i t h o n ly a h a n d f u l o f f e m a le s in ea ch c l a s s . A tten d ees

4
i n c l u d e d b o t h m i l i t a r y o f f i c e r s and d e f e n s e i n d u s t r y c i v i l i a n e x e c u
tiv e s .
The A sse s s m e n t I n s t r u m e n t s
The M y e rs - B r ig g s Type I n d i c a t o r and t h e Herrmann B r a in Dominance
I n s t r u m e n t w ere a d m i n i s t e r e d t o ea ch o f th e 811 p a r t i c i p a n t s a s p a r t
o f t h e DSMC r e g u l a r a s s e s s m e n t p r o c e d u r e . Both i n s t r u m e n t s w ere s e
l e c t e d f o r u s e a t th e DSMC b e c a u s e t h e y were d e s ig n e d p r i m a r i l y f o r
p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t o f h e a l t h y , n o r m a l a d u l t s (B underson, 1988;
Myers & M cC aulley, 1985), i n c o n t r a s t w i t h o t h e r w e ll-k n o w n i n s t r u
m en ts w hich w ere d e v e lo p e d f o r a p p l i c a t i o n t o a b norm al p o p u l a t i o n s i n
c lin ic a l (m ed ical) s e tt in g s .
A c c e p ta b l e C o n s t r u c t V a l i d i t y
The c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y o f any p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t
i s d i f f i c u l t to e v a l u a t e b e c a u s e o f th e h i g h l y co m p lex n a t u r e o f
human p e r s o n a l i t y m e a su rem e n t ( K e r l i n g e r , 1973). N o n e th e le ss, v a li
d a t i o n s t u d i e s o f t h e MBTI ( M y e r s & M c C a u l l e y , 1985) a n d t h e HBDI
(B u n d e rso n , 1988) p r o v id e am ple e v id e n c e o f t h e i r c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y .
M inim al P e r s o n a l B ia s
Both i n s t r u m e n t s a r e s e l f - r e p o r t in v e n to rie s, and t h e y s h a r e a
f a u l t common t o a l l such i n v e n t o r i e s — th e p e r s o n a l b i a s i n a d v e r t e n t l y
i n t r o d u c e d by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t (L a n y o n & G o o d s t e i n , 1982; R o rer,
1965). Because t h e DSMC s t u d e n t s w ere made aw are o f th e v a l u e o f th e
MBTI and HBDI r e s u l t s t o t h e i r c a r e e r s u c c e s s , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e y

a n s w e re d t h e q u e s t i o n s a c c u r a t e l y . Thus, th e r e s u l t a n t MBTI p e r s o n
a l i t y ty p e and th e HBDI q u a d r a n t d a t a f o r ea ch s t u d e n t can be c o n s i d
e r e d t o be a c c e p t a b l e p s y c h o l o g i c a l a s s e s s m e n t s f o r s t u d y p u rp o se s .
G e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f F in d in g s
The f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y a r e c o n s i d e r e d t o be g e n e r a l i z a b l e t o
s i m i l a r p o p u l a t io n s in p ro g ram m anagem ent o f f i c e s b o th w ith th e
g o v e rn m e n t and w i t h members o f t h e d e f e n s e - i n d u s t r y com plex.
D i s s e r t a t i o n Overview
The many and v a r i e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f m i l i t a r y program manag
e r s (PMs) a r e o u t l i n e d i n C h a p te r I I . T h is c h a p t e r h a s be e n i n c l u d e d
to e n a b le th e re a d e r to u n d e rs ta n d th e e s s e n t i a l ro le of i n te r
personal s k i l l s d e v e lo p m e n t i n m a n a g e r i a l l e a d e r s h i p tra in in g . The
DSMC, in th e f o r e f r o n t o f the e f f o r t to in c o rp o ra te the concepts o f
i n d i v i d u a l i t y an d p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s i n i t s p r i m a r i l y b u s i n e s s -
o r i e n t e d c u r r i c u l u m , i s a m odel f o r such u n d e r s t a n d i n g . Be.*cause t h e
e d u c a t i o n o f PMs i s keyed t o d e v e lo p m e n t o f l e a d e r s h i p and m a n a g e r i a l
s k i l l s , t h e l i t e r a t u r e s e a r c h i n C h a p te r I I I a d d r e s s e s m a jo r t h e o r i e s
i n t h e r e l a t e d f i e l d s o f l e a d e r s h i p and p e r s o n a l i t y . D evelopm ent and
u s e o f t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI a r e d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l . The d e s ig n f o r
a n a l y s i s o f t h e MBTI and HBDI d a t a f o r t h e DSMC s t u d e n t s i s p r e s e n t e d
i n C h a p t e r IV. S tu d y f in d i n g s are p re se n te d i n C h a p t e r V. The
c o n c l u s i o n s and re c o m m e n d a tio n s a p p e a r i n C h a p te r VI.

CHAPTER II
MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AT THE DEFENSE

SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT COLLEGE
The m i s s i o n o f t h e DSMC i s t o e d u c a t e m a n a g e r i a l l e a d e r s i n t h e
com plex f i e l d o f d e f e n s e m a t e r i e l a c q u i s i t i o n . Upon g r a d u a t i o n from
t h e P r o g r a m M a n a g e r 's C o u r s e , t h e m i l i t a r y o f f i c e r s and c i v i l i a n
m a n a g e rs r e c e i v e t h e i r a s s ig n m e n ts to p ro g ram m anagem ent o f f i c e s
whose m i s s i o n s s u p p o r t D e p a rtm e n t o f D e fe n se r e q u i r e m e n t s . These new
m a n a g e rs w i l l be e x p e c te d t o f u n c t i o n i n a v a r i e t y o f l e a d e r s h i p
r o l e s f o c u s e d i n p a r t on t h e d e v e l o p m e n t an d s t a f f i n g o f d y n a m i c ,
p ro d u c tiv e o r g a n iz a tio n s t h a t can respond r e a d i l y to the r a p id f lu c
t u a t i o n s and c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g in g demands o f t h e v o l a t i l e econom ic and
p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e s w i t h i n w hich pro g ra m m anagers m ust o p e r a t e .
The Role o f t h e Program Manager
A m i l i t a r y program m anager (PM) h a s be e n compared to t h e c h i e f
e x e c u tiv e o f f i c e r o f a la rg e i n d u s t r i a l firm (B a ll, 1984). He o r she
has ne e d f o r th o ro u g h g r o u n d in g i n t h e b a s i c s o f c o n v e n t i o n a l b u r e a u
c r a t i c m anagem ent ( E t z i o n i , 1964; W eber, 1947) i n o r d e r t o p l a n ,
o rg a n iz e , d ire c t, a nd e x e c u t e a s s i g n e d p r o g r a m s . He o r s h e m u s t
p e r f o r m t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s u n d e r s t r i n g e n t s c h e d u l e and b u d g e ta r y con
stra in ts im posed by s u p e r i o r s i n t h e arm ed s e r v i c e s and, t o an e v e r
i n c r e a s i n g e x t e n t , by t h e U n ite d S t a t e s Congress (F a rm e r, 1978).

The D e p a r t m e n t o f D e f e n s e h a s a l t e r e d t h e o l d e r 1 0 - t o - 1 5 - y e a r
p ro g ram d e v e lo p m en t c y c le t o a m o re s t r e a m l i n e d 8 - y e a r v e r s i o n
(A c q u isitio n , 1986). The f o r m e r f o u r p h a s e s o f d e v e lo p m e n t— c o n c e p t,
adv an ced d e v e lo p m en t, f u l l - s c a l e d e v e lo p m e n t, and p r o d u c t i o n — have
be e n c o m p re s se d i n t o t h r e e p h a s e s . At any tim e d u r i n g t h e s e p h a s e s ,
t h e e n t i r e program can be s u b j e c t e d t o r a d i c a l r e d i r e c t i o n , r e a l l o c a
t io n o f fu n d s, o r re a s s ig n m e n t o f e x p e rie n c e d s t a f f p e rso n n e l to
o t h e r p ro g ram s o f h ig h e r p e rc e iv e d p r i o r i t y . The p o s s i b i l i t y o f
im p e n d in g change i s e v e r p r e s e n t ( P e t e r s , 1987).
Impact of the Program Manager's Personal Skills
The key t o a s u c c e s s f u l program management c a r e e r i s t h e p e r s o n
a l i t y o f t h e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r ( P a t r i c k , 1 9 8 4 ). To b e e f f e c t i v e , t h e
PM m u st p o s s e s s t h e p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s k i l l s needed b o th
t o e x te n d h i s o r h e r l e a d e r s h i p th r o u g h o u t th e o r g a n i z a t i o n and to
in te r f a c e w ith o th er c o rp o ra te e n t i t i e s an d g o v e r n m e n t a l a g e n c i e s .
P e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as i n i t i a t i v e , fle x ib ility , c o n fid en ce,
e n t h u s i a s m , and s p e a k in g a b i l i t y h a v e b e e n i d e n t i f i e d a s n e c e s s a r y
f o r m a n a g e r i a l s u c c e s s i n t h e c o r p o r a t e s e t t i n g ( A r c h ib a ld , 1976).
The n e e d f o r t h e s e s a m e p e r s o n a l a t t r i b u t e s in th e m i l i t a r y
e n v i r o n m e n t was a l s o r e c o g n i z e d b y B a u m g a r t n e r , B ro w n , and K e l l e y
(1984). T h eir in te r v ie w s w ith m i l i t a r y p ro g ra m m a n a g e rs i n d i c a t e d
th a t t h e s e PMs a t t r i b u t e d t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l s u c c e s s t o t h e i r
a b i l i t y to e x e rc is e le a d e rs h ip , t o r e l a t e to o t h e r s , and t o communi
c a t e w i t h a w ide v a r i e t y o f a u d ie n c e s . In o t h e r w ords, th ese o f f i
c e r s c o n s i d e r e d good i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s a n e c e s s a r y s k i l l i n

t h e i r jo b s. E x c e l l e n t o r a l c o m m u n ic a tio n a b i l i t i e s a r e a l s o im p o r
t a n t b e c a u s e th e p ro g ra m m anager m ust n o t o n ly be a b le t o s e l l th e
p ro g ra m , b u t m u st f r e q u e n t l y j u s t i f y i t s e x i s t e n c e t o p r o b in g g o v e rn
m e n t a l i n v e s t i g a t i v e b o d i e s and to t h e p u b l i c p r e s s ( P e t e r s & A u s t i n ,
1985; P e t e r s & W aterm an, 1982).
Program Management C ourse
Course Outline
The c u r r i c u l u m f o l l o w e d b y t h e DSMC w a s p a t t e r n e d a f t e r t h e
c o u r s e o f i n s t r u c t i o n o f f e r e d by t h e H arvard B u s i n e s s School (A cker,
1986). T h is f o c u s was b a s e d on f a c u l t y o p i n i o n t h a t t h e s o l i d e n g i
n e e r i n g ba c k g ro u n d p o s s e s s e d by m ost o f th e s t u d e n t s s h o u ld be aug
m en te d by a m ix o f p e r t i n e n t b u s i n e s s c o u r s e s i n o r d e r t o d e v e lo p t h e
d e s i r e d management e x p e r t i s e . T h is p o s i t i o n i s s u p p o r t e d by o r g a n i
z a t i o n a l m anagem ent l i t e r a t u r e (B adaw y, 1982). C o n s e q u e n tly , DSMC
c o u r s e s a d d re s s e d s p e c i f i c p ro b le m s in d e fe n s e a c q u i s i t i o n , c o s t
a n a l y s i s , c o n t r a c t m anagem ent, c o n t r a c t o r f i n a n c e r e q u i r e m e n t s , i n t e
g ra te d l o g i s t i c su p p o rt, and p r o d u c t i o n (A cker, 1986).
C r i t i c i s m o f B u s i n e s s School T r a i n i n g
The b u s i n e s s com m unity h a s n o t be e n s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e l e v e l o f
in te r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s o f g ra d u a te s o f a c c r e d ite d b u s in e s s sc h o o ls.
Je n k in s, R e iz en stein , and R odgers (1984) found t h a t c o r p o r a t e e x e c u
tiv e s f a v o r e d more e m p h a s is on d e v e lo p m en t o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s ,
w h e re a s t h e b u s i n e s s s c h o o l f a c u l t y c la im e d t h a t t h e i n s t r u c t i o n i n

p e r s o n n e l m a n a g e m e n t o f f e r e d by t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n s was a d e q u a t e .
F in n e y and S i e h l (1985-1986) a g re e d w i t h t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t a n a l y t i
c a l t e c h n i q u e s w ere b e i n g e m p h a s iz e d a t t h e ex p e n se o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l
s k i l l s d e v e lo p m e n t. Fox (1984) s t r o n g l y a d v o c a te d t h a t DSMC s t u d e n t s
re c e iv e s p e c ific i n s t r u c t i o n and p r a c t i c e i n c o n t r a c t n e g o t i a t i o n a s
a p o t e n t i a l l y e f f e c t i v e method o f c o n t a i n i n g t h e e s c a l a t i n g c o s t s o f
d e f e n s e p r o c u r e m e n t.
C u r r ic u lu m A d ju stm e n t by t h e DSMC
I n o r d e r t o be m o re r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e p e r c e i v e d n e e d s o f t h e
a c q u i s i t i o n com m unity, t h e b u s i n e s s - o r i e n t e d c u r r i c u l u m a t t h e DSMC
was r e f o c u s e d to w a rd a c t i v e s i m u l a t i o n s o f r e a l - w o r l d p r o b le m s , p r e s
sures, and a c t i v i t i e s t h a t t h e s t u d e n t program m anagers w i l l be r e
q u ire d to face and s o lv e a fte r th e y e n te r th e ir p o stg ra d u a tio n
assig n m en ts. These s i m u l a t i o n e x e r c i s e s p e r m i t t h e s t u d e n t s to b e
come im m ersed i n r e a l i s t i c s i t u a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g v e r s a t i l i t y i n a p p l y
in g l e a d e r s h i p p r i n c i p l e s to p r a c t i c a l p ro b le m s. The s i m u l a t i o n s
deal w ith in te rp e rs o n a l r e l a ti o n s , n e g o tia tio n s, r e s o l u t i o n o f con
flic ts ( b o th a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and p e r s o n a l ) , and s i t u a t i o n s re q u irin g
t h a t t h e s t u d e n t s p e r f o r m a t d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f t e c h n i c a l and b u s i
n e s s m anagement and s t i l l m a i n t a i n t h e f o r w a r d momentum o f th e o r g a
n iz a tio n (DSMC, 1986).
B l o o m 's ( 1 9 7 1 ) c o n c e p t , le a rn in g fo r m aste ry , and K n o w l e s 's
(1978) r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e s p e c i a l nee d s o f a d u l t l e a r n e r s have be e n
u s e d b y t h e DSMC f a c u l t y t o i d e n t i f y c o m p e t e n c y o b j e c t i v e s t o be
a c h ie v e d by th e stu d e n ts. F a c u l t y m em bers, w e ll v e rsed in th e

s t r i n g e n t re q u ire m e n ts o f th e a c q u i s i t i o n co m m u n ity , have been
a s s i g n e d a s m e n to r s t o i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s t o m o n it o r t h e i r manage
r i a l l e a d e r s h i p p e rf o r m a n c e d u r i n g t h e s i m u l a t i o n s ( G a d e k e n , 1 9 8 7 )
and t o a d v i s e and a s s i s t them to w a rd im provem ent.
I n t e r p e r s o n a l S k i l l s Development
G uest l e c t u r e r s a t t h e DSMC, many o f whom w ere p r a c t i c i n g p r o
gram m anagers a t t h e g e n e r a l o f f i c e r lev el, have r e p e a t e d l y empha
s i z e d t h a t p ro g ram o b j e c t i v e s m u st be a c h ie v e d th ro u g h p e o p le . A
s p e c i a l b l o c k o f i n s t r u c t i o n w as i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e PMC c u r r i c u l u m
d u r i n g t h e 1980s w hich d e a l t w i t h t h e "im provem ent o f l e a d e r s h i p and
m an ag erial s k i l l s by a d d r e s s i n g p o t e n t i a l im p ro v e m e n ts in the stu
d e n t ' s a b i l i t y t o w o r k w i t h a n d t h r o u g h o t h e r s " (DSMC, 1 9 8 6 , p. 3 2 ) .
E l l i s ( 1 9 8 3 ) , a m i l i t a r y m em b e r o f t h e f a c u l t y a n d a p s y c h o l o g i s t ,
in tro d u c e d th e stu d y o f th e co n cep ts o f c r e a t i v i t y , in d iv id u a l d i f
ferences, v a lu e s, ta le n ts, and p r e f e r e n c e s to th e s tu d e n t body.
T h e s e p e r s o n a l a t t r i b u t e s w e r e i d e n t i f i e d by tw o p e r s o n a l i t y a s
sessm ent in stru m e n ts, th e M y e rs-B rig g s Type In d ic a to r a nd th e
H errm ann B r a in Dominance I n s t r u m e n t . Both f a c u l t y and s t u d e n t s w ere
q u ic k to a p p r e c i a t e th e a d v a n ta g e s o f kno w in g t h e i r p s y c h o l o g i c a l
ty p es, t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e i r own and o t h e r p e r s o n a l i t y t y p e s ,
and t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e i r b r a i n dom inance q u a d r a n t s .
Summary
A p rogram m anager m ust p ro d u c e an o p e r a t i o n a l p r o d u c t on tim e
and w i t h i n b u d g e t. The e d u c a t i o n f o r m e r l y p r o v i d e d t o a new PM a t

t h e DSHC was d e v o te d t o i n s t r u c t i o n in th e im p o r ta n c e o f s c h e d u l e s
and c o s t s , an a p p ro a c h t y p i c a l o f m ost b u s i n e s s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n p r o
gram s. D uring t h e e a r l y 1980s, h ow ever, g r e a t e r e m p h a s is was p la c e d
on d e v e lo p i n g i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s through r e c o g n itio n o f th e e x is
ten c e o f w id e ly v a ry in g in d iv id u a l d iff e re n c e s . O p tim a l management
o f p rogram c o s t s , sc h ed u les, and p r o d u c t i o n can be a c h ie v e d w i t h th e
e f f e c t i v e u s e o f m a n a g e r i a l l e a d e r s h i p e x p r e s s e d th ro u g h de v e lo p m en t
of in te rp e rso n a l s k ills a nd r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f w i d e l y
d i f f e r i n g p e r s o n a l i t i e s among a s s o c i a t e s and c o l l e a g u e s .

CHAPTER III
LITERATURE REVIEW OF PERSONALITY AND

LEADERSHIP THEORIES
The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s tu d y i s to d e te rm in e th e r e l a ti o n s h ip s o f
t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s T ype I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) t y p e p r e f e r e n c e s w i t h t h e
m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n D o m in a n c e I n s t r u m e n t
(HBD I), b a s e d on d a t a fro m t h r e e c l a s s e s at th e D e fe n se S y stem s
Management C o lle g e p rogram m a n a g e r's c o u r s e h e l d d u r i n g 1986-1987.
O u t l i n e o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e S e a rc h
The l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w b e g i n s w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f m a jo r l e a d e r
sh ip t h e o r ie s . Because l e a d e r s h ip i s p e r c e i v e d by o t h e r s a s t h e
o u tw a r d e x p r e s s i o n o f p e r s o n a l i t y (B a s s, 1981), t h e m a jo r t h e o r i e s o f
p e rso n a lity are d isc u sse d , as w e ll as th e sp e c ific m easurem ent
i n s t r u m e n t s d e v e lo p e d by i n d i v i d u a l t h e o r i s t s . The two i n s t r u m e n t s
u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y , t h e MBTI a n d t h e HBDI, a r e d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l .
Ten o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t s f r e q u e n t l y u se d t o a s s e s s p e rso n a lity d i f f e r
e n c e s a r e a l s o r e v ie w e d .
MBTI ty p e d a t a from p r i o r s t u d i e s o f pro g ra m m anagers ( N i d i f f e r ,
1984) a s w e l l a s a c c u m u la te d t y p e d a t a on m a n a g e rs and e x e c u t i v e s i n
t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r (M acdaid, M cC aulley, & K a in z , 1986), e x e c u t i v e s i n
t h e f e d e r a l g overnm ent ( P i c k e r i n g , 1986), and m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n
e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e army (DeWald, 1986/1987) a r e c o v e re d n e x t.
12

13
The e v i d e n c e f o r c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e MBTI a n d t h e HBDI i s
th e n e x am in ed . S t u d i e s b y F o r d ( 1 9 8 8 a , 1 9 8 8 b ) , J a m e s ( 1 9 8 6 ) , a nd
Newman (1984/1985) a r e r e v i e w e d .
L e a d e r s h i p and P e r s o n a l i t y Theory I n t e r a c t i o n
Through h i s w e l l- d o c u m e n t e d s t u d y o f t h e t h e o r y o f l e a d e r s h i p ,
B ass (1981) c o n c lu d e d t h a t l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s a r e p e r c e iv e d by
p e e r s and a s s o c i a t e s th r o u g h t h e e x t e r n a l e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e l e a d e r ' s
p e rso n a lity . L e a d e r s h ip and i t s i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w ith p e r s o n a lity
are d isc u sse d in th e fo llo w in g s e c tio n s .
L e a d ersh ip T h e o rie s
C a r l y l e (1858) f o r m u l a t e d h i s " g r e a t man" t h e o r y o f l e a d e r s h i p
on t h e p r e m i s e t h a t t h e a c c o m p lis h m e n ts o f a few e x c e p t i o n a l in d iv id
u a l s had d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d th e c o u r s e o f h i s t o r y . In o th e r w ords,
t h e s e o u t s t a n d i n g l e a d e r s w e re b e l i e v e d t o p o s s e s s superhum an q u a l i
tie s n o t a v a i l a b l e t o o r d i n a r y human b e i n g s . C a rly le j u s t i f i e d h is
t h e o r y th r o u g h s e l e c t e d h i s t o r i c a l r e c o r d s .
The c o n c e p t o f t h e " g r e a t m an" h a s c o n t i n u e d t o s u r f a c e a n d t o
be i n v e s t i g a t e d by r e s e a r c h e r s . S im onton (1984) c la i m e d t o have be e n
s u c c e s s f u l i n r e p l i c a t i n g Woods's (1913) s t u d y o f E u ro p e 's h e r e d i t a r y
ru le rs, w h ich r a t e d th e r u l e r s w ith r e s p e c t to th e ir le a d e rsh ip
q u a litie s and t h e i r i n t e l l i g e n c e . Sim onton r e p o r t e d a h i g h p o s i t i v e
c o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n l e a d e r s h i p and in te llig e n c e .
W h e th e r o r n o t t h e r e w e re i d e n t i f i a b l e l e a d e r s h i p t r a i t s led
S m ith and K ru e g e r (1933) t o i n v e s t i g a t e th e l e a d e r s h i p l i t e r a t u r e .

They l i s t e d s e v e r a l m e n t a l and p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w hich th e y
c o n s i d e r e d to be a t t r i b u t e s o f l e a d e r s . These a t t r i b u t e s in c lu d e d
i n t e l l i g e n c e , know ledge, i n i t i a t i v e , im a g in a tio n , o r i g i n a l i t y , en th u
sia sm , d e d ic a tio n to p u r p o s e , and th e a b i l i t y t o make d e c i s i o n s
q u ick ly .
I f l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s and p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s w e re , in f a c t ,
in te rre la te d , S to g d ill (1948) b e l i e v e d t h a t he c o u l d , th rough a
se arc h o f th e e x te n s iv e l i t e r a t u r e on b o t h s u b j e c t s , d e v e lo p a l i s t
o f l e a d e r s h i p t r a i t s w hich would d i s t i n g u i s h l e a d e r s from f o l l o w e r s .
S to g d ill d id id e n tify several q u a litie s or p e rs o n a lity c h a r a c te r is
t i c s w hich w ere m a n i f e s t e d by l e a d e r s . What h e c o u ld n o t do was t o
d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h e s e l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s w e re d e m o n s t r a t e d o n l y by
d e sig n a te d lea d e rs. In stead , S to g d ill found t h a t lea d e rsh ip q u a li
t i e s w ere e x p r e s s e d i n v a r y i n g d e g r e e s a t a l l m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l s . The
t h e o r y t h a t l e a d e r s h i p a b i l i t y was t h e p r o p e r t y o f a ch o sen few was
not su b sta n tia te d .
S i t u a t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p t h e o r y e m p h asized th e in flu e n c e o f th e
e n v ir o n m e n t on t h e b e h a v i o r o f t h e l e a d e r . The e n v iro n m e n t i n c l u d e d
th e s i t u a t i o n , t h e t a s k to be a c c o m p li s h e d , and th e p e r s o n n e l i n
v o l v e d , a s w e l l a s t h e g o a l s a nd o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e l e a d e r a n d t h e
org an izatio n . F ie d le r 's (1967) c o n ti n g e n c y l e a d e r s h i p model r e l a t e d
th e le a d e r 's a c tio n s both to i n t e r a c t i o n s w ith h i s o r h e r f o llo w e r s
and t o th e r e q u ir e m e n ts o f th e ta s k to be a c c o m p lis h e d . L a te r,
F i e d l e r and Chemers (1974) p o s t u l a t e d t h a t no s i n g l e l e a d e r s h i p s t y l e
would be a p p r o p r i a t e i n a l l c a s e s . The a d a p t i v e l e a d e r would te n d to
m o d ify h i s o r h e r m a n a g e r i a l s t y l e t o f i t t h e needs o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r

situ a tio n .
The l i f e - c y c l e , th re e -d im e n sio n al, s i t u a t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p model
d e v e l o p e d b y H e r s e y a nd B l a n c h a r d ( 1 9 7 2 ) w as a n a t t e m p t t o r e s o l v e
th e is s u e o f p o l a r i z a t i o n in le a d e r s h ip th eo ry . T h is p o l a r i z a t i o n
to o k t h e form o f d i v i d i n g l e a d e r s o r m anagers i n t o one o f two c a t e g o
rie s: ta s k - o rie n te d or p e o p le -o rie n te d . T h o rn to n and Byham (1982)
d e c r i e d t h e te n d e n c y f o r management t o s e p a r a t e t h e two o r i e n t a t i o n s ,
task and p e o p l e , when r e a l w orld s i t u a t i o n s in clu d e in te g r a t io n o f
b o t h v i e w p o i n t s (H e rz b e rg , 1982).
L e a d e r s h i p E x p r e s s e d Through P e r s o n a l i t y
L e a d e r s h ip i s p e r c e i v e d o u t w a r d l y a s t h e c o l l e c t i v e a ttrib u te s
o f a l e a d e r 's p e r s o n a l i t y (B ass, 1981). Bass n o te d f u r t h e r t h a t a
l e a d e r 's in n e r q u a l i t i e s — v a lu e s , d r iv e to a c h ie v e g o a ls , se n se o f
re sp o n sib ility , s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e , p a t i e n c e , v e r s a t i l i t y , a nd h i g h
t o l e r a n c e f o r u n c e r t a i n t y and a m b i g u i t y — a r e a l s o g e n e r a l l y communi
c a te d to th e o u ts id e w o rld th ro u g h h is or h e r p e r s o n a l it y . M a jo r
p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r i e s and t h e m ost f r e q u e n t l y u sed p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s
m ent i n s t r u m e n t s w i l l ea ch be r e v i e w e d i n t h e n e x t s e c t i o n .
P e r s o n a l i t y Theory and A ssessm ent
The m a jo r p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r i e s have been e n u n c i a t e d by dom inant
f i g u r e s i n t h e f i e l d s o f m e d i c in e , p s y c h i a t r y , and p sychology. Seven
o f t h e m o s t o u t s t a n d i n g a r e F r e u d , J u n g , E y s e n c k , M u r r a y , M a s lo w ,
A llp o rt, and C a t t e l l (H ergenhahn, 1980, 1984). P e r s o n a l i t y m e a s u re
m ent in stru m e n ts w ere d e v e lo p e d e ith e r by t h e m a j o r th e o rists

t h e m s e l v e s o r by t h e i r s t u d e n t s i n o r d e r t o a s s e s s i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r
e n c e s and i d e n t i f i a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c e r t a i n t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n s .
T a b le 1 l i s t s 12 p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s , th e f i r s t 10 o f
w hich a r e t h o s e m ost f r e q u e n t l y u s e d t o assess p e rso n a lity d i f f e r
ences. The r a n k i n g i s b a s e d on t h e f r e q u e n c y o f u s e r e p o r t e d b y
Buros (1975, 1978) and by t h e Buros I n s t i t u t e (1985). None o f t h e 10
w as s e l e c t e d f o r u s e a t t h e DSMC b e c a u s e m o s t w e r e d e v e l o p e d t o
e v a lu a te ab n o rm al i n d i v i d u a l s in c l i n i c a l s e t t i n g s in s u p p o rt o f
m ed ical d iag n o ses or p s y c h ia t r i c a n a ly s e s . Both i n s t r u m e n t s u se d a t
t h e DSMC, t h e MBTI a n d t h e HBDI, w e r e d e v e l o p e d f o r a p p l i c a t i o n t o
p o p u l a t i o n s o f n o r m a l, h e a l t h y a d u l t s .
F re u d and H is P s y c h i a t r i c o r C l i n i c a l I n t e r v i e w
F reud was a p h y s i c i a n t r a i n e d in p sy c h ia try . Though F reud was
t h e f i r s t m e d i c a l p r o f e s s i o n a l t o r e c o g n i z e t h e e x i s t e n c e and im p o r
t a n c e o f t h e u n c o n s c io u s m in d , he c o n s i d e r e d h i s p a t i e n t s a n i m a l i s t i c
in n a tu re . F re u d v ie w e d an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l i t y a s a f u n c t i o n o f
i n s t i n c t i v e d r i v e s w hich p r o g r e s s e d from c h il d h o o d t o a d u l t sta tu s.
He was c o n v in c e d t h a t a human b e in g r e a c h e d maximum m e n t a l c a p a c i t y
sim u lta n e o u sly w ith sexual m a tu rity (L auzan, 19 6 2 ; Munn, 1966).
F reud u se d t h e c l i n i c a l i n t e r v i e w a s h i s p r e f e r r e d method o f p a t i e n t
tre a tm e n t.
R o r s c h a c h 's P r o j e c t i v e T e s t
R o rsc h ac h c o n s i d e r e d h i m s e l f an a d h e r e n t o f t h e F r e u d ia n s c h o o l
o f p sy c h o lo g y . He d e v i s e d a p r o j e c t i v e t e s t , t h e R o r s c h a c h ( I t e m 4

M a tr ix o f P e r s o n a l i t y A s s e s sm e n t I n s t r u m e n t s
Number o f Number o f
I te m P e rs o n a lity re fe re n c e s R ank3 refe ren c e s Rankb D e v e lo p m e n ta l A re a s o f R em arks
in stru m e n ts 1965—19 7 l a 1 9 7 7 -1 9 8 4 b b ase a p p lic a tio n
I. M in n e s o ta M u lt ip h a s i c E m p iric a l, p s y c h i a t r i c ; P r im a rily C o m p u te r iz e d s c o r i n g by
P e r s o n a lity In v e n to ry 772 1 339 1 H athaw ay & M cK in ley (1 9 5 1 ) c lin ic a l C o n s u ltin g P s y c h o lo g is ts P re ss
(MMPI), 19A3
2. S ix te e n P e r s o n a lity E m p ir ic a l, F reu d & Ju n g ; C l i n i c a l a nd One o f 2 p e r s o n a l i t y i n v e n t o r i e s

F a c to r Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 370 2 67 1 3 .5 C a t t e l l , E b e r , & T a ts u o k a n o rm a l w ith so u n d p s y c h o lo g ic a l b a se
(1 6 P F Q ), 19A9 (1 9 7 0 ) Lanyon & G o o d s t e in (1 9 8 2 )
3. E dw ards P e r s o n a l i t y M u r r a y 's P e r s o n o l o g y ; N orm al M in im al u s e

P r e f e r e n c e S c h e d u le 33A 3 16 >50 E d w ard s (1 9 5 3 )
(E P P S ), 1953
4. R o r s c h a c h , 1921 329 4 79 9 .5 F r e u d ia n P s y c h o lo g y ; C lin ic a l; P r o je c tiv e

R o rs c h a c h (1 9 8 5 ) p e rs o n a lity
5. C a l if o r n ia P s y c h o lo g ic a l 281 5 61 1 6 .5 E m p ir ic a l; N orm al and C o m p u te r iz e d s c o r i n g by

I n v e n t o r y ( C P I ) , 1956 Gough (1 9 6 8 ) c lin ic a l C o n s u ltin g P s y c h o lo g is ts P re s s
6. B e n d e r - G e s t a l t , 1938 220 6 65 15 G e s t a l t P s y c h o lo g y ; C h ild P r o je c tiv e

B e n d e r - G e s t a lt T e s t (1 9 8 5 ) p s y c h o lo g y
7. E y se n c k P e r s o n a l i t y 217 7 91 8 E m p iric a l; C lin ic a l U sed m o s t l y i n G r e a t B r i t a i n ;

I n v e n t o r y ( E P I ) , 1963 E y s e n c k 6 E y s e n c k (1 9 6 8 ) r e p l a c e d M a u d sle y
8. T h e m a tic A p p e r c e p ti o n 188 8 51 20 M u r r a y 's P e r s o n o l o g y ; N orm al and P r o je c t iv e ; u s e h a s d e c lin e d ;

T e s t (TA T), 1935 M u rra y (1 9 3 8 ) c lin ic a l e v a lu a tio n d i f f i c u l t
9. S tu d y o f V a lu e s (S V ), 162 9 7 >50 H u m a n is tic P s y c h o lo g y ; h o rm a l M in im a l u s e

1931 A llp o rt e t a l . (1960)
10 . M a u d sle y P e r s o n a l i t y 153 10 32 3 6 .5 E m p ir ic a l, F re u d & J u n g : C lin ic a l N e u ro tic is m an d E x tra v e r s io n

I n v e n t o r y (M P I), 1959 E y s e n c k & E y s e n c k (1 9 6 8 ) s c a le s o n ly ; re p la c e d by
E y sen ck P e r s o n a l it y In v e n to ry
11. M y e rs - B r ig g s Type 73 2 2 .5 19 50 J u n g ia n T h e o ry ; P e r s o n a l i t y ty p e One o f 2 p e r s o n a l i t y i n v e n t o r i e s

I n d i c a t o r (M B T I), 1962 M y ers (1 9 6 2 ) w ith so u n d p s y c h o lo g ic a l b a s e
Lanyon 6 G o o d s t e in (1 9 8 2 )
12 . H errm ann B r a in Not l i s t e d Not l i s t e d P h y s io lo g ic a l m e ta p h o r; R ig h t- le ft b ra in M e ta p h o r ic b r a i n d o m in a n c e

D om inance I n s t r u m e n t H errm an n (1 9 8 8 ) d o m in a n c e
(H B D I), 1976
a D a ta a r e fro m P e r s o n a l i t y T e s t s a n d R e v ie w s I I t by 0 . K. B u ro s ( E d . ) , 1 9 7 5 , H ig h la n d P a r k , N J: G ry p h o n P r e s s .
b D a ta a r e fro m The N i n t h M e n ta l M e asu re m e n ts Y e a rb o o k ( V o l s . 1**2), b y t h e B u ro s I n s t i t u t e o f M e n ta l M e a s u r e m e n ts , 1 9 8 5 , L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y o f N e b r a s k a - L i n c o ln .

i n T a b le 1), t o t a p t h e u n c o n s c io u s mind o f t h e p a t i e n t . E v alu atio n
o f th e t e s t r e s u l t s r e q u ir e s the e x p e r t is e of a c l i n i c a l p s y c h o lo g is t
(B u ro s, 1975, 1978). A lth o u g h i t s f re q u e n c y o f u s e h a s d e c l i n e d , the
R orschacn c o n tin u e s to be u s e d p rim a rily in c lin ic a l se ttin g s
(R orschach, 1 9 8 5 ).
Jung and H is P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type Theory
L ik e F re u d , Jung was a p h y s i c i a n w i t h p s y c h i a t r i c t r a i n i n g . In
a d d itio n , J u n g ' s e d u c a t i o n p r o v i d e d h im w i t h an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f
p h i lo s o p h y , th e c l a s s i c s , and E a s t e r n r e l i g i o n s . H is f u n d a m e n t a l
w ork, P s y c h o l o g i c a l Types (Jung, 1921/1971), l a i d t h e groundw ork f o r
r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e v a l u e o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s and th e w ide ran g e
o f i n d i v i d u a l t y p e s i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g no rm a l p e r s o n a l i t y , r a t h e r than
c o n c e n t r a t i o n on t h e p r o b le m s o f n e u r o t i c s and t h e m e n t a l l y i l l .
J u n g 's t h e o r y o f p e r s o n a l i t y p o stu la te d t h a t p e o p le 's a ttitu d e s
to w a r d l i f e depend upon w h e t h e r t h e y draw t h e i r m e n ta l e n e r g y from
t h e i n n e r w o r ld o f i d e a s ( i n t r o v e r s i o n ) o r r e c e i v e g rea ter stim u la
tio n from i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s and t h e e x t e r n a l e n v i
ro n m e n t ( e x t r a v e r s i o n ) . He p r o p o s e d f o u r m e n t a l f u n c t i o n s , rep re
s e n t e d on two p o l a r d i m e n s io n s : s e n s i n g v e r s u s i n t u i t i o n and t h i n k
in g v e r s u s f e e l in g . P ra c tic a l, se n sin g in d iv id u a ls o b ta in t h e i r
i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h e w o r l d a r o u n d th e m p r i m a r i l y t h r o u g h t h e f i v e
p h y sic a l senses. In tu itiv e s t e n d t o i n t e g r a t e know n f a c t s w ith
memory and p r i o r e x p e r i e n c e t o pro d u ce a b r o a d e r o u t l o o k e m b ra c in g
fu tu re p o s s i b i l i t i e s .

The t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g d ic h o to m y r e f e r s to th e m ethod o f d e c i s i o n
m aking. The t h i n k i n g i n d i v i d u a l a r r i v e s a t d e c i s i o n s th ro u g h a s t e p -
b y -step , l o g i c a l l y p r o g r e s s i v e p r o c e s s ba sed on e v i d e n t facts. The
f e e l i n g p e r s o n i s more c o n c e rn e d w i t h t h e p r o b a b le im p a c t o f h i s o r
h e r d e c i s i o n s on o t h e r s a n d t r i e s t o m i n i m i z e p o s s i b l e a d v e r s e r e
a c tio n s. The fe e lin g p erso n ten d s t o be m o re p e o p l e - o r i e n t e d ,
w h e re a s t h e t h i n k i n g i n d i v i d u a l i s more c o n c ern e d w i t h t h e r e q u i r e
m en ts o f th e t a s k a t hand th a n w ith th e p e o p le in v o lv e d . Jung d id
n o t p ro d u ce an i n s t r u m e n t t o accompany h i s th e o r y . He, l i k e F re u d ,
u s e d t h e i n t e r v i e w a s h i s c u s to m a r y method o f t r e a t i n g h i s c l i e n t s .
E y senck and H is P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r i e s
The M a u d s l e y P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( I t e m 10 i n T a b l e 1) was
d e v e l o p e d f r o m E y s e n c k 's w o r k w i t h B r i t i s h s o l d i e r s h o s p i t a l i z e d
a fte r W o rld War I I for n e u ro tic and p s y c h o ti c te n d e n c ie s. The
M a u d s l e y p r o v i d e s s c o r e s on o n l y tw o s c a l e s : e x tra v e rs io n v ersu s
in tro v e rsio n , s i m i l a r t o J u n g ' s t h e o r y , and n e u r o t i c i s m , c lo se ly
a l l i e d w i t h F r e u d 's v ie w s . The E ysenck P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( Ite m 7
i n T a b l e 1) i s a r e v i s i o n o f t h e M a u d s l e y w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f a
p sy c h o tic ism s c a le , plus a s p e c if ic s c a l e d e v is e d to d e t e c t w h e th e r
t h e r e s p o n d e n t i n c l u d e d l i e s among h i s a n s w e r s ( E y s e n c k & E y s e n c k ,
1968). Both i n s t r u m e n t s a r e s u i t a b l e o n ly f o r c l i n i c a l u s e .
T hem atic A p p e r c e p t io n T e s t (TAT)
M u r r a y (M o rg a n & M u r r a y , 1 9 3 5 ) o r i g i n a l l y d e v e l o p e d t h e TAT
(Item 8 in T ab le 1 ), a p ro je c tiv e in stru m e n t, to in v e stig a te

f a n t a s i e s o r w ak in g d rea m s. When t a k i n g t h e TAT, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t
v i e w s a s e r i e s o f am biguous p i c t u r e s and i s a s k e d to d e s c r i b e e i t h e r
v e r b a lly o r in w r itin g h is in te rp re ta tio n of th e scene. M urray
b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t would i n j e c t h i m s e l f i n t o t h e r o l e o f
t h e p i c t u r e d c h a r a c t e r and would c o n s i s t e n t l y f o l l o w h i s own p e r s o n a l
p r e f e r e n c e s i n f o r e c a s t i n g t h e outcom e o f t h e s t o r y . M urray and h i s
m i l i t a r y c o l l e a g u e s ( p s y c h i a t r i s t s and p s y c h o l o g i s t s ) r e p o r t e d a h i g h
r a t e o f s u c c e s s i n u s i n g t h e TAT t o a s s e s s t h e p o t e n t i a l p e rf o r m a n c e
o f a g e n t s d u r i n g W o r l d War I I (U.S. O f f i c e o f S t r a t e g i c S e r v i c e s ,
1948).
M u r r a y ’s e d u c a t i o n a t t h e d o c t o r a l l e v e l i n t h e t h r e e p r o f e s
sio n a l d isc ip lin e s of m e d ic in e , b io c h e m istry , an d p s y c h o lo g y
(H ergenhahn, 1980) p r o v id e d him w i t h an u n u s u a l l y b ro a d ba c k g ro u n d on
w h ic h to b a s e h i s e v a l u a t i o n s . When M u r r a y r e t i r e d from a c t i v e
p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r a c t i c e , t h e u s e o f t h e TAT g r a d u a l l y d e c l i n e d . More
o ver, t h e TAT i s s u b j e c t t o t h e m a jo r d i s a d v a n t a g e o f a l l p r o j e c t i v e
t e s t s — i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s i s h e a v i l y d e p e n d e n t on t h e
e v a lu a tiv e s k i l l o f th e t e s t a d m in is tr a to r .
E d w a r d s 's P e r s o n a l P r e f e r e n c e S c h e d u le (EPPS)
E d w a r d s ( 1 9 5 3 ) d e v i s e d t h e EPPS ( i t e m 3 i n T a b l e 1) t o a d d r e s s
M u rr a y 's (1938) p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r y t h r o u g h t h e u s e o f a n o n p r o j e c t i v e
in stru m e n t, r a t h e r t h a n w i t h t h e p r o j e c t i v e TAT. F ifte e n c o n stru c ts
w e re r e f e r e n c e d , i n c l u d i n g a c h ie v e m e n t , a f f i l i a t i o n , d o m in a n c e, n u r -
turance, and a g g r e s s i o n . The EPPS beg a n t o l o s e i t s p o p u l a r i t y a f t e r

1970 when Edwards r a d i c a l l y rev ised h is p s y c h o l o g i c a l b a s e and em
b r a c e d n ew er p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r i e s .
S tu d y o f V a lu e s (SV)
A llp o rt (A llp o rt, V ernon, & L in d zey , 1 9 6 0 ) d e v e l o p e d t h e SV
( I t e m 9 i n Table 1) t o im p le m e n t h i s h u m a n i s t i c p e r s o n a l i t y th e o r y .
The SV a d d r e s s e s s i x g e n e ra l v a lu e c a te g o rie s : th e o re tic a l (search
fo r tru th ), econom ic ( p r a c t i c a l ) , a e sth e tic ( a r tis tic ) , s o c i a l (human
r e l a t i o n s h i p s ) , p o l i t i c a l (pow er b a s e ) , and r e l i g i o u s (h a rm o n io u s
a c tio n ). A l lp o r t e m p h a size d th e u n iq u e n e s s o f th e i n d i v i d u a l . He
p r e f e r r e d t o s tu d y a s i n g l e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l i t y i n d e p th , rath er
t h a n t o a t t e m p t g e n e r a l i z a t i o n t o g r o u p s (Kergenhahn, 1984), The SV
is i n f r e q u e n t l y used as a r e s e a r c h in stru m e n t (B uros I n s t i t u t e ,
19 85).
B e n d e r-G e sta lt T est
T h i s p r o j e c t i v e t e s t ( I t e m 6 i n T a b l e 1) h a s h a d w i d e a p p l i c a
t i o n f o r a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e m o t o r , c o g n i t i v e , e m o t i o n a l , and s o c i a l
f u n c t i o n i n g o f y o u n g c h i l d r e n , r a n g i n g i n a g e f r o m 4 t o 14 ( B e n d e r -
G e s ta lt T e st, 1985).
C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o l o g i c a l I n v e n t o r y (CPI)
Gough (1968) d e v e lo p e d t h e CPI ( I t e m 5 i n Table 1) p r i m a r i l y a s
an i n s t r u m e n t to p r e d i c t s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n and b e h a v i o r among n o rm a l
in d iv id u als, r a t h e r t h a n t o m e a s u re p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , p e r se. The
v a l u e o f t h e CPI a s a c l i n i c a l t o o l a p p l i c a b l e t o a d o l e s c e n t p ro b le m s

h a s be e n r e c o g n i z e d by Baucom (1985), who h a s compared i t s u s e f a v o r
a b l y w i t h t h a t o f t h e w e ll- k n o w n M in n e s o ta M u l t i p h a s i c P e r s o n a l i t y
In v en to ry .
S i x t e e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c t o r Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (16PFQ)
C a tte ll (C a tte ll, E b e r, & T a tsu o k a , 1970) u sed t h e te c h n i q u e o f
f a c t o r a n a l y s i s on d a t a from l i t e r a l l y th o u s a n d s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s in
o r d e r t o d e v e l o p t h e 16PFQ ( I t e m 2 i n T a b l e 1 ) , w h i c h h e b e l i e v e d
c ap ab le of i d e n tif y in g se co n d -o rd er p e r s o n a lity f a c to r s . Lanyon and
G o o d s t e i n ( 1 9 8 2 ) h a v e a s s e s s e d t h e 16PFQ a s b e i n g o n e o f o n l y tw o
p e rso n a lity in stru m e n ts w h i c h a r e b a s e d on s o u n d p s y c h o l o g i c a l
th eo ry . The M y e r s - B r i g g s T ype I n d i c a t o r i s t h e o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t
accorded t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n .
M in n e s o ta M u l t i p h a s i c P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y (MMPI)
The MMPI ( i t e m 1 i n T a b le 1) c o n t i n u e s t o be t h e i n s t r u m e n t w i t h
th e h ig h e s t freq u en cy of use. I t i s r a n k e d f i r s t b y B u r o s i n 1975
a n d a g a i n b y t h e B u r o s I n s t i t u t e i n 1985. C lin ic a l p sy c h o lo g ists
Hathaway and M cKinley (1951) d e v e lo p e d t h e MMPI a s a d i a g n o s t i c t o o l
t o a i d i n p a t h o l o g i c a l a s s e s s m e n t o f m e d i c a l p a t i e n t s w i t h p r o b a b le
m ental d is o r d e rs . The MMPI i s c o n s i d e r e d t h e p r e f e r r e d d i a g n o s t i c
to o l in c l i n i c a l s e t t i n g s fo r m en tal p a t i e n t s . H ow ever, th e s u i t
a b i l i t y o f t h e MMPI t o a s s e s s t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f n o rm a l p e o p le h a s
b e e n q u e s t i o n e d (King, 1978).

Maslow
W h i l e he d i d n o t d e v e l o p a s p e c i a l i z e d a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t ,
Maslow su c ce e d e d A l l p o r t and M urray a s t h e acknow ledged l e a d e r o f t h e
h u m a n i s t i c s c h o o l o f p s y c h o lo g y (H ergenhahn, 1984). A lthough Maslow
( 1 9 5 4 ) i s p r o b a b l y b e s t know n f o r h i s h i e r a r c h y o f n e e d s , h i s l a t e r
c o n trib u tio n s to the f i e l d o f p e r s o n a l it y fo c u s e d on c r e a t i v i t y and
g o a l a c h ie v e m e n t. M a slo w ( 1 9 7 0 ) r e d i s c o v e r e d a nd r e a r t i c u l a t e d
J u n g 's (1939) o r i g i n a l c o n c e p t o f s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , the in n e r d riv e
by w h ic h e a ch i n d i v i d u a l can becom e m o tiv a te d to w a rd s u c c e s s f u l
a c c o m p lis h m e n t o f g o a l s .
E v a l u a t i o n o f H ig h - F re q u e n c y -o f - U s e I n s t r u m e n t s
The p o p u l a t i o n u n d e r s t u d y c o n s i s t s o f y o u n g t o e a r l y m i d d l e -
a g e d a d u l t men and women t e c h n i c a l l y e d u c a t e d i n e n g i n e e r i n g , t h e
p h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s , or b u sin e ss a d m in is tra tio n . The s e l e c t i o n o f a
p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t had to be made w i t h r e g a r d t o i t s
s u i t a b i l i t y t o t h e p o p u l a t i o n u n d e r s tu d y .
T h r e e o f t h e 12 i n s t r u m e n t s l i s t e d i n T a b l e 1 a r e p r o j e c t i v e .
T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s w i l l be h e a v i l y
d e p e n d e n t upon th e e x p e r i e n c e and judgm ent o f t h e t e s t a d m i n i s t r a t o r .
R e p l i c a t i o n w i l l n o t be r e a d i l y a c h i e v a b l e b e c a u s e a change o f adm in
i s t r a t o r s c a n c h a n g e t h e t e s t r e s u l t s , e v e n w i t h t h e sam e p a r t i c i
p a n t s an d t h e sam e i n s t r u m e n t s . Because th e R orschach (Ite m 4 in
T a b le 1), t h e B e n d e r - G e s t a l t ( I te m 6 ), and t h e T h em atic A p p e r c e p tio n
T e s t ( I t e m 8) a r e a l l p r o j e c t i v e te sts, th e y w ere n o t c o n s i d e r e d

s u i t a b l e f o r u s e i n t h i s s tu d y .
T hree o th e r i n s t r u m e n ts l i s t e d in T ab le 1 have been u sed p r i
m a r i l y i n c l i n i c a l ( m e d i c a l ) s e t t i n g s and t h u s r e q u i r e t h e e x p e r t i s e
o f a c l i n i c a l p s y c h o lo g is t to c o m p le te th e e v a lu a tio n o f t e s t r e
su lts. The M in n e s o ta M u l t i p h a s i c P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( I t e m 1) and
b o t h E ysenck i n s t r u m e n t s , t h e E ysenck P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( I t e m 7)
and t h e M audsley P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( I t e m 10), are c la s s i f i e d as
c l i n i c a l in stru m e n ts. Thus, t h e y a r e n o t a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h e p o p u la
tio n under stu d y . A n o th er of th e in stru m e n ts in T ab le 1, th e
C a l i f o r n i a P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( I t e m 5 ), i s a l s o f r e q u e n t l y u sed i n
c lin ic a l s e ttin g s, a lth o u g h i t was o r i g i n a l l y d e v e lo p e d f o r a s s e s s
m ent o f n o r m a l, h e a l t h y a d u l t s .
Even th ough C a t t e l l ' s S ix te e n P e r s o n a lity F a c to r Q u e s tio n n a ire ,
l i s t e d as I t e m 2 i n T a b le 1, i s h ig h ly reg ard ed as a p s y c h o lo g ic a lly
based in stru m e n t, it c o u ld n o t be u s e d b e c a u s e o f t h e u n a v a i l a b i l i t y
of q u a lifie d p ra c titio n e rs . The Edwards P e r s o n a l P r e f e r e n c e S c h e d u le
( I t e m 3) a nd t h e S t u d y o f V a l u e s ( I t e m 9) w e r e n o t c h o s e n f o r t h i s
s t u d y b e c a u s e t h e i r u s e a s r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t s h a s become m in im a l.
The two i n s t r u m e n t s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y a r e t h e M y e rs - B r ig g s Type
I n d i c a t o r a n d t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n D o m in a n c e I n s t r u m e n t . They w e re
s e l e c t e d b e c a u s e b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s w ere d e v e lo p e d t o a s s e s s t h e p e r
s o n a l i t i e s o f n o r m a l, h e a l t h y a d u l t s and b e c a u s e o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f
a f a i r a m o u n t o f l i t e r a t u r e c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r u s e on v a r i o u s m a n a
g e r i a l p o p u latio n s. The n e x t s e c t i o n w i l l be d e v o te d to a d e t a i l e d
a n a l y s i s o f e a c h o f t h e s e tw o i n s t r u m e n t s — t h e i r d e v e lo p m e n t, a p p li
c a tio n , v a lid ity , and i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n .

26
S e l e c t e d A ssessm ent I n s t r u m e n t s
M y e rs - B r ig g s Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI)
D evelopm ent o f t h e I n s t r u m e n t
The need f o r an i n s t r u m e n t t o im p le m e n t t h e J u n g ia n c o n c e p t o f
p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s w as m e t w hen B r i g g s a n d M y e rs ( M y e r s , 1962)
d e v e lo p e d t h e MBTI, lis te d i n T a b le 1 a s I te m 11. The MBTI p r o v id e s
a means o f i d e n t i f y i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s r e l a t i v e p r e f e r e n c e f o r e i t h e r
e x t r a v e r s i o n o r i n t r o v e r s i o n i n h i s o r h e r a t t i t u d e to w a rd l i f e , for
e i t h e r s e n s i n g o r i n t u i t i o n as a means o f r e c e i v i n g i n f o r m a t i o n from
th e w o rld , f o r e i t h e r t h i n k i n g o r f e e l i n g as a m eans o f d e c i s i o n
m aking, and f o r e i t h e r ju d g m e n t o r p e r c e p t i o n i n becom ing aw a re o f
t h e o u t s i d e w o r ld and d r a w in g c o n c l u s i o n s from t h i s a w a r e n e s s . The
a r t i c u l a t i o n o f t h e j u d g m e n t - p e r c e p t i o n p r e f e r e n c e i s t h e m a jo r con
t r i b u t i o n m ade b y B r i g g s a n d M y e rs t o t h e f i e l d o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l
t y p o lo g y (Myers & M cC aulley, 1985).
D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e MBTI Form G
F o rm 6 o f t h e MBTI c o n s i s t s o f a s e r i e s o f p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s
p h r a s e d i n s i m p l e , s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , n o n t h r e a t e n i n g la n g u a g e . F o llo w
i n g f o r c e d c h o i c e p r o t o c o l , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s e l e c t s o n e o f t h e two
p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s b e l i e v e d more n e a r l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f h i s or her
own p o i n t o f v ie w . The i n d i v i d u a l ' s s c o r e s in d ic a te p referen ce for
o ne o f t h e tw o p o s s i b l e i n d i c e s i n e a c h o f t h e f o u r d i c h o t o m i e s i n

J u n g 's t h e o r y . The MBTI m u st be a d m i n i s t e r e d and s c o re d by q u a l i f i e d
p erso n n el.
MBTI Type D e s c r i p t i o n
J u n g 's p s y c h o lo g i c a l ty p e th eo ry , a s e x t e n d e d b y B r i g g s and
Myers (Myers & M cC aulley, 1985), p o s t u l a t e s th e e x i s t e n c e o f f o u r d i
c h o to m ie s w i t h r e s p e c t to m e n t a l a t t i t u d e and f u n c t i o n : e x tra v e rsio n
(E) v e r s u s i n t r o v e r s i o n ( I ) , s e n s i n g (S) v e r s u s i n t u i t i o n (N), th in k
i n g (T ) v e r s u s f e e l i n g ( F ) , a n d j u d g m e n t ( J ) v e r s u s p e r c e p t i o n (P ).
The MBTI s c o r e s i n d i c a t e w h i c h f o u r o f t h e e i g h t i n d i c e s a r e p r e
f e r r e d by t h e i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a n t . The f o u r p r e f e r r e d i n d i c e s
t r a n s l a t e i n t o t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e ( M y e r s , 1 9 6 2 ). For e x am p le,
t h e MBTI t y p e d e s i g n a t e d IS T J r e p r e s e n t s an i n d i v i d u a l who i s an
i n t r o v e r t ( I ) c o n c e n t r a t i n g on t h e i n n e r w o rld o f i d e a s ; who p r e f e r s
p ra c tic a l, d o w n -to -e a rth , s e n s i n g (S ) a p p r o a c h e s , l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g
(T), and ju d g m e n t ( J ) b a s e d on f a c t u a l d a t a . I n T a b le 2, a ll 16 MBTI
p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s h a v e b e e n o r g a n i z e d i n t o t h e f o rm a t d e v i s e d by
M yers and r e p r i n t e d by Myers and M cC aulley (1985, pp. 20-21).
V a l i d i t y o f t h e MBTI C o n s t r u c t s
Lanyon and G o o d s te in (1982) r e c o g n i z e d th e sound t h e o r e t i c a l
b a s e o f t h e MBTI, f o u n d e d on J u n g ' s ( 1 9 2 1 / 1971) p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e
th eo ry . C a r l y n ( 1 9 7 7 ) h a s s h o w n t h a t t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e MBTI c o n
s t r u c t s com p a res f a v o r a b l y w i t h s i m i l a r p e r s o n a l i t y v a r i a b l e s m e a
s u r e d by o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t s . C a r l s o n and Levy (1 9 7 3 ) p r o p o s e d t h a t
o b s e rv e d b e h a v io r be used to v a l i d a t e p sy c h o lo g ic a l c o n s tr u c ts .

28 29
Table 2
The 16 MBTI Types With Associated Characteristics
C h a ra c te ristic s fre q u e n tly a s s o c ia te d with e a ch type
S e n s in g T y p e s In tu itiv e T y p e s
I5TJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ

S erio u s qu>et. e a r n s u c c e s s b y c o n ce n tra tio n Q uiet, fnendiy. re sp o n sib ;e a n d c onscie ntious S u c c e e d by p e rse v e ra n c e , ongm at ty a n d d e sire U sually h a v e o n g 'n a l m in d s a n d g r e a t drive for
a n a th o ro u g h n e s s P ra ctica l, orderly, m atter-of- Work d e v o ted ly to m e et th e * oblig a tio n s t e n d lo d o w natever is n e e d e d or w an ted Put tneir th e n ow n id e a s a n d p u r p o s e s I n fie 'd s tn a i
la c t. lo g ical, realistic, a n d d e p e n d a o 'e S e e to •! stat>M> to any projeet or g ro u p T horough, b e s t e llorts mlo tneir work Quietly lorcetul. a p p e a l to them , tney h a v e a line p o w er to
th at ev ery th in g is well o rg a n iz e d Take p a in sta k in g , a c c u ra te Tr-eir in te rests a re usually c on scie n tio u s, c o n c e rn e d tor o th e rs R e s p e c te d o r g a n z e a job a n d c a rry it th ro u g h w ith or
resp o n sib ility M ake u p tn eir ow n m in d s a s to n o t te ch n ic al C a n b e p a tien t witn n e c e s s a r y for their firm p rinciples Likely to b e ho n o red a n d w ithout n e ip 5kepticai. critical, in d e p e n d e n t,
w n al s h o u ld o e a c c o m p lis h e d a n d work tow ard <t d e ta J s Loyal, c o n sid e ra te p e rc ep tiv e, follow ed tor their c te s t convictions a s lo how b e s t d e te rm in e d , so m e tim es s tu b b o r n M u s tte a m to
steadily, r e g a rd le s s o< p r o te s ts or distra ctio n s c o n c e rn e d witn now otner p e o p le leel to se rv e th e c o m m o n go o d yie’d le s s im portant p o in ts in o rd e r lo * m the
Introverts
m o st vnportant
ISTP ISFP INFP INTP

C o d o n lo o k ers— qm ei. re se rv e d , o b se rv in g a n d Retiring, quietly friendly, sensitive, km d m o d e st Put) of e n th u sia sm s a n d loyalties, but se ld o m talk Q uiet a n d re se rv e d E specially e njoy theoretical
a n aly zin g h ie with d e ta c h e d curiosity a n d a b o u t tneir abilities Shun d is a g re e m e n ts , d o not of th e s e until the y know you well C are a b o u t or scientific p u rsu its Like solving p ro b le m s with
u n e x p e c te d f la s h e s ol original hum or U sually fo rc e their o p m « n s or v a 'u e s o n o tn e rs U Suaty ■earning, id e a s, la n g u a g e a n d in d e p en d e n t lo g c a n d an aly sis U sually in te r e s te d ma>nty m
in te re ste d in c a u s e a n d e tfe ct. how a n d why d o no t c a r e to rea d b u t a re often toyat followers p ro jec ts ol their ow n Tend to u n d e rta k e to o id e a s , witn iitne Mung for p a rtie s o r sm a ll talk
m e c h a n ic a l th in g s work, a n d m o rg an iz in g ta c ts O ften rela x ed a b o u t g e ttin g th in g s do n e , m u ch, th e n so m e h o w g e l it d o n e Fr<ndiy. bu t Tend lo h a v e sha rp ly d e fin e d in te re s ts N ee d
u sm g lo g ic al prin cip les. b e c a u s e the y enjoy th e p r e s e n t m om ent a n d d o o tte n to o a b s o rb e d « w hat ine y a re dom g to b e c a r e e r s w h ere so m e stro n g in te rest c a n b e u s e d
n o t w ant to spoil it by u n d u e h a s te or e x e n o n so c iab le im ie c o n c e rn e d w ith p o s s e s s io n s or a n d u se fu l
p h y s c a f Surrounom gs
ESTP E SFP ENFP ENTP

G o o d a t o n -th e -s p o t p ro b lem solving D o not O utg o in g e a sy g o in g a c c e p tin g fnendiy enjoy Warmly enthu sia stic , h-gh-spirited, a -g e n o u s . Q u»ck. inge nious, g o o d a t m a n y th in g s
worry, e n jo y w hatev e r c o m e s a lo n g Tend to ik e e very th in g a n d m a k e th in g s m o re tun for o th e rs im aginative A ble to d o alm ost anything that Stim ulating co m pany, alert a n d o u tsp o k e n M ay
m e c h a n ic a l th in g s a n d s p o rts, with frien d s o n tne b y the n e njoym ent Like s p o n s a n d m aking in te rests th e m OuiCk witn a solution for any a rg u e lor fun o n either Side o t a q u e stio n
Side A d a p ta b le , tole ran t, gen erally conservative irv n g s h a p p e n Know w hat s g om g o n a n d jc*n m difl-cutty a n d re a d y 13 h e lp anyone with a R e sourceful m solving n e w a n d c h a lle n g in g
m va lu es D islike long e x p ia n a to n s A re b e s t with e a g e rly Fm d rem e m be ring fa c ts ea s-e r than pro b lem O tte n rely u t th eir ability lo im provise p ro b lem s, bu t m a y n e g le c t routine a ssig n m e n ts
rea l tnrfigs th a t c a n b e w orked, h a n d le d , ta k e n m a s te n n g th e o ries Are b e s t in v iu a to n s thai m siea d of pre p a rm g in a d v a n c e C a n usu a lly find A pt to turn to o n e n e w in te rest a fte r an o th er
a p a rt, o r p u t to g e th er n e e d s o u n d co m m o n s e n s e a n d p rac tic al at>My com pelling re a s o n s for w hatever they w ant SkiMul n finding logic al re a s o n s tor w hat tney
E xtraverts
w ith p e o p le a s w eu a s with th in g s w an t
ESTJ E SF J ENFJ ENTJ

PrachcaJ. rea listic. m atier-of-tact. with a natural W arm -h ea rte d , talkative, popular, con scie n tio u s, R esp o n siv e a n d resp o n sib le G enerally le el rea l H earty, frank, d e cisiv e, le a d e rs m activities
h e a d lor b u s in e s s o r m e c h a rv c s Not in te re ste d b o rn c o o p e ra to rs, a ctive co m m ittee m e m b ers c o n c e rn for w hat o th jr s itvnk or w a n . a n d try to U sually g o o d in a nything th a t re q u ir e s re a so n in g
n su b je c ts th e y s e e n o u s e lor, bu t c a n a pply N e e d h a rm o n y a n d m a y b e g o o d a t cre atin g it h a n d le things with d u e re g a rd lor the oth e r a n d intelligent ta * . s u c h a s p u b lic s p e a k in g Are
th e m se lv es w h en n e c e s s a r y U ke to o rg an iz e A lw ays d o m g som ething n ic e Icr s o m e o n e WOtk p e rso n s fee lings C a n p r e s e n t a prop o sal or u sually well inform ed a n d e njoy a d d in g to their
a n d r u i activ itie s M ay m a k e g o o d b e s t with e n c o u ra g e m e n t a n d p ra is e Main le a d a g ro u p d isc u ssio n with e a s e a n d la ct fund ol k n ow ledge M ay so m e tim e s a p p e a r m o re
a d m in istra to rs, e sp e c ia lly ■>th e y re m e m o e r to m e r e s t ■$ m th in g s m a t a n ec ity a n d visibly atiec t S oc ia b le, popular, sy m p a m e tc R esponsive to positrve a n d confident th a n their e x p e r ie n c e «n
c o n sid e r o th e rs ' fee lin g s a n d p o in ts of view p e o p le s lives p ra is e a n d criticism a n a re a w arrants
N o te . R e p r o d u c e d b y s p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e P u b l i s h e r , C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P r e s s , I n c . , P a l o A l t o , CA 9 4 3 0 6 ,
fro m M y e r s - B r ig g s T y p e I n d i c a t o r b y K a t h a r i n e B r i g g s / I s a b e l M y e rs , c o p y r i g h t 1977. F u r th e r re p ro d u c tio n is p r o h ib ite d
w i t h o u t t h e P u b l i s h e r 's c o n s e n t .
F o llo w in g t h i s g u id a n c e , C arskadon (1979) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e d i f f e r e n t
k i n d s o f b e h a v i o r w h ic h , on t h e b a s i s o f J u n g i a n ty p e t h e o r y , w ould
be m a n i f e s t e d by i n d i v i d u a l s who had b e e n i d e n t i f i e d a s i n t r o v e r t s o r
e x tra v e rts by t h e MBTI. He f o u n d t h a t p e o p l e , e v e n t h o u g h un
in stru cte d in type th eo ry , a re c o n s is t e n t ly a b le to i d e n t i f y o th e r s
h a v in g t h e same MBTI ty p e a s t h e i r own (C arskadon & Cook, 1982).
Herrmann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI)
Developm ent o f t h e I n s t r u m e n t
The HBDI w a s d e v e l o p e d b y H e r r m a n n ( 1 9 8 1 ) t o p r o d u c e a m e t a
p h o r i c model o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e f e r e n c e f o r one o r more o f f o u r
ways o f t h i n k i n g and b e h a v i o r . These f o u r modes a p p e a r t o c o r r e s p o n d
g e n e r a l l y t o t h e m e n t a l f u n c t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e l e f t and r i g h t
c e r e b r a l and l i m b i c c o r t i c e s o f t h e human b r a i n ( S p e r r y , 1964). The
cereb ral l e f t c o r t e x (A q u a d r a n t ) a p p e a r s to correspond to lo g ic a l,
m a t h e m a t i c a l , and h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d t h i n k i n g . T h is ty p e o f t h i n k i n g
i s m a n i f e s t e d by such p r o f e s s i o n a l s a s a c c o u n t a n t s , b a n k e r s , e n g i
n e e r s , a nd l a w y e r s . The l o w e r o r l i m b i c l e f t c o r t e x (B q u a d r a n t )
e m b ra c e s t h e t y p i c a l l y b u r e a u c r a t i c (Weber, 1947) m e n ta l a c t i v i t i e s
o f p l a n n i n g , o r g a n i z i n g , and c o n t r o l l i n g . F i r s t - l i n e s u p e r v i s o r s and
m id d l e m an a g e rs a r e r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e B q u a d r a n t . S o cial w orkers,
t e a c h e r s , n u r s e s , and t h e c l e r g y te n d t o be r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e l i m b i c
r i g h t c o r t e x (C q u a d r a n t ) . T h e s e p r o f e s s i o n s a r e know n f o r t h e i r
i n t e r p e r s o n a l , e m o t i o n a l , and s p i r i t u a l a t t r i b u t e s . The c e r e b r a l
r i g h t c o r t e x (D q u a d r a n t ) i s t h e d o m i n a n t p r e f e r e n c e f o r c r e a t i v e ,

a rtistic , and h o l i s t i c p e o p le whose r a n k s a r e f i l l e d w ith in v e n to rs,
e n tre p re n e u rs, risk -ta k e rs, and s t r a t e g i c p l a n n e r s . They a r e c h a r a c
t e r i z e d by i n t u i t i v e and a l t e r n a t i v e th o u g h t p a t t e r n s le a d in g to
r a d i c a l l y new d e v e lo p m e n ts i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d o f e n d e a v o r.
D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e HBDI
T h e HBDI i s " a n i n v e n t o r y o f 120 q u e s t i o n s , e a c h w i t h a d o m i
n a n c e t i l t i n t o one o f t h e f o u r q u a d r a n t s r e p r e s e n t i n g b r a i n s p e c i a l
i z a t i o n " (H errm ann, 1981, p. 4). The q u e s t i o n s h i g h l i g h t t h e a d j e c
tiv e s th a t b est d escrib e th e p a r tic ip a n t's c h a ra c te ristic s and a l s o
p r o v i d e a s e l f - r a t i n g on t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e t a s k s r e q u i r e d by h i s
o r h e r em ploym ent. O th e r q u e s t i o n s a r e r e l a t e d t o e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l ,
o c c u p a tio n , and h o b b i e s , as w e ll as th e p h y s io lo g ic a l f a c t o r s o f
h a n d e d n e s s , e n e rg y l e v e l , and s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to m o tio n s i c k n e s s . The
p h r a s e o l o g y o f t h e q u e s t i o n s h a s b e e n c a r e f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d t h r o u g h 21
r e v i s i o n s i n o r d e r t h a t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n f o r m a t i o n may be o b t a i n e d
t o c o m p l e te t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s b r a i n dom inance p r o f i l e . L ik e t h e MBTI,
t h e HBDI m u st be a d m i n i s t e r e d and s c o r e d by q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n n e l .
HBDI P r o f i l e D e s c r i p t i o n
HBDI f i n d i n g s may be g ra p h e d a s a q u a d r i l a t e r a l , th e c o rn e rs o f
w h i c h i n d i c a t e t h e l e v e l o f a c t i v i t y w i t h i n e a c h o f t h e f o u r HBDI
q u a d r a n t s , a s i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 1. The s i n g l e dom inance p r o f i l e s
o f a c c o u n t a n t s (A q u a d r a n t ) , m i d d l e m a n a g e r s (B q u a d r a n t ) , s o c i a l
w o r k e r s (C q u a d r a n t ) , and e n t r e p r e n e u r s (D q a a d r a n t ) a r e p r e s e n t e d i n
F igure 1. A lth o u g h t h e d o m in a n t q u a d r a n t r e f l e c t s the in d iv id u a l's

32
J331 y \2 2 2 2 / \ s1221>
□ w i Q ira Q ra
0 .3 CEREBRAL CEREBRAL
LEFT CEREBRAL * 0
logoi R IG H T
Analyzer Creairve
Mathematical Synthesizer
Technical Ariiabe
Problem Solver Holistic _
ConcepluaUzer r ^ I |
rsD
LEFT RIGHT
MODE MODE
V '
rbO
Af s>.
O l7 ConwoUed 1 " 0 Inleipoaonal c 7 r ~ |
Ccnservsiive C> 0N Emotional M' L- 1
Planner
Organization % c? Spiritual
Adminisirairve Talker
LOWER DOMINANCE. PR O FILE
LOWER
□L8 LEFT RIGHT R 8 D
LIMBIC
r iq D ,
F i g u r e 1. Herrm ann B r a in Dominance I n s t r u m e n t P r o f i l e s .

From H e r r m a n n B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI) C e r t i f i
c a t i o n W o rkshop M a t e r i a l s ( u n n u m b e r e d h a n d o u t ) by
N. H errm ann, 1987, Lake L u re , NC: A uthor.
N o te. R e p ro d u c e d by s p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n o f th e p u b lis h e r,
N. H errm ann, B r a i n Books, Lake L u re , NC.

m ost p r e f e r r e d way o f t h i n k i n g , t h a t i n d i v i d u a l may have a seco n d , o r
e v e n a t h i r d , d o m i n a n t m ode. For ex am p le, e n g in e e rs , a r c h i t e c t s ,
in v en to rs, and e n t r e p r e n e u r s a r e o f t e n d o m in a n t i n b o t h t h e A and D
q u a d ra n ts. These i n d i v i d u a l s co m b in e t h e i r l o g i c a l , m a t h e m a t ic a l
p r e f e r e n c e s w i t h t h e i r c r e a t i v e , i n t u i t i v e , and h o l i s t i c m e n ta l f u n c
t i o n s i n o r d e r t o d e v e lo p new b u s i n e s s e s o r new v e n t u r e s .
V a l i d i t y o f t h e HBDI C o n s t r u c t s
B u n d e rs o n 's (1988) e x t e n s i v e v a l i d a t i o n s tu d y o f th e HBDI i n t e
g r a t e d t h e r e s u l t s o f e a r l i e r s t u d i e s , t h e m ost i m p o r t a n t o f w hich i s
Ho's (1988) d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , w hich a d d r e s s e d t h e d i m e n s i o n a l i t y
and d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power o f t h i s i n s t r u m e n t . Ho used f a c t o r a n a l y s i s
t o a n a l y z e HBDI s c o r e s f r o m a s a m p l e o f 5 ,6 1 9 men a n d 2 ,3 7 0 women
(1* = 7,989) from t h e Herrmann d a t a bank.
T a b le 3 p re se n ts th e HBDI m ean sco res fo r H o 's sa m p le
(B u n d e rs o n , 1988). T h e s e d a t a show t h a t men a c h i e v e d h i g h e r m ean
s c o r e s f o r l e f t - b r a i n d o m in a n c e, w h i l e women w ere s t r o n g e r i n r i g h t
b r a i n dom inance. The mean s c o r e d i f f e r e n c e s f o r men and women w ere
v e r y l a r g e f o r Q u a d r a n t s A a nd C. Men s c o r e d s u b s t a n t i a l l y h i g h e r
t h a n women i n Q u a d r a n t A, w h ile t h e w o m en 's m ean i n Q u a d r a n t C
g r e a t l y e x c ee d e d t h a t o f t h e men. Mean s c o r e s f o r men and women w ere
e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same i n Q u a d ra n ts B and D.
T a b l e 4 p r e s e n t s t h e c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x o f t h e HBDI q u a d r a n t
m ean s c o r e s f o r Ho's s a m p l e ( B u n d e r s o n , 1 9 8 8 ). The tw o l e f t q u a d
r a n t s (A and B) were n o t c o r r e l a t e d , w h e re a s th e two r i g h t q u a d r a n t s
(C a nd D) w e r e m o d e r a t e l y c o r r e l a t e d . The o v e r a l l c o rre la tio n

34
Table 3
HBDI Mean S c o r e s f o r a Sample o f 7,989 Men and Women

From Che Herrmann D ata Bank
HBDI mean sc ores
HBDI metaphor
Men Women Total
(N = 5,619) (N = 2,370) (N = 7,989)
L e ft hemisphere 95.2 81.0 91.0

A n a ly tic a l, mathematical
S e quential time focus
Right hemisphere 86.0 102.3 91.0

S p a t ia l, h o l i s t i c
Simultaneous time focus
Quadrant A 75.1 53.3 68.6

Mathematical, a n a l y t i c a l , lo g ic a l
S e quential time o r i e n t a t i o n
Quadrant B 68.1 68.8 68.3

Organized, planned, r i s k avoidant
P re se n t o rie n te d
Quadrant C 55.5 74.9 61.2

B notional, in te r p e r s o n a l, persuasive
P a st o r ie n te d
Quadrant D 73.9 79.1 75.5

I n t u i t i v e , innovative, e n tr e p r e n e u r ia l
F uture o r ie n te d
Note. From "The V a l i d a t i o n o f t h e Herrm ann B r a in Dominance I n s t r u

m e n t " by C. V. B u n d e r s o n , 1988. I n N. H e r r m a n n , The C r e a t i v e B r a i n
( T a b l e s A - l t h r o u g h A - 5 , pp. 3 4 8 - 3 4 9 ) . Lake L u r e , NC: B r a i n B o o k s .

35
Table 4
C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x o f HBDI Q u ad ran t S c o re s
f o r a Sample o f 7,989 Men and Women
From t h e Herrmann D ata Bank
Q u a d ra n t A B C D
A 1 .0 0
B .08 l.CO
C -.7 7 -.2 0 1.00
D -.5 3 -.6 8 .38 1.00
L e f t - r i g h t h e m is p h e re c o r r e l a t i o n = - . 9 1
N ote. From "The V a l i d a t i o n o f t h e Herrm ann B r a in Dominance I n s t r u

m e n t " b y C. V. B u n d e r s o n , 1988. I n N. H e r r m a n n , T he C r e a t i v e B r a i n
( T a b le A -17, p. 3 7 3 ) . L a k e L u r e , NC: B r a i n B o o k s .
b e tw e e n t h e l e f t and r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e s was found t o be -.9 1 , a f i n d
in g w h ic h i m p l i e s t h a t d o u b le dom inance i s much more l i k e l y t o o c c u r
w i t h i n h e m i s p h e r e ( e .g ., A and B o r C and D) t h a n a c r o s s h e m is p h e r e s
( e . g . , A and D o r B a n d C). T h is fin d in g is c o n s is te n t w ith th e
n e g a tiv e c o r r e la t io n s f o r t h e A and D q u a d r a n t s (-.5 4 ) and f o r th e B
and C q u a d r a n ts (-.2 0 ). These n e g a ti v e c o rre la tio n s im p ly th a t
i n d i v i d u a l s a r e u n l i k e l y t o be d o u b l e d o m i n a n t i n t h e A a nd D q u a d
ra n ts o r th e B and C q u a d r a n t s . For th is sam p le, a n .in d iv id u a l
d o m i n a n t i n t h e A q u a d r a n t ( m a t h e m a t i c a l an d l o g i c a l ) i s v e r y u n
l i k e l y t o a l s o be d o m in a n t i n t h e C q u a d r a n t ( i n t e r p e r s o n a l , p ersua
s i v e ) s i n c e s c o r e s f o r t h e s e two q u a d r a n t s w ere n e g a t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d
at -.7 7 . S im ila rly , th e n e g a tiv e c o rre la tio n of th e B and D
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n p rohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

q u a d r a n t s (-.6 8 ) r e f l e c t s t h e v e r y low l i k e l i h o o d t h a t d o u b le dom i
n a n c e i n p l a n n e d r i s k a v o i d a n c e (3 ) a nd e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n n o v a t i o n
(D) w i l l o c c u r i n th e same i n d i v i d u a l .
B u n d e rso n (1988) c o n c lu d e d t h a t th e c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y o f th e
HBDI had be e n c o n fir m e d . I n a d d i t i o n , he e m p h a size d th e v a l u e o f t h e
H errm ann c o n c e p t o f th e " w h o le - b r a in e d . . . as a key f o r p e rs o n a l
g r o w t h " (p . 31) b e c a u s e e a c h i n d i v i d u a l ' s d o m i n a n c e q u a d r a n t i s a n
i n d i c a t i o n o f p r e f e r e n c e , r a t h e r t h a n o f f i x e d d e t e r m i n a t i o n , and
t h e r e f o r e can be r e s p o n s i v e to change. F u r th e r m o r e , Bunderson p r o
p o s e d t h a t an " i n d i v i d u a l can b e n e f i t from r e c o g n i z i n g a r e a s o f
a v o id a n c e " (p. 32) and can t h e n c o n s c i o u s l y m o d ify h i s o r h e r b e h a v
i o r b y p r a c t i c i n g " l e s s p r e d i c t a b l e a nd l e s s s t e r e o t y p e d m odes o f
t h o u g h t , d e p e n d i n g u p o n t h e s i t u a t i o n " (p. 3 2 ). The i n d i v i d u a l c a n
t h u s d e v e lo p f a c i l i t y w i t h p r e v i o u s l y unaccustom ed s t r e n g t h s , such a s
in te rp e rs o n a l n e g o tia tio n s k ills .
U sing t h e MBTI i n O r g a n i z a t i o n a l S e t t i n g s
S t u d i e s o f MBTI Manager Types
I n h i s a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e MBTI f o r t h e N i n t h M e n ta l M easurem ents
Y earbook, DeVito (1985) recommended t h a t t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l com m unity
r e c o g n i z e t h e v a lu e o f t h i s in stru m en t f o r s i t u a t i o n s i n w hich p e r
sonal i n te r a c t io n s , p ersonnel c o u n selin g , team b u i l d i n g , and o r g a n i
z a t i o n a l d e v e lo p m e n t w ere m a jo r c o n c e r n s .
The f o l l o w i n g f o u r s t u d i e s have r e p o r t e d t h e r e s u l t s o f a p p l y i n g
th e MBTI to sp e c ific m anagem ent p o p u latio n s. N id iffe r (1984)

id e n tifie d t h e MBTI t y p e s f o r pro g ra m m an a g e rs. DeWald (1986/1987)
a n a ly z e d t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r m atched p a i r s o f m i l i t a r y
and c i v i l i a n army e x e c u t i v e s d i r e c t i n g a d e f e n s e i n s t a l l a t i o n . Myers
and M cC aulley (1985) r e p o r t e d t h e MBTI t y p e s f o r a sam ple o f m anagers
and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n g e n e r a l b u s i n e s s a s s i g n m e n t s . P i c k e r i n g (1986)
d e t e r m i n e d t h e MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r a p o p u l a t i o n o f s e n i o r g o v e rn
m ent e x e c u t iv e s . The p e r c e n t a g e s o f e a c h o f t h e MBTI t h i n k i n g -
j u d g i n g ( T J ) t y p e s , t o t a l T J s , a nd MBTI e l e m e n t s f o r e a c h o f t h e s e
f o u r s t u d i e s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b le 5.
Program Manager MBTI Types
The p u r p o s e o f N i d i f f e r ' s (1984) s tu d y was t o i d e n t i f y t h e MBTI
t y p e s l i k e l y t o be m a n i f e s t e d by program m an a g e rs. N i d i f f e r 's an a ly
s i s o f t h r e e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r c l a s s e s (1 9 8 2 t o 1 9 8 4 ) i n d i c a t e d t h a t
60% o f t h e s e f u t u r e PMs w o u ld m a n i f e s t o n l y 4 o f t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s .
T h e s e 4 t y p e s a r e I S T J , EST J, IN T J, a nd ENTJ. They h av e b e e n c a l l e d
"th e l o g i c a l d e c i s i o n m a k e rs " (p. 36) by Myers and M cCaulley (1985),
who h a v e d e s i g n a t e d t h e s e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (T Js) as " to u g h -m in d e d ,
e x e c u tiv e , a n a ly tic a l, and i n s t r u m e n t a l l e a d e r s " (p. 36).
The s e n s i n g t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (ST Js), a p p r o x i m a t e l y 40% o f t h e PM
s a m p le , c o u ld be e x p e c t e d to be r e s p o n s i v e t o p r o p o s a l s p h r a s e d i n
term s of f a c t s , l o g i c , and a n a l y s i s , t h e r e s u l t s o f w hich would show
m e a s u r a b l e b e n e f i t t o t h e PM's o r g a n i z a t i o n . The 20% o f PMs who
m ig h t be i n t u i t i v e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (NTJs) would a l s o be f a v o r a b l y
i n c l i n e d to w a rd l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b e n e f i t s . T h eir
a d d itio n a l stre n g th lie s in th e ir in tu itiv e re c o g n itio n of th e

38
Table 5
P ercen tag es o f MBTI Thinking-Judging Types and MBTI Elements

in S ele c te d M anagerial P o pu latio ns
M i l i t a r y and
MBTI 1982-1984 c i v i l i a n army Managers and F ederal
type DSMC c l a s s e s 8 executives*’ a d m in istrato rs0 e x e c u tiv e s 4*
N - 595 N - 60 N - 7,463 N - 1,394
ISTJ 27.22 30.02 14.92 26.32

ESTJ 13.3 23.3 17.0 12.3
INTJ 11.1 10.0 5.6 14.9
ENTJ 8 .4 16.7 10.1 10.6
T o ta l TJs 60.02 80.02 47.62 64.12
MBTI
element
E 37.52 51.72 56.72 37.02

I 62.5 48 .3 43.3 63.0
S 59.2 61.7 56.3 51.1

N 4 0.8 38.3 43.7 48.9
T 83.7 98.3 61.6 86.4

F 16.3 1.7 38.4 13.6
J 69.4 81.7 69.3 71.9

P 30.6 18.3 30.7 28.1
aFrom "The P e r s o n a l i t y F a c to r: S oftw are Technology and the 'Thinking S ty l e s '

o f Program Managers" by R. E. N i d i f f e r , 1984, Program Manager, 13(4), 10-18.
^From "Executive P e r s o n a l i t y Types: A Comparison o f M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n

L e a d e r s i n a S i n g l e O r g a n i z a t i o n " by J . E. DeWald, 1987, D i s s e r t a t i o n Ab
s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 47, 2954A.
c From M anual: A G uide t o the Development and Use o f the Myers-Briggs Type
I n d i c a t o r by I . B. Myers & M. H. M cC a u lle y , 1985, P a l o A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g
P s y c h o l o g i s t s P ress.
^Frora "Managers: F e d eral Executives" by R. T. P ic k e rin g in Myers-Briggs Type

I n d i c a t o r : A t l a s o f Type T a b l e s by C. P. M ac d aid , M. H. M cC aulley , & R. I
Kainz, 1986, G a i n e s v i l l e , FL: Center fo r A p p lic a tio n s o f P sy chological Type.

p o ssib ilitie s f o r g r o w th , progress, and e x p a n s io n w hich may r e s u l t
from t h e i d e a s p r e s e n t e d t o them . T hese NTJs c o u ld be e x p e c te d to be
m o r e r e c e p t i v e t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new m e t h o d s a n d p r o c e d u r e s ,
e s p e c i a l l y when com bined w i t h d e m o n s t r a t e d p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s t o t h e
o rg an izatio n .
P a i r e d M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n E x e c u t i v e s
DeWald (1 986/1987) a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e MBTI t o 30 m atched p a i r s o f
m ilita ry and c i v i l i a n arm y e x e c u t i v e s in a la r g e d efen se i n s t a l l a
tio n . The m a j o r i t y o f t h e o f f i c e r s w e re f u l l c o l o n e l s , w h ile t h e i r
m a tc h e d c i v i l i a n d e p u t i e s h e l d t h e c i v i l s e r v i c e g r a d e o f GM-15. The
d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e MBTI t y p e s a nd t h e t y p e p r o c e s s e s f o r t h e t w o
k i n d s o f e x e c u t i v e s w e re com pared. No d i f f e r e n c e was found b e tw e e n
th e d i s t r i b u t i o n s fo r th e m i l i t a r y p a r t i c i p a n t s and t h o s e f o r t h e i r
c iv ilia n c o u n te rp a rts, a l t h o u g h a n i d e n t i f i a b l e d i f f e r e n c e i n MBTI
ty p e had b e e n h y p o t h e s i z e d . The p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e m i l i t a r y e x e c u
tiv e s who w ere t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (T Js) was i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t f o r t h e
c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s a t 80%. As c a n b e s e e n i n T a b l e 5, th e ty p e
d istrib u tio n i n t h e DeW ald s t u d y r o u g h l y p a r a l l e l e d t h a t i n t h e
N i d i f f e r (1 S 8 4 ) s t u d y . These f in d i n g s s u p p o rt th e a s su m p tio n t h a t
th e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l i a n e x e c u tiv e s in pro g ram
m anagem ent a s s i g n m e n t s w i l l be t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs).
MBTI Types o f M anagers and A d m i n i s t r a t o r s
Myers and M cC aulley (1985) p u b l i s h e d t h e MBTI ty p e d i s t r i b u t i o n
o f a sa m p le o f m an a g e rs and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s (If = 7,463) from t h e d a t a

bank m a i n t a i n e d by t h e C e n te r f o r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type.
The s a m p le c o m p r is e d 56% f e m a le s and 44% m a le s , t h e m a j o r i t y o f whom
w e r e i n t h e 18 t o 40 a g e g r o u p . A bout one t h i r d had e a rn e d c o l l e g e
d egrees. A l l w e re em ployed i n g e n e r a l b u s i n e s s a s s i g n m e n t s . Each o f
t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s was r e p r e s e n t e d among t h e m anagers i n t h i s s a m p le ,
i n c l u d i n g r e l a t i v e l y h i g h p e r c e n t a g e s o f i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) a t 44%, and
fe e lin g , c a r i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) a t 38%. T h is i s t h e o n ly c i t e d MBTI
s tu d y w here th e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (T Js) d id n o t c o n s t i t u t e a c l e a r
m a j o r i t y , b u t o n l y 48% o f t h e g r o u p , a s c a n b e s e e n i n T a b l e 5. The
s m a l l e r p e r c e n t a g e o f T Js c a n p r o b a b l y be e x p l a i n e d by t h e f a c t t h a t
t h i s sa m p le was 56% f e m a le . I n W e s te rn c u l t u r e s , more f e m a le s t h a n
m a le s t e n d t o be i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and f e e l i n g , c a r i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs)
( A g o r , 1 9 8 6 ).
F e d e r a l E x e c u t i v e MBTI Types
The MBTI t y p e s o f s e n i o r f e d e r a l c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s (it = 1,394)
w e re a n a ly z e d by P i c k e r i n g (19 8 6 ). T h e s e e x e c u t i v e s w e r e 90% m a l e
and 10% fe m a le . N i n e t y - s i x p e r c e n t w e re c o l l e g e - e d u c a t e d , and 75% o f
t h e s e had p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g i n la w , b u sin e ss, p h y sic a l s c ie n c e ,
or e n g in e e rin g . F e d e r a l s e r v i c e t i m e r a n g e d f r o m 10 t o 30 y e a r s ,
in c lu d in g su p e rv is o ry ex p erien ce. Age r a n g e d f ro m 35 t o 55 y e a r s .
T h is p o p u l a t io n can be assum ed to in c lu d e n o t o n ly c i v i l s e r v i c e
g r a d e s o f GM-15, b u t a l s o m e m b e rs o f t h e s e n i o r e x e c u t i v e s e r v i c e ,
t h e h i g h e s t s a l a r i e d f e d e r a l l y g r a d e d em p lo y e es.
S ix ty - f o u r p e rc e n t o f t h i s sam p le w e re t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (T Js).
Each o f th e 16 MBTI t y p e s w as r e p r e s e n t e d . As c a n b e s e e n f ro m

T a b l e 5, t h e t h i n k e r s (Ts) p r e d o m i n a t e d a t 86%, w h i l e t h e p e r c e n t a g e
o f f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) was n o m in a l a t 14%. The number o f s e n s
i n g i n d i v i d u a l s ( S s ) a t 51% was v e r y c l o s e t o t h e n u m b e r o f i n t u i
t i v e s (Ns) a t 49%. The r e l a t i v e l y h i g h n u m b e r o f i n t u i t i v e s g i v e s
s u p p o r t t o A gor's (1986) c o n t e n t i o n t h a t more i n t u i t i v e s w i l l be
found among t o p e x e c u t i v e s , a s compared t o m id d l e m anagers, b e c au s e
o f th e i n t u i t i v e ' s in n o v a tiv e a b i l i t y to a d j u s t to changing c o n d i
tions. The p e r c e n t a g e o f i n t u i t i v e s among t h e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (26%
NTJs) i n t h i s sample i s s i m i l a r t o t h o s e found by N i d i f f e r (1984) and
DeWald (1986/1987).
I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f t h e MBTI With t h e HBDI
S tu d y o f I n d u s t r y P r o f e s s i o n a l s
Jam es (1986) r e p o r t e d p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s o f a l o n g i t u d i n a l
s t u d y o f a s p e c i a l p o p u l a t i o n o f b a n k e r s and c h e m i c a l i n d u s t r y p r o
fessionals (1J = 90). Each o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been a d m i n i s t e r e d
b o t h t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI so t h a t each i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e f e r e n c e s were
known i n t e r m s o f b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s . James s e l e c t e d o n l y t h o s e i n d i
viduals w ith strong preferences for their MBTI f u n c t i o n a l e l e m e n t s
(E v s . I , S v s . N, T v s . F, and J v s . P) an d s t r o n g p r e f e r e n c e s f o r
one o r more o f t h e HBDI q u a d r a n t s .
As can be s e en from Ta b l e 6, Jame s (1986) found t h a t t h e s t r o n g
MBTI e x t r a v e r t was m o s t f r e q u e n t l y d o m i n a n t i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t B,
a l t h o u g h Q u a d r a n t s A an d D w e r e o n l y s l i g h t l y l e s s f r e q u e n t . The
MBTI e l e m e n t s o f i n t r o v e r s i o n ( I ) , s e n s i n g ( S ) , t h i n k i n g (T), and

42
Table 6
R e l a t i o n s h i p o f S t r o n g MBTI and S tr o n g HBDI P r e f e r e n c e s

i n a Sample o f 90 Bankers and Chemical
Industry Professionals
Number Strong dominance i n HBDI quadrant

with
MBTI strong
element preference A B C D
for MBTI
element
N % N % N % N %
E 20 12 60.0 14 70.0 8 40.0 12 60.0
I 27 22 81.5 24 88.9 5 18.5 7 25.9
S 45 37 82.2 43 95.6 12 26.7 7 15.6
N 18 8 44.4 6 33.3 10 55.6 18 100.0
T 47 37 78.7 40 85.1 12 25.5 24 51.1
F 10 5 50.0 8 80.0 8 80.0 3 30.0
J 51 44 86.3 47 92.2 11 21.6 15 29.4
P 10 4 40.0 3 30.0 5 50.0 9 90.0
Note. From "The Herrmann, M y e r s - B r ig g s Connection" by U. Jam es , 1986,

I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a i n Dominance Rev ie w, J3(2), 32-35.
N o t e . The sum o f t h e q u a d r a n t c o u n t s f a a row may e x c e e d t h e t o t a l

number o f i n d i v i d u a l s f o r t h a t row b e c au s e some i n d i v i d u a l s d i s p l a y
m u l t i p l e dominance. S i m i l a r l y , t h e row p e r c e n t s may n o t sum t o 100%.
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r re p r o d u c tio n proh ibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

j u d g i n g (J) showed h i g h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n b o t h t h e A and B HBDI quad
rants ( i . e . , d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e i n A a n d B). A b o u t 70% o f t h e I S T J s
were do u b l e do m in an t on t h e HBDI A and B q u a d r a n t s . The m a j o r i t y o f
t h e MBTI i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s ( P s ) w e r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
t h e HBDI Quad rant D. The MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) showed h i g h
e s t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e HBDI C q u a d r a n t , as e x p e c t e d , b u t t end ed t o
show d o m i n a n c e i n t h e B q u a d r a n t a s w e l l , resu ltin g in probable
d o u b l e dominance i n b o t h t h e B and C q u a d r a n t s .
Stud y o f H e a l t h Care P r o f e s s i o n a l s
Ford (1988a) c o n d u c te d an a n a l y s i s o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p be tw e en
t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI on a sa mp le o f 51 f e m a l e s t u d e n t o c c u p a t i o n a l
therapists. The f o u r m ost r e p r e s e n t a t i v e MBTI t y p e s were ENFJ, ESTJ,
ENFP, and INFP. T h e s e f o u r t y p e s a c c o u n t e d f o r 61% o f t h e s a m p l e .
A c c or di ng t o t y p e t h e o r y , t h e MBTI t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g (TF) d ic h o to m y i s
a m e a s u r e o f j u d g m e n t an d t h e s e n s i n g - i n t u i t i o n (SN) s c a l e is a
m ea s ur e o f p e r c e p t i o n . Thus, Ford i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f
t h e f o u r MBTI f u n c t i o n s (S, N, T, a n d F) an d t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g
f u n c t i o n a l gr o u p s (ST, SF, NT, and NF) t o HBDI h e m i s p h e r i c dominance.
Fo r d 's r e s u l t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Ta bl e 7 and su mmarized i n Tabl e 8.
As c a n be s e e n f r o m T a b l e 8, F o r d ( 1 9 8 8 a ) f o u n d t h a t i n t u i t i o n
(N), f e e l i n g ( F ) , a n d , t o a l e s s e r e x t e n t , t h i n k i n g (T) a p p e a r t o be
a l i g n e d w i t h t h e r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e , w h i l e s e n s i n g (S) i s somewhat more
s tr o n g l y a s s o c i a te d w ith the l e f t hemisphere. The NF c o m b i n a t i o n , i n
particular, is s tr o n g ly o rie n te d to the r i g h t hemisphere, w i t h more
th a n t w i c e as many d o m in a n t i n t h e r i g h t t h a n i n th e l e f t and w i t h 14

44
Table 7
HBDI P r e f e r e n c e s f o r t h e Most F r e q u e n t MBTI Types

and S e l e c t e d MBTI E l e m e n t s and Groups Among
51 Female S t u d e n t O c c u p a t i o n a l T h e r a p i s t s
MBTI HBDI dominance
Left Rig ht
h e m is p he re h e m is ph e re
Type N %
A B AB ABCD BC BCD C D CD
ENFJ 10 19 .6 1 9
ESTJ 8 15.7 2 1 1 4
ENFP 7 13.7 1 1 2 3
INFP 6 11.8 1 1 1 1 2
Element A B AB ABC ABCD BC BD ACD BCD C D CD
S 20 39.2 3 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 4
N 31 6 0 .8 1 1 2 1 3 5 1 2 15
T 16 25 .0 2 1 1 1 6 5
F 35 68.6 1 2 4 2 6 1 1 1 1 2 14
Group A B AB ABC ABCD BC BD ACD BCD c D CD
ST 11 2 1 .6 2 1 1 1 2 4
SF 9 17 .6 1 2 1 3 1 1
NF 26 5 1 .0 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 2 14
NT 5 9 .8 4 1
N o t e . D a t a a r e f r o m " C o g n i t i v e P r e f e r e n c e s and P e r s o n a l i t y Ty p e :
F u r t h e r E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " by L. J . F o r d , 198 8, I n t e r
n a t i o n a l B r a i n Dominance Re vi e w, 5(2), 15-21.

45
Table 8
HBDI Hem ispheric P r e f e r e n c e s f o r t he Most F r e q u e n t

MBTI Types and S e l e c t e d MBTI El e m e nt s and Groups
Among 51 Female S t u d e n t O c c u p a t i o n a l T h e r a p i s t s
MBTI HBDI dominance
Left Right
h em is phe re he m is ph e re
Type N % N % N %
ENFJ 10 1 9. 6 1 10.0 9 90.0

ESTJ 8 15 .7 4 5 0. 0 5 62.5
ENFP 7 13.7 1 14.3 7 100.0
INFP 6 11 .8 4 66.7 4 66.7
Element
S 20 39.2 15 75.0 13 65.0

N 31 60.8 13 41.9 27 87.1
T 16 25.0 10 62.5 12 75.0

F 35 68.6 18 51.4 28 8 0. 0
Group
ST 11 21 . 6 7 63.6 8 72.7
SF 9 17 .6 9 100.0 6 66.7
NF 26 51.0 9 34.6 22 8 4. 6
NT 5 9.8 4 80 . 0 5 100.0
N o t e . D a t a a r e f r o m " C o g n i t i v e P r e f e r e n c e s an d P e r s o n a l i t y Type:
F u r t h e r E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " b y L. J . F o r d , 1988 I n t e r
n a t i o n a l B r a i n Dominance Review, 5(2), 15-21.
N o t e . The l e f t and r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e c o u n t s may e x c e e d t h e t o t a l

n u m b e r o f i n d i v i d u a l s f o r e a c h r o w b e c a u s e some i n d i v i d u a l s a r e
c r o s s - h e m i s p h e r i c d o u b l e d o m i n a n t . S i m i l a r l y , t h e l e f t an d r i g h t
h e m i s p h e r e p e r c e n t a g e s may n o t sum t o 100%.
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n p rohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

o f t h e 26 NFs d o u b l e d o m i n a n t i n Q u a d r a n t s C and D. The m a j o r i t y
(58%) o f p a r t i c i p a n t s who were among t h e f o u r most r e p r e s e n t e d MBTI
t y p e s showed dou bl e dominance i n t h e HBDI C and'D q u a d r a n t s .
On t h e b a s i s o f h e r r e s e a r c h , F o r d ( 1 9 8 8 a ) c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e
MBTI and t h e HBDI mea su re s i m i l a r phenomena. She h a s s u g g e s t e d t h e
p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e tw o m o d e l s m i g h t be i n t e g r a t e d t o t h e e x t e n t
t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y i t s e l f c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a p a r t o f c o g n i t i o n ,
rather than a se p a ra te p sy c h o lo g ic al concept. Ford has further
s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e HBDI q u a d r a n t s m ig h t be s u b t i t l e d w i t h MBTI f u n c
t io n a l elements.
Physiological Basis for the MBTI
Newman's (1984/1985) d o c t o r a l research c o n sisted of a study of
t he c o r r e l a t i o n o f e l e c t r o e n c e p h a l o g r a p h i c (EEG) a c t i v a t i o n o f t h e
b r a i n ' s c o r t i c e s w i t h m e n t a l a c t i v i t y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r MBTI c o g n i t i v e
functions. His s u b j e c t s c o n s i s t e d o f 27 male r i g h t - h a n d e d p a r t i c i
pants, i n c l u d i n g 9 p r a c t i c i n g a t t o r n e y s and 18 c e r a m i c a r t i s t s . The
MBTI t y p e t a b l e f o r t h i s g r o u p i s sho wn i n T a b l e 9. The MBTI t y p e s
most r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e 27 p a r t i c i p a n t s were INTJ and INFP.
EEG d a t a were r e c o r d e d from s c a l p e l e c t r o d e s p l a c e d a t c e n t r a l ,
p a r i e t a l , and t e m p o r a l e x t e r n a l l o c a t i o n s on t he l e f t and r i g h t s i d e s
o f ea ch p a r t i c i p a n t ' s head w h i l e he p e r f o r m e d a s e t o f t a s k s . These
t a s k s c o n s i s t e d o f a n e u t r a l t a s k ( a t t e n t i o n t o b r e a t h i n g ) used as a
base re fe re n c e , f o l l o w e d by f i v e c o g n i t i v e t a s k s : two v e r b a l (copy
ing t e x t and w r i t i n g - f r o m - m e m o r y ) ; two s p a t i a l ( m i r r o r d r a w in g and
block design); an d on e test, a w ord-shape-sorting test (WSST),

47
Table 9
MBTI Type T a b l e f o r a Sample o f 27 Male

A t t o r n e y s and Ceramic A r t i s t s
S E N S IN G TYPES IN T U ITIV E TYPES

with TH IN K IN G with FEELING with FEELING with THINKING
ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ E 9 33.3

1 18 6 6 .7
N= 2 N= 1 N= 1 N= 5 C
% = 1 8. 5
o S 4 14.8
%= 7 . 4 %= 3 .7 %= 3.7 o
z N 23 85.2
o
T 14 51.9
F 13 48.1
o<
ISTP J 10 37.0
ISFP INFP INTP m
3D
P 17 63.0
(/»
u- 0 N = 0 N = 5 N 4
=
% = 0.0 % = 0.0 % = 18.5 % a 14 . 8 30 1J 9 3 3 .3
2 1P 9 33.3
EP 8 29.6
< 1 3.7
EJ
ST 2 7.4
SF 2 7.4
ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP 11 40.7
NF
N= 0 N= 1 N = * N = 3 NT 12 44.4
30
%= 0.0 % = 3.7 % = 14.8 nm
TJ
SJ 3 1 1. 1
SP 1 3.7
m NP 16 59.3
X
NJ 7 25.9
>
<
ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ TJ 7 25.9
TP 7 25.9
N= 0 N* 0 N * 1 N> 0 FP 10 37.0
%= 0.0 %« 0.0 3 .7 % a 0.0 co FJ 3 11 .1
o
z 1N 15 5 5 .6
o EN 8 29.6
1S 3 1 1 .1
ES 1 3.7
Note. Dat a a r e from "Hemisphere S p e c i a l i z a t i o n and J u n g i a n Typology:

E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " (p. 10 7 , T a b l e 5, m o d i f i e d ) by J . B.
Newman, 1985, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 46, 761B-762B.
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r re p r o d u c tio n p roh ibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

48
s p e c i a l l y d e s i g n e d f o r Newman's ( 1 9 8 4 / 1 9 8 5 ) r e s e a r c h , to i n d i c a t e
e i t h e r a v e r b a l o r a s p a t i a l a p p ro a c h t o pro ble m s o l v i n g .
The mean a l p h a asy mme try r a t i o s ( r i g h t o v e r l e f t ) f o r t h e tempo
r a l l o b e s a r e shown i n Ta bl e 10. As can be s e e n , t h e r e i s a c o n s i s t
e n t d i r e c t i o n o f e f f e c t f o r a l l t a s k s f o r b o t h t h e SN and TF p r e f e r
ences—higher r a t i o s f o r t h e i n t u i t i v e and t h i n k i n g gro ups and l o w e r
r a t i o s f o r t h e s e n s i n g and f e e l i n g g ro up s. Th is t r e n d was a l s o found
f o r t h e p a r i e t a l a n d c e n t r a l EEG a l p h a r a t i o s , b u t was much l e s s
prono unc ed .
T a b le 10
Temporal Lobe Mean Alpha R a t i o s f o r a Sample o f

27 A t t o r n e y s and Ceramic A r t i s t s C l a s s i f i e d
by t h e MBTI SN and TF Sc a le s
Individual tasks
Problem
MBTI Base V er b al Spatial solving
e le m en t N
Mirror
Breathing Copy Wri te drawing Blocks WSST
N 23 0.97 0.94 1.38 0.96 0. 9 1 0.83
S 4 0. 7 5 0. 7 8 1.03 0. 68 0.64 0 .5 3
T 14 0 .9 9 0. 97 1. 24 0 .94 0. 8 6 0 .8 6
F 13 0 .8 6 0 .8 8 1.08 0. 8 8 0 .9 0 0 .7 0
N o t e . From " H e m i s p h e r e S p e c i a l i z a t i o n and J u n g i a n Typology: E v i

d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " (p. 120, T a b l e 6, m o d i f i e d ) , by J. B.
Newman, 1985, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 46, 761B-762B.

R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s p e r f o r m e d on t h e t e m p o r a l a l p h a r a t i o s
showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r r a t i o s f o r N o v e r S on t h e t h r e e t a s k s o f
b r e a t h i n g , w o r d - s h a p e - s o r t i n g , and m i r r o r d r a w i n g . A higher r a tio
f o r T o ve r F was found o n l y f o r t h e m i r r o r d r a w in g t a s k .
S i n c e a l p h a i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be i n d i c a t i v e o f a r e s t i n g s t a t e
a nd t h e b l o c k i n g o f a l p h a an i n d i c a t i o n o f a r o u s a l , h i g h e r a l p h a
asymmetry r a t i o s s h o u l d r e f l e c t r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r l e f t h e m i s p h e r e
a c ti v a t i o n , w hile lower r a t i o s in d ic a te r e l a t i v e l y g r e a te r r ig h t
h e m i s p h e r e a c t i v a t i o n (Newman, 1984/1985). Thus, the higher r a t i o s
f o r N o ve r S and T o v e r F i n d i c a t e r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r l e f t h e m i s p h e re
a c t i v a t i o n f o r Ns and Ts on t h e t h r e e s i g n i f i c a n t t a s k s .
N ew m an's. (1 9 8 4 /1 9 8 5 ) r e s e a r c h confirmed h is general hypothesis
that in tu itiv es (Ns) would show a b r a i n h e m i s p h e r e p a t t e r n d i f f e r e n t
from t h a t o f s e n s i n g (Ss) i n d i v i d u a l s . H i s f i n d i n g s sh ow e d t h a t
i n t u i t i v e s d is p la y e d g r e a t e r l e f t , r a t h e r than the expected r i g h t ,
hemisphere a c t i v i t y . T hi s f i n d i n g a p p e a r s t o c o n t r a d i c t t h e Herrmann
(1988) m eta p h or o f i n t u i t i o n b e in g a d o m in a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e D
o r u p p e r r i g h t c e r e b r a l HBDI q u a d r a n t .
Newman (1984/1985) a d v o c a t e d t h e s e f i n d i n g s as j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r
a " b roa d n e u r o l o g i c a l b a s i s f o r J u n g 's t h e o r y o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s "
(p. x i ) . He recommended t h a t a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h be c on du c te d t o i n
v e s t i g a t e t h e p o s t u l a t e d n e u r o l o g i c a l - J u n g i a n i n t e g r a t e d ba se.
Summary of Literature Review
The review begins with a discussion of the most popular theories
of leadership. Because leadership is perceived as the outward

e x p r e s s i o n o f p e r s o n a l i t y (Bass, 1981), t h e m ajo r p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o
ries are also presented.
Next follow s a discussion of the most p o p u l a r p e r s o n a l i t y
assessment instrum ents. Ranking o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t s shown i n Table 1
h a s c h a n g e d o v e r t h e d e c a d e b e t w e e n 1975 and 1985. In g e n e ra l, the
changes in ran k have r e s u l t e d from re d u c e d fre q u e n c y of use fo r
p r o j e c t i v e an d c l i n i c a l i n s t r u m e n t s , b e c a u s e t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
r e s u l t s req u ires p rofessional psychological expertise. Emphasis has
s h i f t e d t o a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s s p e c i f i c a l l y d e s ig n e d f o r u s e w i t h
norm al, h e a lth y a d u lts , s u c h a s t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r
(MBTI) an d t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n D o m i n a n c e I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI), b o t h o f
whi ch a r e us e d i n t h i s s tu dy .
P rior s tu d ie s using th ese tw o i n s t r u m e n t s a r e d e s c r i b e d i n
detail. Four s t u d i e s o f MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a
tions in various s e ttin g s are discussed. The most p r o m i n e n t r e s u l t
fo r th e s e m a n a g e ria l groups is the p re v a le n c e of th in k in g -ju d g in g
types (TJs), especially in groups which a re p r e d o m in a n tly male.
N i d i f f e r (1984) found 60% TJs i n a gr oup o f program manager s t u d e n t s
in 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 8 4 DSMC c l a s s e s . DeW ald's (1 9 8 6 /1 9 8 7 ) s t u d y o f p a i r e d
m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n male e x e c u t i v e s showed 80% TJs , identical for
b o t h m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n p a r t i c i p a n t s . The g e n e r a l m a n a g e r i a l
g r o u p i n t h e M y e rs a n d M c C a u l l e y ( 1 9 8 5 ) s t u d y c o n s i s t e d o f 48% T J s .
This g r o u p was t h e o n l y one o f t h e f o u r s t u d i e s w h i c h was p r e
d o m in a n tly fem ale. P i c k e r i n g ( 1 9 8 6 ) f o u n d 64% T J s i n h i s s t u d y o f
f e d e r a l executives.

Evide nce f o r c o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e en t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI i s exam
ined. S t u d i e s by Ford (1988a), James (1986), and Newman (1984/1985)
support the assum ption t h a t a high degree of c o r r e l a t i o n appears to
e x i s t b e tw e en t h e p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s p e r t i n e n t t o i n d i v i d u a l
HBDI q u a d r a n t s an d p a r t i c u l a r MBTI t y p e s and t y p e f u n c t i o n s . Ford
r e p o r t e d t h a t MBTI t h i n k i n g , f e e l i n g , and i n t u i t i o n c o r r e s p o n d e d w i t h
HBDI r i g h t - h e m i s p h e r i c d o m in a n c e, w h i l e MBTI s e n s i n g was s o m e w h a t
m ore a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l e f t - h e m i s p h e r i c d o m i n a n c e . James r e p o r t e d
do u b l e dominance i n HBDI Quad ra nts A and B f o r i n t r o v e r s i o n , sensing,
thinking, an d j u d g i n g ; d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e i n Q u a d r a n t s B and C f o r
feeling. J a m e s f o u n d t h a t e x t r a v e r s i o n was d o m i n a n t i n t h e HBDI B
quadrant, while intuition and p e r c e p t i o n were do m in an t i n t h e HBDI
Q u a d r a n t D. F inally, Newman's r e s e a r c h p r o v i d e s support for a
p h y s i o l o g i c a l b a s i s f o r MBTI t y p o l o g y and a p o t e n t i a l l i n k t o t h e
HBDI b r a i n q u a d r a n t m et a ph or .
The specific hypothesis to be tested, some additional research
questions to be investigated, and the methodology to be used are
outlined in Chapter IV.

CHAPTER IV
METHODOLOGY
The p u r p o s e o f t h i s study is to determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f
m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H errm ann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t
(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a from t h r e e classes at th e Defense System s
Management C o l l e g e (DSMC) prog ram m an a g e r' s c o u r s e h e l d d u r i n g 1986-
1987.
R e s e a rc h H y p o t h e s i s
Discussion
For an a l l - m a l e sam pl e o f 90 b a n k e rs and c h e m i c a l i n d u s t r y p r o
fessionals, James (1986) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e MBTI f u n c t i o n a l e l e m e n t s
o f i n t r o v e r s i o n , s e n s i n g , t h i n k i n g , and j u d g i n g were a l i g n e d s t r o n g l y
w i t h t h e HBDI A a n d B q u a d r a n t s i n t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , and t h a t
i n t u i t i o n and p e r c e p t i o n r e l a t e d h i g h l y t o t h e HBDI D q u a d r a n t i n t h e
rig h t hem isphere. Only e x t r a v e r s i o n and f e e l i n g showed c r o s s -
hemispheric dominance. E x t r a v e r t s were r e p r e s e n t e d i n Quad ra nts A,
B, and D ( t h e l e f t and u p p e r r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e s ) , and f e e l i n g i n d i v i d
u a l s w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e HBDI B an d C q u a d r a n t s ( t h e l o w e r l e f t
and l o w e r r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e s ) .
F o rd 's (1988a) sample of 51 f e m a l e occupational therapists
showed a somewhat greater representation of sensing in d iv id u als in
52

t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , b u t a m a j o r i t y o f t h e MBTI i n t u i t i v e , thinking,
and f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s were a l i g n e d w i t h t h e HBDI r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e .
Newman ( 1 9 8 4 / 1 9 8 5 ) p o s t u l a t e d t h a t MBTI i n t u i t i v e s w o u l d show a
d i f f e r e n t b r a i n h e m i s p h e r e p a t t e r n o f a c t i v i t y from t h a t o f s e n s o r s .
H i s s a m p l e o f 27 l a w y e r s and a r t i s t s , 85% o f whom w e r e i n t u i t i v e s ,
showed s t r o n g l e f t , r a t h e r t h a n r i g h t , h e m i s p h e re a c t i v i t y .
Both p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e t h e o r y and b r a i n dominance t h e o r y would
d i c t a t e HBDI l e f t - h e m i s p h e r i c dominance f o r MBTI s e n s i n g , thinking,
a nd j u d g i n g t y p e s , and HBDI r i g h t - h e m i s p h e r i c d o m i n a n c e f o r MBTI
i n t u i t i v e , f e e l i n g , a nd p e r c e p t i v e t y p e s . The s o m e w h a t m i x e d and
c o n t r a t h e o r e t i c a l f i n d i n g s from t h e l i t e r a t u r e a re l i m i t e d by v e r y
s m a l l and e x t r e m e l y homogeneous s a m p l e s.
Thus, w h i l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s e x i s t , t h e i r e x t e n t and d i r e c t i o n need
t o be c l a r i f i e d . Therefore, the m ain focus o f t h i s study is the
i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e t h e o r e t i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s among MBTI t y p e s and
HBDI q u a d r a n t s .
Statem ent o f Hypothesis
The MBTI e l e m e n t s o f s e n s i n g , t h i n k i n g , and j u d g i n g w i l l be
a l i g n e d w i t h t h e HBDI l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , w ith a high incidence of
d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e f o r b o t h Q u a d r a n t A and Q u a d r a n t B. Given t h i s
hypothesis, t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s o f i n t u i t i o n , feeling, and p e r c e p t i o n
s h o u l d be a l i g n e d w i t h t h e HBDI r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h i n t u i t i v e s and
p e r c e p t i v e s dom ina nt i n Quadrant D, and t h e f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , in
Q u a d r a n t C.

54
Rese arc h Q u e s t io n s
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the MBTI-HBDI r e l a t i o n s h i p ,
t h i s s t u d y a l s o p r o v i d e s a means t o c o n f i r m some e a r l i e r f i n d i n g s i n
the l i t e r a t u r e . Because each o f t he e a r l i e r s t u d i e s us e d a s p e c i f i c
population, t h e g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f t h e s e f i n d i n g s t o t h e group un de r
s tu d y i s open to q u e s t i o n . The a d d i t i o n a l q u e s t i o n s a d d r e s s e d b y
t h i s study are d e ta i le d in the follow ing sections.
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n s 1 and 2
Discussion
The l i t e r a t u r e r e f e r e n c e s h a v e sh ow n t h a t m a n a g e r s t e n d t o be
MBTI t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs). DeWald (1986/1987) found 80% TJs i n a
gr oup o f 30 matched p a i r s o f m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n , upper-level, U.S.
Army e x e c u t i v e s . M y e rs an d M c C a u l l e y ( 1 9 8 5 ) r e p o r t e d 48% TJ s i n a
g r o u p o f 7 ,4 6 3 b u s i n e s s m a n a g e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . P ickering
(1986) found 64% TJs i n h i s s t u d y of 1,395 c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e
U.S. G o v e r n m e n t . M o r e o v e r , N i d i f f e r ( 1 9 8 4 ) f o u n d t h a t 60% o f i n d i
v i d u a l s i n p r i o r DSMC c l a s s e s were TJs. Although t h e e v i d e n c e s u g
gests that t h e p o p u l a t i o n un d e r s t u d y w i l l a l s o be s t r o n g l y c h a r a c
t e r i z e d by TJ r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , t h e f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s have
been f o r m u l a t e d t o c o n f i r m t h i s e x p e c t a t i o n .
Statement of Research Question 1
Are t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e 1986-1987 DSMC program
manager c l a s s e s used in t h i s study d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e for the

1982-1984 DSMC program manager c l a s s e s ( N i d i f f e r , 1984)?
S t a t e m e n t o f R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 2
A re t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e DSMC p r o g r a m m a n a g e r
classes in t h i s study d i f f e r e n t from th o se for o th er m anagerial
populations in the l i t e r a t u r e (DeWald, 1986/1987; Myers & McCaulley,
1985; Pickering, 1986)?
R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s 3, 4 , 5, and 6
Discussion
The demog ra phic d a t a a v a i l a b l e i n t h i s s t u d y i n c l u d e t h e se x o f
the p a r t i c i p a n ts , the branch o f the m i l i t a r y s e r v ic e s or f e d e r a l
a ge nc y t o which t h e y b e l o n g , t h e i r a c t i v e m i l i t a r y or c i v i l i a n s t a
tus, and t h e i r management l e v e l i n d i c a t e d by t h e i r m i l i t a r y r a n k o r
c i v i l i a n grade. None o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e f e r e n c e s h a s a d d r e s s e d a l l
of these v ariab les, b u t r e l a t i o n s h i p s may be i n f e r r e d from t h e s p e
cific p o p u l a t i o n s used.
The p r i m a r i l y m a l e m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s (DeWald, 1986/1987;
N idiffer, 1984; P i c k e r i n g , 1986) a l l had 60% o r h i g h e r TJ r e p r e s e n t a
tion. The o n l y m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n t h a t was n o t d o m in a te d by TJs
was t h a t o f M y e r s an d M c C a u l l e y ( 1 9 8 5 ) , a m a j o r i t y o f w h ic h was
female. Moreover, James (1986) found t h a t o ve r h a l f o f h i s a l l - m a l e
s a m p l e o f 90 b a n k e r s and c h e m i c a l i n d u s t r y p r o f e s s i o n a l s combined a
s t r o n g MBTI TJ p r e f e r e n c e w i t h s t r o n g dominance i n HBDI Q u a d ra n ts A
and B. T h i s e v i d e n c e , w h i c h l e a d s t o R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 3, s t r o n g l y

suggests that a higher percentage of males than of females will
manifest the MBTI TJ types and will exhibit preference for HBDI
Quadrants A and B.
No e v i d e n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o p o s s i b l e MBTI t ype d i f f e r e n c e s among
t h e b r a n c h e s o f t h e U.S. Armed S e r v i c e s i s a v a i l a b l e i n t h e l i t e r a
ture. Thus, R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 4 i s included p r i m a r i l y to determine
w h e t h e r any d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t .
The o n l y s t u d y w h i c h d i r e c t l y c o m p a r e s m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n
e x e c u t i v e s a t t h e same l e v e l i s t h a t o f DeWald (1986/1987). Contrary
to expectation, t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s e m i l i t a r y and
c i v i l i a n Army e x e c u t i v e s w e r e v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l . This f in d i n g
f or m s t h e b a s i s f o r R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 5.
The r e l a t i v e l y h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f i n t u i t i v e s i n t h e P i c k e r i n g
(1986) s t u d y can p r o b a b l y be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t h i s p o p u l a
t i o n in c l u d e d s e n i o r e x e c u t i v e s as w e l l as m id d le m anagers. Agor
(1986) found t h a t t o p e x e c u t i v e s m a n i f e s t a much g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e
of i n t u i t i v e s t h a n do g r o u p s o f m i d d l e o r l o w e r l e v e l m anagers.
Thus, R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 6 i s b a s e d on t he f i n d i n g t h a t t h e p e r c e n t a g e
of i n t u i t i v e s i s r e l a t e d to the l e v e l of the m anagerial h iera rc h y .
Statement o f Research Question 3
Are males and females different in their representation by the
MBTI functions and by dominance in the HBDI quadrants?

Statement o f Research Question 4
Are t h e r e MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e
b r a n c h e s o f t h e armed s e r v i c e s ?
S t a te m e n t o f R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 5
Are t h e r e MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e en i n d i
v i d u a l s b a s ed on t h e i r m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l i a n s t a t u s ?
S t a t e m e n t o f R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 6
Are t h e r e MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e en i n d i
v i d u a l s b a s e d on t h e i r m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l ; t h a t i s , w h e t h e r t h e y a r e a t
t h e h i g h o r t h e m id d l e manager l e v e l ?
The I n s t i t u t i o n and t h e T a r g e t P o p u l a t i o n
The p o p u l a t i o n use d i n t h i s s t u d y c o n s i s t s o f 811 s t u d e n t s from
t h r e e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r c l a s s e s (PMCs 8 6 - 2 , 87-1, and 8 7 - 2 ) a t t h e
Defe nse Systems Management C o l l e g e in Fort Belvoir, V irginia. The
DSMC i s a g r a d u a t e - l e v e l , U.S. G o v e r n m e n t e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n
founded i n 1971 f o r t h e pu rp o se o f t r a i n i n g f u t u r e program managers
i n a c q u i s i t i o n and p r o c u r e m e n t p r o c e d u r e s .
A l l DSMC s t u d e n t s have b a c h e l o r ' s d e g r e e s i n e n g i n e e r i n g , physi
cal science, or business ad m in istra tio n . About o n e - t h i r d have mas
te r's degrees in th e s e d isciplines. M os t h a v e s e v e r a l y e a r s o f
experience in defense a c q u is itio n . Of t h e t o t a l number o f s t u d e n t s ,
72% were u n i f o r m e d m i l i t a r y p e r s o n n e l , 21% were c i v i l i a n em ployees o f

d e f e n s e seg ment s o f t h e f e d e r a l gove rnm en t, and t h e r e m a i n i n g 7% were
c i v i l i a n s from th e i n d u s t r i a l s e c t o r . M i l i t a r y ran k ran g ed from
company g r a d e t o f i e l d g r ad e (0-3 , captain, t o 0-6, colonel). C ivil
i a n g r a d e l e v e l s were c o m p a r a b l e , r a n g i n g from m id d l e t o u p p e r man
a g e m e n t (GS-12 t h r o u g h GM-15). The d i s t r i b u t i o n b y s e x was h i g h l y
skewed, w i t h women c o n s t i t u t i n g o n l y about 6% o f t h e t o t a l group.
The Assessment I n s t r u m e n t s
The t w o i n s t r u m e n t s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y a r e t h e MBTI and t h e
HBDI. They w e r e s e l e c t e d by a DSMC f a c u l t y p s y c h o l o g i s t ( E l l i s ,
19 8 3 ) b e c a u s e b o t h w e r e d e v e l o p e d t o a s s e s s t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f
norm al, h e a lth y a d u lts . D e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e MBTI and t h e
HBDI h a v e b e e n g i v e n i n C h a p t e r I I I u n d e r t h e h e a d i n g , Selected
Assessment In stru m en ts. A b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f the mecha nics o f e a ch
i n s t r u m e n t i s p r e s e n t e d below.
The MBTI was d e ve lo pe d p r i m a r i l y as an i n s t r u m e n t f o r i d e n t i f y
ing Jung's (1921/1971) p s y c h o lo g i c a l types. Form G o f the MBTI
c o n s i s t s o f 126 p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s , p h r a s e d i n s i m p l e , n o n t h r e a t e n i n g
l a ng u a ge . Following forc e d -c h o ice p ro to c o l, t he p a r t i c i p a n t s e l e c t s
one o f t h e two p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s as more n e a r l y d e s c r i p t i v e o f h i s o r
h e r own p o i n t o f view. The i n d i v i d u a l ' s s c o r e s indicate preference
f o r one o f the two p o s s i b l e i n d i c e s i n each o f t h e f o u r d i c h o t o m i e s
in Jung's th eo ry , t h u s g e n e r a t i n g an MBTI t y p e . The MBTI m u s t b e
a d m i n i s t e r e d and s c o r e d by q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n n e l .
The HBDI was d e v e l o p e d t o i d e n t i f y an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e f e r e n c e
for one or m ore of four w ay s of thinking and b e h a v i o r , which

c o r r e s p o n d t o Herrmann's m e t a p h o r i c m o d e l o f t h e m e n t a l a c t i v i t i e s
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e l e f t an d r i g h t c e r e b r a l and l i m b i c c o r t i c e s o f
t h e hum an b r a i n . The HBDI c o n t a i n s 120 i t e m s w h i c h a r e k e y e d t o
determine t he p a r t i c u l a r q u a d r a n t and l e v e l o f b r a i n s p e c i a l i z a t i o n
which t he p a r t i c i p a n t e x p r e s s e s t h r o u g h h i s o r h e r a n s w e rs (Herrmann,
1988). Other q u e s tio n s are r e l a t e d to e d u c a tio n a l l e v e l , occupation,
an d h o b b i e s , as w e l l as th e p h y s i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s o f h a n d e d n e ss,
energy l e v e l , and s u s c e p t i b i l i t y t o m o ti o n s i c k n e s s . Like t h e MBTI,
t h e HBDI m ust be a d m i n i s t e r e d and s c o r e d by q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n n e l .
R e s e a rc h P r o c e d u r e s
Da ta C o l l e c t i o n
As p a r t o f t h e r e g u l a r DSMC a s s e s s m e n t p r o c e d u r e , t h e MBTI and
t h e HBDI were a d m i n i s t e r e d on s u c c e s s i v e days t o ea ch s t u d e n t d u r i n g
t h e f i r s t we ek o f t h e PMC c o u r s e . The d a t a f r o m t h e t h r e e c l a s s e s
c o n s i s t e d o f t h e s t u d e n t ' s MBTI t y p e , HBDI c o d e d q u a d r a n t s c o r e s ,
a c t u a l HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e s , sex, m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l i a n s t a t u s , b r a n c h
of service, an d m i l i t a r y r a n k o r c i v i l i a n g r a d e l e v e l . MBTI and
demog ra phi c d a t a were a v a i l a b l e f o r a l l 811 s t u d e n t s ; HBDI d a t a were
a v a i l a b l e f o r o nl y 800 o f t h e s e s t u d e n t s . The d a t a were s t r i p p e d o f
a l l m e a n s o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ( na m e, s o c i a l s e c u r i t y n u m b e r , d a t e o f
birth, e t c . ) b e f o r e t h e y were r e l e a s e d f o r a n a l y s i s .

R e s e a r c h Des ig n
T h i s e x p o s t f a c t o r e s e a r c h was d e s i g n e d t o e x a m i n e t h e MBTI-
HBDI r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n t h e 1 9 8 6 - 1 9 8 7 PMC c l a s s e s and t o c o m p a r e t h e
MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e s e s t u d e n t s w i t h t h o s e i n o t h e r p u b
l i s h e d m a n a g e r i a l d a ta .
Data A nalysis
Both q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e d a t a were use d i n t h i s s t u d y .
The i n t e r v a l d a t a w e r e a n a l y z e d by t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e . For
statistical p rocessing of the c a te g o ric a l d ata, the c h i-sq u are test
o f a s s o c i a t i o n was used.
To a d d r e s s t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s , two t y p e s o f a n a l y s i s were
performed. First, c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s and t y p e f u n c t i o n s
w i t h HBDI d o m in a n t q u a d r a n t s were a n a l y z e d by t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t o f
asso ciatio n . S e c o n d , a n a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was p e r f o r m e d , u s i n g
t h e a c t u a l HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e as t h e d e p e n d en t v a r i a b l e and t h e MBTI
t y p e s and ty p e f u n c t i o n s as th e i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s . For b o t h
a n a ly t ic approaches, a s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l o f £ < .05 was use d i n t h e
d e c is io n ru le for r e j e c t i o n of the n u ll h y p o th esis. This is con
s i s t e n t w ith recom m endations fo r t e s t i n g e s ta b l is h e d in s tr u m e n ts
(K erlinger, 1973 ).
To a d d r e s s R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s 1 and 2, MBTI ty pe d i s t r i b u t i o n s
f o r t h e 1986-1987 DSMC c l a s s e s were compared w i t h t h o s e f o r the 1982-
1984 DSMC c l a s s e s ( N i d i f f e r , 1984), f o r t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a
t o r s i n t h e M ye rs an d M c C a u l l e y ( 1 9 8 5 ) s t u d y , f o r t h e m i l i t a r y a n d

c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e DeWald ( 1 9 8 6 / 1 9 8 7 ) s t u d y , and f o r t h e
f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e P i c k e r i n g (1986) st u d y . A chi-square t e s t
was us e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e d e g r e e o f s i m i l a r i t y o f th e d i s t r i b u t i o n s .
To a d d r e s s R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n s 3 t hr o ug h 6, each o f which d e a l s
w i t h a demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , c h i - s q u a r e t e s t s were c a r r i e d o u t
f o r t h e de mographic v a r i a b l e s v e r s u s MBTI t y p e s o r ty p e f u n c t i o n s and
HBDI dom ina nt q u a d r a n t s .
The f i n d i n g s from t h i s s t u d y a r e p r e s e n t e d i n C ha pt e r V.

CHAPTER V
FINDINGS
The pu rp o se o f t h i s s t u d y was t o d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f
m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f th e Herrm ann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t
(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a from t h r e e c l a s s e s at th e Defense Systems
Management C o l l e g e prog ram mana ge r's c o u r s e h e l d d u r i n g 1986-1987.
While b o th i n s t r u m e n t s m ea su re p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,
t h e i r protocols d i f f e r . The MBTI i d e n t i f i e s e a ch p a r t i c i p a n t as one
o f 16 MBTI t y p e s , b a s ed on J u n g i a n p s y c h o l o g i c a l ty pe t h e o r y , while
t h e HBDI u s e s f o u r m e t a p h o r i c a l q u a d r a n t s d e r i v e d from b r a i n domi
nance t h e o r y , t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f which p e r m i t p a r t i c i p a n t s t o be
d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n t o one o r more q u a d r a n t c o n f o r m a t i o n s , which r e s u l t
in a coded p r o f i l e fo r each i n d i v i d u a l . The f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y
a r e p r e s e n t e d below.
MBTI Type Distribution
The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s and t h e e i g h t MBTI e l e
m e n t s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n i s sho wn i n T a b l e 11, w h i c h i s p r e
s e n t e d i n t h e s t a n d a r d MBTI t y p e t a b l e f o r m a t . The f o u r t h i n k i n g -
judging (T J) t y p e s accounted for 65.6% o f the study pop u latio n .
These f o u r t y p e s i n c l u d e t h e ISTJ (28.2%), t h e ESTJ (18.0%), t h e INTJ
(10.2%), and t h e ENTJ (9.1%). The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s
62

63
Table 11
MBTI Type Ta b le f o r 811 DSMC S t u d e n t Program Managers
SENSING TYPES IN T U IT IV E TYPES

with THINKING with FEELING with FEELING with THINKING N X
ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ E 342 42.2

1 469 . 5i . 8
N 3 229 N = 23 N= 9 N = 83 c
o S
%= 2 8 . 2 %= 2.8 %= 1 .1 % = 10.2 o 507 62.5
2 N 304 37.5
O
T 717 88.4
2 F
•g 94 11.6
o
<
ISTP ISFP INFP INTP m
>99 J 591 72.9
UI\
V P 220 27.1
N= 51 N» 6 N= 10 Nr 58 -o
m
%= 6.3 %= 0.7 %= 1.2 %r 7.2 20 1J 344 42.4
n
m 1P 125 15.4
EP 95 11.7
< 247 30.5
m EJ
ST 458 56.5
ESTP ESFP ENFP SF 49 6.0
ENTP NF 45 5.6
•u
N* 32 Nr 4 N » 15 Nr 44 m NT 259 31.9
JO
%= 4.0 %= 0.5 %r 1.9 %= 5.4 n
m
•D
-H SJ 414 51.0
< SP 93 11.5
m
m NP 127 15.7
X
NJ 177 21.8
>
<
ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ m
30
TJ 532 65.6
(/) TP 185 22.8
N 3 146 N r 16 N* 11 Nr 74 FP 35 4.3
% = 18 . 0 %= 2.0 %r 1.4 %= 9.1 C FJ 59 7.3
o
o
2 1N 160 19.7
o EN 144 17.8
1S 309 38.1
ES 198 24.4
Note. Data c o l l e c t e d by t h e Defe nse Syst ems Management C o l l e g e i n

1986 and 1987. P a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s t u d e n t s a t t h e
DSMC. T h e s e d a t a a r e u s e d w i t h p e r m i s s i o n and h a v e n o t b e e n p u b
l i s h e d elsew here to date.

c o n f ir m s th e h ig h p e r c e n ta g e o f TJs in t h i s population. The TF
d i m e n s i o n i n c l u d e d 88.4% t h i n k e r s (Ts), the h ighest percentage r e p r e
s e n t a t i o n o f any o f t h e e i g h t MBTI e l e m e n t s , w h i l e t h e 72.9% j u d g e r s
( J s ) on t h e JP d i m e n s i o n were t h e second most f r e q u e n t e l e m e n t . On
t h e E l d i m e n s i o n , 57.8% w e r e i n t r o v e r t s ( I s ) . On t h e SN d i m e n s i o n ,
62.5% w e r e s e n s o r s (Ss).
HBDI Profile Representation
F i g u r e 2 i s a s t a n d a r d HBDI g r a p h i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s i x
mo st f r e q u e n t HBDI coded p r o f i l e s i n t h i s st u d y . These s i x p r o f i l e s
a c c o u n t e d f o r 70.1% o f t h e s t u d y p a r t i c i p a n t s ( s e e T a b l e 12). HBDI
profiles a r e n u m e r i c a l l y coded q u a d r a n t s c o r e s . By c o n v e n t i o n , the
f o u r coded HBDI q u a d r a n t s a r e p r e s e n t e d c o u n t e r c l o c k w i s e i n a l p h a
b e t i c a l o r d e r , t h a t i s , A, B, C, D, w i t h t h e c o d e s f o r e a c h q u a d r a n t
s e p a r a t e d by d a s h e s . A code of 1 i n d i c a t e s dom inance; a code o f 2
t r a n s l a t e s i n t o m o d e r a te p r e f e r e n c e ; a code o f 3 i s i n t e r p r e t e d as
avoidance. I n F i g u r e 2, t h e r e l a t i v e s t r e n g t h o f e a c h o f t h e q u a d
r a n t p r e f e r e n c e s i s d e p i c t e d by t h e d i s t a n c e o f t h e q u a d r a n t s c o r e
p o i n t from th e p e r i p h e r y o f th e c i r c l e . A dom inant q u a d ra n t s c o re
p o in t appears in the outerm ost c o n c e n tric ring. A m o d e r a te q u a d r a n t
p r e f e re n c e sco re p o in t is lo c a te d in the m iddle rin g . An a v o i d a n t
quadrant score p oint i s lo ca ted in the innermost c o n c en tric ring.
Findings Relating to the Research Hypothesis
The statement of the research hypothesis anticipated that sen
sing (S), thinking (T), and judging (J) individuals would be dominant

65
Limbic
F i g u r e 2. Most F r e q u e n t HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s .

66
Table 12
MBTI Type D is trib u tio n s fo r the Most Frequent

HBDI Coded Quadrant P ro file s
MBTI type d is trib u tio n * 1

HBDI
coded
p r o f ile Combined
A-B-C-D N Za ISTJ ISTP ESTP ESTJ INTJ INTP ENTP ENTJ F types
1-1-1-2 35 4 .4 14.3 5.7 14.3 25.7 8.5 0.0 2.9 2.9 25.7
1-1-2-1 86 10.7 12.8 8.1 5.8 16.3 17.4 5.8 7.0 16.3 10.5
1 -1-2-2 229 28.6 30.6 7.0 3.5 27.1 7.8 2.2 2.2 7.4 12.2
1-1 -2 -3 35 4 .4 65.7 2.9 0 .0 22.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 0 .0 5.7
1 -1-3-2 84 10.5 57.1 6.0 0.0 20.2 7.1 2.4 3.6 3.6 0.0
1-2-2-1 92 11.5 13.1 5 .4 4 .4 7.6 15.2 19.6 14.1 13.0 7.6
Sub
to ta l 561 70.1 30.1 6 .4 3.9 20.9 10.2 5.3 5.0 8 .4 9.8
O ther 239 29.9 24.7 6.3 3.8 11.7 10.4 10.9 6.7 10.4 15.1
T o tal 800 100.0 28.5 6 .4 3.9 18.1 10.2 7.0 5.5 9.0 11.4
aEach p ercen t in t h i s column i s the HBDI coded p r o f ile percent o f the to ta l

group o f 800 p a r tic ip a n ts .
bEach row c o n ta in s the MBTI (p e rce n ta g e) d i s t r i b u ti o n fo r the HBDI coded p r o f il e

in th a t row.
N ote. HBDI quadrant sco res are coded to provide a convenient re p re s e n ta tio n o f
quadrant p r o f il e s . By convention, th e coded quadrants are p resented in alpha
b e t i c a l o rd e r, th a t i s , A, B, C, D, w ith th e codes fo r each quadrant sep arated
by dash es. The conversion ta b le fo r th e coding appears below.
HBDI code HBDI sco re range I n te r p r e ta tio n
1 67 or more Dominant
2 34 to 66 Moderate
3 33 or le s s Avoidant

p r i m a r i l y in Q u a d ra n ts A and B in t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , w ith high
i n c i d e n c e o f AB dominance e x p e c t e d t o t a k e p l a c e . A re la te d expecta
t i o n was t h a t i n t u i t i v e (N), f e e l i n g (F), and p e r c e p t i v e (P) i n d i v i d
u a l s w o u l d be d o m i n a n t i n t h e C an d D q u a d r a n t s o f t h e HBDI r i g h t
h e m i s p h e re . F e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) were e x p e c t e d t o show p r e f e r
en ce f o r Quadrant C, w h i l e i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) were
l i k e l y t o show p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D.
The r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s was f u l l y s u p p o r t e d by t h e d a t a i n t h i s
study. A d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the f in d in g s r e l a t i n g to t h i s
h y p o t h e s i s i s p r e s e n t e d below.
HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s and MBTI Types
The s i x most f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g HBDI coded q u a d r a n t p r o f i l e s
and t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g MBTI t y p e s a r e shown i n Table 12. The a s s o
c i a t i o n o f p a r t i c u l a r HBDI coded p r o f i l e s w i t h g i v e n MBTI ty pe s was
s i g n i f i c a n t (j> < . 0 0 0 1 ) b y t h e c h i - s q u a r e test. The s i g n i f i c a n t
r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e d e t a i l e d below.
The HBDI coded p r o f i l e 1 - 1 - 2 - 2 (do uble dom inant i n Qua drants A
and B, and m o d e r a te i n Q ua dr a nt s C and D) was t h e most common p r o f i l e
(28.6%) among a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s and was f o u n d m o s t l i k e l y t o c o r r e
s p o n d t o t h e MBTI t y p e s I S T J and ESTJ, an d l e a s t l i k e l y t o be a s s o
c i a t e d w i t h t h e MBTI t y p e s INTP and ENTP.
The o t h e r two AB d o m in a n t p r o f i l e s , 1 - 1 - 3 - 2 ( d ou ble do minant i n
Q u a d r a n t s A and B, a v o i d a n t i n C, and m o d e r a t e i n D) an d 1 - 1 - 2 - 3
(d o u b le do m in an t i n Q ua dr a nt s A and B, m o d e r a te i n C, and a v o i d a n t i n
D), were p r e f e r r e d by a l m o s t 15% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s and were s i m i l a r

t o t h e 1 - 1 - 2 - 2 p r o f i l e i n MBTI r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Both were h i g h e r th an
e x p e c t e d f o r t h e tw o m o s t f r e q u e n t MBTI t y p e s , I S T J and ESTJ, w i t h
v i r t u a l l y no r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n any o t h e r MBTI type.
The HBDI p r o f i l e 1 - 1 - 2 - 1 ( t r i p l e do m in an t i n Quad ra nts A, B, and
D, and m o d e r a te i n Quadrant C) was p r e f e r r e d by 10.7% o f t h e p a r t i c i
p a n t s and was more f r e q u e n t t h a n e x p e c t e d f o r NTJs and l e s s f r e q u e n t
t h a n e x p e c t e d f o r STJs. The HBDI p r o f i l e 1 - 2 - 2 - 1 (do ub le d o m in a n t i n
Q u a d r a n t s A a n d D, and m o d e r a t e i n Q u a d r a n t s B and C) was p r e f e r r e d
by 11.5% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 62% o f t h o s e w i t h t h e
1 - 2 - 2 - 1 p r o f i l e w e r e among t h e f o u r MBTI i n t u i t i v e - t h i n k i n g (NT)
types, i n c l u d i n g 33.7% NTPs v e r s u s 12.5% i n t h e t o t a l group.
The HBDI p r o f i l e 1 - 1 - 1 - 2 ( t r i p l e do m in an t i n Quad ra nts A, B, and
C, an d m o d e r a t e i n Q u a d r a n t D), t h e o n l y one o f t h e s i x m o s t common
profiles t o i n c l u d e dominance i n Quad rant C, was o v e r t w i c e as f r e
quent for the combined F ty p e s at 25.7% a s for the to tal study
p o p u l a t i o n a t 11.4%.
I n summary, t h e AB dominance p a t t e r n was t h e most p r e v a l e n t f o r
STJ c o m b i n a t i o n s , w h i l e F t y p e s showed a p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quad rant C,
and i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) p r e f e r r e d Quadrant D.
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI Types
Ta b le 13 p r e s e n t s t h e HBDI dominance and a v o id a n c e p a t t e r n s f o r
t h e MBTI t y p e s . S i n g l e q u a d r a n t dominance p a t t e r n s were r e l a t i v e l y
i n f r e q u e n t (7.2%), w h i l e d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e p a t t e r n s w e r e f o u n d f o r
69.6% o f t h e s t u d y p a r t i c i p a n t s , an d o t h e r m u l t i q u a d r a n t p a t t e r n s ,
for 23.2%. The most f r e q u e n t dominance p a t t e r n s were AB (46.2%), AD

T a b l e 13
1©DI Dom inant an d A v o i d a n t Q u a d r a n t P a t t e r n s by MBTI T y p e s
MBTI t y p e s
HBDI Combined
ISTJ IKTP ESTJ ESTP INTJ INTP ENTJ ENTP F types Total
dom inant
quadrant
p a tte rn N X N X N % N X N X N X N X N X N X U X
A 13 5.7 3 5.9 3 2. 1 1 3.2 10 12.2 2 3 .6 3 4 .2 0 0.0 3 3.3 38 4 .8

B 3 1.3 0 0.0 3 2.1 1 3.2 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 4 .4 11 1.4
C 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 1 3.2 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1
D 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 3.6 2 2.8 0 0.0 1 1. 1 6 0.8
AB 157 68.9 24 47.1 89 61.4 9 29.0 26 31.7 7 12.5 20 27.8 8 18.2 30 33.0 370 46.2
AC 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 1 1. 1 3 0.4
AD 17 7.5 8 15.7 10 6.9 4 12.9 19 23.2 24 42.9 15 20.8 13 29.6 7 7 .7 117 14.6
BC 5 2.2 2 3.9 7 4.8 3 9.7 1 1.2 1 1.8 3 4.2 0 0.0 5 5.5 27 3.4
BD 8 3.5 2 3.9 4 2 .8 0 0.0 0 0 .0 1 1.8 2 2.8 3 6.8 2 2.2 22 2.8
CD 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 1.4 0 0.0 1 1.2 4 7. 1 1 1.4 4 9.1 6 6.6 18 2 .2
ABC 5 2.2 3 5 .9 9 6.2 5 16. 1 3 3.7 0 0 .0 1 1.4 1 2.3 9 9.9 36 4.5

ABD 16 7.0 8 15.7- 16 11.0 5 16.1 20 24.4 7 12.5 17 23.6 7 15.9 10 11.0 106 13.3
ACD 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 2 3.6 1 1.4 3 6.8 4 4 .4 10 1.2
BCD 1 0.4 1 2.0 2 1.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 7. 1 6 8.3 4 9. 1 7 7 .7 25 3. 1
ABCD 1 0.4 0 0 .0 0 0.0 2 6 .5 1 1.2 2 3 .6 1 1.4 1 2 .3 1 1. 1 9 1.1
None 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.1 1 0.1
HBDI
a voidant
quadrant
p attern
A 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.2 0 0.0 1 1.4 0 0.0 2 2.2 4 0.5
B 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 1 1.8 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 1 1.1 2 0 .2
C 59 25.9 10 19.6 22 15.2 1 3.2 23 28.1 8 14.3 10 13.9 4 9.1 1 1. 1 138 17.3
D 24 10.5 2 3 .9 8 5 .5 1 3.2 1 1.2 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 3 3.3 39 4 .9
BC 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.8 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1

CD 17 7.5 2 3 .9 2 1.4 1 3.2 1 1.2 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 23 2.9
ABCD 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1 .1 I 0.1
None 128 56.1 37 72.6 113 77.9 28 90.3 56 68.3 46 82.1 61 84.7 40 90.9 83 91.2 592 74.0
Total 228 100.0 51 100.0 145 100.0 31 100.0 82 100.0 56 100.0 72 100.0 44 100.0 91 100.0 800 100.0
(14.6%), and ABD (13.3%). The o n l y a v o i d a n c e p a t t e r n w i t h a n y s i g
nificant r e p r e s e n t a t i o n was t h a t f o r Quadrant C (17.3%).
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e most f r e q u e n t dominance p a t t e r n s were
s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t (j> < . 0 0 0 1 ) by c h i - s q u a r e t e s t f o r t h e MBTI
types. The s p e c i f i c d i f f e r e n c e s a r e d i s c u s s e d below.
Two MBTI t y p e s , ISTJ and ESTJ, showed t h e l a r g e s t i n c i d e n c e o f
AB d o m i n a n c e (68.9% o f t h e I S T J s and 61.4% o f t h e ES T Js ). When
combined w i t h t h e t h r e e o t h e r m u l t i q u a d r a n t p a t t e r n s which i n c l u d e AB
d o m i n a n c e (ABC, ABD, and ABCD), o v e r 78% o f t h e s e t w o MBTI t y p e s
sh o w e d AB d o m i n a n c e . W h i l e AB was t h e m o s t p r e v a l e n t d o m i n a n c e
p attern f o r ISTP (47.1%) and ESTP (29.0%), AD r e p r e s e n t a t i o n for
t h e s e two MBTI t y p e s was doub le t h a t f o r t h e i r J c o u n t e r p a r t s (15.7%
f o r ISTP v e r s u s 7.5% f o r I S T J and 12.9% f o r ESTP v e r s u s 6.9% f o r
ESTJ).
Among t h e f o u r MBTI i n t u i t i v e (N) t y p e s i n Ta bl e 13, AD p a t t e r n
d o m i n a n c e r a n g e d f r o m 20.8% t o 42.9%, much s t r o n g e r t h a n i t was f o r
t h e i r s e n s i n g (S) c o u n t e r p a r t s (6.9% t o 15.7%). F o r INTP and ENTP,
t h e tw o NP c o m b i n a t i o n s i n T a b l e 13, AD was a c t u a l l y t h e m o s t f r e
q ue nt dominance p a t t e r n (42.9% and 29.6%, respectively), much l a r g e r
t h a n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e AB p e r c e n t a g e s of 12.5% and 18.2%.
Alt hou gh a l m o s t t h r e e - q u a r t e r s o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n showed no
a v o id a n c e te n d e n c y t o w a rd any q u a d r a n t , where a v o id a n c e d i d o c c u r, i t
was p r i m a r i l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Quadrant C (17.3%). The h i g h e s t l e v e l
o f a v o id a n c e f o r Quad rant C o c c u r r e d f o r t h e MBTI t y p e s ISTJ (25.9%)
and INTJ (28.1%).

72
I n summary, t h e STJ c o m b i n a t i o n s were most h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d
by AB dom inance, w h i l e AD dominance was r e l a t i v e l y more f r e q u e n t f o r
th e P and N c o m b i n a t i o n s , w i t h NPs showing g r e a t e s t AD dominance.
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI Elements
The r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e HBDI d o m i n a n c e and a v o i d a n c e p a t
terns and t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g MBTI e l e m e n t s are presented i n Ta b l e
14. The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e m o s t f r e q u e n t d o m i n a n c e p a t t e r n s a r e
sig n ific a n tly differen t f o r e a c h MBTI s c a l e (j£ < .002 f o r t h e E l
s c a l e ; £ < .0001 f o r t h e SN, TF, an d JP s c a l e s ) . The d e t a i l s of
t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e p r e s e n t e d below.
The AB d o m i n a n c e p a t t e r n was t h e m o s t p r e v a l e n t f o r a l l MBTI
e l e m e n t s e x c e p t i n t u i t i o n (N) and p e r c e p t i o n (P), where AD dominance
was a b o u t e q u a l l y common. AB dominance was s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r f o r
MBTI i n t r o v e r t s ( I s ) a t 50.6% t h a n f o r e x t r a v e r t s (Es ) a t 40.2%, f o r
s e n s o r s (Ss) a t 60.3% t h a n f o r i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) a t 22.7%, for th in k ers
( Ts ) a t 48.0% t h a n f o r f e e l e r s ( F s ) a t 32.9%, and f o r j u d g e r s ( J s ) a t
54.4% t h a n f o r p e r c e p t i v e s ( P s ) a t 24.2%.
I n t u i t i v e s (Ns) s h o w e d g r e a t e r AD d o m i n a n c e t h a n s e n s o r s ( S s )
(26.1% v e r s u s 7.8%) as w e l l a s g r e a t e r ABD d o m i n a n c e (19.4% v e r s u s
9.6%). P e r c e p t i v e s ( P s ) s h o w e d g r e a t e r AD d o m i n a n c e t h a n j u d g e r s
( J s ) (24.6% v e r s u s 10.9%).
I n summary, AB dominance was more l i k e l y f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s
I , S, T, a n d J t h a n f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s E, N, F, an d P, w h i l e AD
d o m i n a n c e was m ore l i k e l y f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s N and P t h a n f o r S
an d J .

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 73 74
T able 14
HBDI D o m i n a n t and A v o id an t Q u a d ra n t P a t t e r n s b y MBTI E l e m e n t s
MBTI e l e m e n t s
HBDI F J P
T otal E I S N T
do m in an t
quadrant
p attern N X N Z N X N X N X N X N X N X N X
A 38 4 .8 7 2.1 31 6.7 22 4.4 16 5.4 35 4.9 3 3.3 30 5.1 8 3 .7

B 11 1 .4 6 1.8 5 1.1 10 2.0 1 0 .3 7 1.0 4 4.4 9 1.5 2 0 .9
C 1 0.1 1 0.3 0 0.0 1 0.2 0 0 .0 1 0.1 0 0 .0 0 0.0 1 0 .5
D 6 0 .8 3 0.9 3 0 .7 1 0.2 5 1.7 5 0 .7 1 1.1 3 0 .5 3 1.4
AB 370 46.2 135 40.2 235 5 0.6 302 6 0.3 68 22.7 340 48.0 30 32.9 318 5 4.4 52 2 4.2
AC 3 0.4 0 0.0 3 0.6 1 0.2 2 0 .7 2 0 .3 1 1.1 3 0 .5 0 0 .0
AD 117 1 4.6 44 13.1 73 15.7 39 7 .8 78 26.1 11 0 15.5 7 7 .7 64 10 .9 53 24.6
BC 27 3 .4 16 4.8 11 2.4 20 4.0 7 2.3 22 3.1 5 5 .5 21 3.6 6 2 .8
BD 22 2.8 10 3.0 12 2.6 16 3 .2 6 2 .0 20 2 .8 2 2 .2 16 2 .8 6 2.8
CD 18 2 .2 11 3.2 7 1.5 2 0.4 16 5.4 12 1.7 6 6 .6 5 0.9 13 6 .1
ABC 36 4 .5 22 6.5 14 3.0 30 6.0 6 2 .0 27 3.8 9 9 .9 25 4 .3 U 5 .1

ABD 106 13.3 51 15.2 55 11.8 48 9.6 58 19.4 96 13.6 10 1 1.0 73 12.5 33 15.3
ACD 10 1 .2 6 1.8 4 0.9 0 0.0 10 3 .3 6 0.9 4 4 .4 2 0 .3 8 3.7
BCD 25 3.1 18 5.3 7 1.5 6 1.2 19 6.4 18 2 .5 7 7.7 13 2.2 12 5.6
ABCD 9 1.1 5 1.5 4 0.9 3 0.6 6 2.0 8 1.1 1 1.1 3 0 .5 6 2 .8
No ne 1 0.1 1 0 .3 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 0 0 .0 1 1.1 0 0.0 1 0.5
HBDI
a v o id an t
q uadrant
p a tte rn
A 4 0.5 3 0 .9 1 0.2 0 0 .0 4 1.3 2 0 .3 2 2.2 3 0.5 1 0 .5

B 2 0.2 0 0 .0 2 0.4 0 0 .0 2 0.7 I 0 .1 1 1.1 0 0 .0 2 0 .9
C 13 8 17.3 37 11.0 101 2 1.8 93 18.6 45 15.1 137 19.3 1 1.1 114 19.5 24 11.1
D 39 4 .9 9 2 .7 30 6 .5 38 7 .6 1 0.3 36 5.1 3 3.3 36 6.2 3 1.4
BC 1 0.1 0 0.0 1 0 .2 0 0 .0 1 0 .3 1 0.1 0 0 .0 0 0.0 1 0 .5

CD 23 2 .9 3 0.9 20 4 .3 22 4 .4 1 0.3 23 3 .2 0 0 .0 20 3.4 3 1.4
ABCD 1 0 .1 1 0 .3 0 0 .0 0 0.0 1 0 .3 0 0 .0 1 1.1 0 0.0 1 0 .5
N on e 592 74.0 28 3 84.2 30 9 66 .6 348 69.4 24 4 8 1.6 509 7 1.8 83 91.2 412 70.4 180 83.7
T otal 800 1 00.0 336 100.0 464 1 00.0 501 100.0 2 99 100.0 709 100.0 91 1 00.0 585 1 00.0 21 5 1 00.0
A v o i d a n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher (jj < . 0 0 1 ) for t h e MBTI
e l e m e n t s I , S, T, a n d J t h a n f o r t h e E, N, F, a n d P e l e m e n t s . Where
a v o id a n c e d i d o c c u r , i t was a l m o s t a lw a y s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Quadrant C.
HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance by MBTI Elements
The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e HBDI code c a t e g o r i e s — dominant (Code 1),
m o d e r a t e (Code 2 ) , an d a v o i d a n t (Code 3 ) — an d t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g
MBTI e l e m e n t s a r e sh own i n T a b l e 15. The t o t a l d o m i n a n t g r o u p was
d i v i d e d i n t o " s u p e r d o m i n a n t s " (HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e
r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s (67 <= HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e <= 100). The t o t a l
do m in a n t gr ou p f o r Quadrant A was a b o u t e q u a l l y d i v i d e d be tw een t h e
s u p e r d o m i n a n t and do m in an t subgroups. For Q ua dr a nt s B, C, and D, t he
do m in a n t group g r e a t l y exceed ed t h e s u p e r d o m in a n t group. Over 86% of
t h e s t u d y p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t A and o v e r 75% on
Q u a d r a n t B, w h i l e o n l y 16% w e r e d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t C, an d 39% on
Q u a d r a n t D.
Only in Q uadrant C were t h e r e r e l a t i v e l y h ig h p e r c e n ta g e s o f
a v o i d a n t s — f r o m 22.7% t o 26.3% f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s I , S, T, a n d J , and
f r o m 2.2% t o 16.0% f o r e l e m e n t s E, N, F, an d P. Percentages of
a v o i d a n t s on Q u a d r a n t s A a n d B w e r e a l l u n d e r 4%. On Q u a d r a n t D,
percentages o f a v o i d a n t s ra ng e d from 1.0% t o 4.4% f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s
E, N, F, a n d P, an d f r o m 8.3% t o 12.0% f o r e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J.
The q u a d r a n t d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s r e i n f o r c e the
findings already discussed. The d i f f e r e n c e s d e t a i l e d below a r e a l l
s i g n i f i c a n t (j> < .005, u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e n o t e d ) by t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t
of a s s o c i a t i o n .

76 77
T able 15
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , S uperdom inance, a n d A v o i d a n c e b y MBTI E l e m e n t s
MBTI e l e m e n t s
Total E I s N T F J P
HBDI
quadrant
N X N X N X N X N X N X N X N X N X
A
T o t a l dom inant 689 86.1 270 80.3 419 90.3 445 88.8 244 81.6 624 88.0 65 71.4 518 88.6 171 79.6
Superdominant [346 43.2] [117 34.8] [229 49.31 [241 48.1] [105 35.1] (336 47.4] [ 10 11.0] [279 47.7] I 67 31.2]
Dom inan t [343 42.9] [153 45.5] [190 41.0] [204 40.7] [139 46.5] [288 40.6] I 55 60.4] [2 39 40.9] [104 48.4]
M oderate 106 13.3 62 18 .5 44 9.5 56 11.2 50 16.7 83 11.7 23 25.3 64 10.9 42 19.5
Avoidant 5 0 .6 4 1.2 1 0.2 0 0.0 5 1.7 2 0.3 3 3.3 3 0 .5 2 0.9
B
T o t a l d o m in a n t 606 75.7 263 78.3 343 73.9 435 86.8 171 57.2 538 75.9 68 74.7 478 81.7 128 59.5
Superdominant [138 17.2] ( 61 18 . 2 ] [ 77 16.6] [123 24.5] [ 15 5.0] [124 17.5] [ 14 15.4] [1 2 3 21.0] [ 15 7.0]
Dom inan t [468 58.5] [202 60.1] [2 6 6 57.3] [312 62.3] [156 52.2] [414 58.4] [ 54 59.3] [3 55 60.7] [113 52.5]
M oderate 190 23.8 72 21.4 118 25.4 66 13.2 124 41.5 169 23.8 21 23.1 107 18.3 83 38.6
Avoidant 4 0.5 1 0.3 3 0.7 0 0.0 4 1.3 2 0 .3 2 2.2 0 0.0 4 1.9
C
T o t a l d o m in a n t 129 16.1 79 23.5 50 10.8 63 12.6 66 22.1 96 13.5 33 36.3 72 12.3 57 26.5
Superdominant [ 13 1.6] [ 8 2.4] [ 5 1.1] [ 4 0.8] [ 9 3.0] [ 8 1.1] I 5 5.5] [ 9 1.5] [ 4 1.9]
Dom in ant [116 14.5] [ 71 21.1] [ 45 9.7] f 59 11.8] [ 57 19.1] [ 83 12.4] [ 28 30.8] [ 63 10.8) ( 53 24.6]
M oderate 508 63.5 216 64.3 292 62.9 323 64.5 185 61.9 45 2 63.8 56 61.5 379 64.8 129 60.0
Avoidant 163 20.4 41 12.2 122 26.3 115 22.9 48 16.0 161 22.7 2 2.2 134 22.9 29 13.5
D
T o t a l d o m in a n t 313 39.1 148 44.0 165 35.5 115 23.0 198 66.2 275 38.8 38 41.8 179 30.6 134 62.3
Superdominant [ 62 7.8] [ 27 8.0] [ 35 7.5] [ 11 2.2] I 51 17.1] 1 54 7.6] I 8 8.8] [ 24 4.1] [ 38 17.7]
Dominant [251 31.3] [121 36.0] [1 30 28.0] [104 20.8] [147 49.1] [221 31.2] [ 30 33.0] [1 55 26.5] [ 96 44.6]
M oderate 424 53.0 175 52.1 249 53.7 326 65.0 98 32.8 375 52.9 49 53.8 35 0 59.8 74 34.4
A voidant 63 7.9 13 3.9 50 10.8 60 12.0 3 1.0 59 8.3 4 4.4 56 9.6 7 3.3
Total 8 00 100.0 336 100.0 464 100.0 501 100.0 299 100.0 709 100.0 91 100.0 585 100.0 215 100.0
N ote. B racketed (superdom inant and d o m in a n t) v a l u e s are inclu d ed in to ta l d o m in ant v a l u e .

The Quadrant A t o t a l dom ina nt p e r c e n t a g e s f o r e l e m e n t s I , S, T,
and J ( r a n g i n g f r o m 88.0% t o 90.3%) w e r e a l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r
t h a n t h o s e f o r E, N, F, a n d P ( r a n g i n g f r o m 71.4% t o 81.6%). Also,
Quadrant A p e r c e n t a g e s o f s u p e r d o m i n a n t s were g r e a t e r t h a n t h o s e f o r
d o m i n a n t s f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s I (49.3% v s . 41.0%), S (48.1% v s . 40.7%),
T (47.4% v s . 40.6%), and J (47.7% v s . 40.9%), w h i l e t h e r e v e r s e was
true f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s E (34.8% v s . 45.5%), N (35.1% v s . 46.5%), F
(11.0% v s . 60.4%), an d P (31.2% v s . 48.4%).
The Quadrant B t o t a l dom ina nt p e r c e n t a g e d i f f e r e n c e s f o r S o v e r
N (8 6 .8 % vs. 57.2%) an d f o r J o v e r P (81.7% v s . 59.5%) w e r e b o t h
significant. While Quad rant B su p erd o m in an ce p e r c e n t a g e s were l o w e r
t h a n t h e d o m i n a n c e p e r c e n t a g e s f o r a l l e l e m e n t s , t h e r e was s t i l l a
s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f su p e rd o m in a n t Ss (24.5%) t h a n o f
Ns (5.0%) and o f s u p e r d o m i n a n t J s (21.0%) t h a n o f Ps (7.0%). There
w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t differences on Q u a d r a n t B f o r the E l o r TF
scales.
F e w e r t h a n 36% o f a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s f o r a n y MBTI e l e m e n t w e r e
d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t C, w i t h b e t w e e n 60% and 65% b e i n g m o d e r a t e on
this quadrant. However, t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t differences fo r the
percentages of to tal dom inants f o r E (23.5%) o v e r I (10.8%), N
(22.1%) o v e r S (12.6%), F (36.3%) o v e r T (13.5%), and P (26.5%) o v e r
J (12.3%). The E, N, F, an d P e l e m e n t s a l s o h a d s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w e r
p e r c e n t a g e s o f a v o i d a n t s ( r a n g i n g from 2.2% t o 16.0%) t h a n d i d t h e I ,
S, T, a n d J e l e m e n t s ( r a n g i n g f r o m 22.7% t o 26.3%).
Q u a d ra n t D p e r c e n t a g e s o f t o t a l d o m in a n ts w ere t w i c e as l a r g e
f o r N an d P (66.2% and 62.3%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) a s f o r S a nd J (23.0% an d

30.6%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , an d w e r e s o m e w h a t g r e a t e r f o r E t h a n f o r I
(44.0% v s . 35.5%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ; j> < . 0 1 5 ) . The p e r c e n t a g e s o f Quad
r a n t D s u p e r d o m i n a n t s f o r N and P (17.1% and 17.7%, r e s p e c t i v e l y )
were also s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a te r than those for S and J (2.2%an d
4.1%, respectively). The p e r c e n t a g e s of m o d e r a t e s and avoidantsfo r
N and P were a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w e r t h a n t h o s e f o r S and J. There
were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s on Quadrant D f o r t h e TF s c a l e .
I n summary, t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J a l l showed s i g n i f i
c a n t l y h i g h e r dominance and s u pe rd om in a nc e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on Qu ad ra nt
A t h a n d i d t h e e l e m e n t s E, N, F, and P. For Quadrant B, t h e e l e m e n t s
S and J we re s i g n i f i c a n t l y more l i k e l y t o be dom ina nt and s u p e r d o m i
n a n t t h a n were e l e m e n t s N and P. By c o n t r a s t , t h e e l e m e n t s E, N, F,
and P showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and l o w e r
a v o i d a n c e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on Quadrant C t h a n d i d t h e e l e m e n t s I , S, T,
and J. On Quad rant D, t h e e l e m e n t s N and P were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r
on dominanc e and su p erd o m in an ce t h a n t h e e l e m e n t s S and J .
HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance by MBTI TJ Types
The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e HBDI c o d e c a t e g o r i e s f o r t h e MBTI TJ
ty p es (ISTJ, INTJ, ESTJ, ENTJ) i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 16, w ith the
total d o m in a n t group d i v i d e d into s u p e r d o m i n a n t s and theremaining
dominants, as d e s c r i b e d above. Because TJs c o n s t i t u t e d t h e l a r g e s t
p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , t h e f i n d i n g s f o r t h e TJ s w e r e
s i m i l a r t o t h e g e n e r a l t r e n d s d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r f o r the e n t i r e popu
lation .

80 81
Table 16
D istrib u tio n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D om inance, Superdom inance, a n d A v o i d a n c e b y MBTI T J T y p e s
MBTI T J type
ISTJ INTJ ESTJ ENTJ T otal TJs T otal in o n - T J s T otal

HBDI
quadrant
p attern N X N Z N Z N Z N Z N % N Z
A
T o t a l do m in an t 210 92.1 80 97 .6 127 87 .6 58 8 0 .6 475 90. 1 214 78 .4 689 86. I
Superdom inant 1138 60.5] [ 42 51 .2 ] I 65 44.8] [ 27 3 7 .5 ] [272 51.6] [ 74 27.1 ] [346 4 3 .2 ]
Dom inant [ 72 31.6] [ 38 4 6 .4 ] [ 62 42.8] [ 31 4 3 .1 ] [203 38 .5] [140 51.3] [343 42.9]
M oderate 18 7.9 1 1.2 18 12.4 13 18 .0 50 9 .5 56 20.5 106 13.3
A voidant 0 0.0 1 1.2 0 0.0 1 1.4 2 0.4 3 1.1 5 0.6
B
T otal dom in an t 196 86.0 51 62.2 130 89 .7 50 6 9.4 427 81.0 179 65 .6 606 75 .7
Superdom inant 1 59 25.9] [ 4 4 .9 ] I 41 28 .3 ] t 6 8 .3 ] [110 20.9] [ 28 10.3] [138 1 7 .2 ]
Dom inant [137 60.1] [ 47 57 .3] [ 89 6 1 .4 ] [ 44 6 1 .1 ] [317 60.1] [1 51 55 .3 ] [468 5 8 .5 ]
M oderate 32 14.0 31 37.8 15 10.3 22 3 0.6 100 19.0 90 3 3.0 190 23.8
A voidant 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 4 1.4 4 0.5
C
T o t a l d o m in an t 13 5 .7 7 8.5 20 13.8 13 18.1 53 10.1 76 27 .9 129 16.1
S uperdom inant I 2 0.9] I 0 0 .0 ] I 1 0.7] [ 3 4-2] I 6 1.2] [ 7 2.6] E 13 1 .6 ]
D om inant [ 11 4 .8 ] f 7 8 .5 ] [ 19 1 3 .1 ] [ 10 13.9] [ 47 8 .9 ] ( 69 25 .3] [116 1 4 .5]
M oderate 139 6 1.0 51 6 2.2 101 69.7 49 6 8.0 340 64 .5 168 6 1 .5 50 8 63 .5
A voidant: 76 3 3.3 24 29 .3 24 16.5 10 13.9 13 4 25.4 29 10.6 163 20.4
D
T otal dom in an t 44 19.3 41 50.0 34 2 3.4 45 6 2.5 164 31.1 149 5 4.6 313 39.1
Superdom inant [ 7 3 .1] [ 6 7.3] I o 0.0] [ 8 11.1] ( 21 4 .0 ] [ 41 15.0] [ 62 7 .8 ]
D om inant [ 37 1 6.2] [ 35 4 2.7] [ 34 23 .4] I 37 5 1 .4 ] [143 2 7 .1 ] [108 3 9 .6] [251 31.3]
M oderate 143 6 2.7 39 47.6 101 69.7 27 37.5 310 58.8 114 4 1.7 424 53 .0
A voidant 41 18.0 2 2 .4 10 6 .9 0 0 .0 53 10.1 10 3.7 63 7 .9
T otal 228 1 00.0 82 100.0 145 100.0 72 1 0 0.0 527 100.0 273 100.0 800 100.0
N ote. B racketed (superdom inant and d o m in a n t ) v a l u e s are in cluded in to ta l dom inant v a l u e .

Over 80% o f e a ch TJ ty p e was dom ina nt on Quadrant A, w i t h s u p e r
d o m i n a n t s e x c e e d i n g t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s f o r a l l b u t t h e ENTJ
type. P e r c e n t a g e s o f m o d e r a t e s on Q u a d r a n t A w e r e a l l u n d e r 20%,
w i t h a v o i d a n t s u n d e r 2%. The T J s a s a g r o u p s h o w e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y
h i g h e r Q uadrant A dom inance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n th a n d id n o n -T J s, w ith
90.1% t o t a l d o m i n a n t s f o r T J s v e r s u s 78.4% f o r n o n - T J s . M oreover,
51.6% o f t h e T J s w e r e s u p e r d o m i n a n t v e r s u s 27.1% o f t h e n o n - T J s ,
w h i l e 38.5% o f TJs were r e m a i n i n g d o m in a n ts v e r s u s 51.3% o f no n-TJs.
For Quadrant B, t h e TJs formed two d i s t i n c t g r o u p s , t h e STJs and
t h e NT Js. The STJs w e r e h i g h e r i n t o t a l d o m i n a n t s (86.0% f o r I S T J
and 89.7% f o r ESTJ) t h a n t h e NTJs (62.2% f o r INTJ an d 69.4% f o r
ENTJ), a d i f f e r e n c e due t o t h e l a r g e r p e r c e n t a g e s o f s u p e r d o m i n a n t s
f o r t h e STJs (25.9% f o r ISTJ and 28.3% f o r ESTJ) compared w i t h t h o s e
f o r t h e NTJs (4.9% f o r INTJ an d 8.3% f o r ENTJ). The p e r c e n t a g e s f o r
t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s were s i m i l a r f o r a l l T J s , r a n g i n g from 57.3%
t o 61.4%. The TJs as a group were h i g h e r i n t o t a l d o m in a n ts a t 81.0%
t h a n t h e n o n - T J s a t 65.6%, and l o w e r i n m o d e r a t e s a t 19.0% t h a n t h e
n o n - T J s a t 33.0%.
F o r Q u a d r a n t C, t h e TJ s a g a i n f o r m e d tw o d i s t i n c t g r o u p s , t h e
ETJ s and t h e I T J s . The d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e r e f l e c t e d c h i e f l y i n t h e
p e r c e n t a g e s o f t o t a l d o m in a n ts and a v o i d a n t s . The ITJs were lo w e r i n
to tal dom inants (5.7% f o r I S T J and 8.5% f o r INTJ) t h a n t h e ETJs
(13.8% f o r ESTJ an d 18.1% f o r ENTJ), w h i l e t h e ETJs w e r e l o w e r i n
a v o i d a n t s (16.5% f o r ESTJ and 13.9% f o r ENTJ) t h a n t h e I T J s (33.3%
f o r ISTJ and 29.3% f o r INTJ). The TJs as a group were s i g n i f i c a n t l y
l o w e r i n t o t a l d o m i n a n t s a t 10.1% t h a n t h e n o n - T J s a t 27.9%, w h i l e

t he n o n - T J s were lo w e r i n a v o i d a n t s a t 10.6% t h a n t h e TJs a t 25.4%.
For Quadrant D, t h e TJs formed t h e same two groups as f o r Quad
r a n t B, t h e NTJs and t h e S T J s , b u t w i t h e s s e n t i a l l y o p p o s i t e o u t
comes. The NTJs w e r e h i g h on t o t a l d o m i n a n t s (50.0% f o r INTJ and
62.5% f o r ENTJ) an d l o w on m o d e r a t e s (47.6% f o r INTJ and 37.5% f o r
ENTJ) an d a v o i d a n t s (2.4% f o r INTJ an d 0% f o r ENTJ). The ST Js w e r e
low on do m in a n ts (19.3% f o r ISTJ and 23.4% f o r ESTJ), h i g h on moder
ates (62.7% f o r I S T J and 69.7% f o r E S T J) , and r e l a t i v e l y h i g h on
a v o i d a n t s (18.0% f o r I S T J and 6.9% f o r ESTJ). As a g r o u p , t h e TJs
were l o w e r a c r o s s t h e bo a rd on d o m i n a n t s (31.1% t o t a l d o m i n a n t s , 4.0%
superdom inants, and 27.1% r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s ) t h a n t h e n o n - T J s
(54.6% t o t a l d o m i n a n t s , 15.0% s u p e r d o m i n a n t s , and 39.6% r e m a i n i n g
d o m in a n ts ) . The TJs were a l s o h i g h e r on m o d e r a te s a t 58.8% t h a n t h e
n o n - T J s a t 41.7%, an d h i g h e r on a v o i d a n t s a t 10.1% t h a n t h e n o n - T J s
at 3.7%.
I n summary, MBTI TJ t y p e s were more l i k e l y t o be b o t h do minant
and s u p e r d o m i n a n t on Quadrant A t h a n we re non-TJs. The TJ t y p e s were
a l s o more h i g h l y r e p r e s e n t e d by dominance on Quadrant B and were l e s s
l i k e l y t o be do m in an t on Qua drants C and D t h a n were non-TJs. While
t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e en t h e TJs and no n-T Js were s t r i k i n g , t h e r e were
a l s o some s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e TJ t y p e s t h e m s e l v e s . In
Quad rant A, su pe rd om in an ce was g r e a t e r t h a n dominance f o r a l l b u t t h e
ENTJ t y p e . F o r Q u a d r a n t s B an d D, t h e T J s d i v i d e d i n t o tw o g r o u p s ,
d e p e n d i n g on w h e t h e r t h e y w e r e f o r m e d w i t h N o r S. F o r Q u a d r a n t B,
t h e ST J s w e r e g r e a t e r t h a n t h e NTJs on b o t h d o m i n a n c e and s u p e r
dom inance. F o r Q u a d r a n t D, t h e NTJs w e r e h i g h e r on d o m i n a n c e and

l o w e r on a vo id a nc e t h a n were t h e STJs. For Quadrant C, t h e TJs were
d i v i d e d i n t o two gr o u p s b a s e d on w h e t h e r t h e y were formed w i t h E o r
I. The ETJs w e r e h i g h e r on d o m i n a n c e and l o w e r on a v o i d a n c e t h a n
wer e t h e IT J s .
HBDI Quadrant Mean S c o r e s f o r MBTI Types and Elements
HBDI q u a d r a n t mean s c o r e s f o r t h e MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , T J s , and
n o n - T J s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 17. An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e o f t h e
s c o r e s f o r ea ch q u a d r a n t d e m o n s t r a t e d s e v e r a l s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s
among t h e s e means.
Quadrant A means f o r ISTJ, ISTP, ESTJ, and INTJ were a l l g r e a t e r
t h a n 95 and were a l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r t h a n t h o s e f o r t h e r e m a i n
ing ty p e s . The mean o f 10 3. 0 f o r t h e I S T J t y p e was i n t h e s u p e r -
dom inant range ( g r e a t e r th an 100 ), and c o n f i r m s t h e f i n d i n g ( s e e
Ta bl e 16) t h a t a l m o s t t w i c e as many ISTJs were s u p e r d o m in a n t as were
i n t h e n o r m a l r a n g e (67 t o 100) f o r d o m i n a n t s i n Q u a d r a n t A. More
o v e r , t h e m ea ns f o r ISTP, ESTJ, a n d INTJ w e r e c l o s e t o t h e s u p e r -
do m in a n t l e v e l and were t h e o n l y o t h e r mean v a l u e s f o r any q u a d r a n t
even t o r e a c h t h e 90 r an ge . ENTP and combined F - t y p e s were l o w e s t on
Q u a d r a n t A.
The Quadrant A d i f f e r e n c e s f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s were j u s t what
would be e x p e c t e d from t h o s e found f o r t h e t y p e s . Quad rant A means
for I, S, T, and J , all close to the superdom inant level, were
g r e a t e r t h a n t h o s e f o r t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o p p o s i t e s , E, N, F, and P.
The TJ mean, a l s o a p p r o a c h i n g t h e s u p e r d o m in a n t l e v e l , was g r e a t e r
t h a n t h a t f o r non- TJs.

85
Table 17
Mean HBPI Quadrant Scor es b y MBTI Types and MBTI Elements
HBDI quadrant mean score

MBTI
type N Quadrant A Quadrant B Quadrant C Quadrant D
ISTJ 228 103.0 *** 87.6 *** 41.8 * 51.8 *

ISTP 51 96.7 *** 79.7 ** 46.7 * 62.5 *
ESTJ 145 95.2 *** 89.1 *** 48.8 * 55.4 *
ESTP 31 89.1 ** 81.5 ** 57.5 ** 61.9 *
INTJ 82 99.9 *** 73.1 * 43.8 * 70.3 **
INTP 56 89.4 ** 64.3 * 53.3 * 8 6 . 2 ***
ENTJ 72 89.6 ** 73.3 * 51.1 * 76.6 **
ENTP 44 83.9 * 69.1 * 57.0 ** 86.3 ***
Combined
F types 91 77.4 * 80.1 ** 63.9 ** 68.2 **
*** > ** > * £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001
MBTI
element
E 336 88.8 81.4 53.7 66.7

I 464 98.1 80.5 45.9 61.8
E vs . I £ < .0001 n.s. £ < .0001 £ < .0005
S 501 97.3 87.2 46.9 55.0

N 299 88.9 70.3 53.1 78.6
S vs . N £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001
T 709 96.4 81.0 47.3 63.3

F 91 77.4 80.1 63.9 68.2
T vs . F £ < .0001 n.s. £ < .0001 n.s.
J 585 96.6 84.2 47.0 59.2

P 215 87.7 71.7 55.0 76.4
J vs . P £ < .0006 £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001
TJ 527 98.5 83.8 45.3 59.1

Non-TJ 273 85.9 75.2 56.7 73.0
TJ v s . non-TJ £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001 £ < .0001

The Q u a d r a n t B m ean s f o r t h e tw o S J t y p e s , I S T J and ESTJ, w e r e
s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than those f o r the rem aining types, a finding
c o n f i r m e d by t h e f a c t t h a t Quadrant B means were g r e a t e r f o r e l e m e n t s
S a n d J t h a n f o r N an d P. A l t h o u g h t h e Q u a d r a n t B mean f o r TJs w a s
g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t f o r n on - T J s, this f i n d i n g was due e n t i r e l y t o t h e
d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e en J and P ( t h e T and F means were n o t d i f f e r e n t ) .
The Quadrant C means were h i g h e s t f o r t he combined F - t y p e s and
t h e two EP t y p e s , ENTP and ESTP, and were g r e a t e r f o r e l e m e n t s E, N,
F, an d P t h a n f o r t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o p p o s i t e s , I. S, T, and J. As
would be e x p e c t e d , t h e TJ mean f o r Quadrant C was lo w e r t h a n t h a t f o r
non-TJs.
The Q u a d r a n t D m e a n s f o r t h e t w o NP t y p e s , INTP and ENTP, w e r e
s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than those fo r the remaining types. Quadrant D
means were a l s o g r e a t e r f o r e l e m e n t s E, N, and P th an f o r e l e m e n t s I ,
S, a n d J. The TJ mean f o r Q u a d r a n t D was l o w e r t h a n t h a t f o r n o n -
TJs.
I n summary, the a n a ly s is of v a ria n ce findings for the quadrants
c o n f i r m th o s e found f o r th e c h i - s q u a r e a n a ly s e s d i s c u s s e d above.
Q u a d r a n t A mean s c o r e s w e r e g r e a t e r f o r t h e I , S, T, and J c o m b i n a
t i o n s , w i t h TJ a s t h e s t r o n g e s t f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p , and IS TJ a s t h e
s t r o n g e s t MBTI t y p e . Q u a d r a n t B m ea n s c o r e s w e r e g r e a t e r f o r SJ
com binations, w h i l e Q u a d r a n t C was s t r o n g e s t f o r Fs and EPs, and
Quadrant D, f o r t h e NP f u n c t i o n a l group.

87
Summary o f F i n d i n g s f o r t h e R e s e a r c h H yp o t h e s is
E a c h o f t h e t a b l e s a n a l y z e d f o r t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s sh ow s
e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same r e s u l t s , a l l i n a c co r d a n ce w i t h t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s
p r o v i d e d by t h i s h y p o t h e s i s — t h a t s e n s i n g ( S ) , t h i n k i n g (T ), and
j u d g i n g (J) i n d i v i d u a l s would be d o m i n a n t p r i m a r i l y i n Q u a d r a n t s A
and B i n t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h h i g h i n c i d e n c e o f AB d o m i n a n c e ,
and t h a t f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) would show p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant
C, while intuitives (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) would show p r e f e r e n c e
f o r Quad rant D.
The STJ c o m b i n a t i o n s w e r e m o s t h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e AB
d o m i n a n c e p a t t e r n , a s e x h i b i t e d by b o t h t h e MBTI t y p e a n a l y s i s and
t h e MBTI e l e m e n t a n a l y s i s . Moreover, a p p r o x i m a t e l y 89% o f t h e I , S,
T, and J i n d i v i d u a l s and 90% o f t h e TJs were dominant on Quadrant A,
an d o v e r h a l f o f t h o s e w e r e s u p e r d o m i n a n t . F o r Q u a d r a n t B, t h e
e l e m e n t s S a n d J w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y m or e l i k e l y t o be d o m i n a n t and
s u p e r d o m i n a n t t h a n w e r e e l e m e n t s N an d P. The TJ t y p e s w e r e a l s o
more h i g h l y r e p r e s e n t e d by dominance on Quadrant B. The a n a l y s i s o f
variance f i n d i n g s f o r Q ua dr a nt s A and B c o n f i r m t h o s e found f o r t h e
c h i - s q u a r e a n a ly s e s d i s c u s s e d above. Q u a d r a n t A mean s c o r e s w e r e
g r e a t e r f o r t h e I. S, T, and J c o m b i n a t i o n s , w i t h TJ as t h e s t r o n g e s t
f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p , and I S T J a s t h e s t r o n g e s t MBTI t y p e . Quadrant B
mean s c o r e s w e r e g r e a t e r f o r SJ c o m b i n a t i o n s . T h u s , t h e HBDI l e f t
h e m i s p h e r i c dominance o f MBTI s e n s i n g , t h i n k i n g , and j u d g i n g i n d i v i d
u a l s was s t r o n g l y s u p p o r t e d .

F - t y p e s showed a p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant C, w i t h t he e l e m e n t s E,
N, F, and P showi ng s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and
l o w e r a v o id a n c e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h a n d i d t h e e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J.
H o w e v e r , t h e E, N, F, P p r e f e r e n c e f o r Q u a d r a n t C was n o t so s t r o n g
a s w a s t h e I , S, T, a n d J p r e f e r e n c e f o r Q u a d r a n t s A o r B. A sig
n i f i c a n t , b u t n o t h y p o t h e s i z e d , d i f f e r e n c e f o r t h e El s c a l e was a l s o
f o u n d f o r Q u a d r a n t C, w i t h ETJs h i g h e r on d o m i n a n c e and l o w e r on
avoidance than ITJs. N o n - T J s w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y m ore l i k e l y t o be
do m in an t th a n w ere TJs. From t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e , t h e mean
s c o r e s f o r Quadrant C were g r e a t e s t f o r E, N, F, and P c o m b i n a t i o n s ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r Fs an d EPs. T h u s , t h e HBDI Q u a d r a n t C p r e f e r e n c e
f o r MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s was s u p p o r t e d .
Intuitives (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) p r e f e r r e d Quadrant D, w i t h
AD dominance more f r e q u e n t t h a n any o t h e r dominance p a t t e r n . Also,
t h e e l e m e n t s N and P were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on superd om ina nc e t h a n
w e r e t h e e l e m e n t s S and J . T J s w e r e l e s s l i k e l y t o be d o m i n a n t on
Quadrant D th an were non-TJs. Q u a d r a n t D mea n s c o r e s w e r e h i g h e s t
f o r t h e NP f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p , co n firm in g the ch i-sq u a re fin d in g s.
Thus, t h e h y p o t h e s i z e d p r e f e r e n c e o f MBTI i n t u i t i v e s and p e r c e p t i v e s
f o r HBDI Qu ad ra nt D was s u p p o r t e d .
I n summary, a l l r e l a t i o n s h i p s s p e c i f i e d by t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e
s i s b e t w e e n t h e HBDI an d t h e MBTI w e r e s u p p o r t e d b y t h e d a t a f r o m
th is s tu d y .

F i n d i n g s R e l a t i n g t o R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n 1
R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 1 a s k s w h e t h e r t h e r e w e r e MBTI d i f f e r e n c e s
b e t w e e n t h e 1 9 8 6 - 1 9 8 7 DSMC p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s t u d e n t s i n t h e s t u d y
p o p u l a t i o n and a gr oup o f DSMC s t u d e n t s from t h e 1982-1984 program
manag er c l a s s e s (N idiffer, 1984).
Comparison o f MBTI D i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r Two S e t s o f DSMC C l a s s e s
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s and MBTI e l e m e n t s f o r t he 1986-
1987 DSMC c l a s s e s ( s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n ) and t h e 1982-1984 DSMC c l a s s e s
(N id iffer, 1984) a r e p r e s e n t e d i n c o l u m n s 2 and 3 o f T a b l e 18, r e
spectively. There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tw e en t h e MBTI
t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t he two s e t s o f c l a s s e s . The most f r e q u e n t l y
o c c u r r i n g ty pe i n b o t h gr ou ps was ISTJ, which a c co un te d f o r o ve r 25%
o f e a c h group.
No d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e f o u n d f o r t h e E l , SN, o r JP s c a l e s , but
t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( £ < .0 1 1 ) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Ts a n d a
c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y s m a l l e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Fs i n t h e 1986-1987 grou p t h a n
i n t h e 1982-1984 group, though T was much more f r e q u e n t i n each gr oup
t h a n was F. T h is i n c r e a s e i n t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f Ts was a l s o found i n
t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j3 < . 0 4 7 ) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f TJ s i n t h e s t u d y
p o p u l a t i o n t h a n i n t h e 1982-1984 c l a s s e s .
Summary o f F i n d i n g s f o r R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 1
The f i n d i n g s f o r R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 1 i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e two s e t s
o f DSMC c l a s s e s were q u i t e s i m i l a r i n t h e i r MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s , w ith

90
T able 18
Comparison of MBTI Types and MBTI Elements for 1986-87 DSMC Program
Manager Students and Other Selected Managerial Populations
M ilitary and
1986-1987 1982-1984 c iv ilia n army Managers and Federal .
W O T 'T
U U 4 J. DSMC classes DSMC classes8 executives" adm inistrators11 executives0
type N - 811 N - 595 N - 60 N - 7,463 N - 1,394
ISTJ 28.2Z 27.2Z 30.0Z 14.9Z 26.3Z
ISFJ 2.8 3.9 0.0 6.3 2.7
INFJ 1.1 1.3 1.7 3.1 1.8
INTJ 10.2 11.1 10.0 5.6 14.9
ISTP 6.3 5.9 1.7 2.7 5.4
ISFP 0.7 1.3 0.0 2.5 0.4
INFP 1.2 2.9 0.0 4.6 2.4
INTP 7.2 8.9 5.0 3.6 9.1
ESTP 4.0 3.9 6.7 2.7 2.0
ESFP 0.5 0.7 0.0 2.8 0.6
ENFP 1.9 2.0 0.0 6.9 2.4
ENTP 5.4 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.8
ESTJ 18.0 13.3 23.3 17.0 12.3
ESFJ 2.0 3.0 0.0 7.3 1.4
ENFJ 1.4 1.2 0.0 4.9 1.9
ENTJ 9.1 8.4 16.7 10.1 10.6
MBTI
element
E 42.2Z 37.5X 51.7Z 56.7Z 37.0Z
I 57.8 62.5 48.3 43.3 63.0
S 62.5 59.2 61.7 56.3 51.1
N 37.5 40.8 38.3 43.7 48.9
T 88.4 83.7 98.3 61.6 86.4
F 11.6 16.3 1.7 38.4 13.6
J 72.9 69.4 81.7 69.3 71.9
P 27.1 30.6 18.3 30.7 28.1
TJs 65.6Z 60.0Z 80.0Z 47. 7Z 64.1Z
aFrom "The Personality Factor: Software Technology and the 'Thinking Styles' of Program
Managers" by K. E. N idiffer, 1984, Program Manager, 13(4), 10-18.
^From "Executive Personality Types: A Comparison of M ilitary and C ivilian Leaders in a
S ingle O rg an ization” by J. E. DeWald. 1987, D is s e rta tio n A b stra c ts I n te r n a tio n a l, 47,
29S4A. !
cFrom Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myera-Briggs Type Indicator by
I. B. Myers & M. H. McCaulley, 1985, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
dFrom "Managers: F ederal Executives" by R. T. P ic k erin g , in C. P. Macdaid, M. H.
McCaulley, & R. I. Kainz, 1986, M yers-Bngf.a TyP° In d ic a to r: A tlas of Type Tables
(unnumbered pages), G ainesville, FC: Center for Applications ot Psychological Type.
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r re p r o d u c tio n pro hibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

t h e mo st f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g t y p e s (TJs) becoming even, more f r e q u e n t
over the approxim ately 3-year i n t e r v a l b e tw e e n th e two s e t s of
classes.
Findings R e la tin g to Research Question 2
Re s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 2 a s k s w h e t h e r t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e e n
t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and t h o s e f o r
t h r e e o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s from th e literatu re (DeWald,
1986/1987; Myers & McCaulley, 1985; P i c k e r i n g , 1986).
MBTI Comparison f o r Study P o p u l a t i o n

V e r s u s O t h e r M a n a g e r ia l P o p u l a t i o n s
The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n an d f o r t h e
t h r e e o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s from t h e l i t e r a t u r e a r e p r e s e n t e d
i n c o l u m n s 2, 4, 5, an d 6 , r e s p e c t i v e l y , o f T a b l e 18.
There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e e n t h e MBTI d i s t r i b u
tions f o r DeWald's (1986/1987) Army e x e c u t i v e s and t h e s t u d y p o p u l a
tion. I n b o t h g r o u p s, ISTJ was the most f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g t y p e ,
f o l l o w e d b y t h e o t h e r t h r e e TJ t y p e s . The d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e
MBTI s c a l e d i s t r i b u t i o n s were a l s o n o n s i g n i f i c a n t , except t h a t t h e r e
was a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Ts (j) < . 0 1 7 ) an d o f T J s (j 3 < .0 6 ) among
t h e Army e x e c u t i v e s t h a n i n the s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n .
The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e Myers and McCaulley (1985) man
a g e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s w e r e d i f f e r e n t (£_ < .0 0 1 unless o th erw ise
n o te d ) from th o s e f o r th e s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n . The m o s t f r e q u e n t l y
o c c u r r i n g ty p e f o r t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s was ESTJ, w i t h t h e

ISTJ p e r c e n t a g e o n l y a bo ut h a l f t h a t f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n . Most
o f t h e t y p e d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e r e l a t e d t o t h e TF s c a l e . In g e n e ra l,
t h e F t y p e s w e r e m o re h i g h l y r e p r e s e n t e d among t h e m a n a g e r s and
adm inistrators than in the study p opulation, w h i l e t h e r e v e r s e was
t r u e f o r the T types.
The MBTI s c a l e d i s t r i b u t i o n s were a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t
f o r t h e two gr oups. The mana ge rs and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s showed g r e a t e r
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r E t h a n f o r I , w h i l e I was more p r e v a l e n t i n t h e
study pop u latio n . W h i l e S, T, a n d J w e r e m o r e f r e q u e n t t h a n t h e i r
r e s p e c t i v e o p p o site s in both groups, t h e y were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more so
(j^ < . 0 3 6 ) for J in the study p o p u la tio n than in the M ye rs an d
McCaulley (1985) group. Moreover, t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f TJs was s i g n i f i
c a n t l y l o w e r f o r t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , t h e o n l y gr oup f o r
whi ch i t was un d e r 50%, t h a n f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n .
The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s for the Pickering (1986) f e d e r a l e x e cu
tives were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a
tion. Al though ISTJ was t h e modal t y p e i n b o t h gr ou ps , f o l l o w e d by
t h e o t h e r t h r e e TJ t y p e s , t h e r e were some s m a l l b u t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f
f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e tw o d i s t r i b u t i o n s . I n g e n e r a l , MBTI N t y p e s
(e.g., INTJ and INTP) w e r e m o re f r e q u e n t l y (j> < .0 01 ) r e p r e s e n t e d
among t h e f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s , w h i l e t h o s e f o r m e d w i t h S ( e . g . , I S T J
a nd ESTJ) w e r e m o re f r e q u e n t i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n . For th e fe d
e r a l e x e c u t i v e s , t h e S and N p e r c e n t a g e s were about e q u a l , w h i l e o v e r
62% o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n were Ss, a d i f f e r e n c e s i g n i f i c a n t a t j> <
.0001. Almost t w o - t h i r d s o f t he f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s were I co mbina
tio n s, compared w ith ju st over h alf of the study population

(£ < .017). T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s on t h e TF o r J P
d i m e n s i o n s o r f o r t h e TJ d i s t r i b u t i o n .
MBTI Comparison o f DSMC C i v i l i a n s Ver sus O t h e r M a n a g e r ia l P o p u l a t i o n s
Because c i v i l i a n managers were h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d i n two o f t h e
m a n a g e ria l groups from the l i t e r a t u r e (Myers & M cC au lley , 198 5;
P i c k e r i n g , 1 9 8 6 ) , t h e c i v i l i a n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n w e r e com
p a re d s e p a r a t e l y w i t h t h e s e two gr oups. The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s for
t h e c i v i l i a n p o r t i o n o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and t h e two groups from
t h e l i t e r a t u r e a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Table 19.
F o r t h e c i v i l i a n s i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , p e r c e n t a g e s o f Ns,
P s , a n d Fs h a v e i n c r e a s e d s l i g h t l y o v e r t h o s e f o r t h e e n t i r e s t u d y
p o p u l a t i o n , b r i n g i n g t h e i r MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s s o m e w h a t c l o s e r t o
t h o s e f o r t h e Myers and McCaulley (1985) group, enough c l o s e r i n t h e
c a s e o f t h e Ns an d Ps t o c o m p l e t e l y r e m o v e t h e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r
e n c e s t h a t w e r e f o u n d when t h e t o t a l s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n was u s e d f o r
t h e co m p a r is o n .
N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e r e a r e s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tw e en t h e
MBTI t ype d i s t r i b u t i o n s . Both groups we re more l i k e l y t o be STJ t h a n
a n y o t h e r t y p e g r o u p i n g , b u t t h e m a n a g e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s w e r e
m o s t l i k e l y t o be E S T J s , w h i l e t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s w e r e
m ost lik ely t o be I S T J s . The F.I d i f f e r e n c e is sig n ifican t (j> <
. 0 0 1 ) , w i t h I s c o n s t i t u t i n g m o re t h a n h a l f o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n
c i v i l i a n s w h i l e Es c o n s t i t u t e a m a j o r i t y o f t h e managers and a d m i n i s
trators. Though t h e m a j o r i t y o f b o t h g r o u p s w e r e Ts, T t y p e s w e r e
more p r e v a l e n t among t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s , while F types

Table 19
Comparison of MBTI Types and MBTI Elements for 1986-87
DSMC C i v i l i a n Program Manager Students and
Other C i v i l i a n Managers and Adm inistrators
1986-1987 Managers and Federal h

MBTI DSMC c i v i l i a n s a d m i n is t ra t o rs ex ecutives 0
type N - 230 N - 7,463 N =■ 1,394
ISTJ 22.62 14.92 26.32

ISFJ 3.0 6.3 2.7
INFJ 1.3 3.1 1.8
INTJ 12.6 5.6 14.9
ISTP 5.7 2.7 5.4
ISFP 1.3 2.5 0.4
INFP 1.3 4.6 2.4
INTP 10.0 . 3.6 9.1
ESTP 4.4 2.7 2.0
ESFP 0.0 2.8 0.6
ENFP 3.5 6.9 2.4
ENTP 8.3 4.9 5.8
ESTJ 15.2 17.0 12.3
ESFJ 1.7 7.3 1.4
ENFJ 3.0 4.9 1.9
ENTJ 6.1 10.1 10.6
MBTI
element
E 42.22 56.72 37.02

I 57.8 43.3 63.0
S 53.9 56.3 51.1
N 46.1 43.7 48.9
T 84.8 61.6 86.4
F 15.2 38.4 13.6
J 65.7 69.3 71.9

P 34.3 30.7 28.1
TJs 56.52 47.72 64.12
aFrom Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briees

Type I n d i c a t o r by I.TTI Myers & M. H. McCaulley, 198b, Palo Alto, CAT
Consulting Psychologists Press.
From "Managers: F e d e r a l E x e c u t i v e s " by R. T. P i c k e r i n g , i n C. P.
Macdaid, M. H. McCaulley, & R. I. Kainz, 1986, M y e r s - B r i p e s Type
I n d ic a to r : A tl as of Type Tables (unnumbered pages,), G a in e sv i l le , FL:
Center fo r Applications of Psychological Type.

were more f r e q u e n t l y r e p r e s e n t e d among t he managers and a d m i n i s t r a
tors. TJ t y p e s s t i l l d o m i n a t e b o t h g r o u p s , b u t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s
almost 10 p e r c e n t a g e p o i n t s l e s s t h a n i t was b e tw e en t h e t o t a l s t u d y
p o p u l a t i o n and t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . Nonetheless, t h e TJ
rep resen tatio n is s t i l l sig n ifican tly (j> < . 0 0 1 ) g r e a t e r for the
s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s t h a n f o r t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s .
The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s and
the Pickering (1986) f e d e r a l executives show no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r
ences fo r ty p e, e le m e n t, or TJs. The l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e i s f o r t h e
J P s c a l e ( £ < . 0 5 4 ) , w h e r e t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f Ps f o r
t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s has r e s u l t e d i n a l a r g e r p e r c e n t a g e o f
Ps t h a n i s found f o r t h e f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s .
While t h e r e a r e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e en t h e MBTI d i s t r i
b u t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n on t h e one hand and t h e t h r e e mana
g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s on t h e o t h e r , t h e d i f f e r e n c e s a p p e a r t o be j u s t o f
degree. A l l f o u r g r o u p s a r e d o m i n a t e d b y TJ t y p e s and h a v e g r e a t e r
p e r c e n t a g e s o f S, T, an d J i n d i v i d u a l s t h a n o f N, F, and P i n d i v i d
uals. The E l s c a l e i s t h e o n l y one f o r w h i c h t h e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e
d irectio n al. More t h a n h a l f o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n an d o f t h e
f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s a re I s , w h i l e o ve r h a l f o f t h e Army e x e c u t i v e s and
t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e Es. Even t h e v e r y s t r o n g F - t y p e
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r t he managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , much h i g h e r t h a n
t h a t f o r any o f t h e o t h e r p o p u l a t i o n s , c o n s t i t u t e d a m i n o r i t y i n t h a t
group. T hu s , t h e g e n e r a l p a t t e r n o f h e a v y TJ r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , w i t h

m a j o r i t i e s o f S, T, and J i n d i v i d u a l s , p r e v a i l s i n a l l p o p u l a t i o n s .
The g e n e r a l s i m i l a r i t y o f t h e MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s for the study
p o p u l a t i o n an d t h e t h r e e m a n a g e r i a l g r o u p s i s s t r e n g t h e n e d b y t h e
c o m p a r i s o n s b e tw e en t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s and t h e two mana
g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s which were l a r g e l y c i v i l i a n , where t h e d i f f e r e n c e s
a r e a t t e n u a t e d i n t h e one c a s e and c o m p l e t e l y removed i n t h e o t h e r .
F i n d i n g s R e l a t i n g t o R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 3
R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 3 a s k s w h e t h e r t h e r e were MBTI or HBDI d i f f e r
e nc es be tw e en m al e s and f e m a l e s .
MBTI Types and MBTI El em en ts f o r Males and Females
Tab le 20 d i s p l a y s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and
TJ t y p e s f o r m a l e s and f o r f e m a l e s . Approximately tw o -th ird s of the
m a l e a w e r e TJ t y p e s a s c o m p a r e d w i t h l e s s t h a n h a l f o f t h e f e m a l e s
( £ < .007), a d i f f e r e n c e d e m o n s t r a t e d p r i m a r i l y f o r ISTJ s, where t h e
p e r c e n t a g e o f m a l e s was more t h a n t w i c e t h a t o f f e m a l e s . Almost t w o -
t h i r d s o f th e m ale s were Ss, as com pared w i t h l e s s th a n h a l f o f t h e
f e m a l e s (ja < .013). Al though b o t h m al e s and f e m a l e s i n t h i s popula
t i o n were p r e d o m i n a n t l y Ts, f e m a l e s showed g r e a t e r F r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
t h a n d i d m a l e s (ja < . 0 5 5 ) . T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s
b e t w e e n m al e s and f e m a l e s on t he El o r JP d i m e n s i o n s .
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r Males and Females
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI dominance and a v o id a n c e p a t t e r n s for
m ales and for fem ales are presented in Table 21. M ales were

97
Table 20
MBTI Types and MBTI Eleme nts by Sex
Male Female To t a l
MBTI
type N % N % N %
ISTJ 222 29 . 2 7 14.0 229 28.2

ISTP 47 6 .2 4 8.0 51 6.3
ESTP 30 3.9 2 4,0 32 4.0
ESTJ 138 18.1 8 16.0 146 . 18.0
INTJ 78 10 .3 5 10.0 83 10.2
INTP 53 7 .0 5 10.0 58 7.2

ENTP 39 5 .1 5 10.0 44 5.4
ENTJ 70 9.2 4 8 .0 74 9 .1
Combined
F types 84 11.0 10 20.0 94 1 1.6
Total 761 100.0 50 1 00.0 811 100.0
MBTI
e le m e n t
E 317 4 1 .7 25 50 .0 342 42.2

I 444 5 8 .3 25 50 .0 469 5 7 .8
S 484 63 .6 23 4 6 .0 507 6 2 .5
N 277 36.4 27 54 .0 304 3 7 .5
T 677 89 .0 40 80 .0 717 88.4

F 84 11.0 10 20.0 94 1 1.6
J 559 73 .5 32 64 .0 591 72 .9
P 202 26 .5 18 3 6 .0 220 27 .1
TJs 508 6 6.8 24 48.0 532 6 5 .6

Non-TJs 253 3 3 .2 26 52 .0 279 34.4

98
Tabl e 21
HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s by Sex
HBDI Male Female Total

dom inant
quadrant
pattern N % N % N %
A 35 4.7 3 6 .1 38 4.8
B 11 1.5 0 0 .0 11 1. 4
C 1 0.1 0 0 .0 1 0.1
D 6 0.8 0 0 .0 6 0.8
AB 356 47.4 14 28 .6 370 4 6 .2

AC 3 0.4 0 0 .0 3 0.4
AD 112 14.9 5 10.2 117 14.6
BC 22 2 .9 5 10.2 27 3.4
BD 22 2 .9 0 0 .0 22 2.8
CD 14 1.9 4 8 .2 18 2.2
ABC 32 4.3 4 8 .2 36 4.5

ABD 102 13.6 4 8 .2 106 13.3
ACD 6 0 .8 4 8 .2 10 1.2
BCD 20 2.7 5 10.2 25 3.1
ABCD 8 1.1 1 2 .0 9 1.1
None 1 O.i 0 0 .0 1 0.1
HBDI
avoidant
quadrant
p attern
A 3 0.4 1 2.0 4 0 .5
B 2 0.3 0 0 .0 2 0 .2
C 138 18.4 0 0.0 138 17.3

D 37 4.9 2 4.1 39 4.9
BC 1 0.1 0 0 .0 1 0.1
CD 23 3 .1 0 0.0 23 2 .9
ABCD 1 0.1 0 0.0 1 0.1
None 546 72.7 46 93 .9 592 74.0
Total 751 100.0 49 100.0 800 1 00.0

r e p r e s e n t e d more f r e q u e n t l y ( £ < . 0 0 0 1 ) among t h e t h r e e most f r e q u e n t
p a t t e r n s , AB, AD, an d ABD, a t a b o u t 76% t h a n w e r e f e m a l e s a t 47%.
F e m a l e s , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on p a t t e r n s
t h a t i n c l u d e d Quadrant C dominance.
Only 6% o f t h e f e m a l e s sh o w e d a v o i d a n c e t o a n y q u a d r a n t , and
none o f t h o s e t o Quadrant C, w h i l e o v e r a q u a r t e r o f t h e m ale s showed
a v o i d a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y t o Q u a d r a n t C, a d i f f e r e n c e s i g n i f i c a n t a t
£ < . 002.
HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance f o r Males and Females
T a bl e 22 c o n t a i n s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d r a n t s f o r m ales
a n d f e m a l e s , w i t h t h e t o t a l d o m i n a n t s d i v i d e d i n t o t h o s e who w e r e
s u p e r d o m i n a n t (HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i
nants, who s c o r e d i n t h e n o r m a l dominance r an g e (67 t o 100).
Quadrant A showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r ( £ < . 0 0 2 ) r e p r e s e n t a
t i o n fo r males than fo r females. F u r t h e r m o r e , o v e r h a l f o f t h e male
d o m i n a n t s were s u p e r d o m i n a n t s , compared w i t h l e s s t h a n a q u a r t e r o f
the f e m a l e d o m i n a n t s (j> < . 0 0 1 ) . S ig n ifican tly (j^ < .0 0 0 1 ) more
f e m a l e s t h a n m al e s were dom ina nt on Quadrant C, w h i l e m ale s showed a
g r e a t e r t e n d e n c y t o a v o id a n c e on Quadrant C t h a n d i d f e m a l e s . There
were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tw e en m ales and f e m a l e s on Quad
r a n t s B an d D.
M ales showed g r e a t e r TJ , T, and S r e p r e s e n t a t i o n than did
fem ales, who showed g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e s o f Ns and Fs. Only f o r t h e

100
Table 22
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Quadrant Dominance,

Sup er do mi na nc e, and Avoidance by Sex
Male Female Total

HBDI
quadrant
N % N % N %
A
T o t a l dominant 654 87 . 1 35 71.4 689 8 6 .1
Superdominant [338 45.0] [ 8 16. 3] [346 43.2]
Dominant [316 42.1] [ 27 55.1] [343 4 2 .9 ]
Moderate 93 12 .4 13 26.5 106 13.3
Av o id a n t 4 0.5 1 2 .0 5 0 .6
B
T o t a l dominant 573 76.3 33 67 .3 606 75.7
Superdominant [133 17. 7] [ 5 1 0 .2] [138 17.2]
Dominant [440 58.6] [ 28 57.1] [468 5 8 .5 ]
Moderate 174 23 .2 16 32.7 190 23.8
Av oi da nt 4 0.5 0 0 .0 4 0.5
C
T o t a l dominant 106 14.1 23 46.9 129 16.1
Superdominant [ 9 1.2] [ 4 8 .1] [ 13 1 .6 ]
Dominant [ 97 12.9] [ 19 38 .8 ] [116 14.5]
Moderate 482 64.2 26 53.1 508 63.5
Av oi da nt 163 21.7 0 0 .0 163 2 0 .4
D
T o t a l dominant 290 3 8 .6 23 46.9 313 39.1
Superdominant [ 55 7. 3 ] [ 7 14.3] I 62 7.8]
Dominant [235 31.3] [ 16 3 2 .6 ] [251 31.3]
Moderate 400 53 .3 24 4 9 .0 424 53 .0
A vo i da nt 61 8 .1 2 4.1 63 7 .9
Total 751 1 0 0 .0 49 1 0 0 .0 800 1 0 0 .0
Note. B r a c k e t e d ( s u p e r d o m i n a n t and do m ina nt) v a l u e s a r e i n c l u d e d i n

t o t a l dom ina nt v a lu e .

SN d i m e n s i o n , h o w e v e r , was t h e d i f f e r e n c e one o f d i r e c t i o n r a t h e r
than degree. I n t u i t i v e s (Ns) w e r e i n t h e m a j o r i t y among f e m a l e s ,
w h i l e m al e s we re p r e d o m i n a n t l y s e n s o r s (Ss).
Males were much more f r e q u e n t l y dom inant and even s u p e r d o m i n a n t
on Qu a dr a nt A t h a n were f e m a l e s . Fem ales showed a s t r o n g dominance
p r e f e r e n c e f o r Q u a d r a n t C, w h i l e m a l e s w e r e m o re i n c l i n e d t o be
m o d e r a t e o r a v o i d a n t on t h i s q u a d r a n t .
F i n d i n g s R e l a t i n g t o R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 4
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 4 a s k s w h e t h e r t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s in the
MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n s among t h e b r a n c h e s o f t h e armed s e r v i c e s .
D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and El e m e n ts f o r Each Branch o f S e r v i c e
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , elem ents, and TJs a r e shown i n
Table 23. Alt h o u gh t h e f o u r TJ t y p e s were t h e most f r e q u e n t f o r a l l
s e rv ic e branches and f o r t h e n o n s e r v i c e g o v e r n m e n t m a n a g e r s , TJ
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n was s t r o n g e r (p^ < .0 8 9 ) f o r t h e Army t h a n f o r t h e
m an a g e rs i n t h e o t h e r b r a n c h e s o r i n government o f f i c e s . Managers i n
all three branches of t h e armed s e r v i c e s were r e p r e s e n t e d signifi
c a n t l y ( £ < .049) more t h a n were t h e government manag ers on t h e ISTJ
type. A s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p_ < . 0 0 0 1 ) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f g o v e r n m e n t
m a n a g e r s , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e r e i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) t h a n was t h e c a s e
f o r t h e armed f o r c e s m an a ge rs , who were p r e d o m i n a n t l y s e n s o r s (Ss).

102
T ab le 23
MBTI Types and MBTI Elements by Branch of Service
Government
Army Air Force Navy and industry Total
MBTI
type N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z
ISTJ 83 33.9 57 23.1 79 31.0 10 15.6 229 28.2

ISTP 17 6.9 16 6.5 16 6.3 2 3.1 51 6.3
ESTP 9 3.7 11 4.4 10 3.9 2 3.1 32 4.0
ESTJ 54 22.0 42 17.0 40 15.7 10 15.6 146 18.0
INTJ 17 6.9 32 12.9 25 9.8 9 14.1 83 10.2
INTP 18 7.3 19 7 .; 15 5.9 6 9.4 58 7.2
ENTP 7 2.9 14 5.7 15 5.9 8 12.5 44 5.4
ENTJ 20 8.2 20 8.1 25 9.8 9 14.1 74 9.1
Combined
F types 20 8.2 36 14.6 30 11.7 8 12.5 94 11.6
T otal 245 100.0 247 100.0 155 100.0 64 100.0 811 100.0
MBTI
element
E 99 40.4 106 42.9 102 40.0 35 54.7 342 42.2

I 146 59.6 141 57.1 153 60.0 29 45.3 469 57.8
S 175 71.4 146 59.1 159 62.4 27 42.2 507 62.5

N 70 28.6 101 40.9 96 37.6 37 57.8 304 37.5
T 225 91.8 211 85.4 225 88.2 56 87.5 717 88.4

F 20 8.2 36 14.6 30 11.8 8 12.5 94 11.6
J 188 76.7 174 70.5 185 72.6 44 68.8 591 72.9

P 57 23.3 73 29.5 70 27.4 20 31.2 220 27.1
TJs 174 71.0 151 61.1 169 66.3 38 59.4 532 65.6
Non-TJs 71 29.0 96 38.9 86 33.7 26 40.6 279 34.4
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of th e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

103
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r Each Branch o f S e r v i c e
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e HBDI dominance and a v o id a n c e p a t t e r n s
f o r e a ch b r a n c h o f s e r v i c e and f o r t h e government manage rs a r e p r e
s e n t e d i n Ta b le 24. There a r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n p a t t e r n
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , e i t h e r f o r domina nce o r f o r a v o id a n c e , among managers
i n t h e t h r e e b r a n c h e s o f s e r v i c e and o t h e r government a g e n c i e s .
HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance f o r S e r v i c e Branches
T a b l e 25 c o n t a i n s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d r a n t s f o r t h e
m a n a g e r s i n e a c h b r a n c h o f s e r v i c e and i n t h e g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s ,
with t h e t o t a l d o m i n a n t s d i v i d e d i n t o t h o s e who were s u p e rd o m in a n t
(HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s , who s c o r e d
i n t h e n o r m a l d o m i n a n c e r a n g e (67 t o 100). M a n a g e r s i n t h e Army
s h o w e d a s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j> < . 0 1 ) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Q u a d r a n t B
dominance t h a n d i d t h o s e i n t h e o t h e r b r a n c h e s o r i n t h e government
agencies. M a n a g e r s i n t>»\? g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s w e r e s o m e w h a t m or e
(j> < . 0 5 6 ) i n c l i n e d t o be d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t D t h a n w e r e t h o s e i n
any o f t h e armed s e r v i c e s b r a n c h e s . There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f
f e r e n c e s among t h e s e r v i c e b r a n c h e s and government a g e n c i e s on Quad
r a n t s A o r C.
The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r a l l s e r v i c e b r a n c h e s were e s s e n t i a l l y
alike, except for the s tr o n g presence of i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) among man
a g e r s i n t h e go vernment a g e n c i e s , as compared w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y o f

104
T ab le 24
HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant P atterns by Branch of Service
Government
HBDI Army Air Force Navy and industry Total
dominant
quadrant
p a tte rn N Z N X N Z N Z N Z
A 10 4.1 12 5.0 14 5.5 2 3.3 38 4.8

B 5 2.0 2 0.8 4 1.6 0 0.0 11 1.4
C 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1
D 2 0.8 4 1.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 0.8
AB 121 49.4 109 45.0 115 45.6 25 41.0 370 46.2

AC 1 0.4 2 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 0.4
AD 22 9.0 40 16.5 42 16.7 13 21.3 117 14.6
BC 9 3.7 6 2.5 11 4.4 1 1.6 27 3.4
BD 9 3.7 8 3.3 4 1.6 1 1.6 22 2.8
CD 4 1.6 3 1.2 9 3.6 2 3.3 18 2.2
ABC 14 5.7 6 2.5 14 5.5 2 3.3 36 4.5

ABD 37 15.1 32 13.2 30 11.9 7 11.5 106 13.3
ACD 2 0.8 5 2.1 1 0.4 2 3.3 10 1.2
BCD 7 2.9 7 2.9 6 2.4 5 8.2 25 3.1
ABCD 2 0.8 5 2.1 1 0.4 1 1.6 9 1.1
None 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 1 0.1
HBDI
avoidant
quadrant
p a tte rn
A 1 0.4 1 0.4 1 0.4 1 1.6 4 0.5

B 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.4 1 1.6 2 0.2
C 38 15.5 43 17.8 48 19.0 9 14.8 138 17.3
D 14 5.7 15 6.2 9 3.6 1 1.6 39 4.9
BC 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1

CD 11 4.5 5 2.1 7 2.8 0 0.0 23 2.9
ABCD 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 1 0.1
None 181 73.9 177 73.1 185 73.4 49 80.3 592 74.0
Total 245 100.0 242 100.0 252 100.0 61 100.0 800 100.0
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r re p r o d u c tio n p roh ibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

105 106
T able 25
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , S u p e r d o m i n a n c e ,
and A v o id a n c e by B ra n c h o f S e r v i c e
Governm ent
Army A ir Force Na vy and i n d u s t r y T otal
HBDI
quadrant
N Z N X N Z N X N X
A
T otal d o m in ant 209 85.3 211 8 7.2 217 86.1 52 85. 3 689 86.1
Superdom inant [ 98 40.0] [117 4 f c. 4 ] [107 42.4] [ 24 39.3] [346 4 3 .2 ]
D om inant m i 45.3] ( 94 38 8 ] [110 43.7] [ 28 45.9] [343 4 2 .9 ]
M oderate 35 14.3 30 12.4 33 13.1 8 13.1 106 13.3
A voidant 1 0.4 1 0.4 2 0 .8 1 L. 6 5 0 .6
B
T o tal d o m in an t 204 3 3.3 175 72 .3 185 7 3.4 42 68.9 606 7 5.7
S uperdom inant [ 57 23.3] [ 34 14.01 [ 42 16.7] [ 5 8 .2 ] [138 17.2 ]
Dom inant [147 60.0] [141 5 8 .3 ] [143 56.7] [ 37 60.7] [468 58.5]
M oderate 41 16.7 66 27.3 65 2 5.8 18 29.5 190 23.8
A voidant 0 0 .0 1 0.4 2 0 .8 1 1.6 4 0 .5
C
T o t a l dom inant 39 15.9 35 14.5 42 16.7 13 21.3 12 9 16.1
Superdom inant [ 3 1.2] I 4 1.7] I 4 1.6] [ 2 3 .3 ] I 13 1.6 ]
Dom inant [ 36 14 .7 ] [ 31 12.8] f 38 15 .1 ] [ 11 18.0] [116 1 4 .5 ]
M oderate 157 64.1 158 65.3 154 61.1 39 63.9 508 63.5
A voidant 49 20 .0 49 2 0.2 56 22.2 9 14.8 16 3 20.4
D
T otal d o m in ant 85 3 4.7 104 43.0 93 36 .9 31 50.8 313 39.1
Superdom inant [ 13 5.3] [ 22 9.1] [ 18 7.1] [ 9 14.7] I 62 7 .8 ]
Dom inant [ 72 29.4] [ 82 33 .9 ] I 75 29.8] [ 22 36.1] [251 3 1 .3 ]
M oderate 135 55.1 118 48.8 142 56 .4 29 4 7.5 424 53.0
A voidant 25 1 0.2 20 8.2 17 6.7 1 1 .6 63 7,9
T otal 245 1 00.0 242 100.0 252 100.0 61 100.0 800 1 00.0
N ote. B racketed (superdom inant and d o m in a n t) v a lu e s are included in to ta l dom inant v a l u e .

s e n s o r s ( S s ) among t h o s e i n t h e a r m e d s e r v i c e s . W h i l e t h e r e was
s u b s t a n t i a l l y g r e a t e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Quadrant B d o m in a n ts among
Army managers t h a n among t h e o t h e r s and a s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e
o f Quad rant D d o m in a n ts among manage rs i n government a g e n c i e s th an
among t h e o t h e r s , t h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e
b r a n c h e s o f t h e a r m e d s e r v i c e s and t h e g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s i n t h e
d i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI dominance o r a v o id a n c e p a t t e r n s .
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n 5 a s k s w h e t h e r t h e r e were MBTI o r HBDI d i f f e r
e n c e s b e tw e en c i v i l i a n and m i l i t a r y m anagers.
D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and El e m e n ts f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and TJs a r e p r e s e n t e d
i n T a b l e 26. More t h a n t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e m i l i t a r y m a n a g e r s a r e TJ
types, as compared w i t h j u s t o v e r h a l f o f t h e c i v i l i a n managers <
.001), a d i f f e r e n c e born e o u t by t h e f a c t t h a t the most f r e q u e n t MBTI
t y p e s f o r t h e c i v i l i a n s a r e n o t a l l TJ t y p e s — F t y p e s a r e t i e d w i t h
ESTJ f o r t h e second most f r e q u e n t t y p e . ISTJ, ESTJ, and ENTJ a r e a l l
s i g n i f i c a n t l y (jd < .004) g r e a t e r f o r t h e m i l i t a r y ma n a g e rs, w hile the
F t y p e s , INTJ, INTP, and ENTP a r e a l l g r e a t e r f o r t h e c i v i l i a n manag
ers .
While I , S, T, and J a r e a l l r e p r e s e n t e d i n g r e a t e r numbers th an
their respective opposites f o r b o t h m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n m an ag ers ,
there is a sig n ifican tly g r e a te r percentage o f Ss (j) < . 0 0 1 ) , Ts

108
Table 26
MBTI Types and MBTI Elements by

M i l i t a r y or C i v i l i a n S t a t u s
M ilitary C ivilian Total
MBTI
type N % N % N %
ISTJ 177 3 0 .5 52 2 2 .6 229 2 8.2

ISTP 38 6 .5 13 5 .7 51 6.3
ESTP 22 3 .8 10 4.3 32 4.0
ESTJ 111 19.1 35 15.2 146 18.0
INTJ 54 9 .3 29 1 2 .6 83 1 0 .2
INTP 35 6 .0 23 1 0 .0 58 7 .2
ENTP 25 4.3 19 8.3 44 5.4
ENTJ 60 10.3 14 6 .1 74 9.1
Combined
F types 59 1 0 .2 35 15.2 94 1 1 .6
Total 581 1 0 0 .0 230 1 0 0 .0 811 100.0
MBTI
e le m en t
E 245 42.2 97 42.2 342 42 .2

I 336 57 .8 133 5 7 .8 469 57 .8
S 383 65 .9 124 5 3 .9 507 62.5

N 198 34.1 106 4 6 .1 304 37 .5
T 522 89 .9 195 84 .8 717 8 8 .4

F 59 1 0 .1 35 15.2 94 1 1 .6
J 440 75.7 151 65.7 591 72.9

P 141 2 4 .3 79 34 .3 220 27.1
TJs 402 6 9 .2 130 5 6 .5 532 65 .6

Non-TJs 179 3 0 .8 100 4 3 .5 279 3 4 .4

109
(j^ < . 0 4 2 ) , a n d J s (j> < .0 04 ) f o r t h e m i l i t a r y m a n a g e r s t h a n f o r t h e
civ ilian s.
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e HBDI dominance and a v oi d a n c e p a t t e r n s
f o r t h e m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s a r e c o m p a r e d i n T a b l e 27.
There a r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n e i t h e r dominance o r a v o id a n c e
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n b e tw e en t h e m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n managers.
HBDI Dominance, Supe rdo minan ce, and Avoidance

f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s
T a b l e 28 c o n t a i n s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d r a n t s f o r m i l i
t a r y and c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s , w i t h t h e t o t a l d o m i n a n t s d i v i d e d i n t o
t h o s e who w e r e s u p e r d o m i n a n t (HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) a n d t h e
rem aining dominants, who s c o r e d i n t h e n o r m a l dominance range (67 t o
10 0) . T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r Q u a d r a n t A. For
Quad rant B, t h e r e was g r e a t e r (j> < .025) dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r
m i l i t a r y mana ge rs t h a n f o r c i v i l i a n s , a d iffe re n c e th a t c a r r ie d over
i n t o g r e a t e r (j>_ < .014) su p e rd o m in a n c e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n as w e l l .
On t h e o t h e r hand, c i v i l i a n mana ge rs showed g r e a t e r dominance
p r e f e r e n c e ( ^ < . 0 6 8 ) an d g r e a t e r s u p e r d o m i n a n c e p r e f e r e n c e (j3 <
.006) on Quadrant C, w h i l e m i l i t a r y m anagers showed g r e a t e r a v o id a n c e
for th is quadrant. C i v i l i a n s were a l s o sig n ifican tly (j> < . 0 1 9 )
h i g h e r on Quadrant D dominance t h a n were m i l i t a r y managers.

Table 27
HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s
by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S t a t u s
HBDI M ilitary C ivilian Total

dominant
quadrant
pattern N % N % N Z
A 29 5 .1 9 4.0 38 4.8
B 9 1 .6 2 0 .9 11 1 .4
C 1 0 .2 0 0 .0 1 0 .1
D 5 0 .9 1 0.4 6 0 .8
AB 275 4 7 .9 95 42.0 370 46.2

AC 3 0.5 0 0 .0 3 0.4
AD 77 1 3.4 40 17.7 117 14 .6
BC 19 3 .3 8 3 .5 27 3.4
BD 20 3.5 2 0.9 22 2 .8
CD 7 1 .2 11 4.9 18 2 .2
ABC 23 4.9 8 3 .5 36 4.5

ABD 75 13.1 31 13.7 106 13.3
ACD 5 0.9 5 2 .2 10 1 .2
BCD 14 2 .4 11 4.9 25 3 .1
ABCD 7 1 .2 2 0.9 9 1 .1
None 0 0 .0 1 0.4 1 0 .1
HBDI
avoidant
quadrant
pattern
A 1 0 .2 3 1.3 4 0 .5
B 0 0 .0 2 0.9 2 0 .2
C 108 18.8 30 13.3 138 17.3
D 30 5.2 9 4.0 39 4.9
BC 1 0 .2 0 0 .0 1 0 .1
CD 17 3.0 6 2 .7 23 2.9
ABCD 0 0 .0 1 0.4 1 0 .1
None 417 72.6 175 77 .4 592 7 4 .0
Total 574 1 0 0 .0 226 1 0 0 .0 800 1 0 0 .0

Ill
Table 28
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Quadrant Dominance, Superdominance,

and Avoidance by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S t a t u s
M ilitary C ivilian Total

HBDI
quadrant
N % N % N %
A
T o t a l dominant 499 86 .9 190 84.1 689 8 6 .1
Superdominant [255 4 4 .4 ] [ 91 4 0. 3] [346 43.2]
Dominant [244 42.5] [ 99 4 3. 8] [343 4 2 .9 ]
Moderate 74 12.9 32 14.1 106 13.3
Av oi da nt 1 0 .2 4 1 .8 5 0 .6
B
T o t a l dominant 447 77.9 159 7 0.4 606 75 .7
Superdominant [113 19.7] [ 25 1 1 .1] [138 17.2]
Dominant [334 5 8 .2 ] [134 5 9 .3 ] [468 5 8. 5]
Moderate 126 2 2 .0 64 28.3 190 23 .8
Av oi da nt 1 0 .2 3 1.3 4 0.5
C
T o t a l dominant 84 14.6 45 19.9 129 16.1
Su pe rdominant [ 4 0 .7 ] [ 9 4.0] [ 13 1 .6 ]
Dominant [ 80 13.9] [ 36 15.9] [116 14.5]
Moderate 364 63 .4 144 63.7 508 6 3.5
Av oi da nt 126 2 2 .0 37 16 .4 163 2 0 .4
D
T o t a l dominant 210 36 .6 103 4 5 .6 313 39 .1
Superdominant [ 38 6 .6] [ 24 1 0 .6] [ 62 7 .8 ]
Dominant [172 3 0 .0 ] [ 79 3 5. 0] [251 31 .3 ]
Moderate 317 55.2 107 47 .3 424 5 3 .0
Av oi da nt 47 8 .2 16 7.1 63 7 .9
Total 574 1 0 0 .0 226 1 0 0 .0 800 1 0 0 .0
Note. B r a c k e t e d ( su p e r d o m i n a n t and do m ina nt) v a l u e s a r e i n c l u d e d i n

t o t a l dominant v a l u e .
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of th e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

The m i l i t a r y - c i v i l i a n d i f f e r e n c e s found a r e l a r g e l y j u s t a m a t
te r of degree. The l a r g e r p e r c e n t a g e s o f S s , T s , J s , and T J s among
t h e m i l i t a r y managers do n o t change t h e f a c t t h a t t h e c i v i l i a n s a r e
a l s o p r e d o m i n a n t l y Ss, Ts, J s , and TJs. Moreover, t h e g r e a t e r r e p r e
sentation among m i l i t a r y mana ge rs on Quadrant B dominance and t h a t
among c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s on Q u a d r a n t s C and D d o m i n a n c e a r e m i n o r
d i f f e r e n c e s , r e l a t i v e t o t h e v e r y h i g h l e v e l o f d o m i n a n c e on Quad
r a n t s A an d B i n b o t h g r o u p s a nd the relativ ely low er level of
dominance on Qu ad ra nt s C and D i n b o t h gr oups.
R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n 6 asks w h e t h e r t h e r e were MBTI or HBDI d i f f e r
e n c e s b e tw e e n i n d i v i d u a l s a t h i g h e r m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l s ( m i l i t a r y r a n k
0- 5 o r 0 - 6 ; c i v i l i a n g r a d e GM-14 o r GM-15) and t h o s e i n m i d d l e man
agement ( m i l i t a r y r a n k 0 - 4 o r be lo w ; c i v i l i a n gr ade GM-13 or below).
D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types, E l e m e n t s , and TJs f o r Each Rank
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and TJs f o r h i g h - and
m i d d l e - r a n k e d managers a r e shown i n Tabl e 29. The d i s t r i b u t i o n s a r e
presented sep arately for m ilita ry and c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s at each
l e v e l , a s w e l l a s f o r t o t a l h i g h - r a n k e d m a n a g e r s and t o t a l m i d d l e -
ranked managers. H ig h - ra n k m an a g e rs a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( ^ < .048)
h i g h e r on I S T J and l o w e r on ESTJ t h a n a r e m i d d l e - r a n k e d m a n a g e r s .
This d i f f e r e n c e is a ls o ap p a re n t in the sig n ifican tly (j^ < .0 1 5 )

Rank
by
Elements
MBTI
and
Types
MBTI

higher E representation for the middle managers than for the high-
level managers.
T he re i s some e v id e n c e o f i n t e r a c t i o n b e tw e e n r a n k and m i l i t a r y
or c iv i li a n status. H i g h - r a n k i n g c i v i l i a n mana ge rs showed a g r e a t e r
(j> < . 0 1 ) p e r c e n t a g e o f T J s t h a n d i d m i d d l e - r a n k i n g c i v i l i a n s , b u t
t h i s d i f f e r e n c e d i d n o t e x i s t f o r t h e m i l i t a r y managers. There was
a l s o a s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f h i g h - r a n k e d m i l i t a r y managers
who were i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) t h a n t h e r e was f o r t h e m i d d l e - r a n k e d m i l i
tary m anagers, a difference th a t did not e x is t fo r the c i v i l i a n
managers.
HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r Each Rank
The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI dom inance and a v oi d a n c e p a t t e r n s for
h i g h - an d m i d d l e - r a n k e d m a n a g e r s , s e p a r a t e l y f o r c i v i l i a n an d f o r
m i l i t a r y a s w e l l a s c o m b i n e d , a r e g i v e n i n T a b l e 30. T h e r e a r e no
s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b a s e d on r a n k , e i t h e r f o r m i l i t a r y o r f o r
c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s , i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e HBDI d o m i n a n c e an d
avoidance p attern s.
HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance for Each Rank
Ta bl e 31 c o n t a i n s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d r a n t s f o r e a ch
rank, s e p a r a t e l y f o r m i l i t a r y and f o r c i v i l i a n as w e l l as combined,
with the total d o m in a n ts d i v i d e d i n t o t h o s e who were s u p e r d o m in a n t
(HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s , who s c o r e d
i n t h e n o r m a l dominance r an g e (67 t o 100). There were no s i g n i f i c a n t
d ifferen ces for Q uadrant A. For Q uadrant B, th ere was a
R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n o f th e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n proh ibited w ithout p e r m is s io n .

116 117
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. T a b l e 30
HBDI D o m i n a n t a n d A v o i d a n t Q u a d r a n t P a t t e r n s by Rank
High rank M id d le rank
in d u stry
HBDI M ilita ry C iv ilian T otal M ilitary C iv ilian T otal c iv i i i a n T otal
dom in an t
quadrant
p attern N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N X
A 11 4 .3 1 1.6 12 3.7 18 5 .7 6 5.8 24 5.7 2 3.4 38 4.8

B 5 2.0 0 0 .0 5 1.6 4 1.3 2 1.9 6 1.4 0 0.0 11 1.4
C 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 I 0.3 0 0 .0 1 0 .2 0 0 .0 L 0.1
D 3 1.1 0 0 .0 3 0.9 2 0 .6 1 1 .0 3 0.7 0 0.0 6 0.8
AB 11 9 4 6.3 28 43 .8 147 4 5.8 156 49.2 43 41.8 199 4 7 .4 24 40 .7 370 46.2

AC 3 1.1 0 0.0 3 0.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 0.4
AD 34 1 3.2 14 2 1.9 48 15 .0 43 1 3.6 13 12.6 56 13.3 13 22 .0 117 14.6
BC 9 3.5 2 3.2 11 3.4 10 3.2 6 5 .8 16 3.8 0 0.0 27 3.4
BD 6 2.3 . 0 0.0 6 1 .9 14 4.4 1 1.0 15 3 .6 1 1.7 22 2.8
CD 3 1.1 7 10.9 10 3.1 4 1.3 2 1.9 6 1.4 2 3.4 18 2.2
ABC 13 5 .1 1 1.61 14 4.4 15 4 .7 5 4 .9 20 4 .8 2 3 .4 36 4 .5

ABD 40 1 5.6 7 10.9 47 14.6 35 11.0 17 16.5 52 12.4 7 11.9 106 13.3
ACD 1 0 .4 2 3.1 3 0.9 4 1.3 1 1. 0 5 1 .2 2 3 .4 10 1.2
BCD 5 2 .0 1 1.6 6 1.9 9 2 .8 5 4.9 14 3 .3 5 8.5 25 3.1
ABCD 5 2.0 0 0.0 5 1.6 2 0.6 I 1.0 3 0 .7 1 1.7 9 1.1
None 0 0.0 1 1.6 1 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1
HBDI
a v o id a n t
quadrant
p attern
A 0 0.0 1 1.6 1 0 .3 1 0 .3 1 1.0 2 0.5 1 1.7 4 0.5

B 0 0 .0 1 1 .6 1 0.3 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 1 1.7 2 0.2
C 51 19.8 10 15.6 61 19.0 57 18.0 11 10.7 68 16.2 9 15.3 13 8 1 7.3
D 11 4 .3 1 1.6 12 3.7 19 6 .0 7 6.8 26 6.2 1 1.7 39 4.9
BC 1 0.4 0 0.0 1 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 I 0 .1

CD 6 2 .3 4 6.2 10 3.1 11 3 .5 2 1 .9 13 3 .1 0 0 .0 23 2.9
ABCD 0 0 .0 1 1.6 1 0.3 0 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0.0 *1 0 .1
None 188 73.2 46 71.9 234 72 .9 229 72 .2 82 79.6 311 7 4.0 47 79 .7 592 74.0
T otal 257 100.0 64 100.0 3 21 1 00.0 31 7 100.0 103 1 00.0 420 1 00.0 59 1 00.0 800 100.0
118 ' 119
T able 31
D istrib u tio n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , Superdom inance, an d A v o i d a n c e b y Rank
Hig h r a n k M id d le r a n k
Industry
M ilitary C iv ilian T otal M ilitary C iv ilian Total c iv ilia n Total
HBDI
quadrant
N X N % N X N X H X M X H % H X
A
T o t a l d o m in a n t 226 87.9 53 82.8 279 86.9 273 86.1 86 83.5 359 85.5 51 86.4 689 86.1
Superdominant (116 45.1] [ 28 43.7] (144 44.9] [139 43.8] [ 39 37.9] [17 8 42.4] [ 24 40.7] 1346 43.2]
Do min ant [110 42.8] I 25 39.1] ( 135 42.0] [134 42.3] [ 47 4 5.6] [181 43.1] [ 27 45.7] [343 42.9]
M o d e ra t e 31 12.1 9 14. 1 40 12.5 43 13.6 16 15.5 59 14.0 7 11.9 106 13.3
A voidant 0 0.0 2 3.1 2 0.6 1 0.3 I 1.0 2 0.5 I 1.7 5 0.6
B
T o t a l d o m in a n t 202 78.6 39 60.9 241 75.1 245 77.3 80 77.7 325 77.4 40 6 7.8 606 75.7
Superdominant [ 69 19.1] [ 5 7.8] [ 54 16.8] [ 64 20.2] [ 16 15.5] [ 80 19.1] I 4 6.8] [13 8 17.2]
Domi nan t (153 59.5] [ 34 53.1] [187 58.3] [181 57.1] [ 64 62.1] [24 5 58.3] [ 36 61.0] [468 58.5]
M oderate 54 21.0 23 35.9 77 24.0 72 22.7 23 22.3 95 22.6 18 30.5 190 23.8
Avoidant I 0.4 2 3.1 3 0 .9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 1 1.7 4 0.5
C
T o t a l dom inant 39 15.2 13 20.3 52 16.2 45 14 . 2 20 19.4 65 15.5 12 20.3 129 16.1
Superdominant I 1 0.4] ( 5 7.8] t 6 1.9] [ 3 1.0] I 3 2.9] [ 6 1.4] I 1 1.7] [ 13 1.6]
Do m in ant [ 38 14.3] I 8 12.5] [ 46 14.3] [ 42 13.2] [ 17 16.5] I 59 14.1] 1 11 18.6] [116 14.5]
M oderate 160 62.2 36 56.3 196 61.1 204 64.4 70 68.0 274 65.2 38 64.4 508 63.5
A voidant 58 22.6 15 23.4 73 22.7 68 21.4 13 12.6 81 19.3 9 15.3 163 20.4
D
T o t a l d o m in a n t 97 37.7 31 48.4 128 39.9 113 35.6 41 39.8 154 36.7 31 52.5 313 39.1
Suuerdominant ( 17 6.6] ( 8 12.5] I 25 7.8] [ 21 6.6] [ 7 6.8] [ 28 6.7] [ 9 15.2] [ 62 7.8]
Do m in ant [ 80 31.1] f 23 35.9] [103 32.1] [ 92 2? . 0 ] [ 34 33.0] [1 26 30.0] f 22 37.3] [251 31.3]
M o d e ra t e 143 55.6 27 42.2 170 53.0 174 54.9 53 51.5 227 54.0 27 45.8 424 53.0
Avoidant 17 6.6 6 9.4 23 7.1 30 9.5 9 8 .7 39 9 .3 1 1.7 63 7.9
T otal 257 100.0 64 100.0 321 100.0 317 100.0 103 100.0 420 100.0 59 100.0 80 0 100.0
N ote. B racketed (superdom inant and d o m in a n t) v a l u e s are inclu d ed in to ta l dom inant v a l u e .

120
s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j> < .0 2 ) l o w e r p e r c e n t a g e o f d o m i n a n t s among h i g h -
ranked c i v i l i a n managers and among t h e (unranked) i n d u s t r y c i v i l i a n
mana ge rs t h a n among t h e m i d d l e - r a n k e d c i v i l i a n managers or t h e h i g h —
o r m i d d l e - r a n k e d m i l i t a r y m anagers. T h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s r e i n f o r c e d by
t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j^ < . 0 0 4 ) l o w e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Q u a d r a n t B s u p e r
d o m i n a n t s among t h e h i g h - l e v e l c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s an d t h e i n d u s t r y
civ ilian s.
There w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r Q u a d r a n t C. For
Qua dr an t D, t h e r e i s a g a i n i n t e r a c t i o n b e tw e e n r a n k and m i l i t a r y o r
civ ilian status. High-rank c i v i l i a n managers and i n d u s t r y c i v i l i a n
m an a ge rs showed h i g h e r (j^ < .071) p e r c e n t a g e s o f d o m in a n ts than did
c i v i l i a n m i d d l e managers or e i t h e r l e v e l o f m i l i t a r y m anagers.
The f i n d i n g s for t h is research question a l l demonstrate i n t e r
a c tio n of managerial lev e l with m i l i t a r y - c i v i l i a n s ta tu s . The f i n d
i n g b y Agor ( 1 9 8 6 ) o f g r e a t e r i n t u i t i v e rep re sen ta tio n at higher
l e v e l s o f management was n o t c o n f i r m e d , a l t h o u g h t h e r e was a s l i g h t
tendency in t h i s d i r e c t i o n fo r the h i g h - l e v e l m i l i t a r y managers.
Thera was a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f TJs among t h e h i g h -
l e v e l c i v i l i a n managers t h a n among t h e m i d d l e - l e v e l c i v i l i a n manag
e r s , b u t t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was n o t found f o r t he m i l i t a r y managers.
The i n t e r a c t i o n i s a l s o e v i d e n t i n t h e HBDI f i n d i n g s . H igh-
level c iv ilia n managers showed a g r e a t e r p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D
t h a n d i d t h e m i d d l e - l e v e l c i v i l i a n m an a ge rs , b u t t h i s f i n d i n g d i d n o t
a p p e a r f o r t h e m i l i t a r y managers. H i g h - l e v e l c i v i l i a n m anagers were

a l s o l e s s l i k e l y t o p r e f e r Quadrant B t h a n were m i d d l e - l e v e l c i v i l i a n
m an ag ers o r m i l i t a r y mana ge rs a t e i t h e r l e v e l . Moreover, the h ig h -
l e v e l c i v i l i a n mana ge rs we re v e r y much l i k e t h e (unra nk ed ) i n d u s t r y
c i v i l i a n managers i n t h e i r p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D and t h e i r l a c k
o f p r e f e r e n c e f o r Qu ad ra nt B.
The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s e f i n d i n g s i s p r e s e n t e d i n C h a p t e r VI.

CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was to e x p lo r e the r e l a ti o n s h ip s
b e t w e e n two r e c o g n i z e d p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s , t h e My ers -
B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) and t h e Herrmann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u
ment (HBDI), b o t h o f which were d e v e lo p e d f o r a p p l i c a t i o n t o n o r m a l ,
healthy, adult populations. The i n v e s t i g a t i o n c o n c e n t r a t e d on d e t e r
m i n i n g t h e e x t e n t and d i r e c t i o n o f t h o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h r o u g h a n a l y
s e s o f d a t a r e s u l t i n g from t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s t o
t h e same p o p u l a t i o n , the program m anager s tu d e n ts a tt e n d in g th e
D e f e n s e S y s t e m s M a n a g e m e n t C o l l e g e (DSMC), F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a ,
d u r i n g 1986 -1 987 .
The f i n d i n g s were e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e e x t e n t o f t h e i r
s u p p o r t f o r t h e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s which was formu
lated from p s y c h o l o g i c a l theory, b r a i n dominance r e s e a r c h , and em
p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s from t h e l i t e r a t u r e . Thi s h y p o t h e s i s p o s t u l a t e d t h e
existence of sp ecific relationships among MBTI t y p e s and HBDI quad
rants. Six r e s e a r c h q u e s tio n s were a ls o ex p lo re d . The f i r s t a n d
second r e s e a rc h questions addressed the s i m i l a r i t y of the study
population to other m anagerial populations cited in the literature.
The l a s t f o u r r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s were co n c er n e d w i t h w h e t h e r t h e two
in strum ents d if f e r e n tia te d t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n on t h e b a s i s o f
dem ographic ch aracteristics. Four dem ographic categories were
122

investigated: t h e sex o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s , t h e br an c h o f m i l i t a r y o r
g o v e r n m e n t a l s e r v i c e t o whi ch t h e y b e lo n g e d , t h e i r m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l
ian s ta tu s , and t h e i r r a n k i n t he g e n e r a l management h i e r a r c h y .
C o n c l u s io n s R e l a t i n g t o t h e Re s e a rc h H y p o t h e s is
The r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s p o s t u l a t e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s c h a r a c t e r
i z e d by t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s o f s e n s i n g ( S ) , t h i n k i n g ( T ), and j u d g i n g
( J ) w o u l d be d o m i n a n t p r i m a r i l y i n t h e HBDI l e f t h e m i s p h e r e (Quad
r a n t s A and B) w i t h a h i g h i n c i d e n c e o f dou bl e dominance i n b o t h t h e
A and B q u a d r a n t s . A f u r t h e r e x p e c t a t i o n was t h a t i n t u i t i v e (N),
f e e l i n g (F), and p e r c e p t i v e (P) i n d i v i d u a l s would be dom ina nt i n t h e
HBDI r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e (Qua dran ts C and D), w i t h t h e MBTI i n t u i t i v e s
(Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) e x p e c t e d t o show p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D
and t h e f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs), f o r Quadrant C.
In accordance w ith th is hypothesis, the m ajority o f MBTI
t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs), p a r t i c u l a r l y t h o s e who w e r e a l s o s e n s i n g
i n d i v i d u a l s ( S T J s ) , w e r e d o u b l e d o m i n a n t i n t h e HBDI A and B q u a d
r a n t s i n t he l e f t - h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h a h i g h i n c i d e n c e o f sup e rd om in a nc e
(HBDI s c o r e s g r e a t e r t h a n 100) i n t h o s e q u a d r a n t s a s w e l l . This
f i n d i n g i s i n l i n e w i t h b o t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l type t h e o r y u n d e r l y i n g t h e
MBTI and b r a i n dominance r e s e a r c h s u p p o r t i n g t h e HBDI. Psychological
ty pe theory, as s t a t e d by Myers and McCaulley (1985), d e s c r i b e s TJs
as t h e " l o g i c a l d e c i s i o n m a k e r s " (p. 36 ) who f i l l m a n a g e r i a l and
executive ro les. MBTI STJ s a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s b e i n g p r a c t i c a l ,
orderly, dependable, r e a l i s t i c , an d h a v i n g s t r o n g o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
a b ility . Herrmann (1988) h a s e x p l a i n e d t h a t , according to b r a in

dom inance r e s e a r c h , d o u b le dom inance i n HBDI q u a d r a n t s A and B
a p p e a r s t o combine t h e l o g i c a l , a n a l y t i c a l , and r a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s
tics o f Quadrant A w i t h t h e c o n t r o l l i n g , structured, organizational
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Quad rant B, and t e n d s t o r e i n f o r c e the stre n g th s
of these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .
A c c o r d i n g t o MBTI t h e o r y , t h i n k i n g i n d i v i d u a l s ( Ts ) p r e f e r t o
make d e c i s i o n s on t h e b a s i s o f f a c t s a r r a n g e d i n a l o g i c a l , step-by-
s t e p p r o c e s s , s i m i l a r t o t h e m e n t a l p r o c e s s i n g o f i n f o r m a t i o n i n HBDI
Quadrant A. MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) t e n d t o make t h e i r d e c i
s i o n s w i t h more c o n s c i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r t h e p o s s i b l e i m p a c t t h e y
m i g h t have on o t h e r members o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . I n d i v i d u a l s domi
nant i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t C a r e a l s o c h a r a c t e r i z e d by i n t e r p e r s o n a l
c o n c er n . As e x p e c t e d u n d e r t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s and i n a c c o r d a n c e
w i t h b o t h MBTI t h e o r y an d b r a i n d o m i n a n c e r e s e a r c h , MBTI f e e l i n g
i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) showed t h e h i g h e s t dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a l l
MBTI t y p e s i n HBDI Quad rant C.
The MBTI TJs d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e i r h i g h e s t i n c i d e n c e o f a v o id a n c e
t o w a rd t h e HBDI Quad rant C. T hi s f i n d i n g i s no t s u r p r i s i n g , consid
e r i n g t h a t TJ s t e n d t o e x p r e s s t h e i r t h i n k i n g - j u d g m e n t f u n c t i o n by
p r o j e c t i n g themselves as " to u g h - m in d e d , e x e c u t i v e , an aly tical, in
s t r u m e n t a l l e a d e r s " (Myers & McCaulley, 1985, p. 36). TJs b a s e t h e i r
d e c i s i o n s p r i m a r i l y on f a c t s a b o u t t h i n g s i n t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d ,
w hile being generally im pervious to the s o c i a l w orld of people
( R o B a r d s , 1986 ). There was, how ever, a s i g n i f i c a n t , u n a n t i c i p a t e d
f i n d i n g t h a t e x t r a v e r t e d t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (ETJs) were h i g h e r on domi
nance and l o w e r on a vo id a n c e towa rd Quadrant C t h a n were i n t r o v e r t e d

thinking-judgers ( IT J s ) . This p a r t i c u l a r f i n d i n g s u g g e s t s a co nn ec
t i o n b e t w e e n HBDI p r e f e r e n c e s an d t h e J u n g i a n t h e o r e t i c a l p r e m i s e
t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s v i e w o f t h e w o r l d and p e r s o n a l s e l f - a t t i t u d e a r e
d e p e n d e n t on w h e t h e r t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s an e x t r a v e r t o r an i n t r o v e r t .
However, HBDI b r a i n dominance t h e o r y ha s y e t t o e m p h a s iz e t h e im p o r
tance of the a t t i t u d i n a l characteristics o f e x t r a v e r s i o n and i n t r o
v e r s i o n (Herrmann, 1987). The f i n d i n g t h a t an El r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s
w i t h t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t C h a s n o t
been r e p o r t e d i n any l i t e r a t u r e s o u r c e r e v i e w e d .
MBTI i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) t e n d to wa rd i n d e p e n
d e n t t h i n k i n g and fo cu s on p o s s i b i l i t i e s , theoretical relationships,
an d c h a l l e n g e s o f t h e f u t u r e ( M y e r s & M c C a u l l e y , 19 8 5 ). HBDI Quad
rant D individuals are fu tu re-o rien ted , in tu itiv e, and a d e p t a t
startin g new v e n t u r e s (Herrmann, 1988). In a c co rd a n ce w ith th e
t h e o r i e s u n d e rly in g each in s tru m e n t, MBTI Ns and Ps i n t h e s t u d y
p o p u l a t i o n d e m o n s t r a t e d d o m i n a n c e i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t D, a s w e l l a s a
s i z e a b l e i n c i d e n c e o f d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e i n b o t h Q u a d r a n t s A and D.
Such AD d o m i n a n c e c o m b i n e s t h e l o g i c a l , r a t i o n a l , p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Quadrant A w i t h t h e l o n g e r r a n g e , future-oriented
recognition of p o ssib ilities, so ch aracteristic of Quadrant D
(Herrmann, 19 88 ).
Thus, all the expected relationships, including magnitude and
direction, among MBTI types and HBDI quadrants under the research
hypothesis have been fully substantiated by the findings of this
study. Knowledge of these relationships is invaluable because of the
reinforcement provided by the study findings to the principles of

p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e t h e o r y u n d e r l y i n g t h e MBTI and o f b r a i n dominance
research supporting t h e HBDI. New d i r e c t i o n s f o r r e s e a r c h have
u n f o l d e d as a r e s u l t of the finding th a t a s ig n if ic a n t r e la tio n s h ip
e x i s t s b e tw e e n t h e MBTI e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n (El) d i m e n s i o n and
t h e HBDI Quadrant C, c h a r a c t e r i z e d by i n t e r p e r s o n a l concerns. This
kn owl edge h a s p r a c t i c a l i m p a c t on management t r a i n i n g f o r p e r s o n n e l
s e l e c t i o n th r o u g h i n c r e a s e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p o t e n
t i a l when vi ew e d from t he two d i s t i n c t , but r e l a t e d , perspectives of
t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI.
C o n c l u s io n s R e l a t i n g t o t h e R e s e a rc h Q u e s t i o n s
Research Question 1
The f i r s t r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n examined t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e e n t h e
MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f r o m t h e 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 8 4 DSMC p r o g r a m m a n a g e r
c l a s s e s and t h e 1986-1987 c l a s s e s whic h c o n s t i t u t e t h e s t u d y p o p u l a
tion.
The MBTI t y p e d istrib u tio n s of the 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 8 4 DSMC c l a s s e s
(N idiffer, 1984) d i f f e r e d l i t t l e from t h o s e o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n ,
w i t h two e x c e p t i o n s : t he s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e s o f t h i n k
i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Ts) and o f t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs) o c c u r r i n g in th e
study p o p u latio n , as com pared w i t h th e p r i o r c l a s s e s . Thus, the
f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e MBTI t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs), who r e p r e
s e n t e d a c o m f o r t a b l e m a j o r i t y i n t h e p r i o r c l a s s e s , have become even
more p r e v a l e n t i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , the c la s s e s held du rin g the
1986-1987 t i m e frame.

W hile Myers and M cC aulley (1985) have a c k n o w led g e d t n a t th e
p r e s e n c e o f a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f TJs i s t o be c o n f i d e n t l y e x p e c t e d i n
b u s i n e s s and t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d g r o u p s , a g e n e r a l o r c o n t i n u i n g
rise in the percentage o f TJs c o u ld p r e s a g e a p r o b l e m - p r o d u c i n g
trend. M a n a g e r s n e e d t o be a l e r t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t m o s t p e o p l e ,
even w i t h o u t i n s t r u c t i o n i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l type t h e o r y , have b o t h t h e
a b i l i t y t o r e c o g n i z e and t h e t e n d e n c y t o s e l e c t o t h e r s w i t h p e r s o n
a l i t y t y p e s s i m i l a r t o t h e i r own ( C a r s k a d o n & Cook, 19 82 ). Caution
s h o u ld be e x e r c i s e d by t h e s e managers i n o r d e r t h a t t h e y m ig h t a v o id
th e i n a d v e r t e n t c r e a t i o n o f a s e l f - p e r p e t u a t i n g body, which could
become a r i g i d l y s t r a t i f i e d o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h o u t t h e i n f u s i o n o f t h e
b a l a n c i n g o u t l o o k p r o v i d e d by o t h e r p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s ( R o B a r d s ,
1986).
Research Question 2
The s e c o n d r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e
twe en t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and t h o s e
for th re e o th er m anagerial p o p u latio n s review ed in the l i t e r a t u r e
search: Army e x e c u t i v e s (DeWald, 1986/1987), managers and a d m i n i s
t r a t o r s (Myers & McCaulley, 1985), and f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s ( P i c k e r i n g ,
1986).
There i s a r e c o g n i z a b l e p a t t e r n o f s i m i l a r i t i e s among t h e MBTI
d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r a l l of th e p o p u la tio n s compared, w ith t h i n k i n g -
j u d g e r s (TJs) p r o m i n e n tl y r e p r e s e n t e d in a l l fo u r of th e s e groups.
The MBTI s i m i l a r i t y is even more pronounced f o r c i v i l i a n s from t he
s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n compared w i t h t h e two m a n a g e r i a l gro ups t h a t were

prim arily c iv ilia n . The h e a v y T J r e p r e s e n t a t i o n among m a n a g e r i a l
g r o u p s b o t h c o n f i r m s e a r l i e r f i n d i n g s and i s i n k e e p in g w i t h ps ycho
logical ty p e t h e o r y .
Research Question 3
The third research question focused on whether there were any
MBTI or HBDI differences between males and females.
Some s e x d i f f e r e n c e s d i d e m e r g e f r o m t h i s s t u d y . As e x p e c t e d
from t h e l i t e r a t u r e , m ale s d e m o n s t r a t e d a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e of s e n
s o r s ( S s ) a n d t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) , as w e l l a s g r e a t e r d o m i n a n c e
and even sup e rd om in a n c e i n HBDI Quad rant A t h a n d i d fe m a le s . Females
m an ife ste d a h ig h er p ercentage of i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and o f f e e l i n g
i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) c o u pl e d w i t h g r e a t e r dominance i n HBDI Quadrant C.
However, f e m a l e s and m ale s were a c t u a l l y more s i m i l a r t h a n t h e y
were d i s s i m i l a r . For ex ample, f e m a l e s d e m o n s t r a t e d about as s t r o n g a
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on t h e t h i n k i n g d i m e n s i o n as d i d m a l e s . M oreover,
b o t h m al e s and f e m a l e s m a n i f e s t e d e q u i v a l e n t d o m i n a n c e p r e f e r e n c e s
t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d r a n t B, r e l a t e d t o o r g a n i z a t i o n and s t r u c t u r e , and
Quadrant D, r e l a t e d t o s t r a t e g i c p l a n n i n g f o r f u t u r e e nd eav or s.
The a p p a r e n t s i m i l a r i t y o f m a l e s and f e m a l e s i n t h i s s t u d y can
be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e f e m a l e s i n t h i s p o p u l a t i o n o f
b u s i n e s s and t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d s t u d e n t prog ram managers do n o t f i t
t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l v i e w o f women as p r i m a r i l y c a r e - g i v e r s i n t he t e a c h
in g and h e a l t h p r o f e s s i o n s (Myers & McCaulley, 1985). This f in d in g
brings i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e s e x - s p e c i f i c n a t u r e o f some MBTI t y p e s

documented i n t he l i t e r a t u r e , which may be i n s t e a d d i f f e r e n c e s due t o
t h e t y p e s o f p r o f e s s i o n t h a t m al e s and f e m a l e s t e n d t o s e l e c t .
Research Question 4
The fourth research question addressed the issue of differences
in the MBTI and HBDI distributions among branches of the armed ser
vices .
No d i f f e r e n c e s were found i n e i t h e r t h e MBTI o r t h e HBDI d i s t r i
b u t i o n s among t h e t h r e e s e r v i c e b r a n c h e s . However, t h e s t u d y p o p u l a
t i o n a l s o i n c l u d e d a gr oup o f mana ge rs from o t h e r g o v e r n m e n t a l ag en
c ie s not connected w ith the m i l i t a r y s e rv ic e s . These managers were
a l l c i v i l i a n s , w h i l e t h o s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h th e armed s e r v i c e s i n
c lu d e d b o th c i v i l i a n and m i l i t a r y m an ag ers. The a g e n c y m a n a g e r s
m a n i f e s t e d b o t h a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n o f MBTI i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) an d a
g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f d o m i n a n t s i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t D t h a n d i d the
m anagers in the m ilitary services. This finding a g r e e s w ith
Herrmann's (1988) c o n t e n t i o n that intuitives can be i d e n t i f i e d w ith
t h e f u t u r e - o r i e n t e d HBDI Quad rant D.
Research Question 5
The fifth research question probed MBTI or HBDI distributional
differences in the study population based on military or civilian
status.
Both military and civilian managers can be characterized as MBTI
sensors (Ss), thinkers (Ts), and judgers (Js), as well as double
dominant in HBDI Quadrants A and B. The conclusion that the MBTI and

HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n s w e r e e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r f o r t h e m i l i t a r y an d
c i v i l i a n groups in th e stu d y p o p u la tio n is in agreem ent w ith the
e a r l i e r s t u d y b y DeWald ( 1 9 8 6 / 1 9 8 7 ) w h i c h r e p o r t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t
MBTI d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n managers.
Research Question 6
The sixth research question dealt with MBTI or HBDI distribu
tional differences among individuals in the study population based on
their managerial level.
The s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n was d i v i d e d i n t o f i v e g r o u p s : m iddle-
ranked m i l i t a r y , high-ranked m il i t a r y , middle-ranked c i v i l i a n , high-
ranked c i v i l i a n , and i n d u s t r y o r o t h e r g o v e r n m e n ta l agency c i v i l i a n s
who were unran ke d. E a r l i e r s tu d ie s suggested a r e la ti o n s h ip lin k in g
h i g h - l e v e l m a n a g e m e n t w i t h a t e n d e n c y t o w a rd MBTI i n t u i t i v e t y p e s
( A g o r , 1986 ) and t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d r a n t D d o m i n a n c e ( H e r r m a n n , 1987,
1988). The e x p e c t e d g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n o f i n t u i t i v e s among h i g h -
r a n k e d m an ag ers was n o t c o n f i r m e d by t h e f i n d i n g s . However, a rela
t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n HBDI Qu ad ra nt D dominance and m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l was
f o u n d , b u t o n l y f o r c i v i l i a n s , w i t h h i g h - r a n k e d c i v i l i a n s and u n
r a n k e d c i v i l i a n s found t o p r e f e r t h e i n t u i t i v e l y o r i e n t e d Quadrant D.
Alt hou gh t h i s s t u d y found t h a t t h e HBDI Quad rant D r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h
m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l was d e p e n d e n t on m i l i t a r y - c i v i l i a n s t a t u s , th is
f i n d i n g may be d u e t o t h e f a c t that no e x e c u t i v e level m ilita ry
m anagers ( g e n e r a l o f f i c e r s ) were i n c l u d e d i n t h e stu dy .

131
Recommendations
1. F u r t h e r s t u d y i s recommended t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e s i g n i f i c a n t
b u t p r e v i o u s l y u n r e p o r t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e en t h e MBTI e x t r a v e r s i o n -
i n t r o v e r s i o n (El) d i m e n s i o n and HBDI Quadrant C.
2. I n s t r u c t i o n i n r u d i m e n t a l ty p e t h e o r y w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e f e e d
b a c k i s recommended t o managers and t o t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t r a i n i n g
m an ag ers as a p r a c t i c a l method to a c h ie v e th e d e g re e o f o r g a n i z a
t i o n a l b a l a n c e which s h o u ld r e s u l t from t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f p e r s o n
nel w ith d i f f e r e n t psychological types.
3. Alt h o u gh t h e i n s t r u m e n t s a r e n o t i n t e n d e d t o be p r e d i c t o r s
of managerial success, it i s n o n e th e less of i n t e r e s t to i n v e s t i g a t e
t h e s t r u c t u r e o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s where t h e managers have been t r a i n e d
i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l type t h e o r y t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e r e i s a b e t t e r
m ix o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s t h a n t h e r e w ould o t h e r w i s e be. Thus, a
l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d y o f a group o f mana ge rs so t r a i n e d i s recommended,
with the r e s u l t s t o be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h s i m i l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n s whose
m an ag ers have n o t b ee n exposed t o such t r a i n i n g .
4. F u r t h e r s t u d y o f demog ra phic r e l a t i o n s h i p s i s recommended t o
unconfound t h e demographic from t h e o c c u p a t i o n a l f a c t o r s which c lo u d
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these re la tio n s h ip s .
Summary
The f i n d i n g s from t h i s study e s s e n t i a l l y confirmed those from
o th e r s tu d i e s in the l i t e r a t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r l y w ith regard to the
r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e en t h e HBDI and t h e MBTI, th us p r o v i d i n g s u p p o r t

for the theoretical foundations for both instruments. The large
number of participants available for this study enabled the extensive
exploration of interrelationships of several categories of inquiry
addressed by the research hypothesis relating to the MBTI-HBDI rela
tionships and by the research questions which were directed toward
demographic concerns. In particular, the sizeable population pro
vided quantification of detail sufficient for the investigation of
the MBTI extraversion-introversion relationship with the HBDI quad
rant characterizations, a research finding unique to this study.
This latter relationship, if confirmed, will provoke profound ramifi
cations to Herrmann's brain dominance approach and will further
substantiate MBTI psychological type theory.
A number of other findings from this study, particularly those
related to demographic variables, appear to have a population-
specific nature, thus demonstrating the need for multidimensional
investigations of diverse groups before definitive conclusions can be
drawn. Unlike the MBTI-HBDI relationships, which appear to be stable
over populations, generalization or stereotyping solely on the basis
of demographics for either MBTI types or HBDI profiles will require
qualification based on the nature of the population under study.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acker, D. D. (1986). A h i s t o r y o f t h e D e f e n s e S y s t e m s M a n a g e m e n t
C o l l e g e , c e n t e r o f e x c e l l e n c e i n a c q u i s i t i o n management, educa
t i o n , and r e s e a r c h . W a s h i n g t o n , DC: U.S. G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g
O ffice.
A cquisition. ( 1 9 8 6 , J a n u a r y - F e b r u a r y ) . AMC's s t r e a m l i n e d a c q u i s i
t i o n p r o c e s s . Army R e s e a r c h , Deve lop ment, and A c q u i s i t i o n Maga
z i n e , pp. 1 6 - 1 7 .
A g o r , W. H. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . I n t u i t i v e m a n a g e m e n t : I n t e g r a t i n g l e f t and
r i g h t b r a i n management s k i l l s . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: P ren tice-
H all.
A g o r , W. H. (1986). The l o g i c o f i n t u i t i v e d e c i s i o n making: A r e

s e a r c h - b a s e d a pp ro a c h f o r t o p management. W e s t p o r t , CT: Green
wood P r e s s .
A l l p o r t , G. W., V e r n o n , P. E., & L i n d z e y , G. (1960). A study of

values. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n .
A r c h i b a l d , R. D. (1976). Managing h i g h t e c h n o l o g y pro gra ms and p r o

jects. New York: Wiley.
Badawy, M. K. (1982). D e ve lo pi ng m a n a g e r i a l s k i l l s i n e n g i n e e r s and

s c i e n t i s t s : S u c c e e d i n g a s a t e c h n i c a l m a n a g e r . New York: Van
N o s t r a n d R e in h o ld .
B a l l , D. D. ( 1 9 8 4 , A u g u s t 17). S p e e c h by M a j o r G e n e r a l B a l l on t h e
o c c a s i o n o f h i s r e t i r e m e n t d i n n e r , H i l l c r e s t Co untry Club, Mount
Clemens, MI.
B a s s , B. M. ( E d .) . (1981). S t o g d i l l 's handbook of le a d e rs h ip : A

s u r v e y o f t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . New York: Fr ee P r e s s .
Baucom, D. H. (1985). C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o l o g i c a l I n v e n t o r y (CPI). In

B u r o s I n s t i t u t e o f M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s ( E d . ) , The n i n t h m e n t a l
m e a s u r e m e n t s ye a rb o o k (Vol. 1, pp. 250-252). L i n c o l n : University
of Nebraska-Lincoln.
B a u m g a r t n e r , J . S., B r o w n , C., & K e l l e y , P. A. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . S u c c e s s f u l

program s: Can we l e a r n f r o m t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e ? Why h a v e some
p r o g ra m s su c ce e de d where o t h e r s have f a i l e d ? A r e c e n t s t u d y came
up w i t h some s u r p r i s i n g a n s w e rs . Program Manager, 13(1), 31-38.
133

134
B ender-G estalt Test. (1985). I n Buros I n s t i t u t e o f Me nta l Measure

m e n t s , The n i n t h m e n t a l m e a s u r e m e n t s ye arb ook (Vol. 1, pp. 181-
184). Lincoln: U n iv e rs ity o f Nebraska-Lincoln.
B l o o m , R. S. (1971). L earning fo r m astery. I n B. S. Blo om , J .

H a s t i n g s , & G. F. M a d a u s , Ha n d b o o k on f o r m a t i v e and s u m m a t i v e
e v a l u a t i o n o f s t u d e n t l e a r n i n g . New York: McGraw-Hill.
B r i g g s , K., & Myers, I. (1977). M y e rs - B r ig g s t ype i n d i c a t o r . Palo

A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P r e s s .
B u n d e r s o n , C. V. (1988). The v a l i d a t i o n o f t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n
Dominance I n s t r u m e n t . In N. Hermann, The c r e a t i v e b r a i n (pp. 337-
3 7 9 ) . Lake L u r e , NC: B r a i n B oo ks .
B u r o s , 0. K. ( Ed .). (1975). P erso n ality te s ts and r e v ie w s I I .

H ig hl and Pa r k , NJ: Gryphon P r e s s .
B ur os , 0. K. (Ed.). (1978). The e i g h t h m e n t a l m ea s ur em e nt s ye a rb o o k

(Vols. 1-2). Highland P a r k , NJ: Gryphon P r e s s .
B u r o s I n s t i t u t e o f M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s . (1985). The n i n t h m e n t a l
m e a s u re m e n ts y earb o o k (Vols. 1-2). Lincoln: U niversity of
Nebraska-Lincoln.
C a b e l l , C. P . , J r . ( 1 9 8 6 , J u n e 22 ). S p e e c h by B r i g a d i e r G e n e r a l
C a b e l l on f u t u r e d i r e c t i o n s f o r t h e DSMC d u r i n g t h e 1986. DSMC
Alumni A s s o c i a t i o n Symposium, F t . B e l v o i r , Va.
C a b e l l , C. P., J r . ( 1 9 8 7 , J u n e 24 ). Keynote a d d r e s s by B r i g a d i e r
G e n e r a l C a b e l l f o r t h e 1987 DSMC Alumni A s s o c i a t i o n Symposium, F t.
B e l v o i r , VA.
C a r l s o n , R., & L e v y , N. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . S tu d ies of Jungian typology: 1.

Memory, s o c i a l p e r c e p t i o n , and s o c i a l a c t i o n . Journal of Person
a l i t y , 41, 559-576.
C a r l y l e , T. (1858). Heros and h e r o w o r s h ip . L o n do n: Clarendon

Press.
C a r l y n , M. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . An a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i
cator. J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y A s s e s s m e n t , 41(5), 461-473.
C a r s k a d o n , T. G. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . T e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t i e s o f c o n t i n u o u s
s c o r e s on Form G o f t h e M y e rs - B r ig g s Type I n d i c a t o r . R e s e a r c h i n
P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type, J2, 83-84.
C a r s k a d o n , T. G., & Cook, D. D. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . V a l i d i t y o f MBTI d e s c r i p

t i o n s as p e r c e i v e d by r e c i p i e n t s u n f a m i l i a r w i t h t y p e . Research
i n P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type, 5, 89-94.

C a r s k a d o n , T. G., M c C a r l e y , N. G., & M c C a u l l e y , M. H. ( 1 9 8 7 ). Com
p e n d i u m o f r e s e a r c h i n v o l v i n g t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r .
G a i n e s v i l l e , FL: C e n t e r f o r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type.
C a t t e i l , R. B., E b e r , H. W., & T a t s u o k a , M. M. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . Hand boo k f o r

t h e S i x t e e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c t o r Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Cham paign, IL:
I n s t i t u t e f o r P e r s o n a l i t y and A b i l i t y T e s t i n g .
Coy ne , G. K., J r . ( 1 9 8 6 , D e c e m b e r 3). I n t e r v i e w w i t h U.S. Navy

C a p t a i n Co yn e, Dean o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f R e s e a r c h I n f o r m a t i o n ,
Defense Systems Management C o l l e g e , F t. B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a , g r a n t
i n g p e r m i s s i o n t o Ruth E. DeWald t o us e summary C ol l e g e A ss es sm en t
d a t a ( u n i d e n t i f i a b l e by i n d i v i d u a l s ) t o f u l f i l l academic r e q u i r e
m ent s o f h e r d i s s e r t a t i o n .
De fe ns e Systems Management C ol l e g e . (1986). DSMC 1986 c a t a l o g . Ft.

Belvoir, VA: Author.
D e h n e r , F. T. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . A t t r i b u t e s o f an e f f e c t i v e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r .
Pr ogram Manager, 11(1), 24.
D e V i t o , A. J . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . R e v i e w o f M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r . In
B u r o s I n s t i t u t e o f M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s ( E d .) , The n i n t h m e n t a l
m e a s u r e m e n t y e a r b o o k ( V o l. 2, pp. 1030-1032). L i n c o l n : U n i v e r
s i t y of Nebraska-Lincoln.
DeWald, J. E. (1987). E x e c u t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y t y p e s : A co m p a r is o n o f
m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n l e a d e r s i n a s i n g l e o r g a n i z a t i o n ( D o c to r a l
d i s s e r t a t i o n , W e s t e r n M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y , 1986). D i s s e r t a t i o n
A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 47, 2954A.
D o v i c h , R. A. ( 1 9 8 8 , M a r c h ) . N o n p a r a m e t r i c e s : An a l t e r n a t i v e t o
t h e one-way ANOVA—K r u s k a l - W a l l i s t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e among s e v
e r a l m e a n s . Q u a l i t y , p. 68.
Edwards, A. L. (1953). Edwards p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s c h e d u l e (EPPS).

New York: Psychological Corporation.
E l l i s , G. J . , J r . (1983). B rain s id e d n e s s : Using a w a ren e ss to

b u i l d more e f f e c t i v e teams. Exchange: The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behav
i o r Te a ch i n g J o u r n a l , 7(4), 33-36.
E t z i o n i , A. ( 1 9 6 4 ) . M o d e rn o r g a n i z a t i o n s . E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , NJ:
Prentice-H all.
E y s e n c k , H. J . , & E y s e n c k , S. B. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . M a n u a l : Eysenck P e r so n
a l i t y Inventory. San Diego, CA: E d u c a t i o n a l and I n d u s t r i a l T e s t
in g Service.

136
F a r m e r , F. F. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . F a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g how t h e m i l i t a r y p r o g r a m
manager o p e r a t e s i n t h e d e f e n s e s y s t e m s a c q u i s i t i o n p r o c e s s (Doc
t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , George Washington U n i v e r s i t y , 1978). D i s s e r
t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 4 0 , 2276A.
F i e d l e r , F. E. (1967). A t h e o r y o f l e a d e r s h i p e f f e c t i v e n e s s . New
York: McGraw-Hill.
F i e d l e r , F. E., & C h e m e r s , M. M. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . L e a d e r s h i p an d e f f e c t i v e
management. Glenview, IL: S c o t t , Foresman.
F i n n e y , M., & S i o h l , C. ( 1 9 8 5 - 1 9 8 6 ) . The c u r r e n t MBA: Why a r e we

failin g : The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l B e h a v i o r T e a c h i n g R e v i e w , 1 0 ( 3 ) ,
1- 11 .
F o r d , L. J . ( 1 9 8 8 a ) . C o g n i t i v e p r e f e r e n c e s and p e r s o n a l i t y t y p e :
F u r th e r evidence f o r a r e l a t i o n s h i p . I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a i n Domi
na nc e Re vi e w, 5(2), 15-21.
Fo r d , L. J. (1988b). C o r r e la te s o f s u c c e s s fu l c l i n i c a l performance:
A t h e o r e t i c a l s t u d y and a p p l i e d t e x t ab out c o g n i t i v e p r e f e r e n c e s .
U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Union f o r E x p e r i m e n t i n g Col
l e g e s and U n i v e r s i t i e s , C i n c i n n a t i , OH.
F o x , J . R. (1984). Revamping th e b u s i n e s s o f n a t i o n a l d e f e n s e :
Quick f i x e s a r e n o t t h e s o l u t i o n t o s t r u c t u r a l pro blem s i n d e f e n s e
management. H a rv a rd B u s i n e s s R ev ie w, 62(5), 62-70.
Gadeken, 0. C. (1987). The e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f a r o l e - p l a y i n g manage

ment s i m u l a t i o n i n i n c r e a s i n g s e l e c t e d l e a d e r s h i p c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
o f e n g i n e e r s an d s c i e n t i s t s p r e p a r i n g f o r m a n a g e m e n t p o s i t i o n s
( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , George Washing ton U n i v e r s i t y , 1987). D is
s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 48, 171A.
Gou gh , H. G. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . An i n t e r p r e t e r ' s s y l l a b u s f o r t h e C a l i f o r n i a
Psychological Inventory. In P. McReynolds (Ed.), Advances i n p s y
c h o l o g i c a l a s s e s s m e n t ( V ol . 1, pp. 5 5 - 7 9 ) . F a l o A l t o , CA: S c i
enc e and Be h a v i o r Books.
Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J . C. (1951). Manual f o r t h e M in ne s ot a

M u l t i p h a s i c P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y (MMPI). M i n n e a p o l i s : U niver
s i t y o f M in n e s o t a P r e s s .
Hergenhahn, B. R. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e t h e o r i e s o f p e r
s o n a l i t y . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-H all.
Hergenhahn, B. R. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e t h e o r i e s o f p e r
s o n a l i t y (2nd ed.). Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-Hall.
H e r r m a n n , N. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . The c r e a t i v e b r a i n : P a r t s I & I I . Washing

t o n , DC: American S o c i e t y f o r T r a i n i n g and Development.

137
Herrmann, N. (1987). Hermann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI) c e r

t i f i c a t i o n workshop. Lake L u r e , NC: Author.
H e r r m a n n , N. (1988). The c r e a t i v e b r a i n . Lake L u r e , NC: B rain

Boo ks .
H e r s e y , P., & B l a n c h a r d , K. H. (1972). Management o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l

b e h a v i o r (2nd ed.). Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-H all.
H e r z b e r g , F. (1982). The m a n a g e r i a l c h o i c e : To be e f f i c i e n t and t o

be human (2nd ed., r e v i s e d ) . S a l t Lake C i t y , u f l Olympus.
H i r s c h , S. K. (1985). U s i n g t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r i n
o r g a n i z a t i o n s : A r e s o u r c e book. Pa lo A lt o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g Psy
c h o l o g i s t s Press.
Ho, K. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . The d i m e n s i o n a l i t y and o c c u p a t i o n a l d i s c r i m i n a t i n g

power o f t h e Herrmann B r a i n D o m i n a n c e I n s t r u m e n t . Unpublished
d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young U n i v e r s i t y , Provo, UT.
J a m e s , U. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . The H e r r m a n n , M y e r s - B r i g g s c o n n e c t i o n . In ter
n a t i o n a l B r a i n Dominance R e v i e w , 31(2), 32-34.
J e n k i n s , R. L., R e i z e n s t e i n , R. C., & R o d g e r s , F. G. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Prob

ing o pinions—r e p o rt cards on t h e MBA: When e x e c u t i v e s , academ
i c s , and a lu m n i e v a l u a t e MBA p r o g r a m s an d g r a d u a t e s , o p i n i o n s
d i f f e r s h a rp ly . Harvard B u s i n e s s R e v i e w , 6 2 ( 5 ) , 2 0 - 2 2 , 26, 28,
30.
J u n g , C. G. ( 1 9 3 9 ) . The i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t y (S. D e l l ,
Tr a n s. ) . New York: F a r r e r and R i n e h a r t .
J u n g , C. G. (1971). P s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s (H. G. B a y n e s , T r a n s . ;
r e v i s e d b y R. F. C. H i l l ) . P r i n c e t o n , NJ: P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y
Press. ( O r i g i n a l work p u b l i s h e d 1921)
K e l l e y , P. A. (1934). Search in g f o r e x c e lle n c e in the program

office: A l o o k a t t h e way s u c c e s s f u l prog ram managers manage— and
an a n a l y s i s o f t h e a t t r i b u t e s t h e y s h a r e . Program Manager, 13(4),
20- 25.
K e r l i n g e r , F. N. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . F o u n d a t i o n s o f b e h a v i o r a l r e s e a r c h (2 nd
ed.). New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston.
K i n g , G. D. (1978). The MMPI. I n 0. K. B u r o s (E d . ), The e i g h t h

m e n t a l m e a s u r e m e n ts y e a r b o o k (pp. 9 3 5 - 9 3 8 ) . H i g h l a n d P a r k , NJ:
G r yp ho n P r e s s .
K n o w l e s , M. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The a d u l t l e a r n e r : A n e g l e c t e d s p e c i e s (2nd
e d . ) . H o u s t o n , TX: G u l f .

138
L a n y o n , R. I . , & G o o d s t e i n , L. D. (1982). P e rso n a lity assessm ent

( 2 n d e d . ) . New Yo r k : W i l e y .
L a u z a n , G. ( 1 9 6 2 ) . S i g m u n d F r e u d : The man a n d h i s t h e o r i e s (P.

Evans, Tra ns. ). Greenwich, CT: Fawcett.
L e e , J . W. ( 1 9 8 8 , M a y - J u n e ) . L e a d e r s h i p and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n t h e
t e c h n i c a l e n v i r o n m e n t . Pr ogram Manager, pp. 23-31.
M a c d a i d , G. P. , M c C a u l l e y , M. H., & K a i n z , R. I . (1986). M yers-

B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r : A tla s of type ta b le s . G a i n e s v i l l e , FL:
C e n t e r f o r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type.
M a s l o w , A. H. (1954). M o t i v a t i o n and p e r s o n a l i t y . New Y or k:

H a r p e r and Row.
M a s l o w , A. H. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . M o t i v a t i o n a n d p e r s o n a l i t y (2nd e d . ) . New
York: H ar pe r and Row.
Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I. J . (1975). Measurement and e v a l u a t i o n

i n e d u c a t i o n and p s y c ho lo g y (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
M o r g a n , C. D., & M u r r a y , H. A. ( 1 9 3 5 ) . A m e t h o d f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g
fantasies: The The m at ic A p p e r c e p t i o n Te s t. A r c h i v e s o f Neu ro lo gy
and P s y c h i a t r y , 34, 289-306.
Munn, N. L. (1966). Psy ch olo gy: The f u n d a m e n t a l s o f human a d j u s t

ment ( 5 t h ed.). Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n .
M u r r a y , H. A. (1938). E xplorations in p e rs o n a lity . New Y o r k :

Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .
M yers, I . B. (1962). The M y e r s - B r i g g s type in d ic a to r . Palo Alto,

CA: Consulting P s y c h o lo g ists Press.
M y e r s , I . B., & M y e r s , P. B. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . G i f t s differing. Palo A lto ,

CA: C onsulting P sy c h o lo g ists Press.
M y e r s , I . B., & M c C a u l l e y , M. H. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . M a n u a l : A guide to the

d e v e lo p m e n t and u s e o f t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r . P a l o
A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P r e s s .
Newman, J. B., IV. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . H e m i s p h e r e s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and J u n g i a n

typology: Evidence fo r a r e l a t i o n s h i p (D octoral d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
P a c i f i c G r a d u a t e S c h o o l o f P s y c h o l o g y , 19 84 ). D i s s e r t a t i o n Ab
s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 4 6 , 761B-762B.
N i d i f f e r , K. E. (1984). The p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r : Softw are te c h

n o l o g y and t h e " t h i n k i n g s t y l e s " o f p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s . P r o g r a m
Manager, 13(4), 10-18.

139
N i e r e n b e r g , G. I. (1981). The a r t o f n e g o t i a t i n g . New York: Nego

t i a t i o n Institute.
P a t r i c k , M. G. (1984). S k i l l s n e e d e d by a p r o j e c t m a n a g e r . In
D. I . C l e l a n d ( E d .) , M a t r i x m a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m s h a n d b o o k . New
York: Van N o s t ra n d Rei n h ol d .
P e t e r s , T. J. (1987). T h r i v i n g on cha os: Handbook f o r a management

revolution. New York: Knopf.
P e t e r s , T. J . , & A u s t i n , N. K. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . A passion for excellence:

The l e a d e r s h i p d i f f e r e n c e . New York: Random House.
P e t e r s , T. J . , & W a t e r m a n , R. H., J r . (1982). In s e a r c h o f e x c e l

lence: L e s s o n s f r o m A m e r i c a ' s b e s t - r u n c o m p a n i e s . New Yo rk :
P i c k e r i n g , J . W. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . M a n a g e r s : F e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s . I n G. P.
M a c d a i d , M. H. M c C a u l l e y , & R. I K a i n z , M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i
c a t o r : A t l a s o f t y p e t a b l e s (B u s in e s s and management, unnumbered
p a g e s) . G a i n e s v i l l e , FL: Center for A p p lica tio n s of Psychologi
c a l Type.
P i n c h o t , G., I I I . (1985). In trap ren eu rin g : Why you d o n ' t have t o

l e a v e t h e c o r p o r a t i o n t o b e c o m e an e n t r e p r e n e u r . New Yor k:
P s a ro u th a k is , J. (1988, Summer). [E n trep ren eu rial] executive b u ild s

company t h r o u g h a c q u i s i t i o n s . B e t a Gamma Sigma N e w s l e t t e r , p. 4.
R o B a r d s , M. J. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . A p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e w ith i n s i g h t (Vols.
1-2). Laguna Beach, CA: Author.
R o r e r , L. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . The g r e a t r e s p o n s e - s t y l e m y th . Psychological
B u l l e t i n , 6 3 , 129-156.
Ro rs c ha c h. (1985). In Buros I n s t i t u t e o f Me nta l Measu reme nts, The

n i n t h m e n t a l m e a s u r e m e n t s y e a r b o o k ( V ol . 2, pp. 1 2 9 3 - 1 2 9 5 ) .
Lincoln: U n iv e rs ity of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Rowan, R. (1986). The i n t u i t i v e manager. Boston: L ittle, Brown.
S a v i l l e , P. , & B l i n k h o r n , S. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . U n d e r g r a d u a t e p e r s o n a l i t y by
f a c t o r e d s c a l e s : A l a r g e s c a l e s t u d y on C a t t e l l ' s 16PF and t h e
Eyse nc k P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y . W ind so r, Eng land: NFER.
Simonton, D. K. (1984). G en iu s, c r e a t i v i t y , and l e a d e r s h i p : H i s t o -

r i o m e t r i c i n q u i r i e s . Cambridge, MA: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .

140
S m i t h , H. L., & K r u e g e r , L. M. ( 1 9 3 3 ) . A b r i e f s u m m a ry o f l i t e r a
t u r e on l e a d e r s h i p . I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y , School o f E d u c a t i o n , Bul
l e t i n , H b ) , 1-80.
S p e r r y , R. W. (1964, J a n u a r y ) . The g r e a t cerebral com m issure.

S c i e n t i f i c American, pp. 42-52.
S t e r n b e r g , D. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . How t o c o m p l e t e and s u r v i v e a d o c t o r a l d i s
sertation. New York: St. M a r t i n ' s P r e s s .
S t o g d i l l , R. M. ( 1 9 4 8 ) . P e r s o n a l f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l e a d e r
ship: A survey o f the l i t e r a t u r e . J o u r n a l o f Psyc hology, 25, 35 -
71.
T h o r n t o n , G., I l l , & Byham, W. (1982). A s s e s s m e n t c e n t e r s and mana

g e r i a l p e rf o r m a n c e. New York: Academic P r e s s .
T h i e r a u f , R. J . , & K l e k a m p , R. C. (1975). D e c is io n making th ro u g h

o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
U.S. O ffice of S t r a t e g i c S e rv ic e s Assessment S t a f f . (1948). A s s e s s

ment o f men: S e l e c t i o n o f p e r s o n n e l f o r t h e O f f i c e o f S t r a t e g i c
Services. New York: R i n e h a r t .
W a rd , J . (1987). C o r r e l a t i o n o f MBTI and HBDI. Un pub li she d manu

s c r i p t , DSMC, F t. B e l v o i r , VA.
W e b e r , M. (1947). The t h e o r y o f s o c i a l and economic o r g a n i z a t i o n s

(A. M. H e n d e r s o n & T. P a r s o n s , T r a n s . ) . New York: F r e e P r e s s .
Woods, F. A. ( 1 9 1 3 ) . The i n f l u e n c e o f m o n a r c h s : Steps i n a new

science of h i s t o r y . New York: M a cm ill an .

Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in A Population

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in A Population

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Western Michigan University

Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of th e co p y rig h t o w n er. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n p rohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

Ruth Elizabeth DeWald, Ed.D.

W estern M ichigan U n i v e r s i t y , 1989

Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) and t h e H e r r m a n n B r a i n D o m in a n c e I n s t r u m e n t

p o p u la tio n , 800 s t u d e n t p rogram m anagers a t t e n d i n g th e D efense S ys­

tem s Management C o lle g e (DSMC), F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a , d u r i n g 1986-

The r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s , fo rm u la ted from p s y c h o l o g i c a l theory,

b r a i n dom inance r e s e a r c h , and e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e so u rces, p o stu ­

late d s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s and HBDI quad­

ran ts. In a d d itio n , s ix re s e a rc h q u e s tio n s ad d ressed the s i m i l a r i t y

g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e MBTI and HBDI t o d e m o g r a p h i c c a t e g o ­

or c iv ilia n s ta tu s , and management ran k .

sta n tia te d . The m a j o r i t y o f t h e s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n were MBTI s e n s i n g ,

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

A and B, b u t m a n i f e s t e d " su p e rd o m in a n c e " (HBDI s c o r e s > 100) i n t h e s e

q u a d ran ts. The r e l a t i v e l y few MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s d e m o n s t r a t e d

dom inance i n HBDI Q u a d ra n t C. MBTI i n t u i t i v e s and p e r c e p t i v e s w ere

a l i g n e d w i t h HBDI Q u a d ra n t D and w ere AD d o u b le d o m in a n t.

t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l HBDI Q u ad ran t C. High r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e m ost

t i o n a l group c o n firm e d e x p e c te d s i m i l a r i t y w ith o th e r m a n a g e ria l

l a r i t y t o m a le s w i t h r e g a r d t o MBTI t y p e and HBDI q u a d r a n t r e p r e s e n ­

f e m a le s t u d e n t m a n a g e rs . No d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e MBTI and HBDI d i s t r i ­

c iv ilia n MBTI i n t u i t i v e s t e n d e d t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d ra n t D r e p r e s e n t a ­

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

The most advanced technology has been used to photo­

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­

Photographs included in the original manuscript have

U n iversity M icrofilm s International

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

R elationships o f M B T I types and H B D I preferences in a

DeWald, Ruth Elizabeth, Ed.D.

C opyright © 1 9 8 9 by D eW ald, R u th E lizabeth . A ll righ ts reserved.

300 N. Zeeb Rd.

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

b e e n lo v e d ones who have s h a r e d my t r i a l s and t r i b u l a t i o n s and k e p t

D a u g h te r , Sue Cook, and t h e Ronald Lee Cook, J r . , fam ily ;

The R onald Cook, S e n i o r , f a m i l y ;

My h u s b a n d 's b r o t h e r , George F. DeWald;

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

e ffo rts. Many p e o p le c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e a c h ie v e m e n t o f t h e a u t h o r 's

g o a l. W hile i t would be f i t t i n g and p r o p e r to r e c o g n i z e a l l o f t h e s e

have been s e l e c t e d i n to k e n o f my deep a p p r e c i a t i o n t o a i l f u r t h e i r

Dr. Edgar A. K e l le y , D i s s e r t a t i o n C om m ittee C h a i r , and C om m ittee

Member Dr. Kenneth D i c k i e , o f t h e D e p a rtm en t o f E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r­

sh ip , W e ste rn M ic h ig a n U n i v e r s i t y , and C om m ittee Member Dr. H e r b e rt

H. Dobbs, r e g i s te r e d p r o fe s s io n a l e n g in e e r, reco g n ized the v a lu e o f

D r. R i c h a r d M u n ste rm a n , fo rm e rly of th e E d u c a tio n a l L e a d e rsh ip

D e p a rtm e n t, f o r t h e i r p a t i e n t p r e p a r a t o r y work; to Dr. Lana J. Ford,

o f t h e WMU O c c u p a tio n a l T herapy D e p a r tm e n t, f o r s h a r i n g h e r e x t e n s i v e

E n g in e e rin g D e p a rtm e n t, f o r h i s h e l p i n t h e u s e o f t h e HBDI w i t h

e n g in e e rin g p erso n n el. Mrs. Siham F a r e s o f The G ra d u a te C o lle g e gave

A ccess t o t h e d a t a from t h e D efense S ystem s^ Management C o lle g e

(DSMC) was a u t h o r i z e d on December 3, 1986, by Navy C a p ta in George K.

R e p r o d u c e d with p e r m i s s io n of t h e co p y rig h t o w n e r. F u r th e r r e p r o d u c tio n prohibited w ith o u t p e r m is s io n .

C a b e ll, J r., C om m andant o f t h e DSMC d u r i n g 1 9 8 6 - 1 9 8 8 . A ir Force

w i t h Dr. G e rry Weichmann to r e v i e w a l l d a t a p r i o r t o r e l e a s e i n o r d e r

larg e number (800) o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n c r e a s e d th e l i k e l i h o o d o f s u c ­

d u r i n g t h e e a r l y 1980s by a d m i n i s t e r i n g t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI t o t h e

s tu d e n ts, fa c u lty , and s t a f f o f t h e DSMC. H is v i s i o n and i n i t i a t i v e

p o p u la tio n , 800 s t u d e n t p rogram m anagers a t t e n d i n g th e D efense S ys

b r a i n dom inance r e s e a r c h , and e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e so u rces, p o stu

late d s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s and HBDI quad

g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e MBTI and HBDI t o d e m o g r a p h i c c a t e g o

l a r i t y t o m a le s w i t h r e g a r d t o MBTI t y p e and HBDI q u a d r a n t r e p r e s e n

f e m a le s t u d e n t m a n a g e rs . No d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e MBTI and HBDI d i s t r i

c iv ilia n MBTI i n t u i t i v e s t e n d e d t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d ra n t D r e p r e s e n t a

The most advanced technology has been used to photo

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re

Member Dr. Kenneth D i c k i e , o f t h e D e p a rtm en t o f E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r

larg e number (800) o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n c r e a s e d th e l i k e l i h o o d o f s u c

th e d i s s e r t a t i o n t y p i s t "p ar e x c e lle n c e ." I c o n sid e r m y self ex