评论
打印
In 1942, a mother-daughter duo Katherine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers developed a questionnaire that classified people's personalities into 16 types.
1942年，一对母女，凯瑟琳·库克·布里格斯和伊莎贝尔·布里格斯·迈尔斯设计了一张问卷，把人的性格分为十六种。
Called the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, or MBTI, it would go on to become one of the world's most widely-used personality tests.
这就是迈尔斯-布里格斯类型指标，简称MBTI，后来发展成为全世界使用范围最广的性格测试之一。
Today, personality testing is a multi-billion dollar industry used by individuals, schools, and companies.
如今，性格测试已发展成为价值数十亿美元的行业，个人、学校和企业都在使用。
But none of these tests, including the MBTI, the Big Five, the DiSC assessment, the Process Communication Model, and the Enneagram, actually reveal truths about personality.
但这些测试，包括MBTI、大五类人格测试、DiSC测评、过程沟通模型，以及九型人格测试，都不能真正揭示性格真相。
In fact, it's up for debate whether personality is a stable, measurable feature of an individual at all.
其实，性格是否是一个人身上稳定且可测量的特征仍尚存争议。
Part of the problem is the way the tests are constructed.
一部分问题在于性格测试的构成方式。
Each is based on a different set of metrics to define personality:
每种测试都是基于一套不同的性格定义指标：
the Myers-Briggs, for instance, focuses on features like introversion and extroversion to classify people into personality "types,"
例如，迈尔斯-布里格斯测试，主要按照内向与外向将人分为不同的“性格类型”，
while the Big Five scores participants on five different traits.
而大五类人格测试则按照五种不同的特质评估受试者。
Most are self-reported, meaning the results are based on questions participants answer about themselves.
问题大多由受试者自陈，也即是说测试结果是基于受试者自己对问题的回答。
So it's easy to lie, but even with the best intentions, objective self-evaluation is tricky.
因此非常容易作假，但即使极为认真，客观的自我评估也很难。
Take this question from the Big Five: How would you rate the accuracy of the statement "I am always prepared"?
以这个选自大五类的问题为例：你会怎么评定“我总是做好了准备”这句话的准确度呢？
There's a clear favorable answer here, which makes it difficult to be objective.
面对一个明显讨人喜欢的答案，保持客观会变得很困难。
People subconsciously aim to please:
人们潜意识地希望取悦他人：
when asked to agree or disagree, we show a bias toward answering however we believe the person or institution asking the question wants us to answer.
当被问到同意与否时，我们会倾向于回答我们认为问出这个问题的个人或组织想让我们回答的那个答案。
Here's another question -- what do you value more, justice or fairness? What about harmony or forgiveness?
再看一个问题--你更看重什么，正义还是公平？和睦还是宽恕？
You may well value both sides of each pair, but the MBTI would force you to choose one.
你可能同样重视每组中的两方，但是MBTI测试要求你必须选择一个。
And while it's tempting to assume the results of that forced choice must somehow reveal a true preference, they don't:
同时它假定了勉强选出的答案所得出的结果一定可以在某种程度上揭示真实的偏好，但其实并不能。
When faced with the same forced choice question multiple times, the same person will sometimes change their answer.
当同样的勉强选择多次出现后，同一受试人有时会改变答案。
Given these design flaws, it's no surprise that test results can be inconsistent.
考虑到这些设计上的缺陷，测试结果不一致也就不奇怪了。
One study found that nearly half of people who take the Myers-Briggs a second time only five weeks after the first get assigned a different type.
一项研究发现，如果在短短五周后进行第二次迈尔斯-布里格斯测试，将近半数会得到与第一次不同的性格类型。
And other studies on the Myers-Briggs have found that people with very similar scores end up being placed in different categories,
其他研究发现，迈尔斯-布里格斯测试会把分数相似的受试者分到不同类别，
suggesting that the strict divisions between personality types don't reflect real-life nuances.
表明性格类型间的严格分类并不能反映现实生活的细微差异。
Complicating matters further, the definitions of personality traits are constantly shifting.
更复杂的是，性格特质的定义并非一成不变的。
The Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, who popularized the terms introvert and extrovert,
瑞士精神病学家卡尔·荣格，正是他向大众普及了内向与外向这对术语，
defined an introvert as someone who sticks to their principles regardless of situation, and an extrovert as someone who molds their self according to circumstance.
他将内向者定义为不论处于何种情境都坚守自我准则的人，而外向者则根据境况改变自我。
Introversion later came to mean shyness, while an extrovert was someone outgoing.
内向后来变成害羞的意思，而外向者指爱交际的人。
Today, an introvert is someone who finds alone time restorative,
如今，内向者又变成认为独处时光能够滋养自我的人，
an extrovert draws energy from social interaction, and an ambivert falls somewhere between these two extremes.
外向者则从社交中获取能量，中间性格者则处于这两种极端之间。
The notion of an innate, unchanging personality forms the basis of all these tests.
性格是天生的、不变的这一观念正是这些性格测试的基础。
But research increasingly suggests that personality shifts during key periods -- like our school years, or when we start working.
但研究愈发表明性格会在关键时期发生转变--如读书期间，或当我们开始工作时。
Though certain features of a person's behavior may remain relatively stable over time, others are malleable, moulded by our upbringing, life experiences, and age.
尽管个人行为的某些特征可能会一直保持相对稳定，其他的特征则是易变的，会被我们的教养、生活经历和年龄塑造。
All of this matters more or less depending on how a personality test is used.
这些因素的影响或大或小取决于性格测试的使用方法。
Though anyone using them should take the results with a grain of salt,
尽管任何参与性格测试的人都应该对结果持保留态度，
there isn't much harm in individual use -- and users may even learn some new terms and concepts in the process.
但个人参与性格测试没多大害处--反而可能从其中学到一些新的术语和概念。
But the use of personality tests extends far beyond self discovery.
但性格测试的使用已经大大超出自我发现的作用。
Schools use them to advise students what to study and what jobs to pursue.
学校使用性格测试来建议学生学什么以及从事什么工作。
Companies use them decide who to hire and for what positions.
企业使用性格测试来决定雇佣什么人以及给他什么职位。
Yet the results don't predict how a person will perform in a specific role.
但是测试结果并不能预测一个人在特定角色中的表现。
So by using personality tests this way, institutions can deprive people of opportunities they'd excel at, or discourage them from considering certain paths.
所以如此这般使用性格测试，院校可能会剥夺了人们在擅长领域的发展机会，或打消他们选择某些道路的念头。
