Sample2 MBTI College Retention Causal Comparative

Running head: PERSONALITY AND COLLEGE RETENTION 1

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Personality Dimensions and College Retention

Lisa L. Foxworth

University of St. Thomas

Research Professor: Catherine R. Barber, Ph.D.

March, 2011

PERSONALITY AND COLLEGE RETENTION 2

Table of Contents

Abstract 4

Chapter 1: Introduction 5

Introduction 5

Personality development and the MBTI 6

Ethics of MBTI assessment 7

Research question and justification 8

Chapter 2: Literature Review 10

A Conceptual Framework for Retention Studies 10

Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in Retention Efforts 12

Implications of MBTI type for college students 13

MBTI and college student development 14

MBTI patterns in college, persistence, and academic performance 16

Study Rationale 18

Chapter 3: Method 20

Sample

20

Measures 20

MBTI 20

Outcomes 24

Design 25

Procedure and Data Collection 25

Data Analysis Plan 26

Ethical Issues 27


Chapter 4: Results 28

Chapter 5: Discussion 31

Strengths and Limitations 34

Recommendations and Action Planning 35

References 37

Appendix 40


Abstract

This study focuses on the associations between individual, paired, and dominant personality

dimensions of first-year students at a small, Catholic, liberal arts university. Entering freshman

cohorts during the years 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 voluntarily took the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator personality assessment. The resulting sample of those students’ MBTI preferences

consisted of 599 participants. Analyses focused on personality dimensions as they related to

retention, GPA, and length of time to graduate. The analyses supported previous research

studies documenting higher GPA’s and retention among the Orientation and Energy dimensions

of personality. However, unexpected associations were found between dominant personality

types and retention. Specifically, Dominant Sensing students were retained at a significantly

higher rate than the Dominant Feeling students. Dominant Intuitive students were retained at a

significantly higher rate than the Dominant Feeling students. These findings indicate that the

University’s greatest attrition occurred among the Dominant Feeling dimension of personality,

which was also the dimension of the highest proportion of incoming students. Recommendations

for improving both student retention and student performance across personality dimensions are

provided.


Chapter 1

Introduction

Background Information

Retention of first-year college students is a significant concern for many institutions. The

percentage of students who choose to return and ultimately graduate from a college can

significantly affect that institution’s college rankings. Retention and graduation rates can

compose up to 25% of the final score that determines a college’s ranking among other

institutions (Morse, Flanigan, Yerkie, Lee, and Setoodeh, 2004). In turn, improvement in a

university’s ranking can serve as a catalyst for boosting its selectivity score. For instance,

improved rankings for a college can generate more interest in that college among parents and

students. This often results in an increase in the number of applications that college receives in

subsequent years. More applications equate to a smaller percentage of applicants accepted,

making the institution appear to be more selective (Ehrenberg, 2005). Student selectivity can

account for 15% of a university’s final score, which again has the potential of boosting the

institution’s ranking. Thus, an upward spiraling effect in institutional solidity could be achieved

by increased ranking through better retention and selectivity ratings.

However, look beyond the scope of these rankings and a more significant issue exists: Is

there a way to identify students who are at-risk of dropping out of college so that a university can

better meet this group’s emotional and academic needs, thus increasing retention? Although

there are several relevant theories and practices on retention, this study will focus on an often-

used personality assessment tool, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), to determine

whether associations exist between certain dimensions of personality type and retention of first-

year university students at a small, liberal arts, Catholic institution.


Personality Development and the MBTI

Differences in individual personalities are apparent at a very early age and many

psychologists agree that a person’s personality is set early in life. Most psychologists will also

agree that personality is formed through a combination of innate and environmental influences.

Proponents of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator assessment believe that, although individuals

tend to develop alternate psychological processes as they grow older, they will always be more

comfortable with the processes that developed first than they will be with functions developed

later in life (Zeisset, 2006). Consequently, they will prefer to operate primarily through those

functions they have acquired early in life and have since perfected.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a self-report assessment based on Carl

Jung’s theory of psychological type (Lunenburg, 2000). Jung theorized that people take in

information through either an intuitive process or a sensing process. Individuals who prefer the

sensing process are more attuned to concrete details and acquiring information through the

senses. People who prefer the intuitive process are more attuned to the abstract and connecting

ideas, options, and possibilities. Jung’s theory also takes into account how people act on the

information they take in, through either the thinking or the feeling process. People who have a

preference for feeling will make decisions based on values and how it affects people.

Conversely, a person who has a thinking preference will make decisions based on logic and

analytical reasoning. Lastly, Jung believed that two attitudes were responsible for determining

how people acquired energy. The extravert draws energy from the outside world by engaging

others, while the introvert draws energy from within by reflecting on events.

Katharine Briggs and later her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, expanded on Jung’s theory

by adding a fourth component, orientation to the outer world. A person can either have a

preference to orientate through a judgment process (making decisions) or a perception process


(gathering information). By using the eight type codes (Introvert vs. Extravert, Sensing vs.

Intuitive, Feeling vs. Thinking, and Judging vs. Perceiving) and Briggs’ observations, Myers

created questionnaire items that would identify a person’s personality type based on four

preferences. The hope of Myers and Briggs was to create a tool that would promote world peace

by helping individuals to understand each other and that would also assist in career placement

during World War II (MBTI Certification Program Handbook, 2007).

Over the past 50 years, the utilization of the MBTI assessment has grown considerably.

It remains a consistent and reliable psychological tool to determine personality preference. Not

only can we gain a greater understanding of others and ourselves through the MBTI profile, we

can take the insight gained from it as an aid to many aspects of college life. The Career Services

Office at the University of St. Thomas uses the MBTI in academic major advising, career

development, residential life training, team training, and the first-year experience for incoming

students. In fact, my first experience with the MBTI was upon entry to the University. My

assessment results revealed that I had greater preferences for Introversion, Sensing, Feeling, and

Judging. However, my clarity between Sensing and Intuition was very slight. In my search to

determine whether my natural proclivity was for Intuition, I attended a MBTI Step II training and

learned that although I preferred most facets of the Sensing preference, I also identify with a few

characteristics inherent to the Intuitive dimension. The MBTI assessment has not only given me

an understanding of how I relate to the world around me, but has also gave me a deeper

understanding of my preferences and how those preferences influence my communication with

others.

Ethics of MBTI Assessment

Three primary professional values guide the use of the MBTI in the Career Services

Office. First, only a trained professional can interpret the MBTI results, as opposed to handing


the results to the student for self-interpretation. Second, the office maintains confidentiality

regarding the student’s MBTI type. Finally, the student must affirm that they relate to the

personality type description. It is vital that people undergoing the MBTI assessment understand

that there are no “bad” types. The advantage of the MBTI’s sixteen unique personality profiles

is that they acknowledge the communication and thought processes that each personality

contributes to a group. Instead of focusing on differences between types as negative and stifling,

the focus is on understanding that differences among the types can illuminate what previously

was in the dark. Herein lays one of the greatest attributes of the MBTI assessment: its ability to

generate a greater understanding of oneself and others. However, it is important to keep in mind

that a psychological disorder, depressed mood, or other significant life changes during the time

of the MBTI administration can yield erroneous results.

Research Question and Justification

To date, the University of St. Thomas has had four previous cohorts take the MBTI as

part of their first-year college experience program. The assessment results primarily aided the

students in a better sense of self-understanding and as a guide in researching choices of majors.

These administrations took place in September of 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. By designing a

quantitative research design that matches the MBTI results of these students to the archival

retention data in the University records, it can be determined whether associations exist between

certain dimensions of the MBTI personality type and retention. I predict that there will be a

negative association between retention and preference for the Sensing, Thinking, and

Extraversion dimensions of the MBTI at this particular University.

My rationale for this hypothesis is that current research shows a greater influx of Sensing

students enrolling in college classes than in the past (Schroeder, 1993). Previously, the majority

of students who attended college preferred the Intuitive function, as do many students identified


as gifted and talented (Brody and Mills, 2005). Therefore, professors (who also tend to be

Intuitive types) may not adapt their teaching techniques to incorporate the learning styles of the

Sensing student. In addition, I believe the University will have greater appeal to the Introverted,

Feeling types due to the introspective, personal, and Catholic-centered nature of the campus

which places an emphasis on holistic development of the student.

If the results of the study determine differential rates of retention according to MBTI

preferences, then the University can develop a plan to better serve the needs of those students.

For example, depending on the data shown by the research, a plan might target campus activities

that more actively engage at-risk students on campus. In addition, learning skills workshops

could help students identify their preferred learning styles, as well as provide information on

developing alternate learning strategies. Likewise, information disseminated to professors on the

learning styles and preferences of individual MBTI types could result in better teaching

techniques that would be more effective for all students.


Chapter 2

Literature Review

A Conceptual Framework for College Retention

Studies on college retention have existed since the 1950’s, but the lack of clarification in

defining the “college dropout” and the inability of colleges to accurately track a student once he

or she had left the campus, failed to give an accurate picture of the reasons why a student does

not persist at a particular college. For example, consider the student who voluntarily chooses to

withdraw from college as opposed to the academically suspended student who fails to make

adequate grades (Tinto, 1975). Are both students “drop outs”? Additionally, research points to a

multitude of variables that can factor into the reasons why students fail to continue in college.

Tinto argues that a better understanding of retention could evolve if a conceptual

framework existed that would pinpoint the factors contributing to a student either persisting in

higher education or dropping out before attaining a college degree. He proposed that a

prospective student enters college with attributes that may help or hinder his or her performance

in college. For instance, a student may have college-educated parents who have high

expectations that their children will graduate from college. This student may also possess certain

individual attributes, such as intellectual ability, academic curiosity, organizational skills, and a

drive to achieve. All of these factors, coupled with a strong academic preparation through

previous schooling, can greatly influence the likelihood of the student persisting in a college

education. Unfortunately, the opposite is also true: A student who lacks college-educated

parents, is missing key individual attributes, and has had poor academic preparation will face

greater challenges upon entering the college environment. These precursors to higher education

combine to form the goal commitment of the student, which in turn affects grade performance

and further intellectual development while in college. High levels of grade performance and


intellectual development lead to academic integration, which in turn leads to new and higher

levels of goal commitment (Tinto, 1975).

Tinto also believed that social experiences factored into the student’s integration into the

campus. The faculty and peer-group interactions that a student experiences can further social

integration into campus life and can result in a higher institutional commitment. Social

integration and academic integration, as well as pre-college experiences, jointly factor into

whether a student chooses to stay or leave the college environment. Tinto further explained that

students who integrate academically, but not socially, may not find fulfillment in college.

Likewise, students who integrate socially, but not academically, may find themselves

academically suspended from college. In summary, Tinto’s theoretical model of dropout argues

that the factors influencing a student in persisting or dropping out of college are multi-

dimensional. Furthermore, degree of persistence can not only be heavily influenced by the

student’s initial goals and commitments, but can also continue to evolve as new experiences

within the institution help modify those goals and commitments over time. Tinto also stresses

the importance of “good institutional fit” in reducing student dropout rates. If students cannot

see the benefits of staying in college as opposed to the cost and time investment, then they may

choose an alternative that better serves their needs. Similarly, students may not see the same

level of faculty and staff commitment that they desire in a college environment and leave to seek

a more challenging or friendly institution (Tinto, 1975).

Tinto (1993) elaborates further on the importance of institutional commitment stressing

three principles of retention program effectiveness:

1. Institutions are committed to the students they serve. The welfare of the student is

primary.


2. Individuals at the institution are committed to the education of all students (not just

some).

3. Individuals at the institution are committed to the development of supportive social

and academic communities in which all students are integrated as full members. It is

the institution’s obligation (through its programs) to provide ways for students to

integrate into the community (as cited in Exemplary Student Retention Programs,

2004, p. 55).

These three principles of institutional commitment to the student population have become the

cornerstone of many past successful retention models and continue to be a strong influence in

quality retention program planning today (Exemplary Student Retention Programs, 2004).

However, for this level of institutional commitment to all students to exist, one must have a

deeper understanding of the population that is present within the institution. The Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator assessment is one tool that can aid an institution in developing an understanding

of their student population.

Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in Retention Efforts

When students matriculate to a particular university, it would seem logical that they

would choose to attend a university that meshes with their values, their sociability needs, and

their academic interests. However, this may not always be the situation. Some students do

arrive at college with a firm sense of identity and knowledge of their psychosocial needs, but

others may arrive with less self-awareness. In fact, these latter students may have selected the

university based more on others’ considerations and suggestions than on their own preferences.

Regardless, the university shares a commitment to aiding such students in their journey for self-

discovery and connection with the institution. The MBTI assessment is not only a tool that can

help in an individual’s self-understanding, but its utilization can also be one component of a


retention program that assists universities in understanding how an individual’s perception of

university life is affected by his or her individual MBTI type, with some psychological types

persisting and others dropping out. Furthermore, since the MBTI is a commonly used tool in

many university career services offices, it becomes a logical and economical resource for

colleges to better understand their freshman population.

Implications of MBTI type for college students. An individual’s MBTI type indicates

how he or she prefers to interact with the environment. In a college environment, a student’s

MBTI type has significance in regards to the institution’s social offerings and how well the

classroom and academic environments match the student’s preferred type. For example, the first

letter of the MBTI type determines an individual’s source of energy. Therefore, it indicates

whether the student acquires energy through either an Extraverted (E) or an Introverted (I)

attitude. An extraverted student will prefer a wide breadth of interests and will acquire energy

by frequent interactions with others and the outside world. The introvert on the other hand

energizes through reflecting on the inner world of ideas, and these students would desire depth,

not breadth, in their interests. This may be reflected in a small, but intimate group of friends and

limited, but deep interests. Both Es and Is can thrive in a college environment, provided that

opportunities abound for both types to interact in their preferred way.

The second and third letters of a type indicate how a person interacts with the

environment through a Perceiving function, either Intuition (N) or Sensing (S) and a Judging

function, either Thinking (T) or Feeling (F). Intuitives prefer to gather information from the

world through imagination, possibilities, and intuition. They most often come to understand

through hunches or “light-bulb” moments. Furthermore, they most likely enjoy investigating

abstract ideas and theories, as well as learning for the sake of learning. Conversely, Sensing

students will prefer to gather information using the five senses, concentrating on specifics,


details, and concrete data. They have a fine eye and memory for details. Consequently, Sensors

will prefer learning only what they need to know to accomplish their tasks and will do so through

practice, memorization, and recall.

The second set of functions pertains to how an individual acts on the information they

have gathered through their Sensing or Intuition function, and this will occur through either a

Feeling function or Thinking function. Students who prefer the Feeling function will act in a

way that is value-orientated. They will question whether the information is in line with their

values and beliefs or they may act in a way that takes in the considerations of themselves or

others. They are motivated to work well when a human component exists in their work, either

through positive encouragement from a teacher or mentor, or through discovering how their

learning relates to others (Provost and Anchors, 1987). In contrast, the Thinking individual will

make decisions for very analytical and logical reasons and will seldom consider the human

element, instead relying on facts and logical conclusions. The Thinking student will thrive under

a teacher who recognizes competence and expertise in a subject.

The last letter, either Judging (J) or Perceiving (P), determines how the person orients to

the world. A Judging person prefers structure, organization, and completion, whereas a

Perceiving person will prefer spontaneity, open-endedness, and play before work. An

individual’s orientation to the world, in addition to their attitude dimension, also determines

which of the functions (N, S, T, or F) develops first in the personality.

MBTI and college student development. Students who have not developed a clear

understanding of how they best take in information and make decisions are more apt to vacillate

between the functions, producing confusion and frustration for the person (Myers, McCaulley,

Quenk, and Hammer, 2003). This lack of type development in an individual can occur when

one’s environment does not foster an appreciation of the person’s innate type preference. In


response, individuals may begin to distrust their true type and exhibit confusion of their preferred

functioning processes. Lawrence (1993) states that the “most important thing is the power of the

dominant process…if the best learning is to happen, thinking types must pursue logical order;

feeling types must follow their hearts; sensing types must strive to engage their senses in the

master of practical skills; and intuitive types must follow whatever inspires” (p. 29).

Skilled counseling staff in colleges can aid in the process of student type development

through building awareness of type preferences and building students’ insight into how these

aspects of personality can affect learning styles, possible academic and career paths, and social

interactions. For example, a college program called Decision Tree (Exemplary Student

Retention Programs, 2004) is one example of an effective counseling-based retention effort.

Developed at a highly residential university, this program utilized the counseling offices to aid

students in processing their decisions on whether to stay or leave the university. Using this

retention effort, counselors contacted all first-year students about four to six weeks into the

school year and asked if they were considering leaving the university. Counselors then invited

students who responded in the affirmative to speak with them regarding their reasons for wanting

to leave. Those students who accepted the invitation met with counselors to discuss alternatives

to transferring or dropping out of the university. Counselors addressed the students’ concerns

through either counseling or appropriate referrals to other departments within the university. The

success of this program can partly explain the university’s high retention rate of about 86%.

However, one might ask whether this program might have been more helpful to the students’

self-growth if the counselors had integrated the use of the MBTI in their counseling sessions and

articulated to students how their type preferences can come into play during decision-making

processes.


Another type of student awareness program initiated at Marygrove College, the First

Year Seminar program, emphasizes self-awareness and learning how to learn through MBTI type

awareness (McClanaghan, 2000). This study illustrates a method for integrating the MBTI into

retention programs. Objectives of the study were to identify any clustering of learning style

profiles at Marygrove College, introduce students to learning style theory, provide workshops to

help students develop their alternative functions, and provide support to faculty in learning style

theory and development (McClanaghan, 2000). The outcomes of this study determined that

there was a higher ratio of NF students at Marygrove College (40% of African American and

39% of Caucasian) than is present in the general population. McClanaghan surmises that this

may be attributed to the average age of 32 in the undergraduate student population, as older

students may desire a more personal educational environment. More college programs like this

can help students to identify and continue mastering their type strengths while also working to

improve their type weaknesses in relation to their academic classes and communication with

others.

MBTI patterns in college persistence and academic performance. Schroeder (1993)

published an article on the recent change in proportions of MBTI type preferences of college

students. In the past, Intuitives sought out the college environment to nurture their desire for the

abstract and theories. These students often found themselves flourishing in classes taught by

their like-minded, Intuitive professors. Meanwhile, their Sensing counterparts often chose to

enter the workforce in professions that required practical, hands-on skills. Schroeder noted that

recently an increasing percentage of Sensing students are now pursuing higher education and

enrollments are now more accurately representing the proportions of Sensing and Intuitives in

the general population. He found that this generally held truer for institutions that do not place a

high emphasis on entrance examination scores – an area where Sensing students do not generally


excel. One of the most interesting points brought out in this article was the degree of disconnect

experienced between the Intuitive faculty and their Sensing students. Faculty members are often

frustrated by the Sensing student who asks for specifics like: What do I need to study for the

exam? How many pages does my paper need to be? Why do I need to know this? Likewise,

Sensing students are likely to be just as frustrated at professors who refuse to give them the

specifics that their type demands. One concern of this study is the age of the data. Is this same

degree of disconnect visible today or have professors adjusted to the influx of newer learning

styles? Furthermore, has implementation of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy resulted in

high school graduates that are more adept, flexible, or skilled in more diverse learning styles?

Not all institutions have seen a greater proportion of the Sensing student, as indicated in

the aforementioned McClannaghan’s (2000) Marygrove study. McClannaghan’s data indicate

that the Marygrove College campus attracts a larger percentage of NFs, which did not fall into

the norms of college campus populations during the time of this study. McClannaghan attributed

this to the nature of the small, Catholic, liberal arts college. This further illustrates the fact that

individual institution environments may have a tendency to attract certain personality types.

Unfortunately, this research did not include the retention statistics of the campus, and it would be

interesting to know what proportion of these NF students persisted in attaining their degree. For

instance, Kahn, Nauta, Gailbreath, Tipps, and Chartrand (2002) looked at patterns of type and

retention more closely by sampling 677 entering freshman at a large southeastern university who

elected to take the MBTI and participate in the study. Kahn, et al. found that preferences for

Extraversion and Sensing were associated with greater odds of retention than were found in

Introverts and Intuitives (2002). This further illustrates how different university environments

may attract MBTI types that better fit the needs of the individual student, yet the study did not

indicate what factors in the campus environment might have aided in the retention of the ES


students. For example, a large university setting may have greater appeal to the Extraverted

student who energizes by interactions with individuals and participation in campus events. One

might also hypothesize that this university offered a diversity of degrees that led to practical,

realistic careers that would attract and retain the Sensing student.

A similar study entailed analyzing the MBTI results of 6,280 Elon University (a private

school in North Carolina) students over a 9-year period. This study sought to find correlations

between MBTI type and grade performance across academic disciplines. In addition, the study

attempted to find correlations in MBTI type and average GPA. Their results determined that all

IJ and FJ types had statistically higher average GPAs (DiRienzo, Das, Synn, Kitts, and McGrath,

2010). This same study also found that all Extraverted and Perceiving types had lower average

GPAs. A study by Barrineau (2005) reinforced the Elon findings by focusing on a 10-year

period of entering freshman at a liberal arts and sciences college in the Southeast. In this study,

Barrineau reported that approximately 69% of student attrition involved Perceiving students and

73% of these same students were Intuitive Perceivers. This is a recurring pattern in MBTI

studies on type and retention: the Judging types are often better at meeting deadlines,

organization, and structure that proves to be more conducive to expectations in the classroom

and result in a stronger degree of persistence.

Study Rationale

As illustrated in the aforementioned studies, a wealth of data exists on the MBTI and its

application to college students. However, the amount of data published within the past ten years

has diminished. Perhaps this is due to the addition of Tinto’s more recent retention research that

focuses on institutional commitment to student populations. Regardless of the reasons for the

decline in recent research, I believe that the MBTI can still yield valuable data for retention

efforts. Most notably, such data can help to understand a college’s unique student population


and to direct efforts that best connect with the population’s needs. Second, the MBTI can aid in

a student’s search for self-awareness and fulfillment. Finally, an understanding of the college

population can build awareness among faculty as to the best teaching methods for varying

learning styles.

The current study will improve on former studies by compiling multiple aspects of

college retention at this particular University. Primarily, this study will focus on the freshman

cohorts of the previous four years by addressing any associations between MBTI type and

retention. However, it will expand on prior research by relating the findings back to the specific

dynamics of the University’s environment.


Chapter 3

Method

Sample

The sample for this study consisted of four previous cohorts of entering first-year

students at the University of St. Thomas. Since all the data are archival, student consent was not

required to analyze and report the findings. These students entered the University in the years

2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007.

Each student had the opportunity to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

assessment as part of his or her First-Year Experience (FYE) program. Of the 1,165 students

who entered the University in this 4-year period, 599 elected to take the MBTI. Of the students

who took the MBTI, 31.6% self-identified as White, 5.2% as Black, 30.2% as Hispanic, and

16.9% as Asian/Hawaiian Pacific. The remaining 16.1% reported other ethnicities. These

percentages are similar to the cohorts themselves which reported 35.5% White, 4.7% Black,

31.8% Hispanic, and 13.8% Asian/Hawaiian Pacific. In addition, 67.4% of those taking the

MBTI were female and 32.6% were male; again showing a similarity to the cohorts who were

63.5% female and 36.5% male. The majority of the cohorts reported identification with the

Catholic faith, which might be expected due to the Catholic affiliation of the institution. The

remaining students in the cohort reported a large variation in religious affiliations, which reflects

the multi-cultural make-up of the campus. The mean age of the cohorts combined was 17.62,

which was similar to the 17.55 mean of those students taking the MBTI. Fifteen percent of the

students in the combined cohorts were conditional admits.

Measures

MBTI. The MBTI (Myers & Myers, 1998) is a self-report instrument composed of 93

items that determines the personality preferences of the student on each of four separate


dichotomous scales: Extraversion-Introversion, Sensing-Intuitive, Feeling-Thinking, and

Judging-Perception. The measure yields a four-letter type preference by forcing the student to

choose one of two dichotomously opposing answers for each item on the assessment. The

majority of answers chosen by the student on each dichotomy determine the student’s personality

preference on that particular scale. In the event that a tie results on any dichotomy, then the tie-

breaker is determined by giving favor to the I, N, F, or P preference, depending on the scale

being tallied. The reasoning behind this scoring method originates from the lower incidence of I,

N, F, and P dimensions occurring in the general population and as such, the preference of the

majority could produce a more favorable environmental response for the E, S, T, and J

preferences. As a result, an individual may feel a greater desire to affiliate with the majority’s

preference on some of the assessment items, instead of their natural preference. Therefore, if a

tie does occur on opposing dichotomies, the tie is broken by selecting the type perceived as less

desirable because of its minority occurrence in the general population (Myers et al., 2003).

The four individual dimensions of MBTI type interact in a way that is referred to as Type

Dynamics. This interaction of the dimensions results in one of the functions of personality

taking the lead role in the person’s life and as such, is called the dominant function. The

dominant function develops first and remains the strongest through life. It develops through its

relationship to the other three dimensions of the personality type. To determine the dominant

function, one must first look at the type’s orientation to the world (indicated by the last letter, J

or P). If the MBTI type ends in J, then the Judging function, either Thinking or Feeling, is the

extraverted function, or the function that is used in the outer world. Because of this, it is the

function that others will most notice in the person. Conversely, a Perceiving type will extravert

either the Intuition or the Sensing function. Since the two middle letters must provide balance to


each other, the remaining letter of the middle functions becomes an introverted function, or the

function that is used in the person’s inner world.

One additional step is necessary to determine which of these middle letters becomes the

dominant function of the personality. Once it is determined which of the middle letters is

extraverted and which is introverted, the first letter of the personality type will identify the

dominant function. If the person is an Extravert, then the function indicated as extraverted will

be the dominant function. If the person is an Introvert, then the function indicated as introverted

will be the dominant function. The remaining function of the pair is then identified as the

auxiliary dimension of the personality. The auxiliary develops after the dominant and its purpose

is to support and balance the dominant function (Myers et al, 2003). Table 1 illustrates the

dominant function for each of the MBTI types (see Appendix).

The Form M Profile, an on-line version of the MBTI, was used in the current study.

Before the administration of the assessment, students attended an informational session on the

MBTI that included a background of the assessment, directions on taking the assessment, and

some of the applications of their resulting type. The students took the assessment by a

predetermined deadline through an on-line web address from the convenience of their residence.

Students then met again as a group to receive the results of their assessment and a group

interpretation of the meaning of their results. Career counselors also met with individual

students for follow-up sessions if the students requested more information about their type

preference and its implications in their college career. The researcher retrieved the students’

MBTI types from the archival records in the University’s Career Services Office.

Internal consistency of the MBTI Form M instrument measured using logical split-half,

consecutive item split-half, and coefficient alpha computations have yielded high reliability

scores (Myers et al., 2003). All scores exceeded 0.89 and the majority of scores were in the


0.91+ range, suggesting high reliability of the instrument. In addition, test-retest reliabilities of

the instrument have shown a greater consistency in type preferences over time than one would

expect by chance occurrence (Carlyn, 1977). The reliability scores for test-retest studies range

from 0.83 to 0.97 (Myers et al., 2003). When changes have occurred, they have generally been in

only one preference of the four-letter type or in cases where the clarity was low. Additionally,

reliability scores along the T-F dichotomy remain the lowest of the four pairs since the judgment

function is one of the more difficult preferences to develop (Myers et al., 2003). Another

method of measuring reliability of an instrument, equivalent forms reliability, involves

measuring the results of one form of the instrument to another form of the instrument; MBTI

research does not utilize this type of reliability testing (MBTI Certification Program Handbook,

2007).

Validity of the MBTI is supported in analysis of the four preference scales as well as the

whole type preference. The assessment demonstrates content validity with a fairly evenly

distributed number of test items in each of the four dimensions, which represents a well-balanced

instrument (MBTI Certification Program Handbook, 2007). The instrument’s face validity is

very strong for some test items; however, it also incorporates test items that have low face

validity to filter for the effects of “social desirability” in responses (MBTI Certification Program

Handbook, 2007).

The MBTI research uses four methods of assessing construct validity: comparison of

results to best-fit type, comparison of reported type to career selections by self-selection ratio,

factor analysis, and comparison to similar constructs within another validated instrument (MBTI

Certification Program Handbook, 2007). After taking the MBTI and receiving an interpretation

from a qualified professional, respondents receive a description of their type to determine

whether they agree with the assessment results. In cases where the respondent does not validate


his or her type, the professional may provide alternate descriptions to the respondent to

determine whether a change in one or two functions may yield a better fit (Myers et al, 2003).

Agreement in these “best fit” studies range from 35% to 62% and the percentage rate increased

to over 95% when best fit was limited to three of the dimensions as opposed to all four (Myers et

al, 2003). Exploratory factor analyses have demonstrated strong support for the presence of four

factors in this measure. Confirmatory factor analyses have further supported the coherence of

the dimensions (Myers et al, 2003). Correlations of the scales with other instruments support

Myers and Briggs’ theory of type development, as well as the behaviors associated with the four

dichotomies measured by the MBTI instrument (Myers et al., 2003). However, one must bear in

mind that a large amount of research on the MBTI instrument’s validity and reliability is

undertaken and published by the Center for Applied Psychological Type (CAPT), the same

organization that distributes and profits from the sales of the MBTI instrument.

Outcomes. The outcomes of this research were measured by determining if students

returned to the University in subsequent academic years. This measure served to determine

what, if any, associations existed between MBTI types and retention at the University. In

addition, in cases where persisting students graduated from the University, the comparison of

students’ MBTI types against their cumulative grade point average, and the length of time to

complete the degree, served to determine if any additional patterns existed among the data. This

information will help to identify whether personality types differ in terms of drive to persist

(length of time to graduate), and level of achievement (GPA). The Office of Institutional

Research at the University provided all archival retention and graduation data for the purposes of

this study.


Design

This study involved a causal-comparative design that attempted to determine whether an

association exists between the grouping variable of MBTI type dimensions and the outcome

variable of student retention at the University. This design was chosen primarily due to the

existing data within the University’s archival records, as well as the use of the MBTI with prior

first-year student cohorts. The research design has four primary threats to validity. First, since

the MBTI was an optional activity for entering cohorts, not every member of each cohort elected

to take the assessment. The decision to take the assessment or not to take the assessment could

be indicative of one’s preference for a particular judging function or a particular orientation

function, which could exclude accurate reflection of some MBTI dimensions in the data.

Second, a threat to the validity of the research is present since a non-random assignment of

students to groups occurred in this study. Third, some students may not have fully developed

their type dimensions yet and therefore lacked clarity in identifying their preferences. As a

result, they may not have accurately reflected their true type preferences in the assessment.

Fourth, because the first year of college is often a time of newly acquired independence and

exciting discoveries, students may experience temporary changes in some dimensions of type as

they explore new choices in life. Finally, one must bear in mind that any associations found in

this study between MBTI type and the outcomes studied do not imply that causation exists

between these variables.

Procedure and Data Collection

Retention data for the 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 cohorts were requested from the

University’s Office of Institutional Advancement. The data were combined in an Excel

worksheet with the MBTI profiles of students who elected to take the assessment during the first


year at the University. Once matching of the retention data and the students’ MBTI type was

complete, the Director of CSTC purged all students’ identifying information from the document.

Data Analysis Plan

The researcher analyzed the resulting data to determine what patterns existed between

MBTI dimensions and retention for the students who continued at the University, as well as what

degree of association existed between MBTI dimensions and graduation rates. For the purposes

of this study, students were considered retained if they were currently enrolled at the University

or had completed their degree. For those students who graduated from the University, the

researcher also noted any patterns that existed between MBTI dimensions and the final GPA

earned by those students. Data collection and analyses were complete within three months from

the beginning date of research. All data were stored in a password protected Excel worksheet to

ensure confidentially of student information. Once collected, the researcher used descriptive,

parametric, and nonparametric analyses with SPSS software to investigate the significance of the

data.

Individual, paired, and dominant personality dimensions of the MBTI types of students

were analyzed with Chi-square tests to determine if any associations existed between MBTI type

and retention of students. T tests aided in determining whether there were significant differences

among MBTI type dimensions in terms of GPA as well as the length of time to graduate. In

addition, the means, standard deviation, and standard error of means were calculated for the

sample’s gender, age, ethnicity, and religion. Chi-square tests also aided in determining whether

the students who voluntarily took the MBTI differed in gender from those students who did not

take the assessment and to determine whether the two groups were similar in the makeup of their

ethnicities. Likewise, t tests aided in determining whether the two populations’ GPAs differed.


Ethical Issues

Since all data collected for the research were retrieved from the University’s archival

databases, individual student consent was not required. However, University consent to access

the archival data was granted by the Vice-President of Student Affairs, as well as by the Director

of Career Services and Testing (CSTC). The CSTC director is also an active member of the

University Retention Committee and took responsibility for merging the MBTI data with the

retention data and then removing identifying information from the records. She then returned the

information to the researcher for final data analyses. This precaution served to prevent revealing

personal information of the participants unnecessarily and ensured confidentiality of the data.


Chapter 4

Results

The hypothesis of this study proposed that there would be a negative association between

retention and preference for the Extraverted, Sensing, and Thinking dimensions of the MBTI at

this particular University. The basis of the hypothesis was that the University’s small,

introspective, personal, and Catholic-centered nature would be more appealing to the Introverted,

Intuitive, and Feeling dimensions of personality. Figure 1 (see Appendix) indicates that the

largest single dimension preferred by the students included in the study was Feeling, followed by

Perceiving, Sensing, and Extraversion. The lowest occurring personality dimension within the

sample was the Thinking dimension.

The cohorts entering the University in the years 2004 through 2007 consisted of 1165

traditionally aged, first-year students (M = 17.62, SD = 0.95, range = 15-28). The sample for this

study consisted of 599 of these students who chose to take the MBTI. This sample was similar

in age to the cohorts (M = 17.55, SD = 0.81, range = 15-24). The demographics of the sample

group were similar to the total cohort population as indicated in Table 2 (see Appendix). Chi-

square tests were used to determine whether the frequency of men versus women differed for

those who did and did not take the MBTI. These results indicated that the two groups were

significantly different, with a higher ratio of females to males among the test-takers than among

those who did not take the test, χ2(1) = 8.20, p = .004. Chi-square tests were also used to

examine whether the distributions of ethnic backgrounds were different for those who did and

did not take the MBTI. The analysis revealed different ethnic compositions of the two groups,

χ2(5)= 19.25, p = .002. In addition, t tests of the GPAs of those who took the test versus those

who did not take the MBTI indicated that those students who took the MBTI had a higher GPA

than those students who did not take the MBTI, t(340) = 2.53, p = .01. Because of these


differences between participants and non-participants, further research may need to be conducted

to ensure the outcomes are applicable to the entire population.

Some of the students in the 2007 cohort had not reached graduation yet were still enrolled

at the time of this study. This presented a dilemma when determining the coding for the

statistical analysis. Ultimately, students were considered “retained” if they had either graduated

or were currently enrolled. Chi-square analyses were conducted to determine if retention status

varied depending on personality dimensions. Single dimension analysis of S/N, T/F, and E/I

showed no significant findings in retention. However, the analysis of differences in retention

rates between J and P was significant, and indicated a statistically higher percentage of students

with a Judging orientation retained, compared to those with a Perceiving orientation. In addition

to individual dimension analyses, paired dimension analyses were also calculated. Significant

results were found between the IJ and EJ dimensions with more IJs retained than EJs. Similarly,

EPs retained at a higher percentage than did IPs. Refer to Table 3 for complete Chi-square

results for individual and paired dimensions data (see Appendix).

Chi-square analyses were also conducted for the dominant functions of each type. The

results indicated significant differences in retention rates, with the Dominant Sensing student

retained at a higher percentage than the Dominant Feeling student, and Dominant Intuitive

students retained more than Dominant Feeling students. Table 4 illustrates Chi-square analyses

for all dominant dimensions of MBTI types analyzed (see Appendix).

Independent groups t tests were used to compare the length of time that different types

took to reach graduation. The 2007 cohort was excluded from the analyses because the students

in this group had not yet graduated and were still enrolled. These tests indicated no significant

differences in the individual and paired dimension types. However, some significant differences

were apparent among the dominant personality dimensions. The analysis indicated that


Dominant Sensing took longer to graduate than Dominant Feeling, t(94.61) = 2.01, p = .05. A

trend was evident in the analysis of Dominant Sensing, who took longer to graduate than

Dominant Intuitive, t(89.76) = 1.79, p = .08.

The greatest differences were observed in analyzing MBTI dimensions with final GPA of

those students who graduated from the University. Introverts had statistically higher GPAs than

Extraverts did, while Judging orientations outperformed Perceiving orientations. In the paired

dimension functions, TJs scored significantly higher than SPs, while TJs and SJs outperformed

FPs, and TJs scored higher than NPs. There were no significant differences for the dominant

dimensions of personality. A breakdown of the means, standard deviations, and other relevant

data are illustrated in Table 5 (see Appendix).


Chapter 5

Discussion

The hypothesis for this study was that the research data would support a negative

association between retention and personality type preferences for the Sensing, Thinking, and

Extraversion dimensions of the MBTI at this University. The rationale for this hypothesis was

two-fold. First, recent research suggests that a greater influx of Sensing students are enrolling

(but not being retained) in colleges than they have in the past (Schroeder, 1993). Second, the

mission and atmosphere of the University might be more appealing to the Introverted, Feeling,

and Intuitive student. However, the research data failed to support this hypothesis. When

considering only the individual dichotomies of personality, there were no significant associations

between the Sensing/Intuition, the Thinking/Feeling, or the Extraversion/Introversion poles.

However, significant differential rates of retention did occur within the

Judging/Perceiving dimension of personality. This is a well-documented occurrence in type

studies, as was indicated in the Elon findings (DiRienzo, Das, Synn, Kitts, and McGrath, 2010).

Judging types possess attributes that suit them well in an academic environment (Barrineau,

2005). Conversely, Perceivers might find it difficult to meet assignment deadlines and have

more difficulty juggling school responsibilities along with the myriad of other opportunities that

they face daily. This idea was reinforced in the analyses of GPA that supported the Js

significantly outperforming the Ps in overall GPA.

Of particular interest though, is the fact that EPs retained at a significantly higher rate

than IPs. However, this should not be too surprising given the fact that the EPs’ gift of

communication might very well allow them to talk themselves out of many of the consequences

that their Perceiving nature might have gotten themselves into. The opposite may hold true for


IPs, who might quietly suffer the consequences of their actions without ever trying to muster a

defense.

In addition, this study indicated that the IJs persisted at a higher rate than the EJs.

Perhaps this is due to the nature of the Introverted dimension, which might magnify the attributes

of the Judging dimension and aid in its ability to stay focused and on task until assignments are

completed. On the other end of the spectrum, the Extroverts may find themselves consistently

called away from their tasks to interact with the outer world. This is an idea suggested by Tinto

when he emphasized that socially integrated students may often find themselves academically

suspended from college (Tinto, 1975). This supposition is reiterated in the finding that Is on

average earned higher GPAs than Es. Likewise, a quick glance down the list of t test results in

Table 5 (see Appendix) reinforces the idea that combining the Judging dimension with any of the

other dimensions, is associated with a somewhat higher GPA. This is especially true in the case

of TJs, who earned significantly higher GPAs than SPs, FPs, and NPs.

Upon failing to identify a particular dimension or pair of dimensions that influenced the

rate of attrition, the data were organized in a way to aid determining the percent of attrition

among the various MBTI types. Arranging each MBTI type from highest percentage of drop out

to lowest percentage of drop out and then labeling each type by its dominant personality

dimension, allowed a clearer picture of the pattern that was emerging. All of the Dominant

Feeling dimensions clustered together near the top of the chart (indicating greater drop out) and

the majority of the Dominant Sensing types clustered near the bottom of the chart (indicating

greater retention). Dominant Thinking types were somewhat evenly distributed, while Dominant

Intuitives were distributed throughout the bottom half of the chart.

Classifying the 16 Myers-Briggs types by each of their Dominant functions compressed

the 16 types into four categories. This brought to the forefront of the analyses the strongest


attribute of each type. As Lawrence (1993) suggested, the most important consideration in type

is the dominant process. The use of the dominant dimension in analyzing the rate of retention

supported the supposition that the dominant dimension of MBTI type is an important, but

sometimes overlooked, avenue for investigating patterns that occur in personality-driven

behaviors. In fact, MBTI literature often refers to the dominant dimension as “one’s guiding star

or the captain of the ship” because it is the first facet of personality that develops and will always

be the strongest means for a person to view the world (Zeisset, 2006, p. 97). As such, the

dominant dimension could be categorized as the “go to” source for problem solving. In fact,

Myers and Kirby (1994) reiterate this concept by emphasizing that when a final decision must be

made, it is generally made in agreement with the dominant function. If there is a struggle

between the dominant and auxiliary in reaching that decision, the rationale of the dominant

dimension will often prevail.

In addition, given the age of the students participating in the study, using the dominant

function of personality seems a logical choice for consideration. Because the auxiliary often

begins to develop in adolescence, a young college age student has not had much time to fully

develop and refine its use. Consequently, there will be variation in the age at which individuals

master the use of these functions, with some fully developing their dominant and auxiliary by the

early twenties, and others developing them later in life, or not at all (Kirby and Myers, 1994). In

fact, even into middle age and beyond, the auxiliary will never develop as fully as the dominant

function. Only in rare circumstances (generally in times of stress, life changes, type growth, etc.)

will an individual diverge from trusting and relying on the dominant dimension for important

decisions (Quenk, 2000). For example, a person might attempt to utilize the inferior (fourth)

dimension when faced with stressful situations, if the dominant dimension is not providing

effective solutions. It appears that people rely on the inferior dimension in an act of desperation.


Although the basis for the research hypothesis was supported in that the University does

attract higher percentages of Intuitive and Feeling dimensions as shown in Figure 2 (see

Appendix), neither Sensing, Thinking, nor Extraversion exhibited negative associations with

retention. Instead, the findings suggested a greater overall rate of retention in the Dominant

Intuitive and Dominant Sensing populations, and a greater rate of drop out in the Dominant

Feeling population. Since Chi-square analyses adjusts for the higher proportions of incoming

students in its calculations, these results suggest that the rate of drop out occurring with the

Dominant Feeling population is statistically significant and could be a pattern of concern for the

University to address.

Strengths and Limitations

The strengths in this study included the use of appropriate methodology, design, and

analyses. Obtaining a large sample of students also contributed to the increased validity of the

results. Consequently, the results of the study point to the utility of identifying students who are

at-risk of dropping out and discovering potential reasons why they may do so. Although further

research is needed, this study also suggests that it may be possible to identify particular

institutional characteristics that attract certain personality dimensions and then assure that the

needs of those students are met.

However, the study does have several limitations. First, because taking the MBTI was an

optional activity for the students, the results may not have been representative of the University’s

true population and therefore caution should be used when generalizing to the entire University.

There may have been gender, cultural, or personality reasons for some students taking the MBTI

and others not taking it. Since the demographic composition of those students who took the

MBTI differed from the composition of those who did not, obtaining a larger sampling from the

University population would aid in increasing the validity of the data. Additionally, students


who did take the MBTI may not have accurately reported their type preferences, as the first year

of college can be a life-changing event for many students as they explore new experiences and

encounter more freedom in their lives. This may result in an exaggeration of some personality

dimensions or the “experimentation” with new personality dimensions as the students’

environment enlarges. Similarly, some dimensions of personality may still be in development

and result in an inaccurate MBTI report. Finally, the lack of random sampling prevents the

findings to be generalized outside of the immediate population.

Recommendations and Action Planning

Future studies of MBTI personality type and retention should sample as much of the

population as possible to get a more comprehensive view of the personality makeup of the

institution. However, one also must keep in mind that a student cannot be forced to take the

assessment, as doing so may result in erroneous results of type. In regards to the finding of this

research, the University might extend this study to include qualitative research by surveying the

population of students who do not return to discover the reasons they cite for leaving. In

addition, the research could be extended by identifying those Dominant Feeling students who

were residential students and those who were commuters. It may be possible that commuters

feel more of a disconnect with the University than the residential students. Similarly, identifying

those students who were academically dismissed versus those who voluntarily chose to leave,

may aid in determining which personality dimensions are involved in various types of attrition.

Current research implies that Dominant Feeling students strive to find harmony and

connection in their environment. For example, ISFPs are guided by harmony when committing

to a decision, ESFJs are guided by the most supportive choice, INFPs are guided by the most

caring choice, and ENFJs are guided by the most collaborative choice (Myers and Kirby, 1994).


All of these dominant Feeling types have the underlying theme of Feeling, but it is expressed and

acted on in slightly different ways.

Further investigation is necessary to see if themes such as burdensome tuition costs, lack

of ways to integrate socially on campus, or failure of faculty and staff to make the necessary

connections with students are contributing to the Dominant Feeling student dropping out. If

certain themes are unearthed, the University can then take steps to rectify the situation and create

an environment that builds the personal connections that are so important to the Dominant

Feeling student’s needs. In this way, the administration can gain a better understanding of how

the campus projects an image that attracts the Dominant Feeling student, yet fails to meet the

needs of these students once they have enrolled. Doing so will fulfill the third principle of

institutional commitment to students that is emphasized in Tinto’s studies, that faculty and staff

of student-serving institutions are committed to the support of developing social and academic

communities that engage students to integrate on campus (Tinto, 1975).

The findings of this study have emphasized to me the importance of making students feel

welcomed, encouraged, and supported in all aspects of their academic and personal life. Taking

the time to make those connections, no matter how small, can make a difference in giving them

the support they need to reach their goals.


References

Barrineau, P. (2005). Personality types among undergraduates who withdraw from liberal arts

colleges. Journal of Psychological Type, 65(4), 27-32.

Brody, L. E., & Mills, C. J. (2005). Talent search research: What have we learned? High Ability

Studies, 16(1), 97-111. doi:10.1080/13598130500115320

Carlyn, M. (1977). An assessment of the myers-briggs type indicator. Journal of Personality

Assessment, 41(5), 461-473.

DiRienzo, C., Kitts, J., Das, J., McGrath, K., & Synn, W. (2010). The relationship between

MBTI and academic performance: A study across academic disciplines. Journal of

Psychological Type, 70(5), 53-67.

Ehrenberg, R. C. (2005). Method or madness? Inside the U.S. news & world report college

rankings. Journal of College Admission, 189, 29-35.

Exemplary student retention programs. (2004). ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 30(3), 53-

66.

Kahn, J. H., Nauta, M. M., Dennis Gailbreath, R., Tipps, J., & Chartrand, J. M. (2002). The

utility of career and personality assessment in predicting academic progress. Journal of

Career Assessment, 10(1), 3-23.

Lawrence, G. (1993). People types & tiger stripes (3rd ed.). Gainesville, FL: Center for

Applications of Psychological Type.


Lunenburg, F. C. (2000). America's hope: Making schools work for all children. Journal of

Instructional Psychology, 27(1), 39.

MBTI certification program handbook (2007). Louisville, KY: Type Resources of Effective

Enhancement, Inc.

McClanaghan, M. E. (2000). A strategy for helping students learn how to learn. Education,

120(3), 479.

Morse, R. J., Flanigan, S., Yerkie, M., Lee, B., & Setoodeh, R. (2004). Using the rankings.

(cover story). U.S. News & World Report, 137(6), 90-90.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M., Quenk, N., & Hammer, A. (2003). MBTI manual: A guide to the

development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Mountain View, CA:

Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, K. D., Kirby, L. K. (1994). Introduction to type: Exploring the next level of type.

Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Provost, J. A. & Anchors, S. (1987). Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in Higher

Education. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Quenk, N. L. (2000). In the grip: Understanding type, stress, and the inferior function (2nd ed.).

Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Schroeder, C. C. (1993). New students--new learning styles. Change, 25(5), 21.


Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.).

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.

Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.

Zeisset, C. (2006). The art of dialogue: Exploring personality differences for more effective

communication. Gainesville, FL: Center for Psychological Type, Inc.


Appendix

Table 1 Expression of the Dominant Functions in Type Dynamics

Table 2 Distribution of Demographics of the Entering Cohorts vs. Sampled Students taking the MBTI

Table 3 Chi-square Analyses of MBTI Single, and Double Dimensions and Retention vs. Attrition

Table 4 Chi-square Analyses of MBTI Dominant Dimensions and Retention vs. Attrition

Table 5 Ttests of MBTI Dimensions within the Graduates in the Sample and Final GPA

Figure 1 Distribution of MBTI Type Dimensions of Students in Sample by Percentage of Occurrences in Sample (males and females within each matching dichotomy total 100%)

Figure 2 Distribution of MBTI Type of the Entering Students, Persisting Students, and the Dominant Personality Dimension of Each Type


Table 1

Expression of the Dominant Functions in Type Dynamics

Type Attitude Perceiving Function Judging Function Orientation

ENFJ E Introverted Intuition Extraverted Feeling* J

ENFP E Extraverted Intuition* Introverted Feeling P

ENTJ E Introverted Intuition Extraverted Thinking* J

ENTP E Extraverted Intuition* Introverted Thinking P

ESFJ E Introverted Sensing Extraverted Feeling* J

ESFP E Extraverted Sensing* Introverted Feeling P

ESTJ E Introverted Sensing Extraverted Thinking* J

ESTP E Extraverted Sensing* Introverted Thinking P

INFJ I Introverted Intuition* Extraverted Feeling J

INFP I Extraverted Intuition Introverted Feeling* P

INTJ I Introverted Intuition* Extraverted Thinking J

INTP I Extraverted Intuition Introverted Thinking* P

ISFJ I Introverted Sensing* Extraverted Feeling J

ISFP I Extraverted Sensing Introverted Feeling* P

ISTJ I Introverted Sensing* Extraverted Thinking J

ISTP I Extraverted Sensing Introverted Thinking* P

*Indicates the Dominant function of personality


Table 2

Distribution of Demographics of the Entering Cohorts vs. Sampled Students Taking the MBTI

Population (n=1165) Sample (n=599) f % f %

Gender Female 740 63.5 404 67.4 Male 425 36.5 195 32.6

Ethnicity White 414 35.5 189 31.6 Black 55 4.7 31 5.2 Hispanic 371 31.8 181 30.2 American Indian 10 .9 6 1.0 Asian/Hawaiian Pacific 161 13.8 101 16.9 Other 154 13.2 91 15.1

Religion Catholic 651 55.9 354 59.1 Protestant 181 15.5 71 11.9 Other Christian 31 2.7 18 3.0 Jewish 10 .9 5 .8 Other 110 9.4 64 10.8 Not Given 182 15.6 87 14.5

Conditional Admits Yes 186 16.0 90 15.0 No 979 84.0 509 85.0

Retention

Attrition 563 48.3 237 39.6 Graduated or Still Enrolled 602 51.7 362 60.4


Table 3

Chi-square Analyses of MBTI Single and Double Dimensions Correlation with Retention and Attrition of Students

DimensionDropped

Out Retained χ2 df pn % n %

J 90 38.0 167 46.1 3.89 1 .05P 147 62.0 195 53.9

E 119 50.2 191 52.9 .42 1 .52I 118 49.8 170 47.1

S 127 53.6 187 51.7 .21 1 .64N 110 46.4 175 48.3

T 72 30.4 119 32.9 .41 1 .52F 165 69.6 243 67.1

IJ 42 46.7 100 59.9 4.13 1 .04EJ 48 53.3 67 40.1

IP 76 51.7 71 36.4 7.99 1 .005EP 71 48.3 124 63.6

FJ 59 59.0 103 65.2 1.00 1 .32TP 41 41.0 55 34.8

NP 81 57.0 113 51.8 .94 1 .33SJ 61 43.0 105 48.2

FP 106 77.4 140 68.6 3.12 1 .08TJ 31 22.6 64 31.4


Table 4

Chi-square Analyses of MBTI Dominant Dimensions Correlation with Retention and Attrition of Students

Dimension Dropped Out

Retained χ2 df p

n % n %DomS 60 40.5 117 56.0 8.26 1 .004DomF 88 59.5 92 44.0

DomN 53 37.6 107 53.8 8.67 1 .003DomF 88 62.4 92 46.2

DomT 36 40.4 46 30.1 2.71 1 .10DomN 53 59.6 107 69.9

DomS 60 62.5 117 71.8 2.40 1 .12DomT 36 37.5 46 28.2

DomF 88 71.0 92 66.7 .56 1 .45DomT 36 29.0 46 33.3

DomS 60 53.1 117 52.2 .02 1 .88DomN 53 46.9 107 47.8


Table 5

Means, Standard Deviations, and Comparisons of Personality Dimensions for Final Grade Point Average (GPA)

Type n M SD t df pE 79 3.35 0.32 -2.31 170 0.02 I 93 3.47 0.35

J 90 3.48 0.36 2.61 170 0.01P 82 3.35 0.31

S 87 3.43 0.35 0.31 171 0.76N 86 3.41 0.33

T 54 3.47 0.36 1.29 171 0.20F 119 3.40 0.33

NP 50 3.36 0.30 -1.83 102 0.07SJ 54 3.48 0.36

ST 35 3.53 0.321.61 100 0.11NF 67 3.43 0.31

IJ 59 3.53 0.36 1.70 89 0.09EJ 32 3.40 0.35

IP 35 3.38 0.31 0.87 80 0.39EP 47 3.32 0.30

FJ 59 3.45 0.35 1.11 79 0.27TP 22 3.36 0.32

SP 32 3.33 0.32 -2.49 62 0.02TJ 32 3.55 0.37

TJ 32 3.55 0.34 1.98 65 0.05FP 35 3.38 0.31

FP 60 3.34 0.30 -2.66 89 0.01SJ 31 3.54 0.37

SP 35 3.53 0.32 1.61 100 0.11NF 67 3.43 0.31

NP 50 3.36 0.39 2.55 80 0.01TJ 32 3.55 0.37


Figure 1. Distribution of MBTI type dimensions of students in the sample by percentage of occurrences (males and females within each matching dichotomy total 100%).


Dominant Dimension Feeling Thinking iNtuition Sensing

MBTI Types within each Dominant Dimensions

ENFJ

ESFJ

INFP

ISFP

ENTJ

ESTJ

INTP

ISTP

ENFP

ENTP

INFJ

INTJ

ESFP

ESTP

ISFJ

ISTJ

Incoming Students (n = 599) 30.05% 13.69% 26.71% 29.55%

Persisting Students (n=362) 25.41% 12.71% 29.56% 32.32%

Percent Loss in Dimension 48.89% 43.90% 33.13% 33.90%

Figure 2. The distribution of MBTI types of the entering freshman, of those who were retained, and the percentage of those who dropped out. Students are grouped by their MBTI type and the dominant personality dimension.

Documents

Sample2 MBTI College Retention Causal Comparative