1. Who developed the Golden Personality Type Profiler?

The Personality Profiler was developed by Dr. Edward S. Golden, one of the founders of the Association for Psychological Type (APT) and a pioneer in the career development field. Dr. Golden died in 1995. The Association of Psychological Type (APT) posthumously awarded him the Mary H. McCaulley Award in 1995 to honor his contributions to the field of psychological type. Dr. Golden's accomplishments are carried forward by his son, Dr. John P. Golden Ed.D.

~ Back to Top ~

2. Will my personality change as I grow older?

Yes! The process of growth and development of personality is a complex subject. The authors of the Golden Personality Type Profiler take an optimistic viewpoint of personality. People are not simply fixed in behavior. Through life's experiences, both pleasant and painful, we gain a deeper understanding of our own behavior. Sometimes personality growth is measured in moments, sometimes it's measured in days. What causes personality growth is uniquely determined by each person's consitutional make-up and individual life experiences. All the research in the world would fail to predict with any degree of reliability what the causes are. We find the idea of this indiviualized and never-recurring pattern of personality growth to be one of the enchanting mysteries that makes the study of personality so compelling. We strongly hold to the belief that those people who earnestly examine their lives and personalities are capable of the most growth. Perhaps the goal for each person is to achieve his or her own individually determined state of perfection. The Golden Personality Type Profiler is the best instrument we know of to provide these meaningful insights that can accelerate and facilitate personal growth and development.

~ Back to Top ~

3. What is "Personality Type"?

Psychological Type is a theory of personality most often attributed to the works of C. Jung (1921/1923) and E. Kretschmer (1948). According to Kretschmer, "Personality Type is the most fundamental concept of all biology." For psychologist Hans Eysenck, "A type is a group of correlated traits, just as a trait is a group of correlated behavioral acts". For more information on Personality Type, read Carl Jung, Psychological Types. (1921/1923).

~ Back to Top ~

4. What is Temperament?

Temperament is one of the oldest forms of personality theory. Traced back more than 2000 years, the doctrine of temperaments can be credited to the Greek Physician Hippocrates and later to Roman Physician Claudius Galen. The four Temperaments determined by the differing amounts of bodily fluid, or "humors" are referred to as the phlegmatic, sanguine, choleric, and melancholic. In 1798, European Philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his "famous" book Anthropologie, provided the first written descriptions of the four temperaments. David Kiersey popularized Temperament theory when he published his book, Please Understand Me: Character and Temperament Types (1978).

~ Back to Top ~

5. Are Personality Type and Temperament the same thing?

The simple answer is no. The more complex answer is "sort of". Historically, temperament theory suggested that all people fit into one and only one temperament. However, in the context of The Golden Personality Type Profiler, the four temperaments are conceptualized as meaningful paired combinations of the Global scale constructs: the Traditionalist – Sensing /Organized (SZ's); the Visionary – Intuitive/Thinking (NT); the Catalyst – Intuitive/Feeling (NF), and; the Artisan – Sensing/Adaptive (SA). The four temperaments provides a more simplistic, yet highly predictive means of understanding the behavioral actions, values and interest of people, including the self and others.

~ Back to Top ~

6. What are "facet" scales?

Facet is a term used by the Golden Personality Type Profiler to define specific traits or behaviors. They are referred to as facets because they are linked empirically to the superordinate "Global" scales. The Golden Personality Type Profiler measures 36 facet scales covering five global domains. All global and facet scales are graphically represented in the ten-page Interpretive Feedback Report for the Golden Personality Type Profiler. For example, the facet scale "Talkative" is one of the traits commonly associated with the global scale, Extraversion. Personality traits themselves are not observable, but are inferred through experience or, where appropriate, through survey measurement. "A trait can be best thought of as a group of correlated habits or action tendencies". Those interested in further study on the topic of "traits" should refer to Gordon Allport and Henry Odbert's, Psychological Monographs: Trait-names - A psycho-lexical study, 1936, 47, 171.

~ Back to Top ~

7. Why does the Personality Profiler use Adapting/OrganiZing (A/Z) instead of Judging/Perceiving (J/P) for the fourth dimension of personality type?

The A/Z dimension was incorporated into the Golden Personality Type Profiler due to the general agreement among psychologists that it is an important dimension in behavior that can and should be measured. While this dimension is called many names, it is found in most comprehensive surveys of personality. The Adapting/OrganiZing (A/Z) default label is based on our desire to help people remember and communicate this idea effectively. We found understanding, interpretation, and retention to be a problem with the J/P labels. The Factor Analytic statistical technique used to develop the Golden Personality Type Profiler requires a test developer to use both science and art in the creation of their test, science in numbers and art in interpretation. In the case of the fourth dimension Adapting and organiZing represent the two best single labels describing the item content.

~ Back to Top ~

8. Can I use the Adapting/organiZing (A/Z) dimension to identify the dominant function like the Judging/Perceiving (J/P) index does in the MBTI?

Yes. the A/Z and J/P are for all practical reasons interchangeable.

Dr. Golden spent considerable time analyzing Isabel Myers' theoretical basis and reconstructing Jung's writings to understand how Isabel came to the conclusions she did. His conclusion: Think of her theory as just that..a theory. Like Einstein's "Relativity" theory, the idea that J/P points to the dominant function is only a theory. Isabel recognized that Jung made very few references to this idea. He did suggest that Extraverted Rational Types (ET and EF) are more planful and orderly. He did not make similar statements for the Introverted Rational Types (IT and IF):

"Students of Jung will not, however, find any reference to the JP preference in Psychological Types. Although he occasionally refers to judging and perceptive types among extraverts, Jung never mentions that the JP difference can be seen in introverts and that it reflects the character of their extraversion. This omission is inevitable, because he never discusses the introvert's extraversion." -- Isabel Myers, Gifts Differing (1980), pg. 22.

As Isabel Myers recognized, Jung did not make such similar statements about the Introverted and Extraverted Irrational Types (IS, IN, ES and EN). He strongly pointed to the idea that the Dominant Function is more conscious than the other functions, with the Inferior function being the most unconcious. Isabel inferred from Jung that the behavioral outcomes of Introverted Rational Types were as overtly organized and planful as the ET or EF types and must therefore prefer Thinking or Feeling so much so that it is considered to be the dominant function. She theorized that individuals who are not obviously organized must either have the irrational function (S or N) as dominant, or in the case of the IF or IT types, must introvert their dominant function:

"The JP preference does not show itself in simple and accessible reactions. It serves admirably as the fourth dichotomy if one detail is borne in mind: it deals only withthe outward behavior, and thus points only indirectly to the dominant process of the introvert." -- Isabel Myers, Gifts Differing (1980), pg. 22.

Problems with this interpretation, in Dr. Golden's opinion, include:

-1- Jung was very clear and explicit in most of his writings. If he felt something was important he directly said it. There is too little subject matter dealing with these ideas for Isabel Myers to have made such a deep and affirming theoretical prediction about the existence of a fourth dimension of personality.
-2- In practice, i.e., working people in the real world, this theory breaks down. Some Introverted Rational types are as clearly and observably organized and planful as their Extraverted Rational counterparts. These behaviors are not subordinated to the extent that they are not observable in behavior.
-3- If Jung made so little of this, why was Myers' compelled to bring her theory into practice? Dr. Golden believes the answer lies in her familiarity with a test called the Humms-Wadsworth Temperament Scale (1934). While Myers never gave a single reference to her intensive examination of this popular instrument in 1941, it did represent her point of entry into the field of personality theory only one year prior to the release of the Briggs-Myers Type Instrument. Among the dimensions measured by the Humms-Wadsworth was a scale measuring the planful versus unplanful behavior. Many of the survey's questions related to this dimension are similar to the item content developed by Myers. It is quite probable that she incorporated these ideas from the item content of the Humms-Wadsworth Temperament Scale into her first version called Form A. Of interest is the fact that she referred to the fourth dimension as "Judging function extraverted" vs "Perceiving function extraverted".

In summary, the A/Z or J/P can be used to identify the dominant function because the item content is conceptually similar. It depends most of all on whether you find this aspect of the theory helpful and meaningful for the individual receiving the results or in helping them overcome some psychological obstacle through counseling. If it works for you, keep using it. In working with well functioning adults, Dr. Golden has found that this theory has little practical value and may often lead to greater confusion rather than understanding.