Sei sulla pagina 1di 10

More than thirty years of publishing research articles related to the theory and

applications of psychological type and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® instrument.

Journal of Psychological Type® Issue 8 AUG 08


68


Ns and Ps reported significantly higher self-esteem than Ss and Js.
These results provide more evidence for personality characteristics
associated with high self-esteem in adolescence.

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Psychological Type


Eva Papazova
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Psychology

Eliana Pencheva
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Psychology

ABSTRACT RESEARCH REVIEW


The relationship between self-esteem and psychological During the period from 1987 to 1994, there were more
type among adolescents was investigated. The type pref- than 5,000 studies on various issues concerning the self
erences and self-esteem were determined by the Myers- (Banaji & Prentice, 1994). On the other hand, the stud-
Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) instrument and the ies carried out with the MBTI instrument increased
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, respectively. The sample from 337 in 1976 to 5,600 in 1997, and their number
consisted of 573 8th-, 9th-, 10th-, and 11th-grade is still rising (Martin, 1997). Despite this pronounced
students in Bulgaria. Self-esteem was higher for N and interest, there still remain some unresolved and much-
P types and lower for S and J types. The results are discussed problems connected to the two constructs in
consistent with type theory and other relevant studies. question. This article looks at the interaction between
Note: For the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) instrument, the eight preference categories self-esteem and psychological type among Bulgarian
are the following: Extraversion (E) versus Introversion (I), Sensing (S) versus Intuition (N), Thinking
(T) versus Feeling (F), Judging (J) versus Perceiving (P). adolescents aged between 15 and 18, with the intention

Published by the Center for Applications of Psychological Type


Thomas G. Carskadon, Ph.D., Editor C A P T ®
69
of broadening the basis for further studies. adolescent (DuBois, Bull, Sherman, & Roberts, 1998).
Self-Esteem. The literature does not offer a clear, Some authors argue that global self-esteem is
precise, and universally accepted definition of self- on the whole stable during adolescence and slowly
esteem as a psychological construct. Terms used inter- increases afterwards (Harter, 1998; Wylie, 1974).
changeably with self-esteem are self-reverence, self- Others, however, maintain that during adolescence,
acceptance, self-respect, self-regard, self-worth, self- self-esteem goes through a metamorphosis (Jegede,
feeling, self-confidence, self-love, self-satisfaction, 1982). Longitudinal studies of adolescent self-esteem
self-evaluation, and self-appraisal (Hattie, 1992; Wells show lower self-esteem among 11 year olds, relatively
& Marwell, 1976). Self-concept and self-esteem are often low self-esteem between 12 and 13 (because of the
used as synonyms. Most studies of self-concept use transfer to a junior high school and the beginning of
self-esteem tools, whereas self-esteem puberty), and then growing and
scales include items involving both steadily improving self-esteem until


descriptive and evaluative aspects of high school graduation (McCarthy &
the self. This inconsistency of defini- Analyses of self-esteem Hoge, 1982). In light of these obser-
tion helps us understand the difficulty and psychological vations, strict conclusions about
and even the impossibility of empiri- adolescents’ age and self-esteem can-
cally discriminating between self-
type have found not be drawn.
concept and self-esteem, terms that Extraversion, Many studies have found differ-
inevitably used in practice as inter- Intuition, Thinking, entiation of self-esteem among adoles-
changeable (Shalveson & Bolus, and Judging are cents according to gender. Compared
1982). The solution to this problem to boys, girls seem especially vulnera-
can be found, according to researchers,
more often connected ble in their general level of self-esteem.
in differentiating between the opera- with high levels of As a whole, their attitude towards
tional and the descriptive (essential) self-esteem, whereas themselves is considerably more
definitions of the term self- esteem Introversion, Sensing, negative and their self-esteem is
(Steffenhagen & Burns, 1987). much lower (Lynch-Polce, Myers,
Adolescent Self-Esteem. During and Perceiving are Kliewer, & Kilmartin, 2001; Offer &
adolescence, self-esteem is character- related to lower levels. Ostrov, 1984; Quatman & Watson,


ized by ambivalence of emotions and 2001; Silguidjian, 1998; Tiggemann,
attitudes towards oneself. Researchers 2001). Researchers tend to explain
explain the phenomenon by the wide girls’ lower self-esteem by their
discrepancy between the needs and the means of ado- stronger inclination to conform, whereas boys seem to
lescents, this discrepancy becoming the key source of be more independent from other people’s opinions
their almost incessant inner conflicts and abrupt shifts (Gordon, 1962).
of temper (Wolman, 1998). Psychological Type and Self-Esteem. In psychol-
In order to overcome their anxiety, their sense of ogy, the level of global self-esteem is an extremely impor-
ineptitude and inferiority, and to cope with depression, tant and stable personal characteristic. Global self-esteem
adolescents often use vulgar language, engage in van- is correlated with almost all personal characteristics
dalism, play truant, and indulge in alcohol and drug measured through a variety of multifactorial question-
abuse. Associated with low self-esteem in adolescence, naires (e.g., MMPI, 16PF). Individuals with different
these behaviors attract special scientific attention. levels of self-esteem in most cases show statistically
Researchers have also seen manifestations of adolescent relevant differences in their measured dispositions or
low self-esteem in lawbreaking, poor academic per- studied behavior (Wells & Marwell, 1976). Here, we can
formance, promiscuous sex, and suicidal thoughts and also include the studies looking for correspondences
behavior (Harter, 1990; Wolman, 1998). between global self-esteem and psychological type as
High self-esteem, by contrast, is associated with viewed by C. G. Jung (Berry & Sipps, 1991; Clark, 2000;
good academic performance and easy social adaptation. Guyer, 1988; Harrison, 1986; Taylor, 1990).
High self-esteem is also considered a predictor of Jung’s theory of type (Jung, 1995) has been devel-
achieved self-identity and defined self-concept of the oped and operationalized by Katharine Cook Briggs and

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Psychological Type


70

Table 1. Split-Half Reliabilities of the MBTI Scales in the Study Sample.

Gender S–N T–F J–P E–I

Male .65 .57 .68 .47

Female .63 .60 .74 .48

Total .63 .60 .72 .48

her daughter Isabel Briggs-Myers (Myers, McCaulley, RESULTS


Quenk, & Hammer, 1998). Studying adolescents with The results show a satisfactory internal consistency of
the MBTI instrument, researchers have found a stronger the Rosenberg scale (Cronbach’s Alpha = .6) TABLE 1
preference for Extraversion (E) and Perceiving (P) in gives the split-half reliabilities of the four MBTI scales in
comparison to other age groups. High academic scores the sample studied.
and achievements, however, are characteristic of The reliability coefficients for the MBTI instrument
Introversion (I), Intuition (N), and Judging (J). were lower than those obtained during the process of
Analyses of self-esteem and psychological type adapting the questionnaire for Bulgarian populations
have found that Extraversion, Intuition, Thinking, and (N = 464; ages 17–60), which were as follows: E–I, a =
Judging are more often connected with high levels .57; S–N, a = .72; T–F, a = .63; and J–P, a = 0.76
of self-esteem, whereas Introversion, Sensing, and (Pencheva & Kazandjiev, 2001). The lower reliability
Perceiving are related to lower levels (Baxter & Baxter, coefficients can be explained by the specific character of
1994; Golden, 1996). In addition, Introverted and the sample, which consisted of adolescents only.
Intuitive types have more negative self-esteem related According to type theory, adolescents may not have well
to body self-concept and are more prone to neurosis developed and clearly articulated typological prefer-
(Tobacyk, Wells, & Springer, 1988). ences, which is reflected in the systematically lower reli-
ability coefficients in the adolescent samples compared
METHOD to other age groups (Myers et al., 1998).
The sample consisted of 573 adolescents aged 15 to 18 FIGURE 1 shows the estimated distribution of
(mean age = 16.5, SD = 1.03), 203 boys and 370 girls.
All were students in Bulgarian general education high Figure 1. Frequency Histogram of Self-Esteem
schools. Raw Scores.
The MBTI questionnaire, Form G, adapted for use
in Bulgaria by Pencheva (Pencheva & Kazandjiev, 100

2001), as well as the Rosenberg scale for measuring


global self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale; 80
Jhonev, 1996) were employed. Rosenberg’s scale con-
sists of 10 statements, of which 5 are positive (e.g., “I
Adolescents

60
feel I am a valuable person at least as much as the rest,”
“On the whole I am satisfied with myself”) and 5 neg-
40
ative (e.g., “From time to time I definitely feel useless,”
“Sometimes I think I am good for nothing”). Each
statement receives points according to four degrees of 20

intensity, ranging from total disagreement, disagree-


ment, agreement, to total agreement. Global self-
10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 22.5 25.0 27.5 30.0
esteem equals the sum of the scores of the separate
Self-Esteem
items. High scores indicate low self-esteem and low
scores indicate high self-esteem (Jhonev). Std. Dev. = 3.74 Mean = 20.2 N = 573

Journal of Psychological Type®, Volume 68, August 2008


71
Correlations Between MBTI Continuous
Scores and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scores
values on the Rosenberg scale, and it is symmetrical
(normal). Most adolescents fall within the frequency
range between 16 and 24 (M = 20.2; SD = 3.74). This A weak, but statistically significant, inverse correlation
frequency range corresponds to the mid (moderate) lev- was found between “global self-esteem” and S–N
els of self-esteem. The adolescents with levels above 24 continuous scores (r = -.108, p < .01). Thus, with an
fall within the low levels of self-esteem, whereas those increase in self-esteem, the S–N continuous scores also
below 16 fall within the high levels of self-esteem rise slightly, the high self-esteem scores being connected
(Jhonev, 1996). to Intuition, with the low scores connected to Sensing.
As has already been noted, the subgroup of adoles- In addition, there was a weak, but statistically
cents showing mid-levels of self-esteem is the most significant, inverse correlation (r = -.135, p < .01)
numerous one. The reason may be that adolescents between “global self-esteem” and the J–P continuous
from the analyzed sample have a realistic concept of scores. With increased self-esteem, the values of the J–P
themselves (rather than markedly negative or positive continuous scores go up slightly, the higher values of
ones), which is associated with healthy personal func- self-esteem being connected to P, the lower ones to J.

Type Preferences, Age, Gender, and Self-


tioning (Cole et al., 1967) and is expressed in a larger
number of moderate evaluations of their own personal Esteem of Adolescents—Results of the
characteristics. ANOVA
Global self-esteem is significantly related to the S–N
Type Preferences of Adolescents With scale (F = 8.067, p < .01). Higher self-esteem corre-
Low, Mid, and High Self-Esteem sponds to N, whereas lower self-esteem corresponds
Three SRTT comparisons were made between the to S. Age also influences the statistical parameters of
observed frequencies of the psychological types in the adolescent global self-esteem (F = 11.303, p < .001).
subgroups of adolescents with high, mid, and low self- Increasing age leads to increased adolescent global
esteem, and the distribution of psychological types in self-esteem. Gender was not statistically related to
the whole sample (Granade, Myers, & Macdaid, 1987). adolescent global self-esteem.
The results are presented in Tables 2, 3, and 4.
TABLE 2 shows the distribution of psychological DISCUSSION
types in the subgroup of adolescents with high self- A typological pattern has been delineated that corre-
esteem (N = 93) compared with the whole sample. sponds to high, middle, and low levels of adolescent
Preferences for N (I = 1.94, p < .001) and P (I = 1.47, global self-esteem. High self-esteem corresponds to N,
p < .001) were significant. The most common two-letter P, NP, EN, EP, NF, NT, FP, ENFP, and ENTP. These type
types were NP (I = 2.28, p < .001), EN (I = 2.27, preferences are marked by conviviality and sociability,
p < .001), EP (I = 1.97, p < .001), NF (I = 1.95, concentration on the future, optimism, love for innova-
p < .001), NT (I = 1.93, p < .001), and FP (I = 1.54, tion, artistic bent, creativity, flexible and adaptive style
p < .01). The significantly overrepresented four-letter of life, and capability of attracting and organizing peo-
types were ENFP (I = 2.77, p < .001), ENTP (I = 2.35, ple into actions aimed at change (Martin, 1997; Myers
p < .01), and ENTJ (I = 2.05, p < .05). et al., 1998). These are the possible indicators of ado-
As TABLE 3 (SEE PAGE 73.) shows, preferences for I lescent high self-esteem within the sample.
(I = 1.06, p < .05), J (I = 1.07, p < .01), and S (I = 1.06, Adolescent mid self-esteem corresponds to I, S, J,
p < .05) were significant for the subgroup of adolescents SJ, SF, IS, EJ, ESFJ, and ISTJ. These type characteristics
with mid self-esteem (N = 396). The most common are distinguished by a tendency towards what is actual,
two-letter types were SJ (I = 1.09, p < .001), SF (I = real, and pragmatic, a preference for a planned or orderly
1.09, p < .05), IS (I = 1.08, p < .05), and EJ (I = 1.07, way of life, solitary activities and reflection on ideas,
p < .05). The four-letter types ESFJ (I = 1.19, p < .05) tactfulness towards others and exquisite sensitivity to
and ISTJ (I = 1.15, p < .05) were overrepresented. feedback, and a tendency to rely on past experience and
TABLE 4 (SEE PAGE 74.) for the subgroup of adoles- traditions, which are the possible indicators of adoles-
cents with low self-esteem (N = 84) shows that ESTP cent mid self-esteem (Martin, 1997; Myers et al., 1998)
(I = 3.10, p < .01) and INFP (I = 2.73; p < .05) were The only types associated with low self-esteem
significantly overrepresented. were ESTP and INFP. These types can be characterized

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Psychological Type


72

Table 2. Adolescent High Self-Esteem Compared to Whole Sample.

The Sixteen Complete Types Dichotomous Preferences


ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ E 60 (64.5%) I = 1.12
n=7 n = 11 n=3 n=0 I 33 (35.5%) I = 0.84
(7.5%) (11.8%) (3.2%) (0.0%)
I = 0.63 I = 1.08 I = 1.68 I = 0.00 S 48 (51.6%) ***I = 0.69
+++++ +++++ +++ N 45 (48.4%) ***I = 1.94
+++ +++++
++ T 44 (47.3%) I = 0.93
F 49 (52.7%) I = 1.07

J 41 (44.1%) ***I = 0.71


P 52 (55.9%) ***I = 1.47
ISTP ISFP INFP INTP
n=4 n=4 n=0 n=4
Pairs and Temperaments
(4.3%) (4.3%) (0.0%) (4.3%) IJ 21 (22.6%) I= 0.87
I = 0.70 I = 0.68 I = 1.00 I = 2.05 IP 12 (12.9%) I= 0.80
++++ ++++ ++++ EP 40 (43.0%) ***I = 1.97
EJ 20 (21.5%) **I = 0.60

ST 24 (25.8%) **I = 0.65


SF 24 (25.8%) *I = 0.72
NF 25 (26.9%) ***I = 1.95
ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP
NT 20 (21.5%) ***I = 1.93
n=4 n=6 n = 22 n=8
(4.3%) (6.5%) (23.7%) (8.6%) SJ 30 (32.3%) ***I = 0.61
I = 1.12 I = 1.12 I = 2.77*** I = 2.35** SP 18 (19.4%) I = 0.88
++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ NP 34 (36.6%) ***I = 2.28
+ + +++++ ++++ NJ 11 (11.8%) I = 1.33
+++++
+++++ TJ 24 (25.8%) *I = 0.74
++++ TP 20 (21.5%) I = 1.37
FP 32 (34.4%) **I = 1.54
FJ 17 (18.3%) *I = 0.68

IN 7 (07.5%) I = 1.08
ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ EN 38 (40.9%) ***I = 2.27
n=9 n=3 n=0 n=8 IS 26 (28.0%) I = 0.79
(9.7%) (3.2%) (0.0%) (8.6%) ES 22 (23.7%) ***I = 0.59
I = 0.55* I = 0.26 I = 0.00 I = 2.05*
+++++ +++ +++++ ET 29 (31.2%) I = 1.06
+++++ ++++ EF 31 (33.4%) I = 1.17
IF 18 (19.4%) I = 0.92
IT 15 (16.1%) I = 0.76

n % Index n % Index n % Index


Jungian Types (E) Jungian Types (I) Dominant Types

E–TJ 17 18.3 0.84 I–TP 8 8.6 1.05 Dt. T 25 26.9 0.90


E–FJ 3 3.2 0.23 I–FP 4 4.3 0.54 Dt. F 7 7.5 0.34***
ES–P 10 10.8 1.12 IS–J 18 19.4 0.85 Dt. S 28 30.1 0.93
EN–P 30 32.3 2.64*** IN–J 3 3.2 1.03 Dt. N 33 35.5 2.31***

N = 93 + = 1% of N I = Selection Ratio Index *p <.05 **p <.01 ***p <.001

Eva Papazova and Eliana Pencheva

Journal of Psychological Type®, Volume 68, August 2008


73

Table 3. Adolescent Mid Self-Esteem Compared to Whole Sample.

The Sixteen Complete Types Dichotomous Preferences


ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ E 218 (55.1%) *I = 0.95
n = 54 n = 42 n=8 n=5 I 178 (45.0%) *I = 1.06
(13.6%) (10.6%) (2.0%) (1.3%)
I = 1.15* I = 0.96 I = 1.05 I = 1.03 S 316 (79.8%) ***I = 1.06
+++++ +++++ ++ + N 80 (20.2%) ***I = 0.81
+++++ +++++
++++ + T 199 (50.3%) I = 0.99
F 197 (49.7%) I = 1.01

J 262 (66.2%) **I = 1.07


P 134 (33.8%) **I = 0.89
ISTP ISFP INFP INTP
n = 25 n = 30 n=6 n=8
Pairs and Temperaments
(6.3%) (7.6%) (1.5%) (2.0%) IJ 109 (27.5%) I= 1.06
I = 1.03 I = 1.21 I = 0.87 I = 0.96 IP 69 (17.4%) I= 1.07
+++++ +++++ ++ ++ EP 65 (16.4%) ***I = 0.75
+ +++ EJ 153 (38.6%) *I = 1.07

ST 162 (40.9%) I = 1.04


SF 154 (38.9%) *I = 1.09
NF 43 (10.9%) **I = 0.79
NT 37 (09.3%) *I = 0.84
ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP
n=8 n = 23 n = 23 n = 11 SJ 230 (58.1%) ***I = 1.09
(2.0%) (5.8%) (5.8%) (2.8%) SP 86 (21.7%) I = 0.99
I = 0.53*** I = 1.01 I = 0.68*** I = 0.76 NP 48 (12.1%) ***I = 0.75
++ +++++ +++++ +++ NJ 32 (08.1%) I = 0.91
+ +
TJ 147 (37.1%) I = 1.06
TP 52 (13.1%) *I = 0.84
FP 82 (20.7%) I = 0.93
FJ 115 (29.0%) I = 1.07
ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ
n = 75 n = 59 n=6 n = 13 IN 27 (06.8%) I = 0.98
(18.9%) (14.9%) (1.5%) (3.3%) EN 53 (13.4%) ***I = 0.74
I = 1.07 I = 1.19* I = 0.96 I = 0.78 IS 151 (38.1%) *I = 1.08
+++++ +++++ ++ +++ ES 165 (41.7%) I = 1.05
+++++ +++++
+++++ +++++ ET 107 (27.0%) I = 0.92
++++ EF 111 (28.0%) I = 0.99
IF 86 (21.7%) I = 1.04
IT 92 (23.2%) I = 1.09

n % Index n % Index n % Index


Jungian Types (E) Jungian Types (I) Dominant Types

E–TJ 88 22.2 1.02 I–TP 33 8.3 1.02 Dt. T 121 30.6 1.02
E–FJ 65 16.4 1.16* I–FP 36 9.1 1.13 Dt. F 101 25.5 1.15**
ES–P 31 7.8 0.82* IS–J 96 24.2 1.06 Dt. S 127 32.1 0.99
EN–P 34 8.6 0.70*** IN–J 13 3.3 1.05 Dt. N 47 11.9 0.77***

N = 396 + = 1% of N I = Selection Ratio Index *p <.05 **p <.01 ***p <.001

Eva Papazova and Eliana Pencheva

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Psychological Type


74

Table 4. Adolescent Low Self-Esteem Compared to Whole Sample.

The Sixteen Complete Types Dichotomous Preferences


ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ E 53 (63.1%) I = 1.09
n=7 n = 10 n=0 n=2 I 31 (36.9%) I = 0.87
(8.3%) (11.9%) (0.0%) (2.4%)
I = 0.70 I = 1.08 I = 0.00 I = 1.95 S 66 (78.6%) I = 1.05
+++++ +++++ ++ N 18 (21.4%) I = 0.86
+++ +++++
++ T 47 (56.0%) I = 1.11
F 37 (44.1%) I = 0.89

J 52 (61.9%) I = 1.00
P 32 (38.1%) I = 1.00
ISTP ISFP INFP INTP
n=6 n=2 n=4 n=0
Pairs and Temperaments
(7.1%) (2.4%) (4.8%) (0.0%) IJ 19 (22.6%) I = 0.87
I = 1.17 I = 0.38 I = 2.73 I = 0.00 IP 12 (14.3%) I = 0.88
+++++ ++ +++++ EP 20 (23.8%) I = 1.09
++ EJ 33 (39.3%) I = 1.09

ST 40 (47.6%) I = 1.21
SF 26 (31.0%) I = 0.87
NF 11 (13.1%) I = 0.95
ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP
NT 7 (08.3%) I = 0.75
n = 10 n=4 n=4 n=2
(11.9%) (4.8%) (4.8%) (2.4%) SJ 44 (52.4%) I = 0.99
I = 3.10*** I = 0.83 I = 0.56 I = 0.65 SP 22 (26.2%) I = 1.19
+++++ +++++ +++++ ++ NP 10 (11.9%) I = 0.74
+++++ NJ 8 (09.5%) I = 1.07
++
TJ 29 (34.5%) I = 0.99
TP 18 (21.4%) I = 1.36
FP 14 (16.7%) I = 0.75
FJ 23 (27.4%) I = 1.01
ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ
n = 17 n = 10 n=3 n=3 IN 6 (07.1%) I = 1.02
(20.2%) (11.9%) (3.6%) (3.6%) EN 12 (14.3%) I = 0.79
I = 1.15 I = 0.95 I = 2.27 I = 0.85 IS 25 (29.8%) I = 0.84
+++++ +++++ ++++ ++++ ES 41 (48.8%) I = 1.23
+++++ +++++
+++++ ++ ET 32 (38.1%) I = 1.30
+++++ EF 21 (25.0%) I = 0.88
IF 16 (19.0%) I = 0.91
IT 15 (17.9%) I = 0.84

n % Index n % Index n % Index


Jungian Types (E) Jungian Types (I) Dominant Types

E–TJ 20 23.8 1.09 I–TP 6 7.1 0.87 Dt. T 26 31.0 1.03


E–FJ 13 15.5 1.09 I–FP 6 7.1 0.89 Dt. F 19 22.6 1.02
ES–P 14 16.7 1.74* IS–J 17 20.2 0.89 Dt. S 31 36.9 1.14
EN–P 6 7.1 0.58 IN–J 2 2.4 0.76 Dt. N 8 9.5 0.62

N = 84 + = 1% of N I = Selection Ratio Index *p <.05 **p <.01 ***p <.001

Eva Papazova and Eliana Pencheva

Journal of Psychological Type®, Volume 68, August 2008


75
as tolerant and open to a variety of experiences and The orientation towards finding and receiving
people and may not feel a need for structure and fol- information of P types, inclined towards a spontaneous,
low-through in life. On the other hand, INFPs can also unorganized, and flexible way of life, which during ado-
be distinguished as caring, warm, and deeply valuing lescence manifests itself in independence, self-reliance,
relationships because commitment, loyalty, and love are and autonomy from adults, was associated with high
often of great importance to them (Martin, 1997; Myers self-esteem. The preference for P is characteristic of ado-
et al., 1998). lescent samples in general (Myers et al., 1998). Hence it
The concentration on future possibilities, con- was not surprising that the adolescents’ less valued pref-
nected with innovation and change, optimism, discov- erence for J was paralleled with mid levels of self-esteem.
ering creative potential, conviviality, and sociability are The older adolescents from the present study
the factors that the present study connects with high (aged 17–18) demonstrated higher self-esteem than the
self-esteem in adolescents. The higher values of self- younger ones (aged 15–16). These results corroborate
esteem are related to N and P, whereas the lower ones the data of the longitudinal studies of adolescent self-
correspond to S and J. esteem, which show increasing and systematically
The affinity characteristic of N types for working improving self-esteem from 13 to 18 years of age
with abstract information in the realm of possibilities (McCarthy & Hoge, 1982). The girls had no lower
and hypotheses, which in adolescence is a predictor of self-esteem than the boys, which does not confirm the
high grades in all subjects (Myers et al., 1998) and of relationship observed in other studies.
high self-esteem (Baxter & Baxter, 1994; DuBois et al., Self-esteem in adolescence is a theme that will
1998; Golden, 1996), proved to be a predictor in the continue to excite researchers with its many facets.
present sample, also. A preference for concrete and Viewed in the context of the adolescent type prefer-
confined-to-the-facts information, which is characteris- ences, it becomes essentially topical. The present study
tic of S types, is not considered to be a predictor of stressed the universal aspects of adolescent self-esteem,
high grades in school and high self-esteem in adoles- rather than particular or isolated features, which might
cence, and it was related to mid self-esteem among the be determined by a number of factors other than
adolescents studied. personality type.

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Psychological Type


76
REFERENCES
Banaji, M. R., & Prentice, D. A. (1994). The self in social contexts. Jung, C. G. (1995). Psychological types. Sofia, Bulgaria: St. Kliment
Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 297–332. Ohridski University Press. (Orginal work published 1921)
Baxter, S. R., & Baxter, W. D. (1994). Student MBTI type-characteristic Lynch-Polce, M., Myers, B., Kliewer, W., & Kilmartin, C. (2001).
behavior: Correlations with the Adjective Checklist; and Adolescent self-esteem and gender: Exploring relations to
teacher and school psychologist judgment of social accept- sexual harassment, body image, media influence, and emo-
ance and emotional health. In Orchestrating educational change tional expression. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30(2),
in the 90’s: The role of psychological type (pp. 305–319). 225–244.
Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type. Martin, C. R. (1997). Looking at type: The fundamentals. Gainesville,
Berry, G. W., & Sipps, G. J. (1991). Interactive effects of counselor- FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
client similarity and client self-esteem on termination type McCarthy, J., & Hoge, D. (1982). Analysis of age effects in longitu-
and number of sessions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, dinal studies of adolescent self-esteem. Developmental
38(2), 120–125. Psychology, 18, 372–379.
Clark, P. C. (2000). Self-esteem and type. Bulletin of Psychological Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L.
Type, 23(3), 1, 3–4. (1998). MBTI manual: A guide to the development and use of the
Cole, C., Oetting, E. R., & Hinkle, J. (1967). Non-linearity of self- Myers-Briggs type indicator (3rd ed.) Palo Alto, CA:
concept discrepancy—the value dimension. Psychological Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
Reports, 21, 58–60. Offer, D., & Ostrov, E. (1984). Patterns of adolescent self-image. San
DuBois, D., Bull, C., Sherman, M. D., & Roberts, M. (1998). Self- Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
esteem and adjustment in early adolescence: A social-contex- Pencheva, E., & Kazandjiev, R. (2001). Bulgarian translation of
tual perspective. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27, 557– MBTI materials: Problems and solutions. In Psychological type
583. and culture—East & West: A multicultural research conference.
Golden, B. J. (1996). Self-esteem and psychological type: Program and proceedings (pp. 73–79). Gainesville, FL:
Definitions, interactions, and expressions. In Proceedings of Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
the Second Biennial International Conference on Education (pp. Quatman, T., & Watson, C. (2001). Gender differences in adoles-
401–404). Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of cent self-esteem: An exploration of domains. Journal of
Psychological Type. Genetic Psychology, 162(1), 93–118.
Gordon, L. (1962). Human development: From birth through adoles- Silguidjian, H. (1998). Self-concept and psycho-social identity: The life
cence. Gainesville, FL: The University of Florida. transition to maturity. Sofia, Bulgaria: St. Kliment Ohridski
Granade, J. G., Myers, I. B., & Macdaid, G. P. (1987). Selection University Press.
Ratio Type Table program [PC programming and documen- Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. (1982). Self-concept: The interplay of
tation]. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of theory and methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74,
Psychological Type. (Original work published 1976) 3–17.
Guyer, L. K. (1988). Relationships among self-esteem, psychologi- Steffenhagen, R. A., & Burns, J. D. (1987). The social dynamics of
cal type and weight history as a basis for individualizing self-esteem: Theory to therapy. New York: Praeger.
instruction in successful weight-reduction and maintenance. Taylor, F. L. (1990). The influence of an outdoor adventure recre-
Dissertation Abstracts International, 49(11), 3275A. (UMI No. ation class on the personality type, locus-of-control, self-
AAC88-17795) esteem, and selected issues of identity development of
Harrison, M. E. (1986). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a college students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51 (04),
supervisional tool to enhance self-esteem in clinical pastoral 1122A. (UMI No. AAC90-21974)
education students. Masters Abstracts International, 25(02), Tiggemann, M. (2001). The impact of adolescent girls’ life con-
159. (UMI No. AAC13-29024) cerns and leisure activities on body dissatisfaction, disor-
Harter, S. (1990). Self and identity development. In S. Feldman & dered eating, and self-esteem. Journal of Genetic Psychology,
G. R. Elliott (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescents 162(2), 133–143.
(pp. 156–166). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tobacyk, J. J., Wells, D. H., & Springer, T. P. (1988). Jungian type
Harter, S. (1998). Relational self-worth: Differences in perceived and self-concept in junior high school students at high risk
worth as a person across interpersonal contexts among ado- for dropout. Journal of Psychological Type, 16, 47–53.
lescents. Child Development, 69, 756–766. Wells, L. E., & Marwell, G. (1976). Self-esteem: Its Conceptualisation
Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. and Measurement. London: London Sage publications.
Jegede, R. O. (1982). A cross-sectional study of self-concept devel- Wolman, B. B. (1998). Adolescence: Biological and psychosocial per-
opment in Nigerian adolescents. Journal of Psychology, 110, spectives. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
249–261. Wylie, R. C. (1974). The self-concept. A review of methodological con-
Jhonev, S. (1996). Social psychology (Vol. 2). Sofia, Bulgaria: Sofy— siderations and measuring instruments (rev. ed.). Lincoln, NE:
R. University of Nebraska Press.

Journal of Psychological Type®, Volume 68, August 2008


77
Eva Papazova, Ph.D. (INFP) is a research fellow in the department of Personality and Genetic Psychology at the
Institute of Psychology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. She is the author of 18 publications, 9 of them in the area of
MBTI® research, 4 in English. Her dissertation is on psychological type and adolescent self-esteem in which five
samples with different ethnic origins in Bulgaria are compared.

Eliana Pencheva, Ph.D. (INFJ) is an associate professor in Educational and Developmental Psychology and senior
researcher in the department of Personality and Genetic Psychology at the Institute of Psychology, Bulgarian Academy
of Sciences. She also teaches courses at Sofia University “Saint Kliment Ohridski.” Eliana Pencheva is a licensed prac-
titioner for the MBTI® (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®) instrument and a CEECAP (Central and Eastern European
Center for Applied Psychology) Director for Bulgaria. She is the author of 90 publications, 19 of them in the area of MBTI
research, 5 in English. Her latest book, Psychological Typology and Educational Practice, on psychological type and Bulgarian
educators, compares them with two other samples, the general Bulgarian population and American educators.

C O N TA C T
Eva Papazova, Ph.D.
Research Fellow
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Psychology
Akad. G. Bonchev Street, bl.6
1113 Sofia
Bulgaria
Phone & Fax: 359 2 870-32-17
Email: papazovae@hotmail.com

This Journal is being made available through the collaborative efforts of Dr. Tom Carskadon, Editor of the Journal of Psychological Type, and
the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc., CAPT, worldwide publisher. Dr. B. Michael Thorne serves as Executive Editor of the
Journal of Psychological Type.

Journal of Psychological Type is a trademark or registered trademark of Thomas G. Carskadon in the United States and other countries.

CAPT is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the meaningful application and ethical use of psychological type as measured through the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator instrument.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Myers-Briggs, and MBTI are trademarks or registered trademarks of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust in
the United States and other countries.

Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc. and CAPT are trademarks or registered trademarks of the Center for Applications of
Psychological Type in the United States and other countries.

Copyright © 2008 by Thomas G. Carskadon, Editor.

ISSN 0895-8750.

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Psychological Type