PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF THE RESEARCH IN JUNGIAN TYPOLOGY
Serhii Hrebinnyk
Nizhyn Hohol State University
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1558-7177
PDF 84-94 (Українська)

Keywords

personality theory
psychological types
personality typology
temperament
psychodiagnostics

How to Cite

Hrebinnyk, S. (2020). PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF THE RESEARCH IN JUNGIAN TYPOLOGY. PSYCHOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 6(6), 84-94. https://doi.org/10.31108/1.2020.6.6.9

Abstract

The article is devoted to the theoretical study, systematic ordering and critical review of modern scientific developments of Carl Jung's psychological typology described in the fundamental work "Psychological Types", and the study of theories of his followers, which continued and supplemented the original typological model.

The topic relevance is explained by the lack of decent attention to the typology in Ukrainian scientific community, because after more than 100 years of the theory being studied there is still no complete understanding of this personology model.

The article discusses emergence, transformation, and addendums of types theory in line with three directions: Jung's original model; Myers – Briggs theory of personality types (quantitative expansion of personality types, diagnostic tool, and new dichotomous features); Neojungian paradigm of type research (in-depth understanding of "cognitive model" and archetypes integration into the typological model). Current state of development of the types concept is systematically and comprehensively demonstrated on the example of one of the most important theoretical aspects of typology, namely "cognitive model". The article reviews  types multiplication in the process of interparadigmal transition as well as transition to more in-depth study and understanding of "psychological type" concept through understanding its internal mechanics.

Modern scientific developments, empirical and theoretical researches, conceptual links to other domains in psychology, psychodiagnostics, psychophysiology are considered. Shortcomings and critical aspects underlined by authors of various studies relating to the empirical evidentiality of types theory, are mentioned in the article.

Conclusion shows prospects and relevance of further studies of Jungian "psychological types" concept, considering new approaches and trends able to complement and enrich original typology, as well as to open up more opportunities for empirical research and successful resolution of critical issues.

The main unsolved problem of typology is revealed, which is psychophysiological predisposition of a type and its temperamental nature, as noted by some authors who have already studied types theory by linking it with the Kretschmer and Sheldon’s "body structure types" approach. This question is the main direction for future empirical solution and final consolidation of the theory.

 

PDF 84-94 (Українська)

References

Arnau, R. C., Green, B. A., Rosen, D. H., Gleaves, D. H., & Melancon, J. G. (2003). Are Jungian preferences really categorical? : An empirical investigation using taxometric analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(2), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00040-5

Arraj, J. (1986). Jung’s forgotten bridge. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 31, 173–180

Arraj, T., & Arraj, J. (1988). Tracking the Elusive Human: A practical guide to CG Jung's psychological types, WH Sheldon's body and temperament types, and their integration (Vol. 1). Midland, OR: Inner Growth Books.

Barimany, M. E. (2017). The Hierarchy of Preferences in Jungian Psychological Type: Comparing Theory to Evidence (Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington University).

Beebe, J. (2004). Understanding consciousness through the theory of psychological types. Analytical psychology (pp. 95-127). Routledge.

Beebe, J. (2005). Evolving the eight-function model. Bulletin of Psychological Type, 28(4), 34-39.

Budd, R. J. (1993). Jung Type Indicator: The technical manual. Letchworth: Psytech Intemational Ltd.

Ekstrom, S. R. (1988). Jung's typology and DSM-III personality disorders: A comparison of two systems of classification. The Journal of Analytical Psychology, 33(4), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-5922.1988.00329.x

Franz, M. v., & Hillman, J. (1971). Lectures on Jung's typology: The inferior function. New York, NY: Spring Publications.

Garden, A. (1991). Unresolved issues with the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Journal of Psychological Type, 22(1), 3-14.

Giannini, J. L. (2004). Compass of the soul: Archetypal guides to a fuller life. Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

Gorlow, L., Simonson, N. R., & Krauss, H. (1966). An empirical investigation of the Jungian typology. British journal of social and clinical psychology, 5(2), 108-117.

Hrebinnyk, S. (2019). PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF INDIVIDUAL-TYPOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN PSYCHOLOGY. PSYCHOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 5(11), 149-162. https://doi.org/10.31108/1.2019.5.11.10

Jung, C. G. (1953). Collected works. Vol. 12. Psychology and alchemy. New York: Pantheon Books.

Jung, C. G. (1976). Psychological Types. (A revision by R. F. C. Hull of the translation by H. G. Baynes.) Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (1959). Collected works. Vol. 9, Pt. I. The archetypes and the collective unconscious. New York: Patheon Books.

Jung, C. G. (1968). Analytical psychology, its theory and practice: The Tavistock lectures. New York: Pantheon Books.

Kagan, J. (1994). Galen's prophecy: Temperament in human nature. Basic Books.

Keirsey, D. (1988). Portraits of temperament. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book Co.

Keirsey, D., & Bates, M. (1978). Please understand me. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis.

Leary, M. M., Reilly, M. D., & Brown, F. W. (2009). A study of personality preferences and emotional intelligence. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(5), 421–434. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730910968697

Lewis, C. A. (2015). Psychological type, religion, and culture: Further empirical perspectives [Editorial]. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 18(7), 531–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2015.1103520

Loomis, M., & Singer, J. (1980). Testing the bipolarity assumption in Jung’s typology. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 25, 351–356.

Mahlberg, A. (1987). Evidence of collective memory: A test of Sheldrake's theory. The Journal of Analytical Psychology, 32(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-5922.1987.00023.x

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1989.tb00759.x

Myers, I. B., & Myers, P. B. (1995). Gifts differing: understanding personality type. Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black Pub.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (1998). MBTI manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Vol. 3). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, S. (2000). The MTR-i users manual. Oxum, UK: The Test Agency

Nelson, B. & Stake, J. (1994). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Personality Dimensions and Perceptions of Quality of Therapy Relationships. Psychotherapy, 31, 3, 44-455.

Ross, C. F. J. (2011). Jungian typology and religion: A North American perspective. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 22, 165-191.

Sato, J. (2005). Construction of Jung Psychological Types Scale. Journal of Japanese Psychology, 76, 203-210.

Singer, J., Loomis, M., Kirkhart, E. & Kirkhart, L. (1996). Singer-Loomis type deployment inventory. Gresham, OR: Moving Boundaries, Inc.

Stein, M. (1998). Jung's map of the soul: An introduction. Chicago, IL: Open Court Publishing.

Thompson, B. (1996). Personal Preferences Self-Description Questionnaire. College Station, TX: Psychometrics Group.

Thompson, H. (2002). Wave theory of type development and dynamics. Bulletin of Psychological Type, 25, 4, 41-45.

Thompson, H. L. (1996). Jung’s function-attitudes explained. Watkinsville, GA: Wormhole Publishing.

Thompson, H. L. (2003). The evolution of the function-attitudes. Bulletin of Psychological Type, 26(3), 36-39.

Thompson, K. (1985). Cognitive and analytical psychology. The San Francisco Jung Institute Library Journal, 5(4), 40-64.

Wheelwright, J. B., Wheelwright, J. H., & Buehler, J. A. (1964). Jungian Type Survey: The GrayWheelwrights Test manual (16th revision) . San Francisco: Society of Jungian Analysts of Northern California

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright Notice

Articles in the Psychological Journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License International CC-BY that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. For more detailed information, please, fallow the link - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/