Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To zoom in or out on PEP-Web…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Are you having difficulty reading an article due its font size? In order to make the content on PEP-Web larger (zoom in), press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the plus sign (+). Press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the minus sign (-) to make the content smaller (zoom out). To go back to 100% size (normal size), press Ctrl (⌘Command on the Mac) + 0 (the number 0).

Another way on Windows: Hold the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel up or down to zoom in and out (respectively) of the webpage. Laptop users may use two fingers and separate them or bring them together while pressing the mouse track pad.

Safari users: You can also improve the readability of you browser when using Safari, with the Reader Mode: Go to PEP-Web. Right-click the URL box and select Settings for This Website, or go to Safari > Settings for This Website. A large pop-up will appear underneath the URL box. Look for the header that reads, “When visiting this website.” If you want Reader mode to always work on this site, check the box for “Use Reader when available.”

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Meier, C.A. Wozny, M.A. (1978). An Empirical Study of Jungian Typology. J. Anal. Psychol., 23(3):226-230.

(1978). Journal of Analytical Psychology, 23(3):226-230

An Empirical Study of Jungian Typology

C. A. Meier, M.D. and M. A. Wozny

PREVIOUS RESEARCH with the Gray-Wheelwright test by Bradway, Wozny and, more recently, Baumann, Angst, Henne and Muser (BRADWAY 2, WOZNY 6, BAUMANN et al 1) has been concerned with showing how well the different scales measure the dimensions of the Jungian typological model. Such studies have attempted to find meaning (and some even justification) for the way the items were grouped into scales presumed to measure Jungian concepts. We decided on a different strategy. Guided by reflections for a more rigorous statistical approach to the study of Jungian typology among Jungians (MEIER 4), and not satisfied simply to continue this line of research with yet another study on the ‘meaning’ of the scales, we put together an experimental design which would study the way the Gray—Wheelwright scales ‘type’ the individuals of known Jungian types. Our problem resolved itself into answering the question: what is the relationship between living Jungian types and those same types ‘typed’ by the Gray-Wheelwright test? Theoretically, a one-to-one correspondence would be expected provided that (1) the Gray-Wheelwright is valid to give us Jungian types, and (2) the sample of subjects used in the study are Jungian types to begin with.

As regards the validity of the Gray-Wheelwright test, we already knew from past research (WOZNY 6) that at best the items were measuring introversion-extraversion (I-E), sensation-intuition (S-Int) and introverted thinking-extraverted feeling (IT-EF), rather than simply thinking-feeling (T-F) as the authors claimed.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2019, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.