Untitled

Factorial structure and validity of the Francis Psychological Type and Emotional Temperament Scales (FPTETS)

“…This item may need to be revised slightly, perhaps to indicate the sort of 'over emotionality' that is associated with emotional instability. The correlation of the two measures of extraversion was as predicted, and in line with other studies that suggest this aspect of personality is similar across several different models (Francis & Jones, 2000;McCrae & Costa, 1989;Tobacyk et al, 2008). Even with the weaker item included, the emotional temperament scale appeared to be a useful and reliable measure of emotional stability versus instability.…”

“…The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) was derived from work on abnormal psychology and posits three dimensions: extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975;Furnham, Eysenck, & Saklofske, Brown, & Philipchalk, 1992). In a sample of 377 adult churchgoers there was a good correlation between extraversion as measured by the EPQ and MBTI, and moderate correlation between EPQ psychoticism and judging-perceiving scores in the MBTI (Francis & Jones, 2000). The mapping of these two instruments appears to more complex than for the FFM.…”

“…Type models assign individuals to dichotomous categories using the cumulative scores on each dimension obtained from the particular instrument being employed. There is considerable evidence to suggest that type scores correlate with traits in other models (Crump, Furnham, & Moutafi, 2003;Francis & Jones, 2000;Furnham, 1996;MacDonald, Anderson, Tsagarakis, & Holland, 1995;McCrae & Costa, 1989;Tobacyk, Livingston, & Robbins, 2008). In these studies, MBTI scores were usually treated as if they were scores on a trait-based model, and this may sometimes be the best way to use the data from type sorters in research contexts (Village, 2011).…”

The relationship of psychological type to interpretations of Genesis among churchgoers in England.

“…Psychological type theory has been thoroughly evaluated in terms of conceptualization, empirical operationalization, and theological implications (Bayne, 1997; Francis, 2005; Leech, 1996; Lloyd, 2007, 2008, 2012). Type theory describes a limited but core range of individual differences that seem to be equivalent to some traits used in the Big Five or Eysenck personality models (Bayne, 1994, 1997; Furnham, Moutafi, & Crump, 2003; Francis & Jones, 2000; McDonald, Anderson, Tsagarakis, & Holland, 1995; McCrae & Costa, 1989). Although type theory was developed using the notion of dichotomous preferences, there is growing evidence that using continuous type scores is analogous to using trait scores, and a reliable way of indicating underlying preferences for different functions (Tzeng, Ware, & Chen, 1989; Village, 2011b).…”