Unique: Using Your Individual Qualities for Personal Growth #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. I’m currently quite triggered and feeling unsafe, so this is going to be a bit of a ramble. For my letter U post in the #AtoZChallenge, I’d like to talk about how each person is different and how to use your own unique qualities for personal growth.

Some people like to categorize or label themselves or others, for example using the MBTI, Enneagram or another personality test. There is nothing wrong with this in itself, but if you take your labels too seriously, you run the risk of not seeing the person you yourself are.

For example, I’m an Enneagram 4. For the longest time, I thought that because I identify most with this type, I also had to identify with similarly-described types in other categories. If you’ve seen my post on the MBTI, you’ve seen that for a long while, I identified as INFJ. I still am not sure whether I’m an INFJ or INTJ and basing my identity solely on a meme, isn’t quite wise. That being said, the reason I forever thought I must be an INFJ, is in part that I identify most with Enneagram type 4. However, the Enneagram is based on core motivations, whereas the MBTI is based on cognitive preferences, so why would an Enneagram 4 need to be a Feeling type?

Personality tests, like I’ve said, can definitely help understand yourself. However, they are not the be all and end all of self-understanding. Neither is any other method of identifying yourself as one particular type or another. Not even deep introspection. Yes, it will lead you to a deeper understanding of yourself, but if then you decide to narrow your identity down to a type or even a rating on the Big Five, you’re not doing yourself justice. You are unique, after all. And yes, so is everybody else.

Big Five: The Five-Factor Model of Personality #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. For my letter B post in the #AtoZChallenge on personal growth, I’d like to discuss the five-factor model of personality, also known as the Big Five.

The Big Five are five personality traits that psychologists think comprise the human personality. These were proposed based on factor analysis of words people use to describe someone’s behavior. Apparently, these five traits encompass all aspects of the human personality.

Unlike with some other personality typologies, the Big Five isn’t a dichotomous system. Rather, the traits are a spectrum ranging from one extreme to the other and everyone falls somewhere along the spectrum on each trait.

The traits are commonly summed up in the CANOE or OCEAN acronym. They are:


  • Conscientiousness: efficient/organized vs. haphazard/careless.

  • Agreeableness: sympathetic/cooperative vs. cold/competitive.

  • Neuroticism (or low emotional stability): moody/nervous vs. relaxed/calm.

  • Openness to experience: imaginative/philosophical vs. uncreative/unintellectual.

  • Extraversion: bold/energetic vs. shy/bashful.

As you can probably see, most of these traits are not formulated in a morally neutral way. For example, it’s often seen as better to be efficient and organized than to be careless. As such, a high score on all subscales (except for neuroticism) is generally seen as desirable.

I took a Big Five test once when in college and scored badly on all subscales except for openness to experience. Then again, there was a validity scale too, which scored how much you tend to answer in socially acceptable ways even if this isn’t genuine. On this subscale, I scored such that it’s likely that I rate myself more negatively than I am.

How valid are the Big Five in actually assessing someone’s personality? Studies have shown that they can be measured, but whether these are the real or only important personality traits, is still up for debate. For example, some researchers have suggested a sixth trait: honesty vs. humility. Do you notice how this one is actually worded in a morally neutral way?