PSTI

This paper investigates the often-debated connections between personality types and learning preferences, specifically testing whether established instruments like the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the North Carolina Index of Learning Styles (NCILS) exhibit meaningful associations (Myers & Briggs, 1998; Boyle, 1995). While personality influences aspects such as energy source and information absorption (Cervone & Pervin, 2022; Funder, 2019; Ackerman & Heggestad, 1997; Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2005), a direct one-to-one relationship between specific personality type dimensions and learning styles is not consistently observed (Pashler et al., 2008). We report results from a small survey (N = 37) that paired MBTI dichotomies with NCILS-like learning categories and used chi-square tests of independence to check for associations (Cohen, 1988). We additionally incorporate Erving Goffman’s social interaction theory to argue that classroom identities and enacted roles mediate how self-reports translate into study behavior (Goffman, 1959; Eckert, 2008). Overall, the only robust association found was between Extroversion/Introversion (E–I) and Active/Reflective (A–R) learning (χ²(1, N = 37) = 8.07). Other MBTI–NC pairings failed to reach significance. Based on these findings and theoretical considerations, we propose the Personal Study Type Indicator (PSTI) — a context-specific instrument designed to measure study behaviors by combining modality (visual vs. auditory), structure (structured vs. flexible), and orientation (theoretical vs. practical) (Pashler et al., 2008; Tuckman, 1965). Social interaction theory is explicitly used to explain why personality instruments and learning-style questionnaires may diverge: identities are performed and negotiated in group settings, altering both self-report and observed study behavior (Goffman, 1959; Eckert, 2008).