Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Advances in Physiology Education is dedicated to the improvement of teaching and learning physiology, both in
specialized courses and in the broader context of general biology education. It is published four times a year in March, June,
September and December by the American Physiological Society, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda MD 20814-3991.
Copyright 1992 by the American Physiological Society. ISSN: 1043-4046, ESSN: 1522-1229. Visit our website at
http://www.the-aps.org/.
Relationship
between personality type and achievement
in an undergraduate
physiology course
GERALD
D. THARP
School of Biological
Sciences,
University
of Nebraska,
Myers-Briggs
teaching
type indicator;
cognitive
learning
styles; science
TYPE INDICATOR
(MBTI)
The MBTI is based on Carl Jungs theory of personality type and has been developed over the past 50 years
by Myers (6). It identifies individuals along four dichotomous scales. 1) E-I (extraversion-introversion):
Is the
person interested in the outer world of people and action
or the inner world of ideas and concepts? 2) S-N (sensingintuition):
Do they perceive the real, practical facts of life
with their senses or use intuition,
imagination,
and inspiration to see the possibilities and meanings beyond the
facts? 3) T-F (thinking-feeling):
Do they make judgments
or decisions objectively and impersonally based on facts
and logic or subjectively and personally, relying on empathy and feelings? 4) J-P (judgment-perception):
Does
the person prefer to live in a decisive, planned, and orderly way or in a spontaneous, flexible manner?
A persons MBTI profile consists of scores on each of
1043-4046/92
$2.00
Copyright
Nebraska
68588
16 possible person-
ON PERSONALITY
Physiological
Society
Sl
Tharp,
Gerald
D. Relationship
between personality
type
and achievement in an undergraduate
physiology class. Am. J.
Physiol. 262 (Adv. Physiol. Educ. 7): Sl-S3, 1992.-The
MyersBriggs type indicator (MBTI)
was given to 163 students in an
undergraduate
Human
Physiology
course at a large state
university. Selected MBTI personality types were compared for
achievement in the course using a t test to compare total points
earned. High grades were earned by students stronger in the
traits of introversion
(I) and judgment (J), whereas the extraverted (E) and perceptive (P) types had the lowest grades and
dropped out of the course in the largest numbers. When combinations
of MBTI
types were compared, the highest grades
were earned as follows: SJ > ST > IN > IJ > IS (S, sensing; T,
thinking;
N, intuitive).
This ranking indicates that a sensing
personality also has a strong relationship
to achievement in this
Human Physiology course when it is combined with judgment,
thinking,
or introversion.
Instructors
and students need to be
aware of the relationship
between personality and learning so
they can modify their teaching style and learning behavior to
enhance academic achievement.
Lincoln,
s2
PERSONALITY
TYPES
RESULTS
Comparisons of the total course points for selected personality type combinations are given in Table 2. Using a
probability
level of 0.05, significant differences were as
follows: I > E, IJ > EP, ST > SF, SJ > NT, INJ > ESP,
and J was almost significantly higher than P. If the probability is adjusted for running multiple t tests using the
Bonferroni equation (a! = O.O5/number of t tests), significant comparisons were I > E and IJ > EP.
Table 1. Professional
Medicine
Physical
education
Physical
therapy
Biology
Nursing
Undecided
Exercise
science
Nutrition
Pharmacy
Speech pathology
Medical
technology
Education
Physicians
assistant
Veterinary
medicine
Microbiology
Occupational
therapy
Miscellaneous
No. of Students
60
18
17
15
13
11
10
8
6
5
5
4
4
4
3
3
20
ACHIEVEMENT
types
N
Total
Mean
Points
SD
Two-Tail
Probability
E
I
83
80
137.7
155.9
32.5
29.3
o.ooo*
S
N
88
75
147.4
145.7
33.2
31.1
0.741
T
F
98
65
150.0
141.5
33.0
30.4
0.099
J
P
90
73
151.0
141.2
31.5
32.4
0.052
ES
IN
29
35
147.9
158.1
35.4
27.2
0.201
ES
IS
29
45
147.9
154.2
35.4
31.1
0.428
EN
IN
15
35
143.6
158.1
25.1
27.2
0.084
EN
IS
15
45
143.6
154.2
25.1
31.1
0.239
NF
NT
31
44
147.5
144.4
30.7
31.7
0.675
SJ
NT
42
44
160.3
144.4
31.3
31.7
0.0227
NT
SF
44
27
144.4
139.9
31.7
29.5
0.235
SF
ST
27
47
139.9
158.5
NF
ST
31
47
147.5
158.5
30.7
32.8
0.182
EP
IJ
39
46
127.8
155.4
30.3
30.6
o.ooo*
0.017.f
INJ
10
154.1
33.2
0.023t
14
124.5
26.2
ESP
N, no. of subjects in each personality
type. E, extraversion;
F, feeling;
I, introversion;
J, judgment;
N, intuition;
P, perception;
S, sensing; T,
thinking.
* Significantly
different
at Bonferroni
cy <O.OO3 for multiple
t
tests. t Significantly
different
at cy ~0.05.
When the MBTI types of the top students are compared with the students who dropped the course, some
interesting differences are seen (Table 3). More of the
high-achievement
students were of the I, T, and J types,
whereas the students who dropped were higher in E and
P types. These differences also show up when combination types are examined; the top students being more the
IJ, IN, ST, and SJ types, whereas the students dropping
the course were more the EP and ES types.
DISCUSSION
AND
PERSONALITY
Table 3. Comparison
TYPES
of top 41 students
E
I
S
N
T
F
J
P
EP
IJ
SF
ST
SJ
NT
ES
IN
Top students
in course
12
29
25
16
31
10
26
15
4
18
2
12
21
8
8
12
of Students
Students
dropping
course
25
18
27
16
21
22
15
28
17
7
14
13
13
8
18
9
s3
ACHIEVEMENT
level combines abstract concepts with many practical applications to our daily lives. This emphasis would appeal
to the S personality who prefers the immediate,
real,
practical facts of life.
In conclusion, what can we learn from the results of
this study? As currently taught, Human Physiology favors students who can work efficiently by themselves (I),
live in a planned, orderly way (J), and are interested in
the practical applications of science in their lives (S). The
EP types are especially prone to failure in this course.
Instructors and students should be made aware of the
impact of personality on learning so they can modify
teaching styles and learning behaviors. Science instructors can use a variety of teaching activities in their
courses to help motivate the different personality types
(3). The EP students especially will need to become more
organized in their study habits and develop their concentration and reasoning skills. As teachers we need to emphasize that all personality types are valuable, but the
learning environment in each course may favor one type
over another so that some students will have to modify
their attitudes and study skills if they are to succeed. It
must be noted that this study examined only the relationship between achievement in physiology and personality
type. The study did not take into account other variables
that could influence achievement, such as student background in the sciences or years of college completed. Variables in student academic background should be included
in future studies of personality type and achievement.
Received
19 September
1991; accepted
in final
form
2 December
1991.
REFERENCES
1. Charlton,
R. E. Cognitive
style considerations
for the improvement of biology education.
Am. BioZ. Teach. 42: 244,247,
1980.
2. Hoffman,
J. L., and K. Waters.
Some effects of student
personality
on success with computer-assisted
instruction.
E&K.
Technol.
22: 20-21,
1982.
G. A synthesis
of learning
style research
involving
3. Lawrence,
the MBTI.
J. Psychol.
Type 8: 2-15, 1984.
4. McCaulley,
M. H. Personality
variables:
modal profiles
that
characterize
the various
fields of science and what they mean for
education.
J. Coil. Sci. Teach. 7: 114-120,
1977.
5. Melear,
C. T. Cognitive
processes
in the Curry
learning
style
framework
as measured
by the learning
style profile and the Myers-Briggs
type indicator
among
non-majors
in biology.
Diss.
Abstr. Int. 51-1: 127-A, 1990.
I. B., and M. H. McCaulley.
Manual:
A Guide to the
6. Myers,
Development
and Use of the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator.
Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists,
1985, p. 94-139.
M. B. Who chooses science?
A profile.
Sci. Teach. 45:
7. Rowe,
25-28, 1978.
K. T., and V. E. Ruble.
The Myers-Briggs
Type In8. Schurr,
dicator and first-year
college achievement:
a look beyond aptitude
test results. J. Psychol.
Type 12: 25-37, 1986.
9. Schurr,
K. T., and V. Ruble.
Psychological
type and the second
year of college achievement:
survival
and the gravitation
toward
appropriate
and manageable
major fields. J. Psych&.
Type 14:
57-59, 1988.
AND