Thread: Myer- Briggs Type & Best LD Technique

Oh I remember someone made a thread asking people about their type of personality and technique they used the most.

I don't understand that thing much, so will just leave "INTP" here and see if that helps you.

Why the Myers-Briggs test is totally meaningless

I'm still curious and arguing (I think there was this discussion on some past test) on the subjectivity of the best technique. Habit implementation has many nuances for example, but there is are actually many factors that are practically universal (like these kinds of behaviors being formed slowly, repetition being relevant, short-term results useless, etc etc).
The only problem is that we're still mostly clueless about the mechanisms that contribute to lucidity, which makes it hard to identify whether certain actions are beneficial to the lucid dreamer, especially when you consider most if not all people use multiple tools to practice.

^^ All true, except that the Myers-Briggs test does seem to provide an opportunity to tell yourself about the leanings of your own personality, in detail you consciously ignore.

In spite of that, I think OP wasn't really asking if different personality types have better luck triggering those mysterious lucidity mechanisms as much as she was curious about what triggers different types of people choose to employ. Whether Myers-Briggs is valid or not, I think we can all assume that people do have different personality types.

That said, the one time I took this test (at a LaBerge dream Camp, ironically), I registered as Fi (introverted feeling), and I'm fairly confident that I have never become lucid by focusing on intense emotions or dream signs. Indeed, I think I do a little bit of all the other things that OP listed; go figure.

That said, the one time I took this test (at a LaBerge dream Camp, ironically), I registered as Fi (introverted feeling), and I'm fairly confident that I have never become lucid by focusing on intense emotions or dream signs. Indeed, I think I do a little bit of all the other things that OP listed; go figure.

Really? For some reason that seems funny (La Berge doing assessments on the participants). Despite that, I wished more surveys were made on the topic, that study finding regarding "insight" that Coder posted some weeks (months?) ago was a nice discovery.

All true, except that the Myers-Briggs test does seem to provide an opportunity to tell yourself about the leanings of your own personality, in detail you consciously ignore.

I actually think it's the other way around: the test gives you a result based on how you're feeling/behaving in that moment. The constant and radical fluctuations seem to suggest that things like mood/recent events/choice architecture might be much influential on your results. Though, you know how I'd use Myers-Brigs in regarding to lucid dreaming (hypothetically)?

a) Apply test to subjects (use as control)
b) Make them experience lucid dreams
c) Re-apply test after several weeks of those experiences.

It would be interesting to see possible influences on the results of the 2nd round of testing. Once again, if it weren't for the lack of an effective induction method, I bet studies like this would already be a reality.

In spite of that, I think OP wasn't really asking if different personality types have better luck triggering those mysterious lucidity mechanisms as much as he was curious about what triggers different types of people choose to employ.

Funnily enouh, neither was I xD My intention was to comment on something else, but the Myers-Briggs mention triggered the memory of that article right away. What I wanted to suggest was actually in relation to learning styles: in the same way we proven that the theory that people have a specific way of learning that is universally better for them was false, I was also curious to see if the same thing could apply to lucid dreaming induction. Me and Hukif disagree on this (he's more on the middle side and I'm more extremist and due that probably wrong as usual ), but what if it actually there was a better route despite all those aspects? Assuming the use of a valid personality type test, that a set of lding exercises would produce very similar results. After all, is the personality type that big of a difference between two students on the subject of math, or are there much relevant factors that are much more objective and measurable (like method of studying)? Since DILD seems to revolve so much around conditioning, maybe many people are actually missing out simply by thinking certain technique fits their "personality" best. Who knows ^^

Huge sorry if I deviated too much from your line of thinking MoonageDayDream, but the whole topic of lding induction is fascinating when you consider the variety of people that manage to achieve them with (seemingly) completely different methods....it looks just like talking: no matter what, we are all born with the ability to do it

Originally Posted by Zoth

Really? For some reason that seems funny (La Berge doing assessments on the participants). Despite that, I wished more surveys were made on the topic, that study finding regarding "insight" that Coder posted some weeks (months?) ago was a nice discovery.

I don't remember why he administered the test (I'm not even sure I ever knew). I do remember the results pretty much lined up with the participants' personalities, which sort of made the test an exercise in redundancy to me.

I actually think it's the other way around: the test gives you a result based on how you're feeling/behaving in that moment. The constant and radical fluctuations seem to suggest that things like mood/recent events/choice architecture might be much influential on your results.

I didn't get that impression: the test seemed to dive much deeper than current attitudes, but you could be correct. Contrarily, if you are truly honest when answering the questions, wouldn't your current attitude generally correspond with your personality?

Though, you know how I'd use Myers-Brigs in regarding to lucid dreaming (hypothetically)?
a) Apply test to subjects (use as control)
b) Make them experience lucid dreams
c) Re-apply test after several weeks of those experiences.
It would be interesting to see possible influences on the results of the 2nd round of testing. Once again, if it weren't for the lack of an effective induction method, I bet studies like this would already be a reality.

This is an interesting idea. However, if the Myers-Briggs worked as advertised, the results should be the same whenever the test is taken, regardless of lucidity -- after all, lucidity shouldn't change your baseline personality, or even effect it much.

What I wanted to suggest was actually in relation to learning styles: in the same way we proven that the theory that people have a specific way of learning that is universally better for them was false, I was also curious to see if the same thing could apply to lucid dreaming induction. Me and Hukif disagree on this (he's more on the middle side and I'm more extremist and due that probably wrong as usual ), but what if it actually there was a better route despite all those aspects? Assuming the use of a valid personality type test, that a set of lding exercises would produce very similar results. After all, is the personality type that big of a difference between two students on the subject of math, or are there much relevant factors that are much more objective and measurable (like method of studying)? Since DILD seems to revolve so much around conditioning, maybe many people are actually missing out simply by thinking certain technique fits their "personality" best. Who knows ^^

That's an interesting point. Instead of choosing a technique due to your personality type, it might be better to choose to LD, and let the techniques fall where they may, usually as a result of timing or convenience. As soon as you start elevating techniques above lucidity itself, then lucidity is harder, not easier, to achieve. I know I'm a bit of an outlier with this opinion, so I won't argue it, but I do feel that techniques really do not matter. Also, for what it's worth: LaBerge's test bore no real correlation between personality type and techniques chosen, or personality type and successful LD'ing.

Originally Posted by Zoth

Huge sorry if I deviated too much from your line of thinking MoonageDayDream, but the whole topic of lding induction is fascinating when you consider the variety of people that manage to achieve them with (seemingly) completely different methods....it looks just like talking: no matter what, we are all born with the ability to do it

No worries. I appreciate your respectful opinions. And while I do believe Myers-Brigg's is onto something, truth be told, I am minorly obsessed with it right now, and majorly obsessed with lucid dreaming - so why not combine the two and have some fun!

Originally Posted by Sageous

That's an interesting point. Instead of choosing a technique due to your personality type, it might be better to choose to LD, and let the techniques fall where they may, usually as a result of timing or convenience. As soon as you start elevating techniques above lucidity itself, then lucidity is harder, not easier, to achieve. I know I'm a bit of an outlier with this opinion, so I won't argue it, but I do feel that techniques really do not matter. Also, for what it's worth: LaBerge's test bore no real correlation between personality type and techniques chosen, or personality type and successful LD'ing.

I think it can go both ways (I know I need an intense focus in one area).

Originally Posted by Sageous

That said, the one time I took this test (at a LaBerge dream Camp, ironically), I registered as Fi (introverted feeling), and I'm fairly confident that I have never become lucid by focusing on intense emotions or dream signs. Indeed, I think I do a little bit of all the other things that OP listed; go figure.

Thanks for the information. I am also Fi, and also do not rely on emotions for lucidity - usually. Certainly not as dream signs. But nightmares (with intense fear) can trigger lucidity for me. Do they ever trigger it for you?

Originally Posted by Hukif

Oh I remember someone made a thread asking people about their type of personality and technique they used the most.

I don't understand that thing much, so will just leave "INTP" here and see if that helps you.

Thanks for your response. Any particular methods you like to use, or is this just something that comes naturally to you?

Originally Posted by MoonageDaydream

...But nightmares (with intense fear) can trigger lucidity for me. Do they ever trigger it for you?

I suppose they do, sort of. As an arguable side-effect to my LD'ing practice, I haven't had a full-blown nightmare in decades. Should nightmarish images or emotions appear these days, I immediately know that those images are not real, and that this is a dream, and the terror that accompanies a nightmare simply does not well up in me (I think you really must believe an image is real in order for it to truly scare you).

Also, it's been a while so I could be wrong, but I don't believe nightmares triggered lucidity for me back in the beginning (and I used to have them quite often when I was young).