First issue · About the project
We made a freepersonality test
OpenJung adapts a published questionnaire. You can take it without an account, read your results for free, and see how the scoring works.
OpenJung First article · Translated from Chinese
Four letters, different tests
Sometimes an INFP result comes with a -A or -T at the end. The four letters look familiar, but the test behind them is different: 16Personalities uses its own model rather than the official MBTI. OpenJung also gives four-letter results, built on yet another questionnaire. Before reading a result, it is worth checking which test you actually took.
The descriptions below follow each system’s published explanation rather than ranking them by accuracy. Sources are linked after each entry.
Common personality tests
Similar names do not mean the questionnaires or results are the same.
Type framework
MBTI
Four preference pairs, 16 types
MBTI stands for Myers–Briggs Type Indicator. It combines four preference pairs—Extraversion / Introversion, Sensing / Intuition, Thinking / Feeling, and Judging / Perceiving—into 16 types, which is where codes like INFP and ESTJ come from. The official MBTI has its own questionnaire and interpretation process; not every four-letter test online is the official MBTI.
These terms also carry specific definitions. Thinking / Feeling, for instance, is about what you weigh when making decisions, not whether you have emotions. Introversion / Extraversion is not a measure of social skill.
Definition source: Myers & Briggs Foundation · The preference pairs ↗
Five traits, presented as types
16Personalities
The NERIS model behind the colorful characters
16Personalities introduces 16 types with illustrated characters and offers a free test. Its results look like MBTI codes, but the site uses its own NERIS model: it keeps the four-letter format while reworking Big Five dimensions rather than using Jungian cognitive functions and their ordering.
The -A / -T at the end of a result comes from NERIS’s fifth dimension, which the official MBTI does not have. Getting different results on the two sites does not necessarily mean a calculation went wrong—the questions and models differ from the start.
Definition source: 16Personalities · Our Framework ↗
Continuous traits
Big Five
Five dimensions, considered separately
The Big Five usually describes Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism (some scales reverse the last dimension and call it Emotional Stability). Results are reported as scores on each dimension rather than sorting people into five types. Here, “Neuroticism” is a trait label, not a clinical diagnosis.
Big Five refers to a family of models rather than one single questionnaire, and different instruments vary in their items and length. If you want a free option, IPIP’s public-domain item pool includes Big Five scales.
Definition source: IPIP · Big-Five Factor Markers ↗
Behavioral styles
DISC
Behavioral styles in team communication
DISC often shows up in workplace workshops and communication courses. In Everything DiSC, for example, the letters stand for Dominance, Influence, Steadiness and Conscientiousness. It focuses on how people work and communicate—such as their pace and how they handle disagreement—and assumes everyone blends all four styles in different proportions.
Different providers publish different DISC questionnaires, so the name alone does not tell you which version someone took. In a team setting it can help people talk about how they like to share information and collaborate, but it should not be used to judge ability or job fit.
Definition source: Everything DiSC · What Is the DiSC Model? ↗
Nine-type theory
Enneagram
A focus on motives
The Enneagram numbers its nine types from 1 to 9 and focuses on their underlying motives, fears and habitual responses, along with related ideas such as “wings.” It asks why someone acts a certain way rather than only describing outward behavior.
These are interpretations within Enneagram theory, not psychological mechanisms proven by a questionnaire. Even when a description feels uncanny, it cannot establish why a person acted a certain way.
Definition source: Enneagram Institute · How the System Works ↗
Before comparing two results, note the test names and versions. Scores from different models cannot be converted directly.
Why we built this site
16Personalities, IPIP and Open Psychometrics already provide plenty of free material. We wanted to offer another straightforward option: open the page, answer the questions and read your result, with no paywall or sign-up wall in between.
We also wanted people to be able to see how the result is calculated. The core scoring code, questionnaire sources and scoring notes are all public. If a question reads ambiguously or a score looks off, there is a concrete place to check the logic and suggest an edit.
Finally, we left room for your own notes. When a passage reminds you of a real moment, you can jot it down—and you can note what does not fit, too. Next time you visit, you can look back at what you wrote instead of taking the test all over again.
In the workshop
Taking measurements, checking the sketch, fitting the prism into its frame.
How it works
Our full test adapts the 32-item OEJTS 1.2 (Open Extended Jungian Type Scales). It scores the E–I, S–N, T–F and J–P dimensions to display the corresponding four-letter type. We adjusted some wording and item directions and added translations; the 8-question quick test is a short subset of those 32 items.
You can read the exact rules in the core source code and methodology notes. The site is built with Astro, React and Tailwind CSS, and runs on Cloudflare Workers.
Evidence, versions and questionnaire license
Evidence and validation status
Traceable source: the full test adapts the 32-item OEJTS 1.2 by Open Psychometrics. The questionnaire PDF documents that version’s items, scoring rules and license. The development page provides item-selection background, not validation of this adaptation.
Not yet published: internal consistency, test–retest reliability and factor validation for this OpenJung version, its 8-question quick test, or its translations. We do not present unsupported reliability coefficients for this implementation.
Some wording and item directions have been adapted. The quick test uses only 2 questions per dimension; scaling it to 8–40 for display does not give it the precision of the full test. Percentages describe a position on a scale, not accuracy or diagnostic probability.
Use results for reflection and communication. Near-midpoint results do not establish a fixed type. Do not use them for hiring, clinical or other high-stakes decisions.
OEJTS questionnaire items and adaptations are licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, not public domain. The MIT license covers original OpenJung code, not the questionnaire.
Current assessment version: openjung-oejts-1
OpenJung is not the official MBTI and is not endorsed by the Myers-Briggs Company or the Myers & Briggs Foundation. Dedicated validation studies have not been published for this implementation, the quick test or the translations, and being free or open source does not make a test more accurate. Use the results for personal reflection, not for diagnosis or hiring.
How to use it
Take a test, read the results, or keep a few notes of your own.
-
① Take a test
On the test page, pick either the 8-question quick test or the 32-question full test, or try a single dimension. Answer according to your everyday habits. The quick test is a brief starting point and does not have the same resolution as the full 32-item version.
-
② Read the results
The results page shows your scores across the four dimensions alongside a type description. Percentages indicate where your answers sit on each scale, not how accurate the label is. If your score is close to the midpoint or a letter flips when you retest, see the results guide.
-
③ Keep a note or share
In your personal space, you can write a reflection, pick a small exercise to try, or do a weekly review. You can also download a result card or copy a share link—just check what scores or details are in the link before sending it.
Developers can start with the REST API documentation and MCP integration guide. Please note that the code and the questionnaire carry separate licenses.
Thanks
Thanks to Eric Jorgenson and Open Psychometrics for publishing the OEJTS 1.2 questionnaire, scoring rules and license, which made this adaptation possible, and to the maintainers of open resources such as IPIP.
Our type descriptions draw on the work of Carl Jung, Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers, while open-source projects including Astro, React and Tailwind CSS power the website itself. We are grateful to their authors and maintainers.
Thanks as well to everyone who contributes code, translations and feedback. Pointing out an ambiguous question or a confusing sentence gives us something concrete we can fix.
Try OpenJung
Take the free test