Why Did You Get Two Different Personality Types? Compare the Tests Before Looking at What Changed

You got INFP the first time, then INFJ a while later—or received two different sets of letters on two websites. When this happens, it is natural to wonder: Which result is accurate? Have I become a different person?

There is no need to choose a label right away. Inconsistent results may reflect differences between the tests, different interpretations of the questions, or different experiences you had in mind when answering. The final code alone is usually not enough to explain why. A more useful starting point is to confirm what you are comparing, then look at exactly what changed.

First, check: Did you take the same test both times?

Write down the website, test name, language, and completion time for each attempt. If the page provides version details or information about the questions, save those too. Just because two websites both give four-letter codes does not mean they use the same questions, scoring rules, or interpretive framework.

If you get different results across websites, check these differences first rather than treating the two reports as two readings from the same measuring tool. The meaning of a score, an additional suffix, or the classification rules on one website cannot simply be applied to another.

If you are not yet familiar with E/I, S/N, T/F, and J/P, you can start with an explanation of the four letters and everyday preferences. The goal here is to compare test results, not just whether the type nicknames match.

If results differ on the same test, look at what actually changed

“The code changed” and “My entire personality changed” are two separate claims that need to be considered separately. For example, INFP and INFJ differ only in the last position. When comparing them, you can start by revisiting the descriptions of J/P without dismissing all three other pairs of preferences.

In some tests that use classification thresholds, a small score change may alter the letter displayed if your response tendency is close to a threshold. This is one possible mechanism that can help explain classification results; it does not establish that it caused your particular change. If your report shows scores, first check how that test explains them. If there are no scores, you can compare the relevant written descriptions directly.

The Myers-Briggs Company's explanation of retesting distinguishes the stability of individual preference dimensions from the consistency of the four-letter combination. These should not be treated as a single measure. That material discusses its own assessments. It does not establish the reliability of 16PersonalityLab or explain why a particular user on this site received a different type.

Next, check: Which version of yourself did you have in mind?

When you read “usually plans ahead,” were you thinking of a week driven by work deadlines, or your everyday choices when no one was asking you to plan? When asked about “a gathering with unfamiliar people,” were you thinking of spending time with friends or taking on the role of host? Even when the questions are the same, the experiences you draw on may differ.

Consider whether your perspective changed between attempts: perhaps you answered based on the past few days the first time and your long-term habits the second time; perhaps you first chose the person you hoped to become, then answered more in line with what you actually do; or perhaps you misunderstood a question at first and later interpreted it differently. These are useful clues to check, not causes that can be confirmed from the results alone.

For example, suppose Chen received INFP the first time and INFJ the second time. On reflection, he realized that he had mainly thought about how he spent his days off on the first attempt, but about a recent project that had to be delivered on schedule on the second. His next step could be to record how he makes decisions in each setting, rather than immediately concluding that “work turned me into a J” or “one of the results must be wrong.”

Use a table to turn “different results” into comparable information

You do not need to answer the questions again. Start by organizing the two results you already have. The table below is a record-keeping tool, not a scale for reassessing your type.

Once you have filled it in, choose your next step based on the situation:

• Different sources: Read each source's explanation of its methods and results before interpreting the letter differences as a change in yourself.
• Same source, one preference pair changed: Focus on that pair and record how you act in several different situations. Do not look only for examples that support one label.
• Results are hard to explain, or the record appears unusual: Save the results page, completion time, and relevant details, then check with the test's support team. If there is a display, language, or record issue, you do not need to take the test again just to guess at the cause.

If the differences remain unexplained, you can leave the conclusion open for now. The specific experiences you have documented can still help you understand your habits. There is no need to immediately declare one result right and the other wrong.

When is it worth taking the test again?

First, clarify what you hope to resolve by retesting: Did you misread questions last time, fail to complete the test carefully, or want to check a particular preference pair? If you decide to try again, follow that test's instructions and answer honestly, rather than deliberately choosing answers to get the type you want.

There is no need to keep testing until a particular label appears. Receiving the same code several times does not, by itself, prove that a test is accurate. This article does not recommend a fixed retesting interval, nor does it treat paying again as a necessary step in resolving different results. Whether a retest can replace the original report or requires another purchase depends on the current rules of the service you use.

When interpreting your results, you can replace “Which type am I really?” with a more specific question: “When I face this kind of situation, what do I usually focus on first, and when do I adjust?” The Myers & Briggs Foundation's explanation of preferences also notes that people use both sides of a preference pair in daily life. A single behavior does not have to become a fixed rule for your type.

16PersonalityLab offers a test and reports built around four preference pairs. You can first read our introduction to the test to understand what it aims to help you observe. Answering the questions on this site is free; your type result and full report require a one-time purchase to unlock, with no automatic renewal. Before purchasing, review the pricing details for the specific content and access included.

References

1. The Myers-Briggs Company: MBTI Facts, specifically its explanation of test–retest reliability and four-letter consistency. This article does not apply its research figures to this site's test.
2. Myers & Briggs Foundation: The MBTI Preferences, used to help explain the distinction between preferences and everyday behavior. This does not imply that this site has received its certification.