hey. i hope you don't mind my saying this...

personality psychology is very controversial. in particular, it is very controversial whether people have different traits (such as 'compassionate') that is robustly predictive of their behaviour.

the main critique from within psychology comes from the situationist literature. the situationists maintain that they can predict what a person is likely to do on the basis of features of the situation and that there is better predictive leverage to be had by predicting from situation than predicting from personality traits. here is an example of the kind of situation they experimented with.

they placed a coin in the phonebox for someone to find after they had made the call. they then had a person walk past as they left the phonebox and the person dropped a stack of papers. they found that people who found a coin in the phone box were significantly more likely to help the person pick up the papers than control subjects who didn't find a coin.

people are more likely to help when they aren't crowded or rushed. people are more likely to help when the situation smells nice (e.g., outside a bakery rather than outside a fish shop). people are more likely to help when the situation isn't noisy (e.g., with construction work).

people are more likely to harm when they are instructed to harm by a person wearing a white coat and saying 'the experiment requires that you must go on'.

the situation was highly predictive of helping behaviour and it seemed to be more predictive of helping behaviour than any assignment of the trait of 'compassion' seems to be. if you take the same individual and vary the situation you will find that they will be compassionate in some situations and not compassionate in others. there isn't good evidence for stable traits.

Self report has also been found to correlate badly with other report and both have been found to correlate badly with action.

so... i'm fairly sceptical of the Myer Briggs and the Big Five and the other personality measurements.