MBTI Gender Gap: The 30-Point Split That Changes Everything

Female INTJ? You represent less than 1% of women. Male ENFJ? Just 1.4% of men share your type. These numbers reveal something most personality discussions completely miss: the MBTI gender gap creates a thirty-point split in how men and women approach decision-making, and that gap shapes everything from workplace dynamics to relationship friction.

The Thinking-Feeling dimension shows 68% of men identifying as Thinking types compared to just 38% of women, according to The Myers-Briggs Company’s 2018 global assessment manual. No other MBTI dimension comes close to this disparity. If your preferences don’t match your gender’s statistical majority, you’ve likely felt the friction this creates without understanding why.

During my two decades managing teams in advertising, I watched this disparity shape careers in ways that troubled me. One client, an INTJ woman leading product development, faced constant questioning of her direct communication style. Her male INTJ counterpart received praise for the exact same approach she was told to “soften.” Meanwhile, I saw male Feeling types suppress their values-based instincts because they seemed “unprofessional.” The distributions weren’t just statistics on a page. They determined who got promoted, who got heard, and who spent years feeling like they didn’t belong. Understanding the foundations of personality type theory can help explain why these patterns persist.

What Does the 2018 MBTI Data Reveal About Gender Differences?

Research from the MBTI Manual’s 2018 edition, based on samples of 7,771 men and 9,002 women globally, provides the most current data on type distribution by gender. The findings challenge some common assumptions while confirming others.

For men, introversion appears at a rate of 61%, slightly higher than women’s 62%. A narrow one-percentage-point difference contradicts popular narratives suggesting that introversion is predominantly female. Extroversion shows similar proximity: 39% for men and 38% for women. Energy orientation doesn’t significantly correlate with gender.

Sensing versus Intuition shows more variation. Men demonstrate a 71% preference for Sensing compared to women’s 66%. A five-point difference suggests slightly higher rates of detail-oriented, practical information processing among men. Conversely, 34% of women identify with Intuition preferences against 29% of men.

The Thinking-Feeling dimension exhibits the most pronounced gender difference. A 2011 study published in Frontiers in Psychology found that women consistently report higher Agreeableness scores, which aligns with Feeling preferences in the MBTI framework. The 2018 MBTI data confirms this pattern: 62% of women identify with Feeling preferences, compared to just 32% of men. A thirty-point gap represents the largest gender disparity across all four MBTI dimensions.

Judging and Perceiving preferences show moderate differences. Fifty-five percent of women prefer Judging structures against 50% of men, indicating slightly higher preferences for organization and planning among women. Perceiving preferences appear in 50% of men and 45% of women.

Which MBTI Types Are Most Common Among Men?

ISTJ dominates male personality type distribution at 18.9%, according to data from MBTI Ninja’s analysis of the 2018 MBTI Manual. Such concentration makes ISTJs nearly one in five men. The type combines Introversion, Sensing, Thinking, and Judging preferences, creating a profile oriented toward practical analysis and systematic organization.

ESTJ ranks second at 11.2% among men. Like ISTJs, ESTJs favor Sensing, Thinking, and Judging, but draw energy from external interaction. ESTJs appear in leadership positions frequently, leveraging their preference for structured decision-making.

Practical and Analytical Types Dominate

The ST (Sensing-Thinking) types account for over half of all men. Here’s how the most common male types break down:

• ISTJ at 18.9% combines practical focus with systematic organization. These men often gravitate toward roles requiring reliability and attention to detail, from accounting to engineering.
• ISTP at 13% pairs introverted analysis with hands-on problem-solving. During my agency years, I worked alongside several ISTPs who could troubleshoot technical issues faster than anyone else on the team.
• ESTJ at 11.2% brings structured thinking to external leadership. These men often rise to management because their decision-making style matches traditional corporate expectations.
• ESTP at 7.1% combines action orientation with analytical thinking. They thrive in fast-paced environments requiring quick decisions.
• INTP at 5.4% represents the analytical framework builders. I worked alongside several INTPs in our strategy department whose analytical frameworks transformed abstract client challenges into testable hypotheses.

INTJ constitutes 4% of men. Their strategic orientation and systems thinking positions them as long-range planners and architects of complex initiatives.

Rarer Types Among Men

ENFJ represents the rarest male type at just 1.4%. The combination of Extraversion, Intuition, Feeling, and Judging appears uncommon in male populations. INFJ follows closely at 1.5%, making these feeling-oriented, intuitive types statistical outliers among men.

These distributions don’t reflect capability or value. They simply indicate frequency patterns observed across large populations. A male ENFJ possesses the same type characteristics as any other ENFJ, regardless of statistical rarity. Sometimes the challenge lies in expressing what others assume you shouldn’t feel.

Which MBTI Types Are Most Common Among Women?

Women’s type distribution shows markedly different patterns. ISTJ leads at 13.3%, lower than the male 18.9% but still representing the most common female type. The consistency indicates that practical, analytical organization appeals across genders, though with varying frequencies.

ISFJ ranks second among women at 11.3%, a stark contrast with male distributions where ISFJ appears at just 5.9%. Data from MBTI Ninja indicates ISFJ women are more than twice as common as ISFJ men, highlighting how Feeling preferences concentrate more heavily in female populations.

ENFP constitutes 10.2% of women, making it the third most common female type. My experience managing creative teams revealed how ENFPs energized brainstorming sessions. Their enthusiasm for exploring possibilities generated ideas that more analytical types refined into executable strategies.

Feeling-Oriented Types Appear More Frequently

The distribution of Feeling types among women shows clear patterns:

• INFP at 7.6% compared to 4.6% overall, showing significantly higher representation among women who prioritize values-based decision-making.
• ESFJ at 7.5% demonstrates the Feeling preference combined with practical, organized approaches to supporting others.
• ISFP at 7.5% ties with ESFJ, reflecting artistic and values-driven tendencies more common in female populations.
• ENFJ at 3.2% while rare, appears more than twice as frequently among women as among men (1.4%).

The concentration of Feeling types in the top rankings for women reflects the broader 62% Feeling preference documented in the 2018 MBTI data.

Analytical Types Remain Rare

Research from Crown Counseling shows that INTJ appears in less than 1% of women, making it nearly four times rarer than among men. ENTJ shares this distinction, also registering below 1% in female populations.

These distributions create interesting dynamics. An INTJ woman operates in statistical rarity, finding fewer same-type peers than her male counterparts. Statistical rarity doesn’t diminish type validity but does affect social experiences and peer connection opportunities.

Why Is the Thinking-Feeling Gap So Large Between Genders?

Among all MBTI dimensions, Thinking versus Feeling shows the widest gender gap. The thirty-point difference (68% of men identify as Thinking compared to 38% of women) exceeds variations in any other dimension.

Such patterns appear consistently across cultures and studies. Personality psychologist Yanna Weisberg and colleagues examined gender differences at the Big Five personality level and found that women reported significantly higher scores on traits associated with warmth and openness to feelings, which correspond to MBTI Feeling preferences.

Male Feeling types represent 32% of men, creating a minority experience for men who prefer values-based decision-making. Social expectations compound this statistical reality. A male INFP or ENFP faces assumptions about how men “should” make decisions, encountering pressure to adopt more analytical approaches.

Female Thinking types face parallel challenges. Representing 38% of women, they constitute a minority within their gender. One client I worked with, an INTJ woman running product development, described constant questioning of her direct communication style. Her male INTJ counterpart received praise for the same approach she was told to “soften.” I learned the hard way that treating these differences as problems to fix rather than dynamics to facilitate cost me talented team members who left for environments where their natural preferences were valued.

Understanding these distributions helps explain workplace friction. Teams dominated by Thinking preferences may discount contributions from Feeling types, viewing them as too subjective. Conversely, Feeling-heavy environments can perceive Thinking types as cold or dismissive. Balanced teams recognize how different decision-making approaches complement each other.

How Do Cultural Differences Affect MBTI Gender Distribution?

Personality type appears universal across cultures, but distribution patterns vary by region. The Myers-Briggs Company’s global research spanning 23 countries confirms that all sixteen types appear in every culture studied, yet their frequencies differ substantially.

STJ types (ISTJ, ESTJ, ISFJ, ESFJ) predominate globally, appearing most frequently across cultures. However, specific type rankings shift based on cultural values. Collectivist cultures show higher concentrations of Feeling types, while individualist societies demonstrate elevated Thinking type frequencies.

Gender distributions within types also vary culturally. Research examining cross-cultural personality patterns found that gender differences in personality traits appear larger in more egalitarian societies, contradicting expectations that gender equality reduces personality differences.

Truity’s analysis of global personality data revealed that STJ types consistently dominate across all cultures studied, suggesting certain personality preferences confer universal advantages, possibly relating to social stability and organizational effectiveness.

What Do Gender Statistics Mean for Your Individual Type?

Statistical distributions don’t prescribe individual behavior. An ENTJ woman shares the same core preferences as an ENTJ man, even though she appears statistically rarer. Type describes how you process information and make decisions, not how gender “should” behave.

Recognizing distribution patterns helps contextualize personal experiences. If you identify as a rare type within your gender, you might experience fewer same-type peer connections. Rarity doesn’t indicate something wrong with your personality; it reflects statistical probability.

Gender-type combinations carry social implications beyond statistics. Female Thinking types and male Feeling types face expectations that conflict with their natural preferences. Awareness of these pressures helps distinguish authentic personality from adapted behavior.

During my agency leadership role, I noticed how team composition affected decision-making quality. Homogeneous teams (all Thinking or all Feeling types) produced faster consensus but missed blind spots. Diverse teams generated friction but delivered more comprehensive solutions. The gender-type distributions meant that achieving cognitive diversity required intentional team building rather than relying on whoever happened to apply.

How Can You Move Beyond Gender Stereotypes in Personality?

Distribution data describes populations, not individuals. Saying “most men prefer Thinking” differs from “men should prefer Thinking.” The distinction matters tremendously for psychological health and authentic self-expression.

Gender stereotypes often mirror MBTI distributions. Society expects women to prioritize relationships (Feeling) and men to emphasize logic (Thinking). These expectations aren’t personality types; they’re cultural scripts that may or may not align with individual preferences.

Research published in the International Journal of Psychology examining personality and gender differences found that biological sex explains less than 5% of variance in most psychological characteristics. The distributions we see in MBTI types reflect genuine preferences, but individual variation exceeds group patterns.

Understanding your type helps you recognize whether you’re expressing authentic preferences or conforming to external expectations. A male Feeling type might suppress values-based decision-making because it feels socially risky. A female Thinking type might over-explain analytical choices to seem more approachable. Learning to address double invisibility becomes crucial when your personality type intersects with gender expectations.

Type awareness creates space for authentic expression. You can acknowledge gender distribution patterns explain why you might feel different from peers, then choose to honor your actual preferences anyway. Many people face persistent myths about their personality preferences that compound gender stereotypes.

How Can You Apply Distribution Knowledge Practically?

Career planning benefits from understanding type distributions. Fields dominated by specific types create environments where minority types face additional challenges. An INFP in engineering or an ESTJ in counseling operates within type-culture mismatches worth anticipating.

Consider these practical applications:

• Relationship dynamics shift when you recognize type-gender intersections. An INTJ woman paired with an ESFJ man handles not just type differences but also gender distribution realities. She might experience assumptions about female communication styles that don’t match her direct preferences. He might face questions about masculine emotional expression that conflict with his natural warmth.
• Team leadership improves when you account for distribution patterns. If your team skews heavily toward Thinking types (statistically more likely with male-dominated teams), intentionally seek Feeling-type input on decisions. If your team concentrates Feeling types, ensure analytical frameworks receive adequate consideration.
• Professional development becomes more targeted. A male Feeling type might benefit from connecting with other Feeling types regardless of gender, building a support network that validates values-based decision-making. A female Thinking type might seek mentors who’ve successfully worked through similar type-gender dynamics.
• Self-advocacy gets easier with data. When someone suggests your communication style is “too direct” or “too emotional,” distribution knowledge helps you recognize whether you’re receiving feedback about effectiveness or about conforming to gender expectations.

These dynamics can mirror patterns where people sabotage authentic expression to meet social expectations. Understanding how personality type intersects with modern tools can provide additional support structures for working through these challenges.

FAQs About MBTI Type Distribution by Gender

What is the rarest MBTI type for men?

ENFJ represents the rarest type among men at just 1.4% of the male population. INFJ follows closely at 1.5%. These Feeling-oriented, Intuitive types appear uncommon in male populations, creating unique challenges for men who identify with these preferences.

What is the rarest MBTI type for women?

INTJ and ENTJ both appear in less than 1% of women, making them the rarest female types. These Thinking-oriented types contrast sharply with the 62% of women who identify with Feeling preferences. Female INTJs and ENTJs face minority status within their gender.

Why do more women have Feeling preferences than men?

The reasons combine biological and social factors. Neurological research suggests some innate predispositions toward empathy and values-based processing vary by gender. Cultural socialization also reinforces these patterns, encouraging girls toward emotional expression and boys toward analytical detachment. The interaction creates the observed 62% Feeling preference in women versus 32% in men.

Are MBTI distributions the same across all cultures?

All sixteen types appear in every culture studied, but their frequencies vary. STJ types dominate globally, but specific type rankings shift based on cultural values. Collectivist cultures show higher Feeling type concentrations, individualist societies demonstrate elevated Thinking frequencies, and gender differences in type distribution sometimes appear larger in more egalitarian cultures.

Does being a rare type for your gender cause problems?

Statistical rarity creates specific challenges but doesn’t inherently cause problems. Rare type-gender combinations (male Feeling types, female Thinking types) encounter more frequent mismatches between authentic preferences and social expectations. Such mismatches can lead to suppressing natural tendencies or facing questioning of communication styles. Awareness and intentional authenticity help address these dynamics.

Explore more MBTI insights and resources in our Personality and MBTI Hub.

About the Author

Keith Lacy is someone who embraced his true self later in life. With a background in marketing and a successful career in media and advertising, Keith has worked with some of the world’s biggest brands. As a senior leader in the industry, he has built a wealth of knowledge in marketing strategy. Now, he’s on a mission to educate people about the power of introversion and how understanding this personality trait can improve productivity, self-awareness, and success.