◈ Scientific Comparison

Psychology Theories:
Which ones have real scientific backing?

Not all personality theories are equal. This comparison analyses the main models by their methodological rigour, replicability, and consensus within the scientific community.

Rating methodology: Stars reflect scientific consensus based on (1) study replicability, (2) convergent and discriminant validity, (3) test-retest stability, (4) references in indexed journals (PsycINFO, Web of Science), and (5) adoption by bodies such as the APA (American Psychological Association). Not an absolute judgement.

Personality Available on AuraFlags

Big Five / OCEAN Model

Costa & McCrae · 1992 · NEO Personality Inventory

★★★★★

The gold standard in personality psychology. The five factors (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism) have been replicated across 50+ cultures and validated in thousands of longitudinal studies. It is the most cited model in current scientific literature.

Key references:
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R). PAR.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five trait taxonomy. Handbook of Personality, 102–138.
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48(1), 26–34.

Relationships Available on AuraFlags

Attachment Theory

Bowlby & Ainsworth · 1969–1978

★★★★★

Originally developed by John Bowlby and operationalised in adults by Mary Main and Phillip Shaver. The four adult attachment styles (secure, anxious, avoidant, disorganised) have strong neurobiological support and reliably predict the quality of romantic relationships.

Key references:
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. Basic Books.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. JPSP, 52(3), 511–524.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in Adulthood. Guilford Press.

Well-beingComing soon

Positive Psychology · PERMA Model

Seligman · 2011

★★★★

The PERMA model (Positive emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment) has a solid empirical base, especially in workplace and educational contexts. Some critics note Western cultural bias in universal application.

Key references:
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish. Free Press.
Butler, J., & Kern, M. L. (2016). The PERMA-Profiler. International Journal of Wellbeing, 6(3).

Low validity

MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator)

Isabel Myers & Katharine Cook Briggs · 1962

★★★★★

The world's most popular corporate personality test, and one of the most criticised in academia. Main issues: (1) low test-retest reliability — up to 50% of people get a different type after 5 weeks; (2) bipolar dimensions don't reflect actual personality distributions; (3) poor predictive validity for job performance or relationships. Google and the APA advise against using it for hiring.

Key references:
Pittenger, D. J. (1993). Measuring the MBTI… and coming up short. Journal of Career Planning, 54(1), 48–52.
Boyle, G. J. (1995). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Some psychometric limitations. Australian Psychologist, 30(1), 71–74.

No empirical validation

Enneagram

Oscar Ichazo · Gurdjieff · ~1950s–1970s

★★★★

The Enneagram classifies personalities into 9 types rooted in mystical and philosophical tradition, not scientific methodology. Validation studies are scarce, with small samples and no control groups. Its utility is narrative and for informal self-knowledge, not clinical or selection applications.

Key references:
Newgent, R. A. et al. (2004). The Riso-Hudson Enneagram Type Indicator. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling, 36(4), 226–237.

Start with the most solid models

AuraFlags only implements theories with demonstrated scientific backing. All our tests include citable references and honest disclaimers about their limitations.