Tracking Progress — Wearables in Review: Appendix


AbbyMisfit Shine
DarickJawbone UP
ShawnMisfit Shine
ScottMisfit Shine
DavidFitbit Flex
MarceFitbit Flex
TrentWithings Pulse
GastonFitbit One
MaryWithings Pulse
JennyNike FuelBand
KatWithings Pulse
KarenWithings Pulse
MelissaNike FuelBand
JustinJawbone UP


On the first day of the research project each participant was asked to take an online Myers-Briggs Temperament (MBTI) assessment.

Like most personality assessments, there is debate about the accuracy and usefulness of the MBTI in a research setting, and even more so with online tests which are self-administered and represent only a small portion of an actual assessment.

Knowing this, I chose to include this in our research for two reasons:

First, even with their biases, the results of the test can give Uncorked an indication of, if not what we are, then perhaps what we wish we were. If you want to know what Uncorked thinks about itself, this can be an interesting indication of how we perceive ourselves and the traits we view as “ideal”.

Second, and more important to the meta-research this project represents, the results of this test give us a way to establish a baseline for understanding how Uncorked is similar or different to the population at large. As we work, it’s useful to remember that Uncorked, no matter how you look at, is not a very good model for the public at large. Most groups of specialist won’t be. This isn’t bad – in fact it’s probably good: These differences are how designers and developers of all stripes come up with ideas and solutions that aren’t obvious . At the same time, it’s critical that we remind ourselves from time to time that our intuition, while critical, is not a replacement for going out into the world and meeting the actual people who will use our products.

On the following pages I’ve broken down the results in a couple different ways that I hope shed some light both on how individuals might have been biased in any direction towards the device they tested as well as how Uncorked compares to the population at large.


This chart shows the reported results for each participant by function.

Abby E S F J
Darick E N F J
Shawn I N T J
Scott I S T P
David I N F P
Marce E N T J
John E S T J
Trent I N F P
Gaston E N T J
Mary E N F J
Jenny E S T P
Kat I S T J
Karen I N T P
Melissa I N T J
Justin I N F J
E=7 S=5 T=9 J=10
I=8 N=10 F=6 P=5
E=46.7% S=33.3% T=60% J=66.7%
I=53.3% N=66.7% F=40% P=33.3%


This chart compares the reported results for each function in the general public with the test group at Uncorked. The the third column shows number of percentage points difference Uncorked reported for each of its dominate functions.

General UC Diff.
E 49.3 50 E = +0.7
I 50.7 50
S 73.3 31.3 N = +42
N 26.7 68.8
T 40.2 62.5 T = +22.3
F 59.8 37.5
J 54.1 68.8 J = +14.7
P 45.9 31.3


This chart shows general public distributions for each temperament, followed by male/female representation. The fifth column — UC Count — shows the distribution of each temperament within the test group. The sixth column — Expected Distribution — shows what we’d expect those distributions to be if Uncorked were representative of the general public.

Temperament Total Male Female UC Count

Temperament Total Male Female UC Count Expected Dist. N=15
ISFJ 13.8% 8.1% 19.4% 2.2
ESFJ 12.3% 7.5% 16.9% 1 2
ISTJ 11.6% 16.4% 6.9% 1.9
ISFP 8.8% 7.6% 9.9% 1.4
ESTJ 8.7% 11.2% 6.3% 1 1.4
ESFP 8.5% 6.9% 10.1% 1.4
ENFP 8.1% 6.4% 9.7% 1.3
ISTP 5.4% 8.5% 2.4% 1 0.9
INFP 4.4% 4.1% 4.6% 2 0.7
ESTP 4.3% 5.6% 4.3% 1 0.7
INTP 3.3% 4.8% 1.8% 1 0.5
ENTP 3.2% 4% 2.4% 0.5
ENFJ 2.5% 1.6% 3.3% 2 0.4
INTJ 2.1% 3.3% 2.1% 2 0.3
ENTJ 1.8% 2.7% 0.9% 2 0.3
INFJ 1.46% 1.3% 1.6% 1 0.2