Why ESFPs Sometimes Mistype as INFPs
ESFPs are more likely to test “as themselves” than some types – likely because Se-dominance is very honest about present-moment reality. Yet paradoxically, Se-dominants tend to shy away from prolonged introspection; sustained self-inquiry tends to be too exhausting to pursue unless there is a dire need for it (as intense grief may entail). Yet Se-dominants (ES*Ps) tend to think of themselves as introverted because their external focus is not on people – it’s sensory (what they can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste). Thus, ES*Ps are often happy to go skiing, swimming, or hiking by themselves, causing them to think of themselves as more solitary creatures (which they often are).
Fi in the context of the ESFP personality (where Fi is subservient to Se) seems to operate largely as a “vibe detector” – especially a “good vibe detector” for allowing the ESFP to know which environments they wish to be in. The ESFPs I’ve been close to have been very sensitive to hypocrisy, conflict, and tense undertones. To be more precise, Se-associated skills refer to gathering sensory data; and Fi-associated skills evaluate the data as congruent or not.
(If you’re unsure what Se and Fi are, read: The Eight Cognitive Functions.)
ESFPs’ Fi-auxiliary seems to lead them to being human-centric without being as human-seeking as Fe-users. ESFPs think more about human wellbeing (in a holistic sense that covers stress, lifestyle, diet, and so forth) than most T types are likely to do, and thus, they’re unlikely to mistype as a T. But because ESFPs care about human welfare a great deal – yet don’t resonate with the conventional notions of extroversion (“getting your fuel from being social”) – ESFPs will often resonate with a description of an INFP which describes a quiet, humanist, idealist. In truth, ESFPs and INFPs can both fit that description!
Types can only be understood in comparison to one another. If you give terms like “idealist” in a vacuum, then almost anybody of any type will relate to them! Most people would love to believe that they are practical, logical, caring, and deeply thoughtful – so the types that are “more so” are types that others frequently mistype as. The fact that typology is inherently comparative and only meaningful in a comparative context is why I’m writing about types in this directly comparative fashion.
ESFPs and INFPs, despite having two letters different from one another, have one very strong stack similarity: Fi. In the INFP, Fi is dominant. In the ESFP, Fi is auxiliary. This overlap of Fi creates conscientiousness, tone sensitivity, and idealism. But these types are wildly different when we look at Se – it is the dominant function for ESFP and yet it is in the blindspot for INFPs (the furthest position from dominance). Thus, one of the easiest ways to tell them apart is by looking at Se characteristics and behaviors . . . Yet even this is a little tricky between these two types because Fi-dominance (I*FP) leads to strong present-moment orientation as well. Thus, we cannot look at the relationship to time either, as both ES*Ps and I*FPs live more “in the moment” than other types.
The INFP blindspot of Se often manifests as a tremendous absent-mindedness around what they’re doing with their body in space. This might mean clumsiness and spills, or dripping soup down the side of a bowl without noticing. Se-blindspot (IN*P) can manifest as generally slower reaction time, as it seems that these types sometimes take longer to process visual stimuli. (I do not know of any study verifying this, but I have witnessed IN*Ps as reacting noticeably slower as drivers than other types. Keep in mind that “noticeably slower” is measuring in tiny slivers of a second – brains are extremely fast and remarkably good at detecting the tiniest delays in response, which is why the micro-delays in phone and video calls can be so off-putting.)
In contrast, Se-dominance (ES*P) leads to a tremendous ease in one’s environment. Often ES*Ps are shocked that other people “didn’t notice” something. In particular, the Se-Fi (ESFP) combination lends itself to a strong confusion about other people’s “carelessness.” How could they have not seen? How could they have been so oblivious? Are they just being willfully ignorant or blind? (Se-auxiliaries – IS*Ps – often share these sentiments.)
However, ES*Ps are not given to much internally recursive introspection. While their min-max of Ni correlates with them feeling that they are very introspective – especially as they age – they are still primarily focused on the “here and now” as it stands outside themselves. Nonetheless, ES*Ps will absolutely say some profound things in their forties and beyond. To understand why this is, we must consider type development – how each type’s min-max function becomes quite adept later in life (if a type is given any leverage with which to grow).
The grounded, external awareness of the sensory reality makes ES*Ps some of the most steady, resilient, and helpful people you can have as a friend or partner. Many of the more abstract types (the entire IN** quadrant) tend to pair up with ES*Ps because it helps them feel seen, felt, and heard to be with someone whose focus is so consistently sensory and based in objective reality. Those with high Se (*S*Ps) often respond rapidly to subtle micro-facial expressions, offering comfort before their partner was even consciously aware of their own distress!
In contrast, people who pair up with INFPs are often drawn to someone so emotionally open (especially if they are female – which is a result of our cultural training more than it is anything inherent in typology). INFPs are also often loved for their deep abstractions – which begin at a young age.
ESFPs, being such sensory creatures, are more given to conventional notions of romance than many types. ESFPs tend to give flowers freely with no need to intellectualize about the ethics or “deeper meaning” of using the sexual organs of plants as a gift (which any IN** type is likely to think about). ESFPs, if confronted with such an argument against giving a flower, might calmly respond, “I like that flowers make my partner smile.” ESFPs don’t need any other reason to do something. The flowers are obviously beautiful, and the smile is an obvious sign of enjoyment. The same logic will apply to chocolates, jewelry, or any other gift which has sensorial pleasure attached to it – including adult toys.
ESFPs can be positively freeing to be around. The ones I’ve known best were into motorcycle racing, pole dancing, swimming, biking, sensuality, massage, and every form of visual arts. And when I say “into” I mean deeply. Not simply pole-dancing as an idle activity – but competitively. Not simply ordinary biking, but learning and practicing stunts with friends for eight hours straight as a reasonable use of a Saturday. Not simply a mere interest in being sensual, but a studied, careful application of touch as the divine artform it is.
While ES*Ps may seem “shallow” when it comes to complex discussion of esoteric, abstract notions such as the shape of time, intergenerational trauma, or neurolinguistics – these types use their sensory awareness like the superpower it is, often utterly surprising their N friends with profound, practical observations which cut through all the winding roads to the heart of an issue. *S*Ps (ISFPs, ISTPs, ESTPs, & ESFPs) can be astoundingly insightful when it comes to human behavior in particular, as they’ve been using their high Se to absorb body language and vocal tone all their lives – even through television. This is paired with relatively high Ni (at least it isn’t shadow-stack – fifth position and below). The positioning of Se and Ni in *S*Ps to give them a deep repository of “X posture means Y,” and, “A movement means B.” As such, *S*Ps can sometimes provide astonishingly accurate impressions of other people.
This brings us to another key difference between ESFPs and INFPs: while the ESFP will have an almost uncanny ability to detect that you’re “into them,” the INFP may be unsure even after you’ve been outrageously flirting (especially male INFPs who often have been taught to repress so much of themselves). ESFPs pick up on the slight narrowing of the eyes which can indicate arousal or relaxation – whereas the INFP, if they notice at all, may mistake this for sleepiness or boredom. ESFPs (and most F types besides INFP) will notice the exact duration and nature of a hug and be able to calculate with precision exactly how you feel about them based on this behavior.
Both ESFPs and INFPs are sensitive to how they are received – but ESFPs will pick up more sensory cues and be able to relate those sensory cues more accurately to what they actually mean. INFPs are more likely to misinterpret many of the sensory cues, but they often still come to correct conclusions by noticing the details in how something was said. This difference is characterized by the information gathering techniques of the two types: Se (dominant) for ESFPs and Ne (auxiliary) for INFPs.
This shared sensitivity to vibes that ESFPs and INFPs possess “seems more accurate” for ESFPs at first scan, yet things blur as a relationship progresses. ESFPs will almost always read strangers better than INFPs, but once an INFP has become deeply attuned to someone, there are few types that are likely to rival just how well the INFP knows their partner’s moods.
While the ESFP will be relying on sensory perceptions to understand someone else’s state-of-mind, the INFP will apply their Ne-auxiliary to put together a bunch of conceptual signals into a narrative. In this way, ESFPs can be almost “too resilient” in a relationship – bouncing back from arguments and assuming their partner did the same. INFPs are less likely to make this mistake since they themselves are the utter opposite of relationally resilient. INFPs will carry a conflict inside them like a heavy weight until full resolution can be reached.
Is an INFP the only likely thing an ESFP might mistake themselves for? In my first-hand experience, it’s been the pattern. But in general terms, I am quite certain this is far from the only misapprehension. Culture, as a general rule, has come to laud “thinking” over “feeling” and N strengths (like programming) over S strengths (like martial arts). We see these cultural notions of superiority playing out in INFPs mistaking themselves as INTPs, and ISFJs mistaking themselves for INFJs.
The ESFPs I’ve known would be unlikely to mistype as ESTPs because of the strong influence their Fi-auxiliaries have played in their lives, but hypothetically, I imagine an ESFP who was raised among highly abstract types (INTJs being the pinnacle of abstraction) may wish to believe they are an ESTP, ENFP, or even ENTP instead. While ENFP and ENTP (the Ne-dominants) may sound vaguely similar to ES*Ps at first blush, the Se and Ne dominants are quite different in demeanor. Se dominance is grounded in the present moment such that every Se dominant I’ve met has remained relatively* calm even when excited. (*Relative to other people of different types. They’re still excited and expressing as such relative to their own norm.) In contrast, almost every Ne dominant I’ve met has been prone to being at least occasionally loud, bombastic, and chaotically excited. Nonetheless, Se dominants and Ne dominants do have one huge thing in common: they both lead with an external perceiving function, and thus, are very exploratory, adventurous, and interested in novelty. In this way, a particularly adventurous Se dominant may mistype as an Ne dominant.
An ESFP mistyping as an ESTP would make more sense from the perspective of reading the description and strongly resonating. Many ESFPs are supremely practical – and of course they are just as “energetic,” “charming,” and “entrepreneurial” as ESTPs. Se dominance seems to strongly correlate with being very physically robust, and thus, ES*Ps are often into sports – often of the non-spectator kind. ES*Ps can be found climbing mountains, exploring caves, and practicing their skateboarding prowess. (And all of this can generally be said of those with Se-auxiliaries, thus, covering all *S*P types.)
What makes ESFPs stand out to me as a cohesive archetype is the way Se and Fi come together to make such a profoundly grounded individual. ESTPs can still be given to long rambles on political theories or computer systems (via Ti auxiliary showing its influence). In contrast, when an ESFP monologues, it is almost always about a deeply-felt personal experience – even if that personal experience is masked as a critique of various encountered “types of people.” Even when ESFPs seem to be making broad statements, when questioned, they can generally pin what they’re pontificating about to specific experiences they’ve had.
ES*Ps share Se-dominance and thus also share Ni as their min-max function. In both types this min-maxed Ni seems to display itself as a remarkably steady vision of themselves and their corresponding future. That vision seems to pertain to a very strong self-concept (like “I am an architect”). This seems even stronger in ESFPs than ESTPs, perhaps because the ESFP can pin that long-ranged vision of themselves (Ni min-max) to a gut feeling of rightness (Fi auxiliary).
In contrast, Ni-dominants (IN*Js) have ever-changing, ever-evolving visions (Ni dominance), and thus, even if they have a strong self-concept, that concept undergoes revision relatively frequently. Many Ni-dominants will not report this because they are more future-oriented than past-oriented, and thus, they will often dismiss their past visions of themselves and their future as not being relevant or important. Thus, they often perceive themselves as being more long-term stable than they actually are. INFJs, in particular, seem to define themselves by dozens of things – writing, performance, scholarship, gaming, fandom, spirituality, and more (to give some common examples) – and depending on when you meet them in life, one of these may stand out particularly strongly. (If they’re preparing for a big convention, fandom may be the current obsession, but if they’re in college, they may be more focused on their writing.)
ESFPs tend to have a much more simple set of key characteristics they identify with – and their pursuit of perfecting themselves in these areas can be relentless. If you met an ESFP at fifteen who confidently declared they were “an artist” or “a dancer” then you may encounter that same ESFP at forty and find that they still are – and a very accomplished one now! Unless significant life traumas get in the way, Se-dominants (ES*Ps) generally seem to be the ideal type for mastering a single craft, as they can be held in such rapt attention by tiny details which might bore or frustrate other types. One ESFP I knew well told me, “I like things that other people consider tedious.” He said this while painting a wooden box with a very tiny paint brush so that he could focus intently on how the paint interacted with the wood grains at a very fine level. I can report that the box had an extremely smooth, perfect coat of red paint – and it did not need multiple coats despite the lack of primer.
Arguably, the easiest way to tell apart two types with the same dominant function (such as ESFP and ESTP) is to look at the blindspot – which will be the auxiliary on the other type! For this pairing, one type has Ti in the blindspot (ESFP) and the other has Ti auxiliary (ESTP), and the reverse is true for Fi. When reading a Reddit thread about ESFP and their Ti blindspot, I found an illustrative (and funny) demonstration of the ESFP blindspot (which aligns well with my personal experience of being in a deeply committed relationship with an ESFP for three years in my early adult life): “If your theory can’t be explained with the real world, it’s a bad theory and therefore unworthy of recognition. No, I don’t care whether my ideas make sense or not, at least they’re real, which is far more than what you can say about yours!”
In my experience of arguing with an ESFP for long periods of time, I could give concrete examples to back up my abstract claims, and then I would be understood immediately. Unfortunately, the logic itself never stuck. The ESFP in question would later come back to me with the same argument they had before, entirely forgetting my counter-argument. They didn’t lack the intelligence to grasp it, but it was like there was no repository to “hold on” to the information. I believe this is related to the Ti blindspot.
ESFPs tend to be confident in picking up whatever they choose to – perhaps because their physical prowess lends itself to feeling capable in a visceral, embodied way. As such, ESFPs often engage in pursuits which they actually aren’t built for. In one case, I recall watching an ESFP work on building a computer all weekend, and then engage in a programming puzzle for the next weekend. They were stuck on a problem and clearly exhausted by it, but they relentlessly returned to it (as this was related to their very stable self-concept as I mentioned in relation to the Ni in min-max position). The ESFP was so distressed about this programming issue that I eventually took an interest and looked at their monitor which was filled with white text upon a black background. Having no programming training myself, it looked like gibberish. I spent a while staring at it, simply scanning for patterns and aberrations in the pattern.
After several minutes I spotted an aberration and said, “Should that be like that?” I questioned.
“Uh, no,” the ESFP said.
They changed one character of the text and their problem – of many, many hours – was now gone. This, I believe, is another strong example of how the Ti blindspot can manifest in the ESFP’s life. This is also exemplary of why I believe that knowing your type and its strengths and weaknesses is tantamount to life mastery. In particular, knowing your blindspot and who can help you with it can save you hours of frustration in the short term, and years in the long term.
When you begin to see these patterns clearly (like the pattern of modern society currently valuing NT over SF), mistyping stops being a mistake and becomes a clue. It points, quite precisely, to what you value (or what you’ve been taught is valuable), what you admire, and what you may still be learning to see in yourself. Mistyping, then, is not an insignificant error but something showing (potentially) the difference between your self-perception and your truth. Or – maybe your self-perception is quite accurate, and it is the tests and typing system itself failing you. I’ve devised a system with forty-eight subtypes in total, and if no typology description quite fits, it’s likely because you (like me) are a non-canonical subtype!
If you would like to get to know your complete neurotype – which includes your Jungian type, your subtype, and also much more – book a consultation with me.