The Devil’s Advocates of the Personality Types

For some, arguments are best avoided. Assuming, perhaps, that the stances we hold are essentially inflexible, many prefer not to waste time debating them. Others, however, although they may not necessarily enjoy arguing, feel that when controversial topics surface in conversation, it is incumbent upon them to articulate and defend their beliefs.

Then there are those who enjoy playing devil’s advocate, taking an adversarial role in a debate regardless of their own feelings on the subject, to test others’ positions and see how they will react. What would make people court such controversy? The answer might depend on personality type.

To explore this question, we asked our readers whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement, “Sometimes you intentionally disagree with others to see if they truly believe in what they say.”

Which personalities are most likely to adopt the role of devil’s advocate? We take a look below.


Analysts (67% agreeing)

Analyst personality types tend to view their particular brand of rigorous logic as their most powerful tool. Like a mathematician uncovering a novel proof for an undisputed theorem, an Analyst may be more interested in the soundness of an argument than whether or not they ultimately agree with its conclusions, leading them to sometimes adopt positions contrary to their own, simply to strengthen them through debate.

This tendency is a function of Analysts’ core combination of Thinking and Intuitive personality traits. Their Thinking Nature means that they approach problems and topics of debate through a logical and rational – rather than emotional – filter, even as their Intuitive Energy opens their minds up to creative, imaginative possibilities, giving them the ability to view issues from multiple perspectives. In fact, our survey revealed that the Thinking and Intuitive traits had, by far, the greatest influence on the likelihood of respondents to agree. Individuals with the Thinking trait were 23% more likely to agree than those with the Feeling trait (60% vs. 37% agreeing, respectively), and individuals with the Intuitive trait were 19% more likely to agree than those with the Observant trait (53% and 34%).

The Prospecting trait was another key factor (51% agreeing vs. 40% of respondents with the Judging trait). Prospecting individuals are nonconformists who love to improvise. Taking together the combination of Intuitive, Thinking, and Prospecting traits, we have the single personality type that was most likely to agree with our research statement: Assertive Debaters (ENTP-A) (74%).

As their name implies, Debaters enjoy the art of argument more than any other personality type, seeing debate as an intellectual chess match, a game where personal feelings should be set aside in pursuit of the betterment of ideas. Indeed, even the most heated argument is unlikely to bother a Debater as much as a refusal on another’s part to engage in debate in the first place. So it’s no surprise that this type is the most likely to play devil’s advocate.

As a humorous example of a Debater personality type, think of the character Jim Halpert from The Office. How many times throughout that TV series did we see Jim, purely for his own entertainment, intentionally feign ignorance on a topic, make factually incorrect statements, or disagree with officemate Dwight Schrute – just to provoke Dwight into over-the-top behavior? Needless to say, Jim is an excellent example of a quick-witted Debater personality who loves the mental sparring involved in playing devil’s advocate – but he is also an example of how spending too much energy in that role can hinder Debaters’ own productivity.

Diplomats (46%)

Although slightly less than half of Diplomat personalities agreed with our research statement, it may seem surprising at first that this Role was the second-most likely to agree, given that their name implies a fundamental interest in maintaining peaceful harmony. For types who often value ideals and principles above all else, it’s difficult to imagine Diplomats purposely saying something other than what they actually believe.

But Diplomats’ strong Intuitive trait, coupled with their Feeling trait, may give these personality types different motivations for playing devil’s advocate than Analysts have. Their creative minds and empathetic natures allow them to step into an opponent’s shoes and see another side to an issue. But whereas an Analyst might engage in a debate in order to win an argument, a Diplomat might do so in order to achieve a resolution. After all, Diplomat personalities believe that reconciliation can only truly be realized when opposing sides gain a greater understanding of each other’s values and positions.

There is also another possibility to consider that may help us understand Diplomats’ responses. Part of their empathetic nature is an inherent desire to help others, making Diplomats well suited for work in psychology, counseling, and mentorship. Some Diplomat personalities may intentionally disagree with what others say as a psychological strategy, a sort of reverse psychology that can help others realize their potential or achieve a personal breakthrough.

The memorable scene from the Oscar-winning film The King’s Speech comes to mind, in which King George VI’s speech therapist, Lionel Logue, disrespectfully sits on the king-to-be’s coronation throne and argues that since George doesn’t want to be king, he doesn’t have to listen to him. Logue mocks and goads George until, enraged, the future king finally shouts, “I have a voice!” This moving moment is a turning point in the film, helping the king overcome his speech impediment.

Explorers (39%) 

A minority of Explorers agreed overall, but their responses were drastically divided between the Thinking and Feeling personality traits. Entrepreneurs (ESTP) (63%) and Virtuosos (ISTP) (51%) agreed at significantly higher rates than Entertainers (ESFP) (34%) and Adventurers (ISFP) (28%).

As Thinking personality types, Entrepreneurs and Virtuosos, like Analysts, may see debate as a sort of game. Whereas Analysts might prolong a debate because they’re enjoying the process, Explorer personalities may see it simply as something that must be won. Entertainers, on the other hand, tend to be people-pleasers, and Adventurers can be changeable types who are less sure of their own opinions; as such, both personality types are less likely to engage in debate in the first place.

Sentinels (32%)

As with Explorers, Sentinel personality types were also divided along the Nature aspect in their responses, with types possessing the Thinking trait agreeing at notably higher rates. As a group, however, Sentinels tend to avoid debate even when they have strong opinions on a subject, so the idea of contradicting someone simply for contradiction’s sake may strike them as profoundly wrongheaded. Rather than waste time making an argument that they do not agree with, Sentinel personalities are far more likely to work to implement the solutions at which they have already arrived.

Turbulent Defenders (ISFJ-T) were the least likely of all personality types to agree (20%). It’s important to note that as Introverted, Observant, Feeling, and Judging types, Defenders are the opposite of Debaters in every trait. While Debaters have a knack for taking up any position to objectively view an argument from all sides, Defenders tend to be such passionate advocates for their own beliefs that they have neither the inclination nor the ability to stand up for anything else. Of course, while Debater personalities may win an argument on points alone, few can compete with Defenders in terms of absolute sincerity.

Samwise Gamgee, the ultimate sidekick from The Lord of the Rings, is a great example of a Defender to consider here. Reliable and loyal almost to a fault, Sam is there to support Frodo and see him through the terrible burden of his task, not to challenge the reasons behind it and risk causing Frodo to lose hope and give up altogether. Frightened though he may be, Sam never wavers in his beliefs and is always around to remind us, “There’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it’s worth fighting for.”


Although there was a slight tendency for Extraverted personality types to be more likely to intentionally disagree with others than their Introverted counterparts (48% vs. 42% agreeing, respectively), overall, there was little variation in the responses of the four Strategies. The People Mastery Strategy agreed at a rate of 49%, Social Engagement at 48%, Confident Individualism at 44%, and Constant Improvement at 41%. Roles, therefore, appeared to play a greater part in our readers’ willingness to engage in devil’s advocacy than did Strategies.


What is the purpose of an argument? Is it simply to win – or is it to come to some greater understanding of the truth?

Those who play devil’s advocate more frequently than others, such as Analysts and other personality types with the Thinking trait, may feel that, in doing so, they are attempting to refine their own ideas as much as those of their opponents. Conversely, those who see devil’s advocacy as a waste of time, such as Sentinel personalities with the Feeling trait, may contend that skill at debate is mere sophistry, and that action is more important than words.

Do you ever find yourself in the role of devil’s advocate? Why? Let us know in the comments!

You can see the full set of data, including correlation coefficients, in the Academy. Please also consider participating in our Member Surveys!

11 months ago
I agree with this. As an ISFJ-T, when someone shares me their beliefs, I always assume they are sincere. Why would they not be sincere? But, if they take advantage of my assumption of their good intentions, I will not hesitate to leave. And, if I just keep arguing with people on something I don't believe in, how would that make me look? There may be a driving force behind ENTP's or thinkers, but mine are emotions and sincerity. Sincerity and authenticity are one of the things that I look for in a friend. So when a person is willing to share a personal belief, I feel it's my job to support it, not oppose it.
5 months ago
Well, that's a very enlightening description of how you see things. It baffles me, but I guess I sort of get it (ie, you are a foreign being to me, but I shall allow you to live). Thanks for sharing.
4 months ago
I think that an important point to mention here is that for some people (such as myself) they'll usually declare that they're playing the devil's advocate in advance in order to ensure that their intentions aren't misunderstood. To me it's important that people understand why they have the positions they do and that they have good reasoning behind their stance but most crucially, that they also understand what drives people to the opposing position. And declaring your intent beforehand usually makes people more willing to engage than they would be otherwise. As an INTJ-a, I play devil's advocate because to me there's no practical difference between ensuring my own opinions are logically supported and making sure I understand those with differing opinions.
11 months ago
I would have guessed Architects to be the most inclined to represent Devil's advocate given their intense desire to get to the truth of things even if it means steamrolling their own emotions.
10 months ago
I'm an INTJ-A and while sometimes I enjoy arguing for something I don't believe in, I don't necessarily like doubting someone else without any reason just to see their reaction. Maybe that's why we don't rank so high but definitely we are up there.
7 months ago
I respect that. However, it seems that the INTJ has an almost pathological obsession with the truth, regardless of who or where it comes from, which makes for a great devil's advocate. It's also another reason we are horrible at sycophancy - because it prioritizes subjectivity over objectivity. Often when I'm in meetings or at home discussing a topic, others will think I'm fighting for what I actually think, when in reality, I'm just trying to vet out potential "traps" in the argumentation or causation. Getting to a logically sound reason or answer for a given question is for most of us of the highest regard and concern, so that's where I was coming from. It has little to do with someone else's feelings (And aren't emotions just encumbrances to moving forward with doing things properly? After all, that's where we score on the Thinking/Feeling axis).
11 months ago
Wouldn't there be more reasons to "play devil's advocate"?
11 months ago
That’s odd. The ENFPs were only slightly above the half mark, although I have many ENFP friends who often play devil’s advocate just for the sake of debating.
11 months ago
Hooray! It was the Debater's hat, Mr Krabs - he was number One!
Your name: