The Enneagram of Personality: Is It Pseudoscience?
Addie Zhang
July 7, 2026
Neuroscience Pairing
The author's search for self-understanding through personality tests touches on a core feature of the human brain: the default mode network (DMN), a set of brain regions that activates when we reflect on ourselves, imagine our future, or think about why we do what we do. Self-referential thinking, asking who am I and why do I act this way, is not just a philosophical habit. It is something the brain is literally built to do.
The Enneagram's appeal may partly be explained by a phenomenon called narrative identity, the brain's tendency to organize experience into a coherent story about the self. When a personality description feels accurate, the brain's reward circuitry responds, not necessarily because the description is scientifically precise, but because coherence itself feels satisfying. This is related to the Barnum effect, a well-documented cognitive bias where people accept vague, general descriptions as uniquely personal.
What makes this essay stand out is that the author does both things simultaneously: she finds genuine value in the Enneagram and holds it to an evidence standard. That balance, using self-reflection as a tool without mistaking it for a diagnosis, is exactly what good science literacy looks like in practice.
It is human nature to crave understanding, and also to learn. Intrapersonal learning serves as an important part of self growth, but the chase for certainty and validation in knowing one’s self can lead you astray. In recent years, various personality diagnostic tests have gained popularity online, marketed as a tell-all tool. Some personality theories, such as the Big 5, are relatively well-received by the scientific community, while others, such as the Myer-Briggs Personality Type Indicator, fall under wider scrutiny. Big claims have been made about their effectiveness, promising eye-awakening understanding that can support both your personal and professional growth. Of all the personality tests I have taken, the one that I found most accurate was the Enneagram test I took; a personality theory that separates people by why they think a certain way, rather than how they think. In essence, each personality type reflects what drives the way we view the world, almost a core desire or need. The nine different archetypes are described by the so-called Enneagram Institute as “1 THE REFORMER… 2 THE HELPER…3 THE ACHIEVER…4 THE INDIVIDUALIST…5 THE INVESTIGATOR…6 THE LOYALIST…7 THE ENTHUSIAST…8 THE CHALLENGER… 9 THE PEACEMAKER.” Many debate over the origins of the theory, with some arguing that it holds religious and spiritual roots, while others agree that it was popularized in the United States by philosopher Oscar Ichazo in the 1970s. In a CNBC article in 2023, reporter Aditi Shrikrant discusses this and describes the rise of the Enneagram personality theory, “As with many phenomena of questionable scientific origins, it has gained popularity despite a lack of endorsement by the academic community. On TikTok, the hashtag #enneagram has 370.4 million views.” Its popularity has brought both criticism and support, leading to debate on its true validity.
Proponents of Enneagrams have argued for its use as a self-growth tool. In a Medium Article, licensed counselor Shelly Prevost argues that “People like routines. We need an easy-to-implement system in order to achieve what we want in life. If you want to grow as a human, you need the Enneagram.” Her article is phrased almost like a personal testimony, discussing how transformational learning about enneagrams was for her. Seeing herself in the Enneagram allowed her to unlock unconscious patterns of behavior, giving her an understanding of how she was thinking. This allowed Shelly to find a solution to her troubles, and pave a step forward. However, as we learned in class, personal testimonies are rarely reliable when not backed by scientific study. Enneagrams have been mainstream for many years, with studies on it continuing to be published to this day. Research published by the Journal of Clinical Psychology (Hook et al) in 2020 gathered evidence to create conclusions on the overall effectiveness of the Enneagram of Personality. “We noted previously that the Enneagram is best viewed as a theory of character structure… results have demonstrated positive changes in work variables (e.g., leadership versatility; Ho, 2018) and personal growth variables (e.g., self-knowledge, spiritual growth, and interpersonal relationships; Cluley, 2005; Lee, 2015; Sutcliffe, 2002). Although this study is still limited, it does suggest that the Enneagram has the potential to increase workplace effectiveness and promote personal growth…we believe a fruitful direction for research is to develop the Enneagram as a therapeutic tool.” This presents a few key claims, arguing that Enneagram's are a positive professional and personal growth, and have a valuable (and in the case of Prevost, necessary) therapeutic value.
However, we must also consider the flip side, arguments and research pointing to Enneagrams being pseudoscience. First we must consider that the very same paper arguing the benefits of the Enneagram, also acknowledges that not enough research has been done to create a solid conclusion. The authors continue by writing that “...research is still in a preliminary stage, we suggest that clinicians proceed with caution. Enneagram theory remains largely untested, and the returns on…empirical work has been conducted in those areas have been mixed.” While there is support that warrants promising prospects, many of the studies sighted were isolated to a specific country or a smaller group, and were qualitative studies. Larger systemic research has to be done in order for claims of various benefits to be guaranteed scientifically. Executive director of Skeptic Magazine Michael Shermer, further debunks Enneagram validity, quoting scientific skeptic Robert Todd Carroll. He argues that the Enneagram of Personality "can't be tested because they are so vague and malleable that anything relevant can be shoehorned to fit the theory.” This argument is a key aspect of pseudoscience, claims that are vague and unfalsifiable. From our Baloney Detection kit, we find that “Not proven false” does not mean “true,” revealing a fundamental flaw to arguments in favor of the Enneagram. Similarly, proponents of the Enneagram make excuses for its validity, with Shermer finding that ‘they argue that it does not matter whether there is evidence to support its numerology and symbology, because the enneagram “works”, and because people “find value” in the elegance of the symbol along with its triads, wings, arrows and other ancillary theories.” These attempts to avoid falsification are a key characteristic of pseudoscience, using different cases to try to prove the validity of Enneagrams instead of disprove it.
In the end, I do find Enneagrams to not have enough evidence to be considered science, but I feel that there is still more to be considered. Even proponents agree to its mystical nature, which is what I think the Enneagram ultimately serves as, an almost conceptual idea of different personalities that we may identify with. Even though it is not science and only has mixed evidence backing it up, The Enneagram is still a tool that many can identify with and benefit from. Shermer himself states that “Summarily dismissing the EoP, however, ignores its proven benefits and the value many gain through better understanding themselves and others.” The most important thing is to understand that the result you get from your Enneagram quiz does not define you, and is only important to you if it can bring growth and discovery.
Bibliography:
The Enneagram Institute. (2014). The Nine Enneagram Type Descriptions. The Enneagram Institute. https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/type-descriptions/ Type: commercial
I used this website as a brief introduction to what the different Enneagram types are. Although the source is commercial, this page was not meant to sell you something, which is why I find it to be mostly credible. The information provided aligns very similarly with other descriptions of the different types.
Shrikant, A. (2023, March 21). Are you “The Achiever” or “The Enthusiast?” Why so many people—including your boss—are obsessed with the Enneagram test. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/21/personality-tests-why-the-enneagram-is-trending-again.html
Type: informational
I used this article as background information detailing the popularity of the Enneagram of Personality. I find it to be credible, and came from a known new outlet.
Prevost, S. (2021, July 2). Why the Enneagram is the Ultimate Personal Growth System. Medium; Big Self. https://medium.com/big-self-society/why-the-enneagram-is-the-ultimate-personal-growth-system-479c25d0b645
Type: proponent
I used this article as an example of arguments made by proponents of the Enneagram. I found it to be slightly biased due to it being a personal testimony, but useful in showing how many counselors advocate for the Enneagram.
Hook, J. N., Hall, T. W., Davis, D. E., Van Tongeren, D. R., & Conner, M. (2020). The Enneagram: A systematic review of the literature and directions for future research. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 77(4), 865–883. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.23097
Type: scientific
I used this paper as a scientific source giving an impartial analysis of the Enneagram. It comes from a reputable source and acknowledges both sides of the argument.
Shermer, M. (2025, February 21). The Fallacy of the Enneagram Personality. Substack.Com; Skeptic. https://michaelshermer.substack.com/p/the-fallacy-of-the-enneagram-personality
Type: skeptical
I used this article as an example of arguments made by skeptics of the Enneagram. I found it to be mostly credible, as it took a logical and evidence-backed approach to proving their point.