At work, I recently had an MBTI test done, and I came out as the INFP type. It seems to be a good indicator to my personality type, and offers some insight into the decision that I make. INFP personalities are associated more with ideals, music, and writing, but not programming. However, I have always approached programming the way I approach writing.

Just out of curiousity, I was wondering if there is a predominant type for those involved in IT, especially in programming.

So, if you will, please share your personality type!

In 29 years at my former place of business (approx 5000 employees) I've seen two times when consultants came in to administer personality tests. Each time we were given a fancy pop-up card with a colourful graph to display on our desks for the dubious benefit of promoting better interaction with others. Management eventually saw these tests for what they really are - a pseudo-scientific scam to separate corporations from their money.

sadly many companies still use them (and 'iq tests') to determine whether candidates are "suitable for the field", iow whether the guy/gal has the right personality and iq to work in that line of business at all.
Which leads to many programmers being highly surprised that despite 15-20 years of working successfully and professionally for a variety of IT companies they're suddenly deemed as being utterly incapable of programming by some shrink who decides that based on how they respond to some tests.

Personality tests are at least a bit more interesting than self-help seminars or BS pep rally or 'team building' nonsense. Walking around blind-folded is so useful for having effective project meetings. There is at least a little bit of scientific basis for some personality traits.

PS There is a decent amount of evidence that intelligence is real (in that various different tests of problem solving are consistently correlated) but obviously intelligence =/= good worker.

Then there is the often parodied (and rightly so) "team-building" seminar.

@Agilemind intelligence is real, but those "tests" don't test for it. They test for test taking ability.
I've found end reported errors in the tests, verifiable errors, but as the companies using them rely blindly on the numerical score reported by some grading algorithm you fail anyway.

And of course a single universal "test" can't reliably work for people with different thinking patterns. Yet all those "tests" use the exact same type of questions and only those and then decides whether someone is "suitable" for the job based on the number of "correct responses" (and with the exact same tests being admitted for every conceivable job out there, you're either "suitable" for all jobs or none at all.
Rather unlike a real IQ test which uses a variety of different techniques, which are then analysed by trained professional psychologists, and are admitted face to face rather than through some computer screen.

Very true, intelligence is very hard to measure accurately as just one example most IQ tests require reading questions off a page/screen so dyslexics often score poorly despite being able score as normal if evaluated via interview.

I knew one person in high school who consistently did poorly on IQ tests because she was OCD (not a common term back when I was in high school). She was obsessive about very carefully and completely filling in each o (to indicate her multiple-choice selection) with her pencil. A non-OCD would quickly make a mark and continue. She would spend 5-10 seconds carefully filling in.

yes, knew someone similar. Always did poorly on written tests, was brilliant when it came to face to face interviews. Nobody recognised for years that she was severely dyslexic...
Had something similar myself. Did poorly on tests where the questions were written on the blackboard in the front of the classroom. When the test was printed and distributed on my desk I did very well on the same test.
Wasn't until 2 years later that a teacher had the bright idea to move me to the front of the room, closer to the blackboard. Turned out I wasn't stupid at all, I just needed glasses...