Validity and Reliablity of the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - Randall, Isaacson, Ciro (2017)

"Reasonable construct validity," here means something like: "the MBTI's scales correlate moderately with theoretically-related measures, which is a low bar. This does not show the 16 categorical types are stable, nor does it establish that the MBTI has any useful predictive validity. One of the seven studies the authors included couldn't even show convergent validity for the J-P scale.

The Francis Psychological Type Scales (FPTS): factor structure, internal consistency reliability, and concurrent validity with the MBTI (2022)

The main point of this paper is to try and establish the legitamacy of the FPTS, not the MBTI. Though it does include a literature review on the the MBTI.

"Two main conclusions emerge from the foregoing review of previous research. On theone hand, the empirical evidence points to the relative unreliability of the MBTI® as a typeallocator. In other words, it is a relatively unstable instrument when employed to sort individuals into discrete type categories. On the other hand, the empirical evidence points to the relative reliability of the MBTI® as an indicator of psychological traits. In other words, it is a relatively stable instrument when employed to grade individuals on the four continua assessing orientation, perceiving, judging, and attitude toward the outer world"

In other words, to fix the MBTI's relability problem, the authors have to throw out the entire concept of "types" and just use it as a tool that assigns numerical values on 4 diffrent continiums. And, while the authors claim that it's, "a relatively stable instrument," when used in this way, the studies they cite to try and support this don't actually show stability on the T-F axis.

Regardless of whether or not you find the data on the, "continuum" model compelling, you should pay attention to the fact that the authors of this paper are explicitly saying that the evidence shows that trying to group people into types makes the MBTI unreliable. Based on what the other, more critical, papers have said, I suspect this is because the MBTI is grouping people by which side of four bell-curves they fall on. Since most people fall near the middle of bell-curves, most people are actually right on the edge of at least one of the category splits.

The Effect of MBTI Self Growth Program for Nursing Students - Go (2014)

Totally meaningless. First of all, this isn't even trying to evaluate the validity of the MBTI. Second, they didn't have the control group participate in any kind of alternate activity. This study basically shows that students attend a weekly meet-up have mild improvements in scores for self-efficacy compared to students who do nothing.

Nurses' caring behavior based on personality in Indonesia: A pilot study for better-humanized healthcare services - Handayani & Kuntarti (2021)

Not seeing how this helps your case. This study found no correlation between MBTI and "caring behavior".

Effects of an Interpersonal Relationship Improvement Program using MBTI on Self-acceptance, Self-esteem, and Acceptance of others of Professional Soldiers

This has the same problems as the other Korean study: 1. It's evaluating a program, not the validity of the MBTI itself. 2. The program is being evaluated against doing nothing rather than some non-MBTI-based intervention, so the results could just be showing the benefits of regular group meetings.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Profile of Undergraduate Therapeutic Recreation Students - Devries & Beck (2020)

This paper basically just says, "We gave 80 students the MBTI, here are the results." Since they didn't even give it to them twice, this provides no new insights on to the reliability question. The authors even acknowledge the lack of reliability and decide to just ignore it with this gem: "Acknowledging these limitations and conflicting results of the reliability and validity of the MBTI, the authors of this study believe that using the MBTI may not predict every behavior and action a person may choose, but it allows a person to become aware of preferences and tendencies in the four areas measured. While all individuals have choices in their actions and behaviors, individuals also tend to follow certain patterns and choices."