Let’s consider some famous people for a bit; Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, Eleanor Roosevelt, Elon Musk, Emma Watson, J.K.Rowling and Warren Buffet. Undoubtedly famous people in various fields of science, business, entertainment and politics. Besides their popularity, general perception people have of them is that they are introverts.

On the other hand, consider Bill Clinton, Margaret Thatcher, Steve Jobs and Oprah Winfrey; famous individuals perceived as extroverts. 

A quick way that most people differentiate extroverts from introverts is that extroverts love being around other people while introverts need time to themselves. Extroverts are more outspoken, loving the company of others  while introverts are quiet and introspective. Right?

Between Introverts & Extroverts

A closer examination of these differences date back to the 1920s when psychologist Carl Jung coined the terms “introverted” and “extroverted” in his 1920s work about Psychological Types. In his research, the key differences between them had to do with energy. While extroverts are energised by social interactions, introverts are less energised as they will need to compensate with me-time to “recharge”.

German psychologist Hans Eynsenck later espoused the biological explanation for this E/I difference. According to his theory, the behaviors of introverts and extroverts are due to differences in cortical arousal (to do with brain activity). As introverts naturally have a higher cortical arousal than extroverts, they prefer less stimulating environments to avoid becoming overwhelmed. Hence, it would not be surprising that extroverts seek after highly stimulating environments such as networking, team-bonding activities and social gatherings to augment their arousal levels.

Delving deeper into the observable traits, extroverts are often described as having inclination for the following:

• Large social circles
• Enjoy being the center of attention
• Highly expressive 
• Gain energy from being around other people
• Outgoing, enthusiastic and energetic

On the other hand, introverts are often described as having inclination for the following:

• Enjoy time in solitude
• Dislike being the center of attention
• Value close and in-depth relationships
• Soft-spoken
• Gain energy working in quiet environments
• Independent and focused

Such descriptions might often be used by many as a mental checklist to differentiate an introvert from an extrovert. In fact because they appear logically related, we tend to identify with them. We are also less likely to question the validity and reliability of using them as personality indicators. So they must be right, right? 

Pitfalls of Typecasting

That births a very fundamental problem of typecasting. Typecasting is a conclusion made in our minds to force-fit a person into a preconceived personality type. Unfortunately, people are more complex than that. Have you ever seen someone you thought as ‘introvert’ said he loves hosting or going to a big party? Or have you seen a self-proclaimed ‘extrovert’ overtly declining gatherings or networking sessions?

“Wow I never expected that of you!” “You don’t seem like that kind of person.” “That’s so not you!”

But why can’t it be? Are we so simple to think in one way? In fact, E/I is often seen as a kind of continuum, with people exhibiting a mix of introverted and extroverted tendencies — “ambiverts” fall somewhere in the middle of this continuum. And that breeds another set of problems; is the notion of extroversion or introversion even valid to begin with? Even Jung did not think people could be completely introverted or extroverted. He said; “There is no such thing as a pure introvert or extrovert, such a person would be in the lunatic asylum.”

It gets worse when our world begins to favor ‘extroverts’ in success or career progressions. As a result, we promote or give greater credits to ‘extroverts’ than ‘introverts’ when this dichotomy becomes widely accepted. We see a slippery slope reasoning taking place when we observe ‘extroverts’ in leadership roles, or in people-centric careers like sales, marketing, or public relations.

‘Introverts?’ Or Over-Simplification of Human Psychology 101?

How true is it though that ‘introverts’ may be less effective in sales, networking and leadership? People who make this conclusion are likely confused by the difference between introversion and shyness. They assume that ‘introverts’ are shy and therefore less inclined to interact well with others. 

According to Robin Edelstein, PhD, chair of the Personality and Social Contexts Psychology Program at the University of Michigan, “Shyness has anxiety, or a negative component, to it.” Pure introversion, on the other hand, does not have that negative aspect to it. Their solitude is by choice, not necessarily due to a low self-esteem. 

Similarly, their preference to be around fewer people should not be a reason to jump to conclusions about their friendships. As wisely clarified by Edelstein, “introverts and extroverts do not differ in the quality of the friendships that they have.” 

Considering an ‘introvert’s’ preference for one-on-one friendships, we can perhaps draw parallels to the type of sales that may energise them rather than conclude a poor-fit for a sales job. 

For instance, there is a possibility that they may be inclined to one-on-one solution sales in a farmer role rather than transactional sales in a hunter role. However, to verify this accurately and specifically, it will be necessary to conduct a psychometric personality assessment of the person deemed an ‘introvert.’

Avoiding the Pitfall

So how do we avoid the typecasting pitfall? How do we avoid making logical assumptions of personality types based on mere correlations? How do we help individuals make sense of themselves if they feel like “ambiverts”?

A key criteria to consider is whether the profiling tool assesses individuals by validating specific behavioural tendencies based on verifiable correlations among the trait characteristics. As such, we would be able to capture important information about an individual. We can also uncover the underlying causes for certain perceptions that the person in question has or others have about him/her.

Conventionally, ‘extroverts’ tend to have strong personality inclinations in all of the following 3 aspects and their corresponding traits: 

• Communicative
• Outgoing 
• Relational

Each of these aspects comprise of between 2 – 4 corresponding traits. However, people are complex and often may be more inclined in some of these aspects and less so in others. 

For instance, a person could have a combination of traits that makes him more of a communicative person and less so as an outgoing and relational person. Another person may be more relational but less communicative and outgoing. To delve deeper on the extent a person is inclined in a certain aspect will require further examination of the corresponding traits. Therefore with a clear framework (this is not the one and only), we can appreciate the richness of our personalities and gain insight into aspects of ourselves where there is room for growth.

A Spectrum of Personalities

According to Barry Smith, ambiverts makeup 68% of the population. That puts another nail in the proverbial coffin of the E/I model. How accurate is the model when it can only sample 32% of the population?  

Psychology is complex and personalities are multihued. If we still prefer the E/I model, why not ask ‘what type of introvert/extrovert am I?’ ‘Or when do I prefer to exhibit introverted/extroverted behaviours?’

This helps us gain greater clarity and insight into our personalities. It value-adds and equips us to understand the uniqueness of every individual. To end off, try asking of what type of ambivert are you instead of the usual E/I method.

References:

https://www.prevention.com/health/mental-health/a24068521/introvert-vs-extrovert/

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-science-behind-extroversion-and-introversion-1282059791