Extraversion vs. Introversion
A
When most people think of introverts, they imagine a shy, quiet person who is socially anxious, highly sensitive and who prefers to spend most of their time alone. On the other end of the spectrum, extraverts are thought of as highly gregarious socialites who can’t stand to be alone for more than five minutes at a time. These understandings of extraverts and introverts, developed by Carl Jung in his book Psychological Types in 1923, have dominated psychological theory for the past 90 years. However, modern psychological researchers are challenging these assumptions and presenting alternative and more nuanced interpretations of the extraversion-introversion spectrum.
Jung theorised that all people fall into one of two categories: the introvert or the extravert. The original categories were based off of the Ancient Greek archetypes Apollo and Dionysus. Apollo, son of Zeus and Leto, is the god that sheds light on understanding through music, poetry and medicine, among others. Introverts are associated with Apollo, and are thought by Jung to focus their psychic energy on the internal world of the mind. Extraverts, on the other hand, are associated with Dionysus, son of Zeus and Semele and the god of wine, theatre and ecstasy. Jung saw extraverts as being much more engaged and interested in the outside activities of the world, and as being prone to losing their sense of self.
While Jung may have been onto something, his definitions were based on his own personal theory, experience and intuition rather than on empirically sound research. That’s why modern psychology has picked up where Jung left off and investigated through controlled studies the patterns of behaviour that tend to go together within individuals in regards to the extravert-introvert dimension of personality. The results pointed to far less binary definitions than previously thought.
B
Researchers have identified that the core of extraversion-introversion is sensitivity to rewards in the environment. Extraverts are more engaged, motivated and energised by opportunities for positive social interaction because their brains release more dopamine as a reward for such behaviour. That’s why, in controlled studies, an extravert’s brain activity will increase far more significantly than an introvert’s when they are smiled at. That’s not to say that introverts don’t respond positively as well; both are likely to report being smiled at as a subjectively positive experience. But the reward value from the experience will be markedly less for the introverts. This explains why introverts become annoyed or exhausted easily by high-stimulation interactions: they simply aren’t reaping the benefits that extraverts do.
Being rewarded so highly for social engagement leads extraverts to seek it out. They thus tend to display behaviours that help them navigate social interactions, such as smiling, loudness, friendliness, a refined sense of humour, etc. However, while previous understanding of the introversion-extraversion marked the pro-social behaviours themselves as defining traits of extraverts, we now know that they are merely tools for extraverted individuals to use in obtaining the chemical rewards they are wired to receive. In other words, it’s the motivation behind the adoption of such behaviours that determines a person’s introverted or extraverted orientation.
C
But why do some people experience rewards from pleasant social interactions and attention while others don’t? This is a question that science has yet to find a concrete answer to, but some suggest that it has to do with human evolution. One theory postulates that complex social lives are a dominant force that drives the evolution of human intelligence, creativity, language and even consciousness. The human rewards system thus evolved to be extremely responsive to social rewards, and the ability to gain the attention of others plays significantly into a person’s access to social rewards. In this way, extraversion is viewed as a strategy for furthering human evolution.
D
However, extraversion has its risks and limitations that are complimented by introversion. High investments in time and energy are required to gain social rewards, leaving little energy for less socially oriented tasks. Some studies have even shown that extraverts have poorer financial management strategies, being far more willing than their introvert counterparts to spend compulsively if there are social rewards involved. In addition, extraversion is correlated with higher levels of physical risk due to a tendency to be more exploratory of one’s environment. Extraverts are far more likely than introverts to be injured from physical activities.
Introverts, on the other hand, receive more rewards from activities such as intellect and imagination, making them more prone to put their energies into less socially oriented projects that extraverts may leave by the wayside. It’s no surprise, then, that many of the world’s geniuses and great inventors have been introverts. It takes significant time in relevant solitude to work through complex mathematical, scientific or philosophical puzzles, time that extravert simply cannot afford to take. So while extraverts may be playing a substantial role in the evolution of our species, the role of introverts is not to be overlooked.