User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 89

  1. #21
    (blankpages) Xenon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilkRoad View Post
    But it just seemed like the article suggested we don't like people or can "take or leave" human relationships. If you saw me with a good friend you wouldn't say that...
    My first thought was something along these lines - presumably these would have been unfamiliar human faces, would they not? The results may have been quite different if the subjects were viewing the faces of important people in their lives.

    Also, the fact that introverts' brains show the same P300 response to flowers and (strangers') faces doesn't mean their entire brains were responding identically. If they were, they wouldn't be able to distinguish between people and flowers.

    And as for this...

    The introvert's brain treats interactions with people the same way it treats encounters with other, non-human information, such as inanimate objects for example
    The subjects were looking at a series of unfamiliar faces. How does that tell you anything about their neurological responses to "interactions with" people?

    The study could well tell us something interesting about introverts vs. extroverts, but the way these things are interpreted and reported just makes makes me sometimes.

  2. #22
    Lay the coin on my tongue SilkRoad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xenon View Post
    The study could well tell us something interesting about introverts vs. extroverts, but the way these things are interpreted and reported just makes makes me sometimes.
    I can't help wondering if it's the way the study is reported that tells us something interesting about introverts vs extroverts...
    Female
    INFJ
    Enneagram 6w5 sp/sx


    I DOORSLAMMING

  3. #23
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,782

    Default

    its true, very rarely remember what people are wearing or what they look like. that's why i hate the question: "what were they wearing" because honestly i don't know. uh clothes?
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  4. #24
    (blankpages) Xenon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    The article is not talking about MBTI introverts. If only you would simply click the link where it says "introvert." http://www.livescience.com/6291-stud...eople-shy.html

    Wow look at that, even the link to the other page has the word "shy" in it.

    It pisses me off to have to explain this after mentioning it above once already.

    "Socially shy" is not an acceptable definition of "introvert" IN MBTI TERMS. You know this to be true. And yet you continue to berate the author of that page on the basis of your OWN idea of what an introvert is.

    And in fact, your (or our) idea of what an introvert is really isn't generally accepted by psychologists.
    Who are you talking to?

    First of all, the link in your quote above is an article about a completely different study. Yes, that study was defining introverts as anxious and inhibited personalities. Yes, that definition doesn't apply to everyone who is an MBTI "I" type - there is likely a correlation, but there are plenty of MBTI introverts who are not sensitive, shy, neurotic and inhibited. How does that negate all the criticisms made here? The study in question here doesn't say how they classed people as introverts or extroverts. Even if they were using the sensitive-shy definition, all the criticisms still stand: relationships are still important to shy/inhibited people, their temperament doesn't mean they "dislike people", they don't see people as objects, etc. And a lot of MBTI introverts are shy/inhibited types and relate to those traits at least somewhat. Not all by any means, but a lot. So the fact that people see reason to be critical of the study doesn't mean they don't understand that there are different definitions of "introvert", and that this entire discussion should come to a close once you come along and enlighten everyone. Thanks anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by SilkRoad View Post
    I can't help wondering if it's the way the study is reported that tells us something interesting about introverts vs extroverts...
    Oh, I don't know about that. I think both introverts and extroverts prefer to interpret information in a pretty self-flattering way when they have the opportunity.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xenon View Post
    Who are you talking to?

    First of all, the link in your quote above is an article about a completely different study. Yes, that study was defining introverts as anxious and inhibited personalities. Yes, that definition doesn't apply to everyone who is an MBTI "I" type - there is likely a correlation, but there are plenty of MBTI introverts who are not sensitive, shy, neurotic and inhibited. How does that negate all the criticisms made here? The study in question here doesn't say how they classed people as introverts or extroverts. Even if they were using the sensitive-shy definition, all the criticisms still stand: relationships are still important to shy/inhibited people, their temperament doesn't mean they "dislike people", they don't see people as objects, etc. And a lot of MBTI introverts are shy/inhibited types and relate to those traits at least somewhat. Not all by any means, but a lot. So the fact that people see reason to be critical of the study doesn't mean they don't understand that there are different definitions of "introvert", and that this entire discussion should come to a close once you come along and enlighten everyone. Thanks anyway.



    Oh, I don't know about that. I think both introverts an extroverts prefer to interpret information in a pretty self-flattering way when they have the opportunity.
    Geesh.

    The link to the OTHER study appeared in the FIRST study. Nobody bothered to click the link to the first study so we can all know what "introvert" they were talking about in the first study.

    "relationships are still important to shy/inhibited people." That's not what the first study said. It says that introverts (using their definition provided by the link to the other study) view faces the same way they view inanimate objects. Even the thread name says it.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  6. #26
    (blankpages) Xenon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Geesh.

    The link to the OTHER study appeared in the FIRST study. Nobody bothered to click the link to the first study so we can all know what "introvert" they were talking about in the first study.

    "relationships are still important to shy/inhibited people." That's not what the first study said. It says that introverts (using their definition provided by the link to the other study) view faces the same way they view inanimate objects. Even the thread name says it.
    The article (not the study itself, but the interpretation and reporting of the results) does, in fact, suggest that people are less important to introverts, and that introverts just plain don't like people. Some direct quotes:

    ...introverts, or their brains, might be indifferent to people — they can take them or leave them, so to speak.
    Extroverts like to be around other people and generally enjoy social situations while introverts are the opposite.
    The results strongly suggest that human faces, or people in general, hold more significance for extroverts, or are more meaningful for them
    So yes, it says straight out that introverts "can take or leave" people, that people are less "meaningful" for them, that an extrovert is someone who enjoys people and an introvert is "the opposite". These things are not accurate, either of MBTI introverts or socially shy people. That is what people are criticizing here. Even if the subjects were grouped largely according to social inhibition, that does not invalidate any of these criticisms.

    The fact that the other study was about shyness/neuroticism/inhibition doesn't mean that's what was measured here. The site just puts links to studies on similar topics at the bottom. There are different ways of classing people as introverts; some of them are likely quite strongly correlated with MBTI type. You have no way of knowing what people "bothered to click", since once again, they are making criticisms of the study that are equally valid even if they had been defining "introvert" as a shy, inhibited person.

    So, there is no reason to expect that "they meant introvert this way, not that way" should stop people from criticizing the article, and no reason to come in and bitch out @SilkRoad or the entire thread or whomever (I'm still not any clearer on whom your bitching was directed at) when that doesn't happen.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xenon View Post
    The article (not the study itself, but the interpretation and reporting of the results) does, in fact, suggest that people are less important to introverts, and that introverts just plain don't like people. Some direct quotes:





    So yes, it says straight out that introverts "can take or leave" people, that people are less "meaningful" for them, that an extrovert is someone who enjoys people and an introvert is "the opposite". These things are not accurate, either of MBTI introverts or socially shy people. That is what people are criticizing here. Even if the subjects were grouped largely according to social inhibition, that does not invalidate any of these criticisms.

    The fact that the other study was about shyness/neuroticism/inhibition doesn't mean that's what was measured here. The site just puts links to studies on similar topics at the bottom. There are different ways of classing people as introverts; some of them are likely quite strongly correlated with MBTI type. You have no way of knowing what people "bothered to click", since once again, they are making criticisms of the study that are equally valid even if they had been defining "introvert" as a shy, inhibited person.

    So, there is no reason to expect that "they meant introvert this way, not that way" should stop people from criticizing the article, and no reason to come in and bitch out @SilkRoad or the entire thread or whomever (I'm still not any clearer on whom your bitching was directed at) when that doesn't happen.
    From your comment, I see that the report is defining "introvert" and "extrovert" (notice it's not spelled the MBTI 'extravert' way) either according to common psychological practice or according to dictionary definitions.

    in·tro·vert/ˈintrəˌvərt/
    Noun:
    A shy, reticent, and typically self-centered person.
    A person predominantly concerned with their own thoughts and feelings rather than with external things.


    ex·tro·vert/ˈekstrəˌvərt/
    Noun:
    An outgoing, overtly expressive person.

    "An extroverted person is likely to enjoy time spent with people and find less reward in time spent alone. They tend to be energized when around other people..." (Wiki).

    It's Jung who is off-the-wall in obscurely defining these two terms according to cognitive attitude or focus of attention regarding functions. That's not to say he is wrong, but that we are comparing two different systems here that happen to use the same words.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  8. #28
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    It's Jung who is off-the-wall in obscurely defining these two terms according to cognitive attitude or focus of attention regarding functions. That's not to say he is wrong, but that we are comparing two different systems here that happen to use the same words.
    The article doesn't really bother me but Mal did you forget that it was Carl Jung who gave the world the terms Introversion and Extraversion? Incidentally the difference in spelling has nothing to do with MBTI, it is merely a difference with no real significance beyond a dilution by the general populace, then again it could be significant depending on which side you take with the spelling.

    However if you can provide evidence as to why im wrong on this I will happily admit it and alter my perception.

    Unfortunately from what ive seen information on the subject seems contradictory and divided. Some sources define them as separate between one being used as a psychological term, (extraversion), and one being just a set of general outward traits, (extroversion). But then other sources say that they are merely two different spellings of the same thing.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  9. #29
    (blankpages) Xenon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    It's Jung who is off-the-wall in obscurely defining these two terms according to cognitive attitude or focus of attention regarding functions. That's not to say he is wrong, but that we are comparing two different systems here that happen to use the same words.
    I've been acknowledging from the beginning that there is a difference in the MBTI and common psychological definitions of introversion/extroversion, so I'm not sure why you felt the need to quote the dictionary to me. My points are 1. Many MBTI introverts also relate to the more standard definition of an introvert in a number of ways (from my own observations and experience, more often than not), and many people here identify with both and 2. The article is painting a picture of introverts as not liking/being indifferent to people, which isn't accurate regardless of which definition you use - preferring to spend more time alone or have fewer relationships doesn't mean the relationships you do have are any less important or you are "indifferent" to them. Psychologists have been saying this for years; there's no reason for the article not to make this distinction. Therefore, even if there were no relationship at all between the two definitions of "introvert" and the article was only talking about the common psychological definition, the criticisms that have come up in this thread would still be valid.

    If you aren't interested in discussing false perceptions of introverts unless we're talking strictly about MBTI introverts, you're free to go post in another thread and talk about something else, rather than coming in here and bitching because other people want to talk about it.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    The article doesn't really bother me but Mal did you forget that it was Carl Jung who gave the world the terms Introversion and Extraversion? Incidentally the difference in spelling has nothing to do with MBTI, it is merely a difference with no real significance beyond a dilution by the general populace, then again it could be significant depending on which side you take with the spelling.

    However if you can provide evidence as to why im wrong on this I will happily admit it and alter my perception.

    Unfortunately from what ive seen information on the subject seems contradictory and divided. Some sources define them as separate between one being used as a psychological term, (extraversion), and one being just a set of general outward traits, (extroversion). But then other sources say that they are merely two different spellings of the same thing.
    M-W.com states that the first known use of the term "introversion" was in 1654. It is possible that its first known psychological (versus biological or some other) use was by Jung. But Wiki states that they were first popularized by Jung.

    I think Jung coined some terms, but those weren't among them. He redefined a lot of known concepts and corrected some errors made by other psychologists. And I'm sure he redefined those too.

    The word "extraversion" is relatively late in coming into prominent use as a synonym of "extroversion." My big Webster's New World Dictionary, which I've owned for 30 years, does not list it.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

Similar Threads

  1. What the human face may look like in 100,000 years
    By Such Irony in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 07-13-2013, 05:44 PM
  2. Type an inanimate object
    By Bamboo in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 12-06-2009, 02:56 PM
  3. Do you ever talk to inanimate objects?
    By Kingfisher in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-15-2009, 02:32 PM
  4. Can inanimate objects carry expressive meaning?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-29-2009, 05:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO