[1 of 5]
Tests
You've taken some function-based MBTI tests, and I already noted (in
post 7) that the official MBTI is really the only MBTI test with a lot of psychometric support behind it.
Dario Nardi's one of the leading cognitive functions guys (as you may know), and
his test is arguably the most-linked-to cognitive functions test, but as further discussed in the spoiler in
this post, INTJs typically get high Te scores
and high Ti scores (with Te not substantially favored over Ti), when they take Nardi's test. They also tend to get high Ni scores
and high Ne scores (with Ni not substantially favored over Ne). And INFJs often get Fi scores that are as high or higher than their Fe scores. And all the IN types tend to relate pretty strongly to Ti. And so on. I'm theoretically an "Ni-dom," but Te and Ti were my two highest scores on Nardi's test.
As I understand it, there has
never been a cognitive functions test where the results come anywhere close to lining up with the Harold Grant model expectations, where INTJs are supposedly Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTPs are supposedly Ti-Ne-Si-Fe.
I've been involved in forum "type me" exercises for six years now, and they often include people posting their results from a variety of tests, some dichotomy-based and some function-based. And that experience has led me to conclude that, assuming someone has reasonably well-defined preferences, they're more likely to correctly type themselves using dichotomy-based tests than tests (or analysis) based on the functions. And if they've got one or more preferences that are in or near the middle, I think dichotomy-based tests are more likely to correctly indicate that situation as well.
E/I
Your shyness is clearly a dominant element of your personality, and it's not uncommon to hear that
introversion and shyness are not the same. And that's true. For one thing, there's no clear, generally-agreed-on definition of shyness, and for another, introverts may make up something close to half the population, but when most people refer to "shy people," they're talking about a substantially smaller group.
And maybe most importantly, introversion, like the other MBTI (and Big Five) dimensions, is really a multifaceted cluster of personality characteristics, and it's a mistake to try to boil any of those dimensions down to just one or two of their facets.
That said, it's also fair to say that, while many or most introverts aren't all that shy (partly depending on how you define shyness),
most shy people are introverts — and it's probably fair to say that the likeliest candidates for noteworthy levels of shyness and/or social anxiety are people who are both significantly introverted
and above-average in neuroticism (like you).
I'm a neurotic introvert, and so was Jung, and it's maybe worth noting that Jung wasn't really a believer in the possibility of "shy extraverts" and "outgoing introverts." Here's how Jung described extraverts and introverts:
[Extraverts and introverts] are so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out. Everyone knows those reserved, inscrutable, rather shy people who form the strongest possible contrast to the open, sociable, jovial, or at least friendly and approachable characters who are on good terms with everybody, or quarrel with everybody, but always relate to them in some way and in turn are affected by them.
Jung believed that extraversion and introversion were products of evolution, and had evolved to produce two contrasting sets of behaviors, with introverts hardwired to have "a hesitant, reflective, retiring nature that keeps itself to itself, shrinks from objects, is always slightly on the defensive and prefers to hide behind mistrustful scrutiny"; and extraverts hardwired to have "an outgoing, candid, and accommodating nature that adapts easily to a given situation, quickly forms attachments, and ... will often venture forth with careless confidence into unknown situations."
Jung viewed extraversion/introversion as the most fundamental division underlying his types, and spent more of
Psychological Types talking about the personality characteristics he thought extraverts tended to have in common and introverts tended to have in common than he spent talking about all eight of the functions put together. And it's true that Jung assigned
too many aspects of personality to E/I, but he was right to view E/I as a multifaceted dimension, and Myers also recognized that — and any MBTI source that tells you that E/I is basically just about
where you get your energy, man is an MBTI source you should cross off your list.
For a longer introduction to E/I that does more justice to its multifacetedness (including an expanded collection of Jung quotes), see
this post.
Here's one paragraph from that post:
Another complicating factor when it comes to sociability is that both E/I and T/F have a significant impact, on average and all other things being equal, on somebody's propensity to engage in social activity, with EFs being the most social, ITs the least, and ETs and IFs in between. (And as long as I'm rambling, I'd say male/female and S/N can also, each in its own way, have some influence on someone's social propensities, with the result that I'd be inclined to peg female ESFs as the likeliest social butterflies and male INTs — like me — as the likeliest MBTI candidates for hermithood.)
(And as a wonkish clarification that maybe should have been in that post, it's pretty clear that Jung was above-average in neuroticism, and that he considered at least some of his neurotic characteristics part of introversion. More importantly, I'd say, Jung also viewed much of what you'd think of as the concrete/abstract component of S/N as part of E/I. So when Jung describes "introverts" in
Psychological Types, his descriptions tend to be better matches for neurotic INs than for introverts in general.)
Here are the five MBTI "Step II" E/I facets:
Initiating
• Sociable
• Congenial
• Introduce people | Receiving
• Reserved
• Low-key
• Are introduced |
Expressive
• Demonstrative
• Easier to know
• Self-revealing | Contained
• Controlled
• Harder to know
• Private |
Gregarious
• Want to belong
• Broad circle
• Join groups | Intimate
• Seek intimacy
• One-on-one
• Find individuals |
Active
• Interactive
• Want contact
• Listen and speak | Reflective
• Onlooker
• Prefer space
• Read and write |
Enthusastic
• Lively
• Energetic
• Seek spotlight | Quiet
• Calm
• Enjoy solitude
• Seek background |
And if you want to read the full descriptions of those facets in the Step II Manual, you can find those in
this PerC post.
Here are McCrae & Costa, creators of the most well-known Big Five test (the NEO-PI-R), summarizing extraversion and introversion:
Extraverts are sociable but sociability is only one of the traits that comprise the domain of Extraversion. In addition to liking people and preferring large groups and gatherings, extraverts are also assertive, active, and talkative. They like excitement and stimulation and tend to be cheerful in disposition. They are upbeat, energetic, and optimistic. Salespeople represent the prototypic extraverts in our culture, and the E domain scale is strongly correlated with interest in enterprising occupations.
While it is easy to convey the characteristics of the extravert, the introvert is less easy to portray. In some respects introversion should be seen as the absence of extraversion rather than what might be assumed to be its opposite. Thus, introverts are reserved rather than unfriendly, independent rather than followers, evenâ€paced rather than sluggish. Introverts may say they are shy when they mean that they prefer to be alone (they do not necessarily suffer from social anxiety). Finally, although they are not given to the exuberant high spirits of extraverts, introverts are not unhappy or pessimistic.
And here are their descriptions of the six NEO-PI-R E/I facets:
Warmth: Warmth is the facet of Extraversion most relevant to issues of interpersonal intimacy. Warm people are affectionate and friendly. They genuinely like people and easily form close attachments to others. Low scorers are neither hostile nor necessarily lacking in compassion, but they are more formal, reserved, and distant in manner than high scorers. Warmth is the facet of E that is closest to Agreeableness in interpersonal space, but it is distinguished by a cordiality and heartiness that is not part of A.
Gregariousness: Gregariousness refers to the preference for other people's company. Gregarious people enjoy the company of others; the more the merrier. Low scorers on this scale tend to be loners who do not seek — or who even actively avoid — social stimulation.
Assertiveness: High scorers on this scale are dominant, forceful, and socially ascendant. They speak without hesitation and often become group leaders. Low scorers prefer to keep in the background and let others do the talking.
Activity: A high Activity score is seen in rapid tempo and vigorous movement, in a sense of energy, and in a need to keep busy. Active people lead fast-paced lives. Low scorers are more leisurely and relaxed in tempo, although they are not necessarily sluggish or lazy.
Excitement Seeking: High scorers on this scale crave excitement and stimulation. They like bright colors and noisy environments. Excitement-seeking is akin to some aspects of sensation seeking. Low scorers feel little need for thrills and prefer a life that high scorers might find boring.
Positive Emotions: Positive Emotions is the facet of E most relevant to the prediction of happiness. This facet assesses the tendency to experience positive emotions such as joy, happiness, love, and excitement. High scorers on this scale laugh easily and often. They are cheerful and optimistic. Low scorers are not necessarily unhappy; they are merely less exuberant and high-spirited.
It's not uncommon to hear introverted forumites saying they feel like they were more
extraverted as children. Although, all other things being equal, an introverted child can be expected to feel/act more introverted than an extraverted child, it's also quite typical for an introverted child, growing up in an untroubled family/school environment in which they excel (and which mostly involves interaction with familiar people), to feel/act significantly more extraverted than they will as an adult. That was true for me in spades. I'm pretty strongly introverted, but was something of a class clown in my school days, and significantly more gregarious than in my adult incarnation — while at the same time being significantly less gregarious than my extraverted classmates.
And I'm a T. As already mentioned, as far as the importance of friends and other people in somebody's life goes, T/F can play just as important a role as E/I, with EFs being the most social types, ITs being the least social types, and ETs and IFs in between. IFs are introverts, and that means they'll tend to favor social interaction that involves what's often referred to as their "inner circle," but it's not at all uncommon for IFs — and this is more true during their school years than later in life — to end up having a regular gang (or two) who they spend a lot of their free time hanging out with. And it's always important to keep in mind that, in general, the differences between introverts and extraverts tend to be substantially more pronounced when they're dealing with strangers or not-too-close acquaintances than when they're dealing with their family, friends and familiar classmates.
Extraverts — and especially EFs — actually
enjoy meeting new people. I am not making this up. And at
large gatherings, too. Send them to a business conference where there's a cocktail party between the afternoon presentations and dinner, and they don't grit their teeth and endure the damn thing. They're jazzed! They've got lots of stories they like to tell, and opinions they enjoy expressing, and a fresh audience means people who haven't heard their stories before. They enjoy the process of crossing paths with a total stranger and turning that stranger into something more friend-like.
But if an IF's introversion gives them a tug in the leave-me-alone direction, their F is likely to make them someone whose life revolves to a substantial degree around the relationships that are important to them. And there's more on that issue in the T/F section of the third post, below.
[
cont'd in next post...]
