Biological Introversion/Extraversion

[wedekit]

Well, I learned about the Biological model of I/E in my Theories of Personality class. I asked my teacher how well it related to Jung's version and she told me that there was some overlap but overall it is an unexplored area. So I thought I would do some casual exploration...

Basically, I's are more quickly and strongly aroused when exposed to external stimulation. Introverts are also more easily overwhelmed by the stimulation of parties, loud music, or social gatherings while extraverts find this kind of stimulation pleasant. On the other end of the coin, extraverts are quickly bored by slow-moving movie plots and soft music while introverts often find these subtle sources of stimulation engaging. When trying to study in a library, research has found that introverts typically will pick quiet study rooms away from all stimulation while extraverts prefer to sit out in the open amidst the stimulation.

Another difference, according to the biological model, is that extraverts are much more sensitive to the idea of rewards. This leads to impulsive behavior which makes them more likely to be found on a roller coaster or at a party. However, this also means that if an extravert thought going on a walk alone would be pleasing, they would be more likely than an introvert to actually do it.

Although I do not wish to address this piece of information as I do the others, research in the biological approach has found that extraverts are happier. This is, in short, due to their ability to appreciate and pursue social experience (commonly found to be a key factor in overall happiness) and their ability to appreciate rewards. As far as rewards go, research has found that extraverts are more pleased with their own accomplishments than introverts, and do not react as badly to failure as introverts. (Of course the problem I see with this is that social experience and rewards do not even begin to describe what constitutes happiness. These two things are items that are measurable by experimentation while I'm sure at least some of the things introverts find happiness in are not as easily measurable. I personally don't see happy as something experienced but rather something obtained.)

So, in summary: Introverts are much more sensitive to stimulation than extraverts.

So, I wish just wondering if whoever reads this feels like it is in some way descriptive of their MBTI I/E preference? I personally feel like the biological model of an introvert fits me well.

Thanks.

 

[disregard]

I definitely agree.

I am an extravert (biologically, at least), and I can vouch for preferring my "alone" time still to be in the vicinity of other people. I am a very happy person because of what you mentioned-- I know how to get the experience I need to maintain that equilibrium, and I do it. It is generally unlikely for me to feel overwhelmed by stimulation, unless I'm tired or hungry, then I will become cranky and want to withdraw. Interaction pumps me up, like sunlight to a plant.

 

[wedekit]

I definitely agree.

I am an extravert (biologically, at least), and I can vouch for preferring my "alone" time still to be in the vicinity of other people. I am a very happy person because of what you mentioned-- I know how to get the experience I need to maintain that equilibrium, and I do it. It is generally unlikely for me to feel overwhelmed by stimulation, unless I'm tired or hungry, then I will become cranky and want to withdraw. Interaction pumps me up, like sunlight to a plant.

The funny thing is I can't even imagine what that must feel like. Too much stimulation and I panic, lol.

 

[Athenian200]

I agree with it. One thing I noticed about myself is that I don't seem to get excited about things as often as other people... as if things that are meant to be seen as rewards don't stimulate me as much. I don't feel that strong a sense of accomplishment for a job well done. I feel only a sense of balance, which is upset towards negative if something goes awry.

It's almost as if my mind is designed to work on the principle, "avoid negative consequences" rather than "seek the best outcome."

 

[sammy]

I am the same as Dana when it comes to getting pumped up with social interaction and external stimuli. If I don't get enough in a day, I become easily agitated. I cannot sit in the quietest areas of the library without going slowly insane and wondering what is going on elsewhere.

I usually sit on a floor which is generally quiet but talking to neighbors/talking on your phone is permitted. I avoid the floors where you can hear a pin drop. But I also avoid the floors where there is too much uncontrolled noise --but the visual stimulation of seeing so many people comforts me. I will be irritated if there is noise while I am going through a moment of intense concentration.

 

[bluebell]

The funny thing is I can't even imagine what that must feel like. Too much stimulation and I panic, lol.

Ha. Exactly. I find walking through the food hall at the mall overwhelming - noise, bright lights, crowds. I get really tense and I can't think.

However, I quite like working in an open-plan office. The noise and people are somewhat comforting (heh, unless there is LOUD conversation right next to my desk). Work is usually enough to satisfy my need for interacting with other people.

 

[disregard]

Ha. Exactly. I find walking through the food hall at the mall overwhelming - noise, bright lights, crowds. I get really tense and I can't think.

I hate situations like that too. I think the preferred source of stimulation varies from person to person.

 

[miss fortune]

I love interacting with people- I enjoy my job because I spend my shift talking to interesting people who I may not have had the opportunity to meet anyways. I even get bored with silence at home- I am almost always playing music, have the TV on (not watching it- I just like the noise!) or am talking to myself like a crazy person

I even listen to classical music obnoxiously loudly

shopping malls are hideous though- I don't like crowds *shudder*

 

[bluebell]

I even listen to classical music obnoxiously loudly

I listen to heavy metal obnoxiously quietly.

shopping malls are hideous though- I don't like crowds *shudder*

I go when it's quiet. Even then, the bright lights and stuff are distracting. And yep, crowds, ugh.

 

[wedekit]

I listen to heavy metal obnoxiously quietly.
I go when it's quiet. Even then, the bright lights and stuff are distracting. And yep, crowds, ugh.

Hahaha, yeah, I totally like to go places when I know NOBODY is there. I even prefer driving later at night when no one is on the streets or freeways. An iPod was my savior walking to class because I could just tune everything else out and concentrate on listening to music and walking. Unfortunately I lost my USB cord so I haven't been able to use it in the last 3 months (I ordered a new one today, finally). I was forced to be "sociable" under those circumstances. At least I have a new skill under my belt... smalltalk.

 

[bluebell]

An iPod was my savior walking to class because I could just tune everything else out and concentrate on listening to music and walking. Unfortunately I lost my USB cord so I haven't been able to use it in the last 3 months (I ordered a new one today, finally). I was forced to be "sociable" under those circumstances. At least I have a new skill under my belt... smalltalk.

lol, I've been meaning to get an iPod for a couple of months now. I borrowed someone's mp3 player once, and it was way easier to tune out the world listening to it. But, uh, I'm being a tad indecisive.

Yeah, small talk is useful to learn. I made myself learn how to do it a few years back. I can prattle on autopilot now, while I watch myself in bemusement (amusement?).

 

[scantilyclad]

me too. If i know i have to go to the mall, or grocery store, i will pick a time that i know that it will have the least amount of people. Crowds bother me more than anything in the world. I get really frustrated when i have to work my way through a crowd, or get stuck walking behind people who walk slowly. I always take my MP3 player with me, because it keeps people from initiating any sort of small talk, and i can stay within my own little world while i'm out, since all the outside noise is drowned out. =)

 

[LucrativeSid]

I enjoy slow moving movie plots if they are good, when I read I'm very focused and I like to stay away from all distractions, I like slow and peaceful music more than fast music, I enjoy going on walks alone, and I don't like parties very much.

Does this mean I'm an introvert? I'm just now starting to be very interested in Ne, but from what I might guess so far, it doesn't really require all that much external stimulation. I'm sitting here alone right now, late at night, and I'm in a good mood and feel very peaceful. Am I using Ne to write this post? I really don't know.

I'm always doing something different. Just the other night I declinded a party invitation to stay home and finish reading the Fountainhead. To me, that was the better choice. If I had gone, I probably would had as much fun as I could have, because it doesn't make sense to do something half-assed. Hanging out with a bunch of drunk people and then sleeping somewhere else because I'm too drunk to drive just doesn't appeal to me very much. I think my favorite kind of stimulation is the kind that I create myself. If I could convince everybody to perform experiments with me, then I'd probably be very excited, but if they are doing things that seem boring or like a waste of time to me, I'm more likely to leave. I'd rather do what I think is fun alone than compromise and do something stupid just to be with people.

 

[nemo]

^ Ne isn't attracted to the experience itself, but rather the possibilities and ideas drawn from it. Thus we're often averse to mundane, ordinary social activities that don't offer much new.

Why don't you like parties? I don't really like them either, but for me it's mostly because once you've been to one college party full of drunk 20-somethings, you've basically seen them all. Boring boring boring.

To the OP: I can agree with the idea.

When I was a kid I was super sensitive to some kinds of stimulation like fluorescent light and certain noises, but it never bothered me. Even now I consider myself easily stimulated, but the thing is... I don't really have an upper threshold. Or at least I've never hit it. And the more stimulation, the better, since I don't get overloaded unless I'm sick or hungry or cranky or something.

I read somewhere that this had to do with cortical arousal levels.

 

[bluebell]

When I was a kid I was super sensitive to some kinds of stimulation like fluorescent light and certain noises, but it never bothered me. Even know I consider myself easily stimulated, but the thing is... I don't really have an upper threshold. Or at least I've never hit it. And the more stimulation, the better, since I don't get overloaded unless I'm sick or hungry or cranky or something.

I read somewhere that this had to do with cortical arousal levels.

I like your description. I definitely have an upper threshold, and it's set pretty damn low - I frequently hit my overload limit. Noise, sights, volume, stimulous, talking, listening, crowds, loud voices etc etc.

And yes, I think I've read that somewhere too.

 

[arcticangel02]

Although I do not wish to address this piece of information as I do the others, research in the biological approach has found that extraverts are happier. This is, in short, due to their ability to appreciate and pursue social experience (commonly found to be a key factor in overall happiness) and their ability to appreciate rewards. As far as rewards go, research has found that extraverts are more pleased with their own accomplishments than introverts, and do not react as badly to failure as introverts. (Of course the problem I see with this is that social experience and rewards do not even begin to describe what constitutes happiness. These two things are items that are measurable by experimentation while I'm sure at least some of the things introverts find happiness in are not as easily measurable. I personally don't see happy as something experienced but rather something obtained.)

I know you don't want to really go into this one, but what makes you believe 'happiness' is something someone must achieve, or obtain?

Because personally, I consider myself a 'happy person'. I wake up on an ordinary day, and my default mood is, at least, 'pleasant', and most of the time the rest of my day I feel 'happy' (although exactly what 'happy' is depends on who's talking about it - here I mean something along the lines of a 'pleasant contentness'). I haven't done anything to achieve this, I just am.

I'd be curious to know what your definition of happiness is, what your normal state of being is, and how one goes about achieving 'happiness'?

 

[6sticks]

I disagree entirely. I seek stimulation rather than avoid it and would much prefer it to boredom. I've also never had a problem with crowds. Being introverted is not necessarily the same as being shy or nervous.

 

[alcea rosea]

Being introverted is not necessarily the same as being shy or nervous.

I agree definitely. I thougt previously that all I people are shy. That's not the case. Some of the are more reserved than shy. Reserveness doesn not mean shyness. It looks like the reserved people look before they talk or act. They evaluate the situation before reacting. They do not go along before a thought.

 

[Eldanen]

I tend to vacillate between desiring the stimulation of other people, and wanting to shy (double meaning) away from it. When I go out, I tend to look for a sort of "click" inside myself that says, "okay, you might have a chance at a relationship with this person, so ... approach." I believe that I'm probably a biological extrovert. (Possible to have Ne as main function and be a biological introvert?)

The interesting thing I've experienced is that after a time when I'm around people more often, I sorta get used to it, get into the flow of it, and become as loud (...or louder) than everyone else, while when alone for extended periods of time, I get used to that and operate more in that capacity. Maybe it's my ENPness, haha.

To the point (urgh), has anyone here heard of the idea of (low) latent inhibition? It deals with the ability of a person to screen out information from the external environment. I read an article recently -- Why Mad Scientists Are Mad: What’s Behind the Creative Mind? -- that talked about this. Apparently, the low latent inhibition coupled with the ability to process the extra information can result in a higher level of creativity, while the lack of ability might result in psychosis. That's not to say, though, that those with less inhibition won't experience "psychosis." (When it comes to schizophrenia, I tend to agree with psychiatrists like Thomas Szasz .)

How plastic is the idea of biological I/E? If I focus and consciously hold myself open to information for a long period of time, will I get used to the change? And vice versa.

 

[Seanan]

Although I do not wish to address this piece of information as I do the others, research in the biological approach has found that extraverts are happier. This is, in short, due to their ability to appreciate and pursue social experience (commonly found to be a key factor in overall happiness) and their ability to appreciate rewards. As far as rewards go, research has found that extraverts are more pleased with their own accomplishments than introverts, and do not react as badly to failure as introverts. (Of course the problem I see with this is that social experience and rewards do not even begin to describe what constitutes happiness. These two things are items that are measurable by experimentation while I'm sure at least some of the things introverts find happiness in are not as easily measurable. I personally don't see happy as something experienced but rather something obtained.)

So, in summary: Introverts are much more sensitive to stimulation than extraverts.

So, I wish just wondering if whoever reads this feels like it is in some way descriptive of their MBTI I/E preference? I personally feel like the biological model of an introvert fits me well.

Thanks.

I know you said you don't wish to address this as much as the rest but, to me, it is critically important. These ascertions are so invalid that I have to question all the rest that went before it in the testing. It smacks of major subjectivity, thus, indicating the rest may not be that objective. Happiness or lack of it is based on social activity? As a "biological introvert," I strongly disagree. Happiness is a by-product of actualizing choices. As for "rewards," stated as pertaining to I/E... to me its a matter of quantity vs quality. I find the extrovert less intense. Their experience more diffuse. Example: Strong background activity or loud background noise while conversing with multiple people disallows biological/mental intense focus on any of them.... preferred by the extrovert as "energizing." For an introvert, these are described as "distracting" implying a desire for intense focus. Following that line of thought, what an introvert experiences has more intensity and that includes happiness. Abundance is offset by a deeper experience of less. Therefore, I would say, they are equal but arrived at differently.