What definition of I and E do you find most useful?

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Some tests and theories associate E with more sociability and I with less of it, whereas with other systems, E and I are made of completely different traits.

One neurologically inspired theory by Hans Eysenck relates E and I with person's preferred level of psychological arousal, associating higher preferred levels with E and lower with I. Person is said to feel greatest comfort level at their preferred level, and rapidly decreasing comfort at any higher level. Sociability is not given any special meaning in this E/I construct.

How much does extraversion equate as sociability to you?

 

[usernameredacted]

Well, what exactly is meant by "psychological arousal"? If it's anything like "stimulation", I can see where the two would go hand in hand.

When I was a kid, I would get really annoyed, frustrated, and overwhelmed when there were to many people around for too long (I consider this over-stimulation.) so much so that I would tell my mom's guests, "This is my house, and it's time for you to leave."

Now, I still can't handle too much social stimulation. There are certain peopole I am very comfortable with that I could hang out with all the time and not feel over-stimulated; but, aside from these, too much social activity still stresses me out, to the point of depressing me. It's nothing against these certain people who don't have the exception. I think part of it relates to how well I know the person and is also affected by how extraverted/energetic that person tends to be. (The more low-key the better.)

 

[Athenian200]

I would say that it influences sociability, but not completely. Ease of psychological arousal would definitely play a role as well. I believe that the best test of Introversion/Extraversion would be whether you feel more relaxed and comfortable alone/with less than four good friends, or around lots of other people you may or may not know. This may not work for everyone, but it seems to be the best deciding factor I've come up with.

I would also consider the following criteria:

• Reactivity to stimuli. E's have a higher threshold/need for stimulation, I's are more aware of and affected by typical things.
  
  
• Focus. E's prefer to focus on what their actions achieve/effect outwardly, towards others/reality, and I's prefer to focus on what their actions achieve/effect inwardly, towards their inner idea.
  
  
• Mental Energy. E's tend to feel mentally stimulated by being in the company of other people, and I's feel mentally stimulated by contemplating/dealing with something alone or with only a few other people.
  
  
• Evenness of relationships. Extraverts tend to have more friends, but aren't usually much closer to a smaller number of them than to others. Introverts tend to have fewer friends, but have markedly defined, smaller inner circles of very close friends. (Extraverts also have inner circles, they just aren't as sharply defined.)

 

[Natrushka]

Some tests and theories associate E with more sociability and I with less of it, whereas with other systems, E and I are made of completely different traits.

One neurologically inspired theory by Hans Eysenck relates E and I with person's preferred level of psychological arousal, associating higher preferred levels with E and lower with I. Person is said to feel greatest comfort level at their preferred level, and rapidly decreasing comfort at any higher level. Sociability is not given any special meaning in this E/I construct.

How much does extraversion equate as sociability to you?

I found this post by pt to be very helpful, Santtu

 

[The Ü™]

I've come to realize that Extraversion vs. Introversion are also tied to actual functions, with S and F being more extroverted and N and T being more introverted. When you think of modern definitions of introversion, S and F both tend to be outwardly directed, while N and T are internal.

N and T functions also tend to be negative-to-neutral in their thinking. The N by its nature is unhappy with the way things currently are and wishes to change things or escape the outer world into their own world. The T has the most realistic bent on life, which could manifest as negative thinking.

(And Jung did view Introverted Intuition as true introversion.)

S and F functions tend to be more joyful. The S is happy with the way things are and has the least trouble with making the best of everything. In the same way, the F is humanistic and diplomatic, which makes them more pleasant.

I'd say that Extraverts are more forceful while Introverts are more receptive.

 

[ptgatsby]

For me, I define;

E = primed for positive emotions
I = decidedly unprimed for positive emotions.

More along the lines of Hans. I measure the side effects, like social/outgoing/etc seperately (ie: how do I know someone is likely primed is by the behaviour rather than the biology).

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I = gets energy from within.
E = gets energy from the environment.

While the most common source of energy for an extravert is people I don't think it has to be the only source. For example roller coasters or loud music or other exciting things can be stimulating for an extravert.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I = gets energy from within.
E = gets energy from the environment.

While the most common source of energy for an extravert is people I don't think it has to be the only source. For example roller coasters or loud music or other exciting things can be stimulating for an extravert.

Thanks, this was a nice idea! I often forget this theoretically (even tho I love listening to loud music) as I think them as S activity.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I would say that it influences sociability, but not completely. Ease of psychological arousal would definitely play a role as well. I believe that the best test of Introversion/Extraversion would be whether you feel more relaxed and comfortable alone/with less than four good friends, or around lots of other people you may or may not know. This may not work for everyone, but it seems to be the best deciding factor I've come up with.

I would also consider the following criteria:

• Reactivity to stimuli. E's have a higher threshold/need for stimulation, I's are more aware of and affected by typical things.
  
  
• Focus. E's prefer to focus on what their actions achieve/effect outwardly, towards others/reality, and I's prefer to focus on what their actions achieve/effect inwardly, towards their inner idea.
  
  
• Mental Energy. E's tend to feel mentally stimulated by being in the company of other people, and I's feel mentally stimulated by contemplating/dealing with something alone or with only a few other people.
  
  
• Evenness of relationships. Extraverts tend to have more friends, but aren't usually much closer to a smaller number of them than to others. Introverts tend to have fewer friends, but have markedly defined, smaller inner circles of very close friends. (Extraverts also have inner circles, they just aren't as sharply defined.)

That's a nice analysis, you considered both personal and impersonal factors and both person's expressions and where they take their input for their thought processes.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Well, what exactly is meant by "psychological arousal"? If it's anything like "stimulation", I can see where the two would go hand in hand.

Yep that's about what he probably ment with it.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I found this post by pt to be very helpful, Santtu

It was, the thread is insightful too! thanks!

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

When I was a kid, I would get really annoyed, frustrated, and overwhelmed when there were to many people around for too long (I consider this over-stimulation.) so much so that I would tell my mom's guests, "This is my house, and it's time for you to leave."

Probably not your favourite kind of stimulation for so long time. That is quite a graceful way to handle the issue.. running out of mental reserves could incite worse behaviour from a person :>

 

[INTJMom]

An E gets energized at a party.
An I gets drained at a party.

 

[substitute]

I think of extraversion as being an orientation towards the world of external matters, a relationship with the object that's concrete and immediate, whilst introverts habitually abstractify the object and are oriented towards the inner world.

It kind of annoys me when people equate extraversion with 'liking people' and 'being good with people'. Yes, that can be a side effect of being an extravert because if you're oriented towards action in the external world then you tend to form relationships with people and have a lot of practice at it. But the whole 'needing people' thing is more an F trait than an E trait, I think. I can spend hours or days alone quite happily, whilst an INFJ I know needs people in a way I never could.

 

[xNFJiminy]

Extraversion = having a relatively low level of natural brain activity

Introversion = having a relatively high level of natural brain activity

I believe neuroscience and other kinds of experiments currently support this model. Introverts respond more intensely not only psychologically, but physiologically to external stimuli. They salivate more to a drop of lemon juice on the tongue. They have lower pain thresholds. They need significantly higher amounts of sedative to become unconscious because there's more going on to be dulled down. The total amount of brain activity is greater, but the specific areas of the brain activated also differ somewhat, with resting extraverts having more activity in the parts associated with sensory awareness and introverts having more in the parts associated with problem solving.

Well, this is useful for understanding how the differences are best defined and explained, but perhaps less so for actual typing, unless you happen to own a brain scanner.

 

[Tayshaun]

E= dominant perception or judgment attitude (depending on P/J) is based on environmental standards and objective reality.

I= dominant perception or judgment attitude (depending on P/J) is driven by a usually idiosyncratic, personal "inner-force" following a subjective road map.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Extraversion = having a relatively low level of natural brain activity

Introversion = having a relatively high level of natural brain activity

I believe neuroscience and other kinds of experiments currently support this model. Introverts respond more intensely not only psychologically, but physiologically to external stimuli. They salivate more to a drop of lemon juice on the tongue. They have lower pain thresholds. They need significantly higher amounts of sedative to become unconscious because there's more going on to be dulled down. The total amount of brain activity is greater, but the specific areas of the brain activated also differ somewhat, with resting extraverts having more activity in the parts associated with sensory awareness and introverts having more in the parts associated with problem solving.

This is hugely interesting. Thanks for sharing! I'll need to study this more.

 

[Matt22]

Extraversion = having a relatively low level of natural brain activity

Introversion = having a relatively high level of natural brain activity

I strongly suspect that there is something wrong with that theory because "natural brain activity" is too vague and general a description. What would make more sense to me would be if I heard that "Extroverts have less brain activity in ____ part of the brain."

Also, I think that there is a lot of things that get mis-interpreted as being E/I indicators. For example, I have all of these things that I's normally associate themselves with:

* I know that I can get drained, or on the other hand, overstimulated in social interactions.
* Being alone can "recharge my batteries"
* I'm not particularly loud or assertive
* I don't have a particularly high pain or stimulus thresholds. I'm not an adrenaline junky.
* I do my best thinking by myself.
* I do sometimes appreciate stuff more by myself.

But I know that I'm E because I still draw my energy from being around others. When I go home at the end of the day and find myself alone, I just see this time as something to put up with or make the best out of. I can appreciate being alone and recognize that it's healthy, but I don't see it as a need.

 

[ptgatsby]

I strongly suspect that there is something wrong with that theory because "natural brain activity" is too vague and general a description.

This might help - http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...541-healthy-introversion-extroversion-4.html#

These also might help - links from proteanmix!

http://www.apa.org/journals/features/bne115133.pdf (PDF Warning)
http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp793452.pdf (PDF Warning)

 

[Vicki]

[/QUOTE]* I know that I can get drained, or on the other hand, overstimulated in social interactions.
* Being alone can "recharge my batteries"
* I'm not particularly loud or assertive
* I don't have a particularly high pain or stimulus thresholds. I'm not an adrenaline junky.
* I do my best thinking by myself.
* I do sometimes appreciate stuff more by myself.

But I know that I'm E because I still draw my energy from being around others. When I go home at the end of the day and find myself alone, I just see this time as something to put up with or make the best out of. I can appreciate being alone and recognize that it's healthy, but I don't see it as a need./QUOTE]

that's the way it is for me too.
I also get my energy from other people and I love social events. (unlike my introverted family)

but sometimes I really want to be alone,
I'll ask people to leave me alone for a while
and I'll be off thinking about things like la-dee-da
then I'm happy again.