Relationship of extraversion and social goals

relationship of extraversion and social goals

Recent research evidence suggests that while extraversion is predictive of many positive social outcomes, it may not be extraversion itself that. The trait of extraversion–introversion is a central dimension of human personality theories. . Extraverts seek excitement and social activity in an effort to heighten their A study on regional brain volume found a positive correlation between .. to engage in active behavior and goal pursuit, which brings about an active. and, second, life goals as mediators in the previously established relation between personality traits . Extraverted individuals are characterized as social and.

These behavioral differences are presumed to be the result of underlying differences in brain physiology. Eysenck designated extraversion as one of three major traits in his P-E-N model of personality, which also includes psychoticism and neuroticism. Eysenck originally suggested that extraversion was a combination of two major tendencies, impulsiveness and sociability. He later added several other more specific traits, namely liveliness, activity level, and excitability.

These traits are further linked in his personality hierarchy to even more specific habitual responses, such as partying on the weekend.

Eysenck compared this trait to the four temperaments of ancient medicine, with choleric and sanguine temperaments equating to extraversion, and melancholic and phlegmatic temperaments equating to introversion. In terms of the environmental component, the shared family environment appears to be far less important than individual environmental factors that are not shared between siblings. He hypothesized that introverts are characterized by higher levels of activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused than extraverts.

That extraverts require more external stimulation than introverts has been interpreted as evidence for this hypothesis. Other evidence of the "stimulation" hypothesis is that introverts salivate more than extraverts in response to a drop of lemon juice.

This is due to increased activity in their reticular activating systemwhich responds to stimuli like food or social contact. One consequence of this is that extraverts can more easily learn the contingencies for positive reinforcement, since the reward itself is experienced as greater. One study found that introverts have more blood flow in the frontal lobes of their brain and the anterior or frontal thalamuswhich are areas dealing with internal processing, such as planning and problem solving.

Extraverts have more blood flow in the anterior cingulate gyrustemporal lobesand posterior thalamus, which are involved in sensory and emotional experience. A study on regional brain volume found a positive correlation between introversion and grey matter volume in the right prefrontal cortex and right temporoparietal junction, as well as a positive correlation between introversion and total white matter volume.

According to one study, extraverts tend to wear more decorative clothing, whereas introverts prefer practical, comfortable clothes. In general, extraverts decorate their offices more, keep their doors open, keep extra chairs nearby, and are more likely to put dishes of candy on their desks. These are attempts to invite co-workers and encourage interaction. Introverts, in contrast, decorate less and tend to arrange their workspace to discourage social interaction.

Fleeson and Gallagher found that extraverts regularly behave in an introverted way, and introverts regularly behave in an extraverted way. Indeed, there was more within-person variability than between-person variability in extraverted behaviours. From this perspective, extraverts and introverts are not "fundamentally different".

relationship of extraversion and social goals

Rather, an "extravert" is just someone who acts more extraverted more often, suggesting that extraversion is more about what one "does" than what one "has". Additionally, a study by Lippa found evidence for the extent to which individuals present themselves in a different way. This is called expressive behaviour, and it is dependent upon the individuals' motivation and ability to control that behaviour.

Lippa examined 68 students who were asked to role-play by pretending to teach a math class. This study found that actual introverts were perceived and judged as having more extraverted-looking expressive behaviours because they were higher in terms of their self-monitoring. Thus, individuals are able to regulate and modify behaviour based on their environmental situations.

Extraversion and introversion - Wikipedia

Humans are complex and unique, and because introversion-extraversion varies along a continuum, individuals may have a mixture of both orientations. A person who acts introverted in one situation may act extraverted in another, and people can learn to act in "counterdispositional" ways in certain situations.

For example, Brian Little's free trait theory [37] [38] suggests that people can take on "Free Traits", behaving in ways that may not be their "first nature", but can strategically advance projects that are important to them. Together, this presents an optimistic view of what extraversion is.

Rather than being fixed and stable, individuals vary in their extraverted behaviours across different moments, and can choose to act extraverted to advance important personal projects or even increase their happiness, as mentioned above. Implications[ edit ] Acknowledging that introversion and extraversion are normal variants of behavior can help in self-acceptance and understanding of others.

For example, an extravert can accept their introverted partner's need for space, while an introvert can acknowledge their extraverted partner's need for social interaction. Researchers have found a correlation between extraversion and self-reported happiness. That is, more extraverted people tend to report higher levels of happiness than introverts.

relationship of extraversion and social goals

Extraverts simply report experiencing more positive emotions, whereas introverts tend to be closer to neutral. This may be because extraversion is socially preferable in contemporary Western culture and thus introverts feel less desirable. In addition to the research on happiness, other studies have found that extraverts tend to report higher levels of self-esteem than introverts.

David Meyers has claimed that happiness is a matter of possessing three traits: Meyers bases his conclusions on studies that report extraverts to be happier; these findings have been questioned in light of the fact that the "happiness" prompts given to the studies' subjects, such as "I like to be with others" and "I'm fun to be with," only measure happiness among extraverts. For example, extraverted youths are more likely to engage in antisocial or delinquent behavior.

Although extraversion is associated with many positive outcomes like higher levels of happiness, those extraverted people are also likely to be exposed to interpersonally transmitted infectious disease as they tend to contact more people.

When individuals are more vulnerable to infection, the cost of being social will be relatively greater. Therefore, people are less extraversive when they feel vulnerable and vice versa. Clients may respond better to different types of treatment depending on where they fall on the introversion-extraversion spectrum. Teachers can also consider temperament when dealing with their pupils, for example acknowledging that introverted children need more encouragement to speak in class while extraverted children may grow restless during long periods of quiet study.

Furthermore, people who emigrate from islands to the mainland tend to be more extraverted than people that stay on islands, and those that immigrate to islands.

Utah and the southeastern states of Florida and Georgia also score high on this personality trait. People who live in the northwestern states of IdahoMontanaand Wyoming are also relatively introverted.

Using the same positive affect and extraversion scales, Hills and Argyle [67] found that positive affect was again significantly correlated with extraversion. Also, the study by Emmons and Diener [68] showed that extraversion correlates positively and significantly with positive affect but not with negative affect. Similar results were found in a large longitudinal study by DienerSandvik, Pavot, and Fujita[69] which assessed 14, participants from areas of continental United States.

However, the latter study did not control for neuroticism, an important covariate when investigating relationships between extraversion and positive affect or wellbeing. Specifically, the personality trait of extraversion is seen as a facilitator of more social interactions, [58] [74] [76] since the low cortical arousal among extraverts results in them seeking more social situations in order to increase their arousal.

Therefore, it is believed that since extraverts are characterized as more sociable than introverts, they also possess higher levels of positive affect brought on by social interactions. Also, in the study of Argyle and Lu [66] extraverts were found to be less likely to avoid participation in noisy social activities, and to be more likely to participate in social activities such as: Similar results were reported by DienerLarsenand Emmons [81] who found that extraverts seek social situations more often than introverts, especially when engaging in recreational activities.

However, a variety of findings contradict the claims of the social activity hypothesis. Firstly, it was found that extraverts were happier than introverts even when alone.

relationship of extraversion and social goals

This hierarchy can describe both general and specific traits of personality in an organized structure. The fundamental weakness of the Big Five is that it does not explain personality function—a weakness that is common to the trait approach. Traits are descriptive characteristics of people, but they do not have a clear purpose or process. Some theorists have proposed that traits are inherited physiological entities, which cause behaviors, goals, and other adaptations e.

However, in its current form, the Big Five cannot explain why people differ on traits or how people use their traits. This lack of function is partly a result of the origin of the Big 5 in factor analysis. Goals are by definition process-based units, whereas traits are by definition static descriptions.

Whole Trait Theory Whole Trait Theory Fleeson, in press proposes that traits are not limited to only a descriptive part or only an explanatory part, but properly conceived, join the descriptive and explanatory parts into whole traits.

Extraversion and introversion

Density Distributions of Personality States Whole Trait Theory characterizes the descriptive side of traits as density distributions of states. Personality states are measured the same way as personality traits, by using the same content e. First, the distributions are wide, because the typical individual varies along an entire state dimension quite a bit, as much as the typical individual varies in mood and more than individuals differ from each other in their states.

In other words, people have the capacity to behave either extraverted or introverted in a given moment, even if they generally are introverts or extraverts. In fact, Fleeson and Gallagher showed that distributions of extraversion states for even highly extraverted and highly introverted individuals overlap quite a bit in the degree of extravertedness of their behavior.

Explaining this variability is an important job of trait theory, as well as an opportunity to discover the mechanisms underlying traits. The Explanatory Side of Traits The second part of whole traits is the explanatory part, and it causes the descriptive part, that is, it consists of the causal forces that produce distributions of states. When goals are the causal force, states can be conceived of as instruments, means, or tools employed to achieve the goal; states are relegated to a support role.

Based on this theory, we hypothesized that variation in personality states manifestations of traits can be explained by goals. The pursuit of a goal increases or decreases the personality state that facilitates accomplishing the goal. For example, a person is trying to have fun: Subcomponent-State Function Hypothesis Testing this proposal that Big 5 states are tools for accomplishing goals requires identifying the goals that the states facilitate.

That is, if the trait is a tool, what is it a tool for? There is no yet identified list of goals that Big 5 traits facilitate, so we had to identify such a list. We started with empirical literature reporting associations between goals and traits. There are a variety of procedures for identifying goals: Based on Whole Trait Theory, we propose a different procedure and a different level of analysis.

Instead of considering what large-scale goals people pursue in their lives, we used a method we call the subcomponent-state function identification procedure to generate goals. First, we focused on the specific subcomponent level rather than the larger trait level, because subcomponents may more easily be seen as means to accomplish goals.

Instead of asking why people act extraverted, for example, we asked why people act sociably or assertively.