Introverts and Extroverts:
Close Encounters with Communicators of a Different
Kind
by
Michael Forney
The paper is paper is written with the primary intent of enhancing my
communication knowledge. The comments
and ideas expressed in this informational paper should not be perceived as
authoritative. I have extremely limited knowledge in the area of communication
theory. As an extreme introvert, I’m
simply trying gain greater understanding of the complexities associated with
human interactions.
Should you happen to cross paths with an alien from
another planet, what would you say?
Would you be completely paralyzed with fear? Would words prove to be extremely elusive? It is quite conceivable that all of the
communications skills that you acquired over the course of a lifetime would be
rendered inept during your close encounter with a third kind.
While the possibility of bumping into a resident from
another galaxy is rather remote, it is quite common to cross paths with humans
that exhibit communication styles and tendencies that are different, sometimes
radically so, from our own. A foreign excursion, for instance, to a country
with a different native tongue and set of customs can generate anxieties much
akin to those felt when placed in close proximity to a saucer-flying, celestial
neighbor. These communication anxieties
can be greatly mitigated by simply studying the language and practices of that
foreign culture. The acquisition of knowledge does have a rather soothing
influence on many of the anxieties that life tends to generate.
A far more perplexing form of communication anxiety
emerges when the other kind can speak
your verbal language and is equally disposed to prevailing cultural values and
expectations. Such persons, while human,
can appear as awkward and aloof as beings from the most remote reaches of the
universe. Some persons may be quite reserved in their demeanor. Some may chatter excessively over a broad
range of disconnected topics. Another
person may have extreme difficulty maintaining eye contact. A young child may stare in a relentless
manner. From a view devoid of dual
perspective, these differences can be incorrectly perceived as being
threatening and potentially dangerous. Such
common views, unfortunately, are sanctioned by the non-relinquishing forces of
human selfishness. Differing
communication behaviors and styles should be embraced as colorful additions to
the kaleidoscope of the human experience. As humans, we are quite different but
yet the same.
The primary purpose of this paper is to embark on a
cursory exploration of the communication interactions among inhabitants of
different communication worlds. Those
inhabitants are introverts and extroverts. Why are their communication exchanges sometimes
so awkward? Can communication strategies
be employed that will facilitate the flow of ideas and information among these
differing communicators? To address these daunting questions, I had to appeal
to a very diverse research community. This paper represents a humble attempt to
illuminate some possible answers. This
paper is organized into three main sections.
The first section is devoted to developing background for better
understanding both the development of personality and introvert-extrovert
characteristics. The second section of
this paper provides a brief orientation concerning the Transactional Model of
Communication. This model provides
context for the exploration efforts of this inquiry. The transactional model can most effectively
simulate the dynamic influences that govern human communication
interactions. The final section of this
paper will consist of a series of communication scenarios among communicators
with varying communication styles and tendencies. In the context of the transactional model,
these hypothetical scenarios are intended to illuminate those areas, if
applicable, where the communication process breaks down between
communicators. If possible,
communication strategies will be suggested to repair the communication process.
Section I: Some
Helpful Background
The Development of
Human Personality
What
is personality? According to
psychologist Gordon Allport (1961), “personality is a dynamic organization,
inside the person, of psychological systems that create the person’s
characteristic patterns of behavior, thoughts and feelings.” Our unique
personalities are the result of both very powerful innate influences such as
genetics and external stimuli such as parental nurturing behaviors and peer
influences. A person’s personality
greatly influences her perception of the world.
In fact, a unique circularity results: our personality influences our
worldview and our worldview influences our ongoing personality development.
Because of its nebulous and evolving nature, the human
personality does not manifest itself in a rigidly, consistent manner. Humans can exhibit varying personality traits
under similar conditions and surroundings. Such inconsistencies are not a sign
of some underlying defect in the fundamental structure of the human
persona. As Charles Carver and Michael
Scheier point out in their interesting book Perspectives
on Personality, this behavior is known as intrapersonal functioning. According to these authors, “personality
isn’t like a rubber stamp that you pound onto each situation you enter. Instead, there are mechanisms or processes
that go on inside you, leading you to act in ways you do. Such processes can create a sense of
continuity within the person, even if the person acts in different ways in
different circumstances. That is, you
can feel the same processes engaged, even if the results differ in different
situations” (2000, page 6).
The mystical nature of human personality intensifies when
examined on an interpersonal basis. No
two personalities are exactly the same. Human personality consists of a
spectrum of traits and possibilities. As depicted in Figure 1 below, human
personality ranges between the extremes of pure introversion and pure
extroversion. As will be discussed shortly, all persons possess both
introverted and extroverted characteristics.
The term ambivert, possessing
both introverted and extroverted behaviors, most appropriately represents the
manifestation of human personality.
The types of personality traits exhibited by humans were
significantly illuminated by the pioneering work of Carl Jung, the famed Swiss psychiatrist
and psychologist. Jung (1923) based on patient studies observed that humans
engaged in patterns of behavior that were both inward and outward directed.
Persons whose behaviors were inward-influenced were considered to be introverts, the inhabitants of the inner
world of thought and feelings.
Alternatively, persons whose behaviors were more outwardly-influenced
were considered to be extroverts, the
inhabitants of the outer world of things and people.
In
conjunction with these important observations, Jung was equally interested in
how persons dealt with the reality of both the inner and outer worlds. He
identified four ways in which this occurred.
The first was sensing, getting
information by means of the senses. The
second was thinking, evaluating
information or ideas rationally, logically.
The third was intuiting, a
kind of perception that works outside of the usual conscious processes. This
way is also referred to as judging. The fourth was feeling, similar to thinking
but linked to an emotional response.
Jung suggested that all persons possessed these personality traits;
however, some traits tend to be more dominant than others.
Based
on Jung’s contributions to personality theory, it is possible to place
personality types at precise locations along the personality continuum. Specifically,
there are sixteen personality combinations possible after determining if a
person is more predisposed to introverted or extroverted tendencies. These personality types are identified by a
four letter sequence such as INFJ (introverted intuiting with feeling). This
personality type, for instance, consists of persons that are serious students
and workers who really want to contribute.
They are private and easily hurt.
They make good spouses, but tend to be physically reserved. People often
think they are psychic (Myers & Myers, 1980).
The
personality types identified by Jung serve as the primary standards on which
many personality tests are conducted. On such test is the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator, a very popular and well studied personality test.
Introverts and
Extroverts: A Closer Look
American
culture is dominated by extroverted activities.
Our society encourages free expression of ideas and assertive behavior.
We are encouraged to be outgoing. Being
labeled a “people-person” is a noteworthy achievement. Failure to mimic these
social expectations generally results in the introvert being both misunderstood
and ridiculed. Such is the plight of the introvert, a minority in the regular
population {accounting for roughly 25%} but a majority in the gifted population
(Gallagher, 1990; Hoehn & Birely, 1988).
Despite
being both admonished to follow difficult social practices and being
overwhelmingly outnumbered, the introverts appear to be a rather determined and
adaptable group. Their achievements in many spheres of society are
evident. As researcher Arnold Henjum
states “…studies provide evidence that there is a positive relationship between
introversion and achievement. It seems
likely that the introvert’s vigilance or “stick to the task” accounts for a
great deal of this success. Also, the
introvert’s self-sufficient, hard-working attitude and introspective,
analytical style equips her/him very well for the demands of rigorous, abstract
activities” (2001, page 41). These comments corroborate similar observations
put forth by famed personality theorist, Hans Eysenck. He concluded that
introverts appear to possess a greater capacity for concentrated work which may
translate into advantages in educational achievements (Eysenck, 1971).
Given
the wide gulf that exists among personality types, what culprits account for
these differences? The precise origins
of both introversion and extroversion are not completely known. Research
efforts have, however, significantly narrowed the possible explanations. Biology and early social conditioning have
provided significant clues.
A
USA Today Magazine article reports that researchers at the
In
addition to the biological connections to personality type, early social
conditioning patterns also play a critical role in personality
development. For children raised in
supportive and nurturing environments, the prospects of venturing into the outer
world are less intimidating. Love and
encouragement are vitally important ingredients in the formation of healthy and
balanced personality types. Unfortunately, the distribution of these
ingredients is not uniformly spread throughout the lives of young children. As Edgard Friedenberg points out in his
poignant book, The Vanishing Adolescent,
“In their encounters with society, youngsters are frequently badly hurt. They are sickened and terrified; they feel
their pride break, cringe from the exposure of their privacy and are convulsed
with humiliation as they realize that they cannot help cringing because their
responses are pretty much beyond their control” (1965, page 35). In response to such inhumane treatment, many
youngsters have no choice but to seek refuge and false security in the most
remote corners of the inner world. Their
eventual personality type is, in large part, not of their own doing or
preference.
For
purposes of better understanding their respective communication styles, it is
important to examine some of the basic characteristics that tend to distinguish
introverts from extroverts. As reflected in Table 1 below, the mannerisms and
behaviors of these personality types can be extremely polarized.
Table 1: Introvert-Extrovert Characteristics
|
Introverts |
Introverts |
Extroverts |
Extroverts |
|
Can be happy alone |
Reserved, quiet and
deliberate |
Are social-need people |
Establish multiple fluid
relationships |
|
Dislike attending parties |
Form a few deep attachments |
Demonstrate high energy and
noise |
Engage in lots of activities |
|
Need time alone to recharge |
Concentrate well and deeply |
Communicate with excitement |
Have many best friends and
talk to them often |
|
Prefer non-group work |
Communicate best one-on-one |
Draw energy from
people-loves parties |
Prefer face-to-face
communications |
|
Cautious in meeting people |
Think carefully before
speaking |
Lonely and restless when not
with people |
Respond quickly |
Source: Characteristics
extracted from article by Burress and Kaenzig (1999)
A cursory examination of the indicated characteristics
would strongly suggest that introverts and extroverts truly reside in different
worlds. However, exercising caution is
necessary. Personality types lend themselves to the formation of hybrids. It is
reasonable to assume that neither all introverts nor all extroverts are confined
to these predetermined sets of behavioral categories. Some extroverts will
relish opportunities at solitude and tranquility; some introverts can exhibit
high energy and have a multitude of friends.
As evidence of the diversity possible within a
given personality type, Henjum identifies two categories of introverts…. “Type
A introverts would include those self-sufficient, confident, hard-working,
successful people who have firm goals, are self-actualizing and are able to
interact very well with people when they must or when they choose to do
so. These people qualify as introverts
because their general style could be described as “reserved” rather than shy….In
other words, this type of person can function very adequately in social
situations although on the whole he prefers activities that involve inner
experience, introspection and subjectivity….Type B introverts would include
those people who are shy, timid, and lacking in communication skills, very
withdrawn and who have a low self concept.
In other words, these are people who have been “wounded” and are at a
real disadvantage in our society. They
may have a strong fear of people and generally experience extreme dread when
they must do something in front of others….Their self-consciousness and sensitivity
contribute to their usual achievement or performance being below their apparent
overall ability—this is particularly true when they are placed in a new
situation (page 40).
From
the proceeding passage, it is evident that some introverts have communication
skills that are on par with the more socially-inclined extroverts. The Type A introverts tend to be good actors
in social settings. Accordingly, they
can readily discuss information and ideas in an ever-expanding number of
circumstances. On the other hand, the
Type B introverts tend to suffer most terribly because of their communication
deficiencies. They are relegated to the
most extreme fringes of society and forced to observe in silence and pseudo
contentment.
Section II: The
Transactional Model of Communication
Now
that a relatively firm psychological basis for introverted and extroverted
personality has been established, the next logical step is to examine how such
personalities intermingle in a communications context.
Because
of its ability to capture the dynamic processes inherent in interpersonal
communications, the transactional model of communication (see Figure 2 below)
will serve as the framework for examining introverted-extroverted oral
communication exchanges. Originally developed by Dean Barnlund (1968), the
transactional model views both communicators simultaneously as both receivers
and senders of communication feedback. Because of its ability
Source: Based on an animated
model developed by Daniel Yates,
to replicate the multiple
roles played by communicators, the transactional model is considered superior
to preceding communication models such as the linear and interactive
models. Woods echoes this sentiment by
stating that “the transactional model includes the strengths of earlier models
and overcomes their weaknesses. The
transactional model recognizes that noise is present throughout interpersonal
communication. In addition, this model
includes the feature of time to remind us that how people communicate varies
over time” (2004, page 19).
In Figure 2, the transactional model is depicted as a
collection of integrated elements. The
key elements of the transactional model are: the communicators, the
communication context, the communication channel, and noise.
The communicators within the transactional model
simultaneously, both consciously and unconsciously emit signals that stimulate
the communication processes of others.
Within the mind of each communicator, reaction, at some level, is always
occurring in response to some external stimuli.
The reaction could be in the form of perception,
a detection of some external communication element. The reaction could be from the location where
meaning is assigned; where encoding-
the transformation of externally received information into a form that seems
most reasonable to the communicator- occurs.
The communicator transmits a
response to the information received. A
communicator’s background or field of experience which is strongly
influenced by the communicator’s beliefs, attitude, expectations, memory, etc. gives
specific organization to the transmitted response. Each reactionary element plays a critical
role in linking the inner world to the outer world. I am most interested in learning how the
sequence of these communication events is influenced when the communicator is
either extroverted or introverted.
The interactions among communicators must take place in
some communication context. The context
can be thought of as the paradigm in which communicators interact. That paradigm could be a social setting such
as an office party or sporting event.
Time also greatly influences the contextual paradigm. For instance, communication exchanges that
occur during early morning hours may differ in intensity levels from similar
exchanges that occur at alternative points in time.
Within the relevant communication context, the
communication channel represents the “two-way information freeway” among
communicators. Messages are transported-both
verbal and nonverbal-simultaneously among participants. Feedback motivates the
development of more feedback. The
channel could have its origins in either the physical senses (such as the
messages conveyed through eye contact) or some external medium (the exchange of
email messages or a telephone conversation).
The transactional model is constantly bombarded with
noise influences. As Woods indicates,
“noise is anything that distorts communication so that it is more difficult for
people to understand each other” (page 333).
Noise can originate from sources that are either internal or external to
the communicator. Internal noises are physiological and mental forces that
impact the communication process.
Physical pain, for instance, can potentially alter communication
dynamics. Similarly, the emotional state
of a communicator can both enhance and detract from the communication
experience. A third type of noise that is
particularly relevant for introvert-extrovert exchanges is the influence of genetics. My brief review of the personality literature
suggests that our individual genetic makeup exerts significant noise influences
on our communication endeavors. I think of
genetic influences a silent form of noise.
That is, our individual genetic programming governs our communication
behavior in a manner that is transparent to both our physical and psychological
senses.
The effective integration of the elements of the
transactional model facilitates the level of understanding among communicators. If the delicate connections between these
elements should dissolve, subsequent communication efforts will be dramatically
altered or even terminated. My curiosity
compels me to try to identify where and when the communication exchanges among
introverts and extroverts starts to breakdown.
In effect, I’m most interested in trying to identify the communication
elements that contribute to the termination of communication efforts among the
differing personality types. If precise
elements can be identified, specific corrective strategies may then be employed
to try and repair the resulting communication breakdowns.
Communication
Agitation
In studying the transactional model, it quickly became
apparent that each element of the model serves as a critical link in the
communication process. Should any of the
communication links become severely stressed, the entire communication activity
becomes jeopardized. Communication
agitation begins to surface. Communication agitation can be thought of as
the internal pressure within a relevant communication element that when
sufficiently elevated will cause that communication element to become weakened
or inactive. Communication agitation
is the byproduct of noise and other sources of communication interference.
Stated alternatively, noise causes the communication process to weaken,
communication agitation is the effect of noise.
Because the level of noise interference will vary, the
degree of communication agitation within each element will also vary. To capture the variation of communication
agitation, a simple scaling system can be utilized. The communication agitation scale (CAS) can
be depicted as a numerical range of values that reflect agitation variations. In Figure 3, the CAS is assumed to
range from zero to five. A
CAS rating of zero suggests that no communication agitation has occurred in
response to some source of interference.
The communication element has not been weakened. Alternatively, a CAS rating of five implies
that the communication element has become inactive due to the excessive level
of agitation. The communication process
is terminated. Between these extremes,
the level of communication agitation ranges from slight agitation to severe
agitation.
Section III: Introvert-Extrovert
Communication Scenarios
In
this final section, I will attempt to construct some specific communication
scenarios intended to highlight some of the communication ramifications related
to introvert-extrovert information exchanges.
Within the context of the transactional model, I want to identify those
critical communication elements, if any, that become agitated during the
communication process.
Given that communication exchanges can occur under
virtually any set of circumstances, I will need to invoke a series of
assumptions to greatly limit the scenario possibilities. First, the characteristics of both a
extroverted and introverted communicator must be restricted to those identified
in Table 1. Second, the context for
communication exchanges will be a quiet, peaceful public park setting. This restriction is intended to filter out
potential sources of noise that may negatively influence the communication
efforts of an introvert. Third, the
communication channel will be created through face-to-face communication.
Based on these assumptions, I want to examine the
following scenarios: (1) Extrovert-Extrovert (X-X), (2) Introvert (Type A)-Introvert
(Type B) (IA-IB), (3) Extrovert- Introvert (Type A) (X-IA),
and (4) Extrovert- Introvert (Type B) (X-IB). In each scenario, I want to try to determine
where the communication process starts to weaken. Once the point(s) of weakness are identified,
I will suggest strategies for restoring the communication process.
Scenario I: Extrovert-Extrovert (X-X)
In this scenario, two extroverted communicators are
assumed to engage in a conversation.
Because of their underlying personality characteristics, the
communication process proceeds quite efficiently.
The context, in which the interaction occurs, is also not
an impediment. Being social beings, the
surrounding environment does not deter the extrovert’s urges to make
communication contact.
The communication channel is open and messages and
feedback flow quite vigorously among the two communicators. The nonverbal messages are quite
synchronized. Eye contact, body language
suggests a genuine interest in the information provided by the other
communicator. The energy and enthusiasm
of the extroverted communicator enlivens channel activities, feedback is
swiftly provided. The communication experience ascends to a higher level.
Within the mind of each communicator, the internal
processing of information feedback proceeds in a rather efficient manner. Given that extroverts are generally skilled
and effective communicators, the encoding/decoding of both verbal and nonverbal
messages proceeds smoothly. Should a
communicated message prove unclear to one of the extroverted communicators,
he/she will not be “shy” about requesting clarification and additional
details. The resulting transmission of
processed and refined information is a relatively easy endeavor for the
extroverts.
Given their obvious skill at communication, extrovert
communicators are not immune from the vast influences of culture, prior
experiences, attitude, etc. that shape communicator perception. The existence
of stereotypes, for instance, could introduce an element of complexity to an
otherwise efficiently functioning communication process. For example, one communicator’s negative attitude
about the other communicator’s hair color could potentially sabotage the
conversation. Moreover, noise influences
may also present formidable challenges.
Such influences are inherent in all human beings regardless of
personality type.
Based on my assessment of the extroverted communicator
interactions, the elements of the transactional model appear relatively synchronized
and free-flowing. After accounting for
noise and perceptual challenges, the degree of communication agitation would
appear to have a minute influence on the critical elements of the communication
process. Interestingly, the fluid nature of extroverted communication may
itself serve as a major impediment when attempting to communicate with other
personality types. The extrovert becomes accustomed to conversations in which
responses are quick and laden with useful information. Any conversations not meeting such
expectations may contribute to communication agitation.
Scenario II: Introvert (Type A)-Introvert (Type B) (IA-IB)
Given the communication efficiency exhibited by
extroverted communicators, the communication exchanges among introverted
communicators appear to be quite intriguing for a different set of reasons.
In this scenario, a Type A introvert and a Type B
introvert engage in a conversation. The
tone and level of conversational intensity can differ significantly from that
of the extroverts. While present in the conversation, the level of enthusiasm
and energy may be more subdued.
The context in which interactions among the introverts
occurs should not be an impediment. As
stated in the scenario assumptions, the park setting reduces the external noise
influences on introvert behavior. Recent
research findings do corroborate the premise that excessive external noise does
cause increased levels of anxiety among introverts (for music influences see Furnham and Allas (1999); for television
influences see Furnham et. al. (1994)).
In this scenario, the communication channel is open but
both messages and feedback flow at a much more directed and slower pace. The depth and quality of the information
exchanged will typically reflect the intellectual advantages usually associated
with the introvert’s introspective bent.
Nonverbal messages may be quite awkward in terms of execution. Eye contact, body language may suggest a
guarded, defensive posturing. Because
both communicators are inhabitants of the inner world (especially the Type B),
the superficial nature of these nonverbal cues is recognized but discounted
among these communicators. Introverts
show each other the respect and compassion that is often lacking in their outer
world experiences.
The internal processing of information by introverts
occurs in a slower, less efficient manner.
The encoding/decoding of both verbal and nonverbal messages can require
the employment of greater mental resources and effort. Because of genetic conditioning and less
conversational experience, assessing appropriate meaning and symbolism can be quite
frustrating. To compound matters, the
introverted communicators may be less inclined to request clarification and
additional details. Accordingly, the
communication exchanges among introverts will probably be of relatively shorter
duration. Communication, however, has
occurred and such occurrences took place under mutually respectful
conditions. Being respected is a valued
and rewarding source of information for introverts.
Introverted communicators are also not immune from the
vast influences that shape perception.
Influences such as culture, attitude, etc. do indeed invade introverted
communication exchanges. However, the
introspective tendencies of introverts may exempt them, at some level, from the
development of deeply rooted stereotypes.
That is, the introverts are preoccupied with inner world activities so
the gravity and significance of many outer world events goes unnoticed. If true, such liberation would partially
explain why introverts are less preoccupied with superficial nonverbal
behavior. More so than for the extroverts,
noise influences present especially formidable challenges for introverted
communicators.
Based on this assessment of introverted communicators,
the elements of the transactional model do exhibit some degree of communication
agitation. The communication channel is
characterized by slower moving feedback and verbal messaging. The transmission of nonverbal messages is
done in an awkward manner. Furthermore,
the internal decoding/encoding behavior of introverts can be quite disjointed
and rather clumsy. The resulting
communication inefficiency is inherently related to both genetic influences and
limited conversational experience.
Interestingly, informational exchanges do seem to work among introverts.
In spite of the sputtering and puffs of smoke, their successful, brief
exchanges of information seem to be driven by the energy emitted from both
mutual respect and having a common residency in the inner world.
Scenario III:
Extrovert-Introvert (Type A) (X-IA)
Unlike the previous two scenarios, this scenario involves
inhabitants from different worlds. The
Type A introvert, however, has developed the ability to temporarily adapt to
the peculiarities of the outer world.
For this reason, the Type A’s behavior should be thought of as
illusionary. That is, what is initially
observed concerning the Type A’s communication behavior will differ
significantly from his/her behavior later in the communication process. Eventually, the Type A must retreat back to
the inner world to both recharge and refocus.
This behavior is verified by the comments of fellow Type A introvert,
Jonathan Rauch, a writer for the Atlantic Monthly. Mr. Raunch states that “after an hour or two
of being socially “on,” we introverts need to turn off and recharge. [His] own
formula is roughly two hours alone for every hour of socializing…..For
introverts, to be alone with our thoughts is as restorative as sleeping, as
nourishing as eating. Our motto: “I’m
okay, you’re okay—in small doses.”(2003, page 2) This inherent behavior of the Type A introvert
makes this particular scenario quite interesting.
Again, the context in which the communication occurs is
controlled and does not impede the interactions among these two participants.
Initially, the activities within the communication
channel closely resemble that of the (X-X) scenario. The Type A does a wonderful job of “acting”
as an extrovert. Both verbal and
nonverbal messages flow freely and simultaneously among the two
communicators. The communication channel
is enlivened with energy and enthusiasm.
However, once the communication interactions proceed beyond the
tolerance threshold of the Type A, the dynamics within the communication
channel start to change significantly.
As the communication illusion of the Type A begins to disintegrate,
communication agitation begins to surface.
The Type A may start to exhibit awkward communication tendencies. A Dr. Jekyll - Mr. Hyde transformation is
starting to unfold. The feedback now
provided by the Type A becomes less generous and insightful. The nonverbal messages such as distorted body
language also start to highlight the communication transformation.
Being quite perceptive, the extrovert senses the change
occurring in this face-to-face encounter.
The now diminished quality of feedback creates communication agitation
within the extrovert. The
encoding/decoding processes within the extrovert become less efficient due to
the inferior quality of feedback being received. The resulting verbal messages transmitted by
the extrovert may be a series of questions such as, “Are you okay?”, and “Did I
say something wrong?” A vicious,
downward communication spiral begins to occur.
Due to his weakened state, the introvert provides even less
feedback. The level of communication
agitation is now severely elevated for both communicators. The communication process is rapidly
deteriorating.
Due to the transformation of this communication
experience, the extrovert’s perception of the introvert may now become
influenced by some of the cultural stereotypes levied against introverts. Stereotypes such as introverts are dull and
aloof. The attitude of the extrovert
will probably change in a negative direction since communication expectations
are not being satisfied.
Based on my assessment of this scenario, the elements of
the transactional model were initially nicely synchronized and free from
communication agitation. As the
communication scenario continued, the communication process began to rapidly
deteriorate. The degree of communication
agitation proceeded to the high end of the CAS.
To prevent such future communication meltdown, it is apparent that the
introvert must develop some strategy for exiting the conversation prior to
significant transformation. A simple
request to continue the conversation at a later time may be all that is
needed. While this scenario initially
showed promise, the scenario also verifies that extroverts and introverts are
truly inhabitants of different worlds.
Scenario IV: Extrovert-Introvert (Type B) (X-IB)
In this final scenario, the two participants have
polarized communication capabilities. In
general, the extrovert has good communication skills. The Type B introvert lacks, what are
considered, good communication skills. A
successful communication experience among these two participants would appear
to be unlikely. The extrovert
communicates with excitement and enjoys people. The Type B is wounded and
typically afraid of other people.
Having controlled for potential contextual influences,
the elements of the communication channel are quickly subjected to extreme
communication agitation. A face-to-face
encounter among these two participants can be extremely awkward and
difficult. The extrovert is confused by
the “strange and distorted” mannerisms of the Type B. The Type B’s behavior is likely the scars
that resulted from early-life, outer world experiences. Each of these participants is equally
confused by the other.
Due to the mutual confusion and anguish, the interactions
among these two may actually end before starting. The tragedy of this aborted communication
attempt is that these two humans do not get an opportunity to benefit from the
life experiences of the other. The
extrovert could learn much from the introvert, and vice versa. Life-balancing and personal growth
opportunities are lost forever. But does
communication termination have to be the only outcome?
Based on my assessment of this scenario, the irrational
perspective of each participant is the main culprit that sidetracks this
communication exchange.
To rectify this impasse, both parties need a strong dose
of dual perspective. That is, the
extrovert should consider the inner world perspective. The introvert should consider the outer world
point-of-view. Moreover, the extrovert
would need to practice patience and empathetic listening. Giving the intellectual bent of many
introverts, the knowledge base of the extrovert could be enhanced by making
such efforts. To reduce the transmission
of undesirable nonverbal cues, the introvert should consider the SOFTEN
technique. Developed by Don Gabor, a
recognized communication expert, the SOFTEN technique is designed to reduce of
“soften” the display of certain nonverbal behaviors. In the SOFTEN acronym, the S stands for
smile, the O stands for open posture (no folded arms), the F suggest adopting a
forward lean during conversations ( to show interest), the T stands for touch
(such as a handshake), the E stands for eye contact, and N stands for nodding
to again show conversational interest (Gabor, 2001). Lastly, both parties could potentially
experience fruitful information exchanges by recognizing the human bond that
exists among them. An appreciation of
this bond should generate a celebration of differences and promote greater
understanding and acceptance.
In conclusion, the communication scenarios reviewed hold
promise for fruitful exchanges of information (see attachment for a summary of
the CAS results assumed for each scenario).
Clearly, the extrovert-introvert exchanges will require some effort to
maintain and support. The mutual
benefits to be gained should encourage such efforts. We typically learn the most from those that
we know the least about. Differing
communication behaviors and styles are truly the colorful additions to the
kaleidoscope of the human experience.
So, should a communicator of a different kind cross your path, what
should you do? I would suggest saying
hello, showing respect, being willing to listen, and being open to learning.
Works Cited
Allport, Gordon. Patterns
and Growth in Personality.
Barnlund, Dean. Interpersonal
communication: Survey and Studies.
(1968).
Burress, Jill, and Lisa
Kaenzig. “ Introversion: The Often Forgotten Factor Impacting the Gifted.”
Carver, Charles, and Michael
Scheier. Perspectives On Personality.
Eysenck, Hans.
Friedenberg, Edgard. The
Vanishing Adolescent.
Furnham, Adrian, and Kathryn
Allass. “ The Influence of Musical Distraction of Varying Complexity on the
Cognitive Performance of Extroverts and Introverts.” European Journal of Personality. 13.1
(January/February 1999).
Furnham, Adrian, et. Al, “Television Distraction and the Performance
of Introverts and Extroverts.” Cognitive Psychology 8.7 (December 1994)
Gabor, Don. How to Start a
Conversation and Make Friends.
Hejum, Arnold. “Introversion:
A Misunderstood “Individual Difference” Among Students.” Education. 103
(2001).
Hoehn, L., and M.K.
Birely. “Mental Process Performances of
Gifted Children.”
Jung, Carl. Psychological
Types.
Myers, I.B., and Myers P.B. Gift
Differing.
Rauch, Jonathan. “Caring for
Your Introvert.” The Atlantic Monthly. March 2003.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200303/rauch.
Wood, Julia. Interpersonal
Communication Everyday Encounters.
Yates, Daniel. “Animated
Transactional Model of Communication”, University Website.
<http://pirate.shu. edu/~yatesdan/modelhtml. (
“Shy or Outgoing? Blame it on
Your Brain.”
