Attending Conferences as an Introvert

About this you are mistaken:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraversion_and_introversion

Despite these differences, a meta-analysis of 15 experience sampling studies has suggested that there is a great deal of overlap in the way that extraverts and introverts behave.[33] In these studies, participants used mobile devices to report how extraverted (e.g., bold, talkative, assertive, outgoing) they were acting at multiple times during their daily lives. Fleeson and Gallagher (2009) 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. The key feature that distinguishes extraverts and introverts was that extraverts tend to act moderately extraverted about 5-10% more often than introverts. From this perspective, extraverts and introverts are not "fundamentally different". 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".

That article goes on to say:

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 [35][36] 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.

In short: The dichotomy is a false one. To imply anything else is just pop psychological BS, albeit fashionable BS right now.

He's talking about social anxiety, not introversion.

That's a whole other problem, and is considered an anxiety disorder. If it's resulting in career limiting behaviour, it's probably worth therapy, such as CBT, to try and resolve:

http://socialphobia.org/social-anxiety-disorder-definition-s...

That's pretty generic, I could use that as an argument for anything.

I wonder if there was ever a scientific study checking if there is a correlation between the degree of introversion and competency in a deeply technical/scientific subject. Disclaimer: I studied Physics. Having specialized in Theoretical Particle Physics, extrovert people were just not there. Actually I wrote my thesis at a professor who had quite extrovert tendencies but it turned out he was not really helpful and rather rude. (Forced extrovert?) How do you actually solve an integral by talking? It's a trick question, of course it's possible but I have never seen how extroverts solve a complicated integral while thinking loudly and discussing. How do you socialize by not talking so much? It's also possible. Communicating with body language etc. might be what makes us human actually.

That said, being a strong introvert myself, I can network for hours when it's for a reason. But I rarely do that anymore because I don't see much of a point. Most people I meet through such Networking Marathons ended up in my LinkedIn/Facebook, congratulating them every few years for stuff or maybe coincidentally even being able to seek useful help sometimes. But my strongest connections I found "organically", frequenting places I have deep interest in or through common friends. With these connections I have co-founded 2 companies or given mutual help, inspiration and collaboration over years. I doubt extroverts have that very often. ;)

That's not actually true; extroversion/introversion, like other normal personality axes, does not, in the evidence, seem to be a dichotomy, but instead a continuum. It's a real area in which people vary, but not a binary one.

> That said, the author is using the wrong term. He's talking about social anxiety, not introversion.

Note that this is a fairly common conflation that is partially reflected in the popular Meyers-Beiggs personality typing system, in which the Extroversion/Introversion axis seems to combine both the Extroversion axis and the Neuroticism axis of the somewhat better validated Big 5 system.

With that definition in mind:

To summarize: in general, extroverts get energy from social interaction, and introverts lose energy in them.

There is no evidence that extraversion/introversion is a hard delineation. In fact, in my other comment I already cited studies that demonstrate the opposite, that it is a continuum and people are on different places on that continuum, sometimes day to day or hour to hour.

You may find this surprising, but sometimes I love parties, and sometimes I hate them! Sometimes I really want to be around people, and sometimes I want nothing more than to be alone for a while. Sometimes I really want to listen to loud, banging music! Sometimes, I would rather be in a quiet room with a book.

Step back and ask yourself: Are you really as consistently and persistently introverted as you claim? Because I'll bet you a large sum of money that, if you're being honest with yourself, the answer is a lot more nuanced than that.

To be honest, I find this entire trend interesting. On the one had, there's a strong movement that is driving a change in the perception of things like gender and sexual attraction as being on a continuum, based on the realization that humans are, in fact, complex, diverse creatures.

And yet, at the same time, we seem driven to slot people into these fixed personality types so we can all walk around with our "introvert" or "extravert" badge or brag about our Myers-Briggs personality type.

It's really baffling... it's like people both want to label themselves, and at the same time defy labels.