The Plight of the Introvert [A Rant] | Hacker News Reader

The Plight of the Introvert [A Rant]

blog.edwardamsden.com

122 pointsvgnet64 comments

Introversion and extroversion always seem to have hazy definitions, but one I like better than the popular social model of how people are "energized" is this:

Rather than extroversion being about whether a person is socially "energized" by groups or not, it's really about how much stimulus a person can accept before their brain starts feeling saturated. IE, it's less about the social aspect and more about being able to process stimuli in general. It's just that social gatherings tend to provide a lot more stimuli (people are complicated!)

In this model, an introverted person is simply a person that becomes saturated much more easily; and the reason they dislike crowds and other large gatherings is just because the amount of possible inputs are tremendous and need to be kept track of. An extroverted person might feel more comfortable in these situations, either because they can process more stimuli, or more likely in my opinion, because they're less sensitive to those stimuli. (I don't think it's a coincidence that a lot of the introverted people I know tend to pick up on subtle social cues a lot more readily than extroverts, and also tend to emit more subtle cues).

As a person that's probably moderately introverted, thinking of it in terms of "saturation" feels more natural to me. If I'm in a large group I don't so much feel a loss of energy (unless I'm trying hard to be extra friendly); if anything, when I reach a saturation point I'm at a higher energy level, I'm just sort of "full".

I wish I could remember where I first read about this way of thinking about it though and give some sources.

I suspect you read about it while reading some MBTI-related stuff. INTP?

Haha yep, INTP exactly. Certainly sounds likely, I do have some books on that stuff.

I'd be interested to see how many INTPs are HN readers. I, for one, am one.

Me too.

I am an INTJ which I would suspect a lot of the front-end people are here. I started out as a 3D artist doing simulation and ended up doing simulation development and then went into front-end, I have always suspected that there are a lot of INTJ's in that middle-land of front-end development and other disciplines that blend art with code.

On a related note my friend in school was also an INTJ and we always frequented an Irish pub that a lot of elderly people hung out at. People would always ask us why we hung out there and knew if they wanted to find us that is where we would be. We hung out at the place because it was quite and we could talk to people in deeper conversations than the clubs. To this day I still prefer a quite bar or restaurant to one where a bunch of socializing is going on.

Someone does a poll every once and a while. Here are two:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=946249 (858 days ago)

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1675197 (562 days ago)

Thanks for those links. The analysis on the older one is really interesting Most significantly, 76% of HNers were 'NT' types, compared to 11% in the general population.

Since HN has grown quite a bit in the last few years, I'd be interested to see if we've drifted closer to the 'norm' or if we're still dominantly NT Rationals.

Note that MBTI shouldn't be taken as a reliable scientific model. Is just a nice idea with some applications, as long as you don't take it too seriously. See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator#Val...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator#Rel...

there is actually a more quantitative basis for this than MBTI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11220447

We need more experiments on this. A possible way to become an extravert, should one want to, is to become better at multitasking. (However, that research suggests that introverts are worse at picking up social cues --- only when they are already engaged in some other task, e.g. talking.)

The model you're talking about also sounds similar to the Intense World Theory [1] of autism. It says that an autistic brain tries to process more details about the world around them than a typical brain does, and therefore gets easily overwhelmed when there's too much information to process. Autism, of course, is not exactly the same as introversion (autistic people usually don't get social cues), but the theory seems to have some commonalities with the idea you're describing.

Saturation is exactly how I'd describe interacting with a large number of people at the same time, too. I feel like an app server that's suddenly getting hammered with more simultaneous requests than I can handle. I'd handle those requests much more efficiently if they were serialized, one by one.

[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21191475

I pretty much agree with you and also believe it's not the ability to process more or less stimuli but rather how sensitive one is to stimuli.

http://www.amazon.com/Quiet-Power-Introverts-World-Talking/d... is an excellent book on the subject.

I think you have something there. This notion of introversion and extraversion is really just a preference, and the preference has a real basis in experience.

Perhaps we should just change our vocabulary, perhaps to say crowd-loving or crowd-avoiding. Even that's wrong because it's obviously some crowds and not all crowds.

There are lots of reasons why one might be avoiding crowds. I suspect for the classic geek (or indeed any subculture), a lot of this is simply shame and embarassment fatigue. One is confronted with many people who will quickly size one up according to some unfavorable yardsticks. Wouldn't anybody find that to be "draining"?

I'm not so sure. If I am in a room with 6 people who are not talking about something I am interested in or feel I cannot engage in, I am unstimulated and want to leave. If I am in a room with 6 academics or other kinds of highly interesting people (to me) I can talk all night. I cannot handle dance parties but I love dinner parties. Some people might classify me as an introvert because I'd rather read a book than sit around drinking beer all night, but it's all about the type of company and the kind of stimulus that energizes me.

> Rather than extroversion being about whether a person is socially "energized" by groups or not, it's really about how much stimulus a person can accept before their brain starts feeling saturated.

That's a nice idea, but I'd like to tweak it a bit. It's about the amount of stimulus you prefer. So, yes, as you indicated, introverts tend to have a difficult time with a lot of it. But what you didn't mention is that extroverts tend to have a difficult time if they don't get enough.

Indeed, for just about anyone, there is "not enough", and there is "too much". FTA:

> However, some of us can't do alone. We also can't do large groups well.

I think this classification of introvert/extrovert personality is a little self-fulfilling.

See, I have always believed myself to be introvert, despite what people tell me. I find all these different ways to classify someone as introvert, find one or more that fits me, and I say "see, I'm introvert!"

Until one day, I just randomly started to think the behavior of my ex (cough..), who is considered to be extrovert by everyone, including herself. And guess what, she also gets tired of groups at times, and she also wants quiet time at home, or any other classification of introvert I've read.

What I now believe is that, introversion/extroversion is a state of mind, rather than personality. Most people are both introvert and extrovert, only at different times. Some may be extrovert more often, others introvert more often.

I have no scientific proof of this, but it seems to fit with what I observed of myself and people around me.

I think you have taken a couple of assumptions and drawn the wrong conclusions.

First, introversion/extroversion describes a characteristic of how you generally prefer to be 'energised' (introvert: on your own; extrovert: around other people). Whilst the description is a binary one, the characterisation of someone is not. If you ever do a Myers-Briggs test, the result you get back will often place you on a sliding scale of introversion-extroversion - when I did the test I was on the border of the two (slight leaning towards introversion).

So simply because your ex decided to have a quiet night in, doesn't suddenly means she's an introvert. Unless one is an extreme introvert or extrovert, you won't be solely displaying the one type of behaviour at all times.

Second, the 'state of mind' conclusion seems to be a bit of a leap of logic :) Just because someone exhibits the occasional different behaviour doesn't mean it's 'all in the head'. Would you argue that cancer suffer who have good and bad days with their pain mean that their pain is caused by a 'state of mind' rather than an actual illness?

Introversion/extroversion is not something you can 'think positive' your way out. This is exactly the complaint of introverts who are tired of people who think that 'if they just made more effort they wouldn't be so anti-social'!

I have trouble with this "energized" word. I don't know what it means.

I think this is complete nonsense. I mean all those projections of what "normal people" supposedly think about you if you don't enjoy partying in large groups all the time.

First of all, nobody really cares about you (or anybody else), so nobody will worry about you being antisocial or not. Secondly it simply isn't true that most people want to party in large groups all the time.

You are setting yourself up for failure with your beliefs.

Yeah I agree, I think what he's done is redefined introvert around his own very specific and likely over-thought preferences.

What does ideal group size have to do with introversion anyway?

Actually I resonated with what he said a lot. I'm a loner but I crave interaction.. but not interaction in large groups, and I don't like talking about trivial topics most of the time. My ideal interaction is with 1-2 others.

I also resonated with the OP. I'd rather learn about something, or someone, in depth (rather than piecemeal).

Somewhat analogous to PG's 'Wealth' essay (which was referenced yesterday by a commentor on HN), people who have startups are choosing to do a lot of work in a smarter way over a more concentrated period rather than, let's say, work 50 years for the Post Office, getting a slow pay out. In the same way, I would argue an introvert isn't the "Post Office"-type, as it were.

I'd like to add that I don't have a whole lot of interest in talking to people I don't know. This is probably because it's connected to trying to get to know one or more people in a group/social setting. If we're just going to talk for 5 minutes, even 10, I'm not sure what we're going to gain from that. There's always that line between whatever you deem is investment and reward. There's also inorganic vs. organic ways of meeting new people and being put in a room with strangers isn't my idea of organic. Turning the tables once again, try putting me in a room of (preselected) strangers who each have some/several things in common with me and, all of a sudden, inorganic doesn't matter as much.

I'm going to guess you crave non-trivial interaction. Small talk isn't fulfilling... it's deep thought provoking/inspiring discussion you crave?

I'm not even sure what the "interaction in large groups" is supposed to be? Even on a party, usually you only talk to 1 to 3 people at a time. If you don't like floating around the party like a butterfly, just find a comfy couch somewhere.

I don't understand why the author and it's supporter are so bent on drawing a black and white picture of other people, like either they enjoy large groups or single interactions? What if most people "enjoy" both - larger groups are usually just a tool for finding small groups to interact with.

Talking to people in a party, vs really being one-on-one with them is different for me. When you're in a party, I feel you have the pressure to talk about "fun", casual topics vs deep discussion. Simply because of the context of the situation.

There are better parties out there my friend.

I am not blaming the party, my friend.

I am.

That pressure might be completely in your mind. Also one-on-one meetings might not always be deep, either.

Okay, but is this introversion?

That's not an interesting question to me.

Nevertheless it's an important question because the whole article is framed as being about introversion. The dislike of smalltalk is at best a loose correlation. Extroverts can equally dislike small talk.

You can define it however you wish. Look it up in the dictionary to find your answer.

> First of all, nobody really cares about you (or anybody else),

Well, you've just managed to insult your readers and everyone who will ever care about them, so congratulations on that, you must be very proud.

> so nobody will worry about you being antisocial or not.

I have exactly the opposite experience, and it has been a source of extreme stress in my life. Perhaps you should stop assuming your own life is representative of everyone else's.

It's a well known psychological fact that people overestimate the amount of attention other people give to them. Besides, I was only quoting a song (by garbage).

What experience do you have? That people avoid you because you avoid them?

I'd answer your question, but the fact that you were quoting some obscure song instead of arguing an actual point tells me it would be a waste of time. Go back to reddit.

It's a song by Garbage called Medication.

I appreciate how this post doesn't posit that introverts "don't want to be around people", like many articles and essays do. I'm an introvert and love being around people; just not all people all the time. It's an important distinction.

However, something in this article that I pick up, and I see it in other writings, is that introverts like to think while extroverts don't.

Just as extroversion is dressed up in socially-positive words like "outgoing", "friendly", "life of the party", etc., it seems like more and more introversion-related articles are using equally seductive and over-the-top words like "deep", "intellectual", "pensive", and more. Just pointing out that a lot of extroverts aren't the former words, and a lot of introverts aren't the latter words.

I just seem to notice this in articles about intro/extroversion. People keep using words and terms to make it seem like there's a huge difference in intellect, etc. between the two groups. I don't think that's true.

IIRC there was some evidence of this found in research -- cited in "59 Seconds: Think a Little, Change a Lot". IIRC the study was focused on characteristics of 'successful' people where 'success' was defined in terms of societal achievements (e.g. monetary success, status). Ultimately, the gist was that, among other personality characteristics, people who identified as 'introvert' were more 'successful'. This may have absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, per se, but in my humble opinion; it probably does (not saying this because I identify as 'introvert').

Another way I like to describe the difference between introverts and extroverts is that introverts are energised by solitude, while extroverts are energised by company. Introverts certainly want to socialise as much as extroverts, but they then need to retreat to recharge, while an extrovert will find alone time draining, and need to retreat to a social setting to recharge.

Great way to sum it up, by that measure I'm a clear introvert. That doesn't mean shy, quiet in gatherings or even unhappy in company of others, but group time is exhausting and alone time is, as you say, recharge time.

I imagine introvert/extrovert is simply an inadequate description -- for the ways people want to use it -- of the ways people prefer to interact; after reading a number of blog posts like this I'm increasingly convinced that the reality is far more nuanced. There are more categories of social interaction than "large group" / "small group" / "not at all"; you can talk about very complex things, very simple things, personal things, impersonal things, societal politics, clique politics, and so forth; people generally have differing preferences with regard to different things.

The introvert/extrovert distinction was never meant to be a complete description of someone's social preferences, but just a general way to classify all of the crazy people that psychiatrists encountered back in the early 20th century. MBTI tests can be suprisingly apt, but they aren't going to tell you everything there is to know about yourself.

This resonates with me very well as an introvert who enjoys company but finds large group very energy draining. I never thought that extroverts actually find such activities energy gaining. Instead I have felt it was just me who doesn't find large group dynamics enjoyable.

Here is a TED talk "Power of introverts" I recently enjoyed on this subject.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/susan_cain_the_power_of_int...

The problem I've always had with being an introvert is that many extroverts think it's a curable disease. Furthermore, because I do behave as the blog post describes, people often don't believe I'm actually an introvert. The solution I've found is it's much more acceptable if I explain to people that I'm an "ambivert", an introvert who has developed skills normally associated with extroverts. At minimum, it gets people off my back...

I am a self-proclaimed introvert. I tend to think about small "mistakes" I made socially and how I could have done better. However, I enjoy being around people, just a small group of people all of whom I know. I like to be engaged in a conversation, and if put in a situation with a large number of people (such as a party or "social gathering") i will spend most if not all of the time with the same people. It's not that I don't like people, it's just that to connect with them I have to have a conversation with them of greater length than happens at such social gatherings - and it just so happens that the people who enjoy these conversations are other introverts, creating the appearance of the introverts hanging out at the edge of the crowd and talking with other introverts.

I do believe in the idea that social interaction is energy draining for introverts and the opposite, energy gaining, for extroverts. With all demands a startup puts on a person, I can understand why an introverted founder would decline social invitation for no other reason than being worn out.

It always amazes me every time I find someone or something on the internet that resonates perfectly with me. I can't stand being alone, it makes me really depressed. But social events don't feel right either, they take a lot of energy as the author says. What I feel best with varies and it's more complicated than just a variation in time.

So what I mean is, he's probably right. Introversion and extroversion are no dichotomy and probably even more complicated than a spectrum. I've heard too many people say I'm an introvert while I feel am not just as this person has heard too many say he's not an introvert.

I consider myself introverted because being in a large crowd is very exhausting for me.

But recently I found that the main problem I have with lots of people is that the sound level gets so high that I have problems following individual conversations. It takes me a lot of concentration to understand the person next to me.

That's why I mostly avoid crowded or loud places, since I wouldn't understand a thing anyway. I generally hear well, but seem find loud sound painful earlier than other people.

Because of this, I wonder if hearing problems could be a cause of introversion.

Hi guys!

I'm the OP. I don't have time to respond to everyone here, but let me just say it's been quite gratifying to see the productive discussion this has generated. I wrote this post late at night, after a particularly exhausting group activity, hoping to thoughtfully react to my frustration. Whether or not I managed that, these sorts of discussions are just what I was hoping for!

The article hit the nail on the head for me. Maybe someone can offer some advice on my related plight?

I'm like many of you in the sense that I spend all day every day on my computer -- I work in security, and I'm introverted. At the same time, I do crave interaction, and I find that going to bars in my college town provides me with social stimulation (I don't talk to Jersey Shore airheads). However, as I am also a night owl, this is basically my only social interaction for the day: the day doesn't seem complete unless I've talked to people. Therefore, I have become an alcoholic, which has profoundly affected me psychologically, and it's beginning to affect me physically as well.

The obvious solution to this problem is to find forms of socialization that don't involve alcohol. But that's easier said than done: what should I do? I have no hobbies and few other interests that don't involve books.

Real advice would be appreciated. Thanks.

A must read: Caring for Your Introvert, The habits and needs of a little-understood group - http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-f...

Right on. This is why I try to be a speaker or help with organizing/running events I go to, because a) I get a perfect excuse to be busy, b) I get a perfect excuse to run off for a nap after speaking/chairing, c) people will generally want to talk to me about my talk in depth, d) if it gets too heavy, I can hang out in the speakers' room/similar instead.

d is quite a handy one. If possible, I try to find a way to tag on to people in the speakers' room, because the atmosphere there is way better for introverts, IMHO. Smaller groups, not noisy, people actually doing work, etc. Luckily I'm usually speaking or organizing so can do this, but it could get a bit crazy if everyone tried this ;-)

I wonder if introversion/extroversion are umbrella terms for a wide range of meshing cognitive and personality traits.

For instance, we all default to a particular attentional style. To use the actor Woody Allen as an example, he has a classic narrow-internal attentional style (introspective, perhaps slightly neurotic) which suggests he's an introvert, yet these traits works for him socially on many levels.

But is he introverted? I think he and many people transcend that label.

More on Attention Theory: http://rejectiontherapy.com/control-your-reality-like-a-tv-s...

A good mixture of extroverted and introverted personalities will be good for a start-up team. The key is for the extroverts to know when to just shut up and listen....lol

Yeah.. you guys aren't "real" introverts. Real introverts are like me and have practically no friends online or off, almost never go out unless they have to, and do all of their social interaction by writing comments on random Hacker News or reddit posts, rarely even seeing a username they recognize.

My life in a nut shell right there. We should be friends...hmm, wait...maybe not

Another one about introverts: http://www.carlkingdom.com/10-myths-about-introverts

I like that one better :)

What is this 'energy' is that people are extracting from their social environment? And why are we holding off judging extroversion against introversion?

I'm going to state for the record that introversion is best. Anybody who isn't introverted has no kind of mental life.

Every extrovert is an introvert in some way. I have seen introverts become extroverts in their comfort zones and have seen extroverts become introverts in a new and unfamiliar environment or situation.

That sums it up in my experience. The entire 'idea' of 'personality' is likely much more dynamic than static, despite the concerted efforts of 'social 'scientists'' attempting to justify their existence (as meaningful) - despite nearly a century of data (facts) to the contrary.

Your identity is a work in progress....

I always thought I was an introvert, but I never had this energy problem people are talking about after being social for a long period of time.

My problem was that I just couldn't get outside my comfort zone. After years of forcing myself outside my comfort zone (which many people don't or can't do), I don't really have a problem anymore.

One of the problems with being introverted is that you will probably get passed up for promotions at most companies. you need to be social to move up the ladder, even if you are a developer.

I remember reading a study done a few years back to figure out why many Asian Americans were being passed up for promotions in their work place, despite that they went to better schools and had many honors when they graduated compared to their white co-workers. Initially people thought discrimination was the biggest and only factor but the study showed that they tend to be more introverted and would not ask for a salary raise or a promotion as much as their white counterparts would. Success will not be handed to you in a silver platter in the corporate world, sometimes you just have to go out there and stake your claim.

The author has a strange view (and cares way too much) about what other people think. Reminds me of myself in high school.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com