[ SECRET POST #3493 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3493 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 22 secrets from Secret Submission Post #499.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Introversion

[herpymcderp]

Cite your sources, show your work.

That might be the definition from some obscure online dictionary, but it's not the definition used in psychology. The terms "introvert" and "extrovert" are complex ideas that can't really be boiled down to either of the things you're listing here.

Re: Introversion

[(Anonymous)]

Nayrt but the concept isn't hard or complex at all.

"Introverted" means in the head, "extroverted" means out of the head. They aren't complex psychological frameworks, they are words used just like "imaginative" or "compulsive" or "sociable".

The term "an introvert" isn't exactly a fair term, neither is "an extrovert", because that boils a person down to a single personality trait. But using them as descriptors is not a complex thing in psychology. (and they aren't really diagnoses anyway, so it's not like you'll find this in the DSM or something)

Re: Introversion

[herpymcderp]

No, the complex part is that the terms only really apply to styles of social interaction. That's it. They don't ascribe other parts of personality, they don't dictate behaviours, they only describe a preference (or, some would argue it's not a preference but rather an inborn predilection). The other thing you're missing out is the term ambivert, which some psychologists are now using to describe those who have no real social preferences.

The complex bit is where one must necessarily use the words in combination with descriptors of actual behaviour. For example, you can have a social introvert: someone who habitually engages in social activity but has a preference for being alone.

Also adding to the complexity is the problem of online social interaction. Most theories don't count this as social interaction, and hence most questionnaires developed for introversion/extroversion scales didn't use to include it as a measure. If you ask people to re-take the tests including the amount of time they spend interacting socially online, you get very different results.

Then of course there are the theories of interaction-based neurological development... but that's a whole other thing entirely. They generally boil down to the assumption that some base amount of social interaction is necessary to develop and maintain neural health. So really, they're a tiny part of a hugely intricate puzzle.

It's a lot like trying to define sexuality in that way. There are caveats, identifiers, actual behaviours... you get the gist.

Re: Introversion

[diet_poison]

I think there is real validity to the fact that many people use those words in casual usage, outside of academia/psychology offices, with generally accepted definitions, and they can be useful that way

Re: Introversion

[dethtoll]

I googled the phrase and it's Merriam-Webster...

Re: Introversion

[herpymcderp]

Merriam-Webster though it may be, it still doesn't actually get to the meat of how modern psychology uses the terms. In fact, it strikes me as a sort of antiquated way of approaching the topic due to the fact that the term mental life is even mentioned.

These days we don't tend to think of intro/extroversion as relating to someone's inner landscapes - so to speak - so much as we tend to think of it as the way social interaction affects a person's mental resources.

Re: Introversion

[dethtoll]

It's just a dictionary though? It's not the DSM.

Re: Introversion

[herpymcderp]

Yeah, but you're unlikely to find mention of introversion and extroversion in the DSM because they aren't disorders per se.

Now I'm slightly bothered that someone might look this up in the dictionary out of curiosity and get the wrong impression. Hm. Oh well.

Re: Introversion

[(Anonymous)]

They aren't disorders "per se", they aren't disorders at all, and it is incorrect that there is a "psychological definition" of them beyond the Webster dictionary. They are not clinical terms beyond any other personality trait.

Re: Introversion

[herpymcderp]

The entire discipline of the study of personality in psychology begs to fucking differ with you.

It's not my discipline, but it does exist, and it does have its own definitions.

Re: Introversion

[(Anonymous)]

What are the definitions used in psychology?

Re: Introversion

[(Anonymous)]

It's also extraverted, not extroverted (I know, I know, extroverted is also correct, but only because people have been saying it wrong all this time that it was declared correct).