Research has found that extraverts are not always happier than introverts. why not?

Subjective well-being, or happiness, is not necessarily a unitary construct. Diener (1984) has argued that subjective well-being has at least three components: positive affect, negative affect and cognitive variables such as satisfaction with life. Positive affect correlates strongly with extraversion and negative affect with neuroticism. Most measures of happiness also correlate positively with extraversion. A recent meta-analysis (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998) reported correlations between extraversion and several measures of subjective well-being between 0.17 and 0.27, although in studies with the Oxford happiness inventory (OHI) (Argyle, Martin & Lu, 1995) happiness and extraversion are typically associated with correlation coefficients of about 0.45. For such reasons, extraversion has come to be regarded as the individual personality difference that is most strongly and positively allied with happiness. In a longitudinal study, Costa, MacCrae and Norris (1981) reported that extraversion predicted positive affect 17 years later. More recently, Tellegen (1985) has put forward the complementary idea that happiness, or more specifically positive emotionality, forms the core of the trait of extraversion.

The main characteristic of the extravert is social activity, which can be a major source of happiness (Argyle & Lu, 1990a). Hills, Argyle and Reeves (2000) investigated some motivational factors that might lead young people to engage in a variety of leisure pursuits. As such activities are voluntary and not generally undertaken for material gain, it seems reasonable to assume that they are carried out for the satisfaction or happiness that they are expected to generate. The most widely applicable explanation for taking part in leisure activities was found to be the opportunity they created for social interaction, which provides further support for a link between happiness and the sociability that characterises the extravert.

However, these results are not fully consistent with personal observation. Most people can number among their friends and acquaintances those who appear to be happy without being particularly gregarious. The above results are also at variance with the ideas of those classical philosophers, for example Aristotle and Epicurus, who have given the greatest attention to human happiness. Their prescriptions for happiness involve withdrawal from many of the social aspects of life and living a quiet, peaceful existence in relative solitude. The same can be said of the ways of life commended by most religious systems. Their aim is to provide great personal happiness for believers, either in life or after death, and medieval anchorites and hermits believed that total isolation was the way to achieve it. Nevertheless, religious systems usually prescribe detailed codes of social behaviour that may include taking part in regular corporate worship. This can be a source of social support that may in turn enhance well-being (Hills & Argyle, 1998a). However, these codes are generally regarded as duties or obligations and not as the primary source of religious happiness; religious happiness comes from a personal relationship with the Divine. In this context, it is noteworthy that the majority of those who report intense religious experiences say that these occur in solitude (Hay & Morisey, 1978).

As originally described by Jung (1928), introverts and extraverts differ in their primary orientations. The introvert’s main concern is to establish autonomy and independence of other people, whereas the extravert looks towards and seeks the company of others. Jung envisaged introversion and extraversion as two alternative orientations, and expressed no opinion about which was the more desirable. However, Jung’s typology was adopted by other workers beginning with Freud, who considered extravert behaviour to be a sign of maturity and introvert behaviour a sign of arrested development (Coan, 1994).

A higher-order factor corresponding to Jung’s introversion–extraversion has been identified in most multidimensional personality inventories developed over the past 75 years. In consequence, much research has been devoted to identifying the individual traits and behaviours that form its component parts. From a consideration of the principal existing models of extraversion, Watson and Clark (1997) have presented a schematic model of extraversion that comprises six independent traits and twelve associated sub-traits. Inevitably, later formulations contain many features that were not present in the original concept and successive formulations have not always been mutually consistent. Eysenck and Eysenck (1975) identified risk taking and a tendency towards unreliability as aspects of extraverted behaviour. These aspects do not feature in later models (Hogan, 1983, Tellegen, 1985) which instead emphasise social facility and influence, ambition and an orientation towards hard work and achievement. Nevertheless, all models include the traits of sociability, gregariousness and affiliative tendency, which are central to the present study.

Eysenck (1967) has explained the difference between introverts and extraverts in terms of cortical arousal. The extravert is not easily aroused and, in compensation, seeks stimulation in the company of many people. The extravert needs to have people to talk to, craves excitement and opportunities for physical activity, likes to laugh and be merry, and engages in many social interactions, which are a major source of happiness. In contrast, the introvert has a low arousal threshold and can function without the need for high levels of external stimulation. The introvert is usually represented as a quiet individual who is fond of books rather than people, does not like excitement and is distant except to intimate friends (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975). The view that extraversion is a preferred state has come to be widely accepted among social psychologists. In consequence, introverts are sometimes represented as withdrawn, isolated or lacking social competence, rather than as individuals who seek independence and autonomy. Concentration on the link between extraversion and happiness could have led researchers to overlook states of happiness enjoyed by introverts that do not involve a great deal of social interplay.

This distinction relies on individual differences in the need for stimulation, but is stimulation the same as happiness? Introverts may not derive much satisfaction from gregarious situations because they do not need the external stimulation provided by the presence of many people, but they could be no less open to other kinds of happiness. Whereas extraverts need many people around them, introverts may be more selective and focus on establishing individual affiliative relationships with a few special friends and experience higher levels of empathy with them. Introverts may have highly satisfying leisure activities that can be carried out in relative isolation. They may also enjoy an intense inner life, based on intellectual, musical or religious activities which give them much to think about without the need to rely on other people (Storr, 1988).

The broad aims of this study are to explore:

The importance of extraversion relative to other variables associated with happiness. Other correlates of happiness have been described which are related to cognitive style, for example goal-directed behaviour (Brunstein, 1993), optimism (Myers, 1992) and self-esteem (Brown, 1986) and these may be more important to introverts than to extraverts.

The extent to which overall happiness can be accounted for by factors other than extraversion. For example, the happiness of individuals who do not score highly on extraversion could be explained by other factors such as low neuroticism or greater satisfaction with life.

The similarities and differences that may exist between the qualities of happiness demonstrated by those who are, respectively, high and low in extraversion. Happy introverts might prefer quieter forms of social activity than extraverts, which involve fewer people and greater intimacy. They might also derive more enjoyment from solitary activities and have more satisfying inner lives than extraverts.

Data characteristics

Independent t-tests indicated no significant gender effects with respect to OHI, extraversion, preference for solitude, affiliative tendency, life orientation or life regard. There were significant differences in the means for neuroticism, t(269)=3.24, p<0.001, empathic tendency, t(264)=5.06, p<0.001, and self-esteem, t(269)=−0.56, p<0.05. However, the magnitudes of the differences were not great. Women had higher neuroticism scores as is usually found (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975). They also

Discussion

The first aim of this study was to explore the importance of extraversion relative to some other variables and, with the exception of empathic tendency, all were significantly and substantially correlated with happiness. When the effect of extraversion was controlled for by partial correlation, the association between happiness and life regard, self-esteem, life orientation and neuroticism hardly changed, which suggests that these variables are substantially independent of extraversion. However

Conclusions

For the participants in this study, the variables that appear to be most closely associated with happiness are life regard, self-esteem, life orientation and mental stability. Introversion–extraversion is also a significant correlate of happiness, but other factors examined — empathic and affiliative tendencies and preference for solitude — which are closely related to introversion–extraversion are, surprisingly, not significantly associated with happiness. In comparisons of selected groups of

Cited by (113)

• Exploring the role of extrovert-introvert customers’ personality prototype as a driver of customer engagement: Does relationship duration matter?

  2020, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

  Research has proven that extraverts are not only social and outgoing in face-to-face settings, but also active players who seek interactions in online social communications (Yoo and Gretzel, 2011). On the other side of the continuum, introversion refers to a person's tendency to be quiet, shy, inwardly focused, timid, and reserved (Hills and Argyle, 2001). As described by Amichai-Hamburger and Ben-Artzi (2000), an “introvert is a quiet, reflective person who prefers his or her own firm and does not enjoy large social events; he or she does not crave excitement and may be seen by some as distant and remote” (p. 443).

• Unpacking the differential effects of dispositional envy on happiness among adolescents and young adults: The mediated moderation role of self-esteem

  2019, Personality and Individual Differences

  This instability across studies may be due to the small number of items in this instrument. To ensure better psychometric properties in measuring happiness, future studies can be conducted with other instruments, such as 29-item Oxford Happiness Scale (Hills & Argyle, 2001) or 18-item Orientation to Happiness (Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2005). Moreover, the broad concept of psychological well-being can be defined by two major principles, namely hedonia and the eudaimonia (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

• Seeking more solitude: Conceptualization, assessment, and implications of aloneliness

  2019, Personality and Individual Differences

  Finally, future research on aloneliness will help to clarify inconsistencies in the literature regarding the links between various motivations for solitude and socio-emotional adjustment. This should also include the inclusion of a broader range of personality characteristics that may encompass individual differences in one's desire to spend time alone (e.g., introversion, Hills & Argyle, 2001). Initial evidence suggests that aloneliness accounts for some of the links between affinity for aloneness and negative outcomes, but more research is needed to examine this pattern across diverse outcomes related to wellbeing and clinical symptomatology.

• Happiness among second year MBBS students and its correlates using Oxford Happiness Questionnaire

  2019, Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research

  They are responsible and excellent citizens.3 Psychologists believe that happiness has three main components- the relative existence of positive emotion, the lack of negative emotions and life satisfaction.4 Medical field is one of the fields that due to the clinical period, the pressure of hospital work and stressful environment have considerable effects on happiness and job performance.

Recommended articles (6)