2020/01/29

우주는 푸른 용 - 매혹적인 우주의 창조 이야기 브라이언 스윔



알라딘: 우주는 푸른 용

우주는 푸른 용 - 매혹적인 우주의 창조 이야기   
브라이언 스윔 (지은이),허찬란 (옮긴이)분도출판사2019-12-12
원제 : The Universe Is a Green Dragon: A Cosmic Creation Story





 10.0100자평(1)리뷰(0)
이 책 어때요?

192쪽
140*215mm
250g

책소개
지금 당신의 창조성을 일깨우며 경이롭게 펼쳐지는 우주 이야기. 138억 년 전, 거대한 침묵의 불이 있었다. 존재하는 모든 것들, 모든 생명, 나아가 우리 인간의 기원을 거슬러 올라가면 이 태초의 불덩어리가 있었다.

물리학자 브라이언 스윔은 우리에게 새로운 우주 이야기를 들려준다. 두 사람이 하룻저녁 나누는 짧은 대화를 통해 우주의 기원과 발전을 돌아보며 ‘우주 안에’ 살고 있는 인간 생명의 의미와 역할을 살펴보고 모색한다.

스윔에 따르면 우주는 단지 물질 충돌의 우연한 결과에 그치는 것이 아닌, 계속해서 발전하는 어떤 존재에 더 가깝고, 우리 인간 또한 이 창발하는 우주에 참여하고 있다. 이 책은 독자들을 새로운 우주 신학으로 초대한다.


목차


한국의 독자들에게
추천의 말

서문

1. 하느님의 첫 계시, 우주
창조성: 그 기원과 발전
매혹
우리의 운명, 환희
우주의 위험과 기회에서 오는 악: 핵 과학과 핵무기

2. 하느님의 창조물, 지구
바다

생명

바람

3. 빅뱅의 절정
변화: 사회와 지질 활동
우주의 불이 찍어 내는 예술

감사의 말
역자 용어설명
접기

---

책속에서



P. 36 가장 놀라운 일은 우주에 존재하는 모든 것이 같은 기원에서 출발했다는 사실을 깨달은 거죠. 내 몸을 이루는 원소와 당신 몸을 구성하는 원소가 본질적으로 연관되어 있다는 것이 믿어지세요? 그들이 빅뱅이라는 단일 에너지 사건에서 나와서 포획되었기 때문이죠. 우리 족보를 따라 올라가면, 우리 조상은 생명체를 거쳐 별들로, 그리고 태초의 원시 불덩어리까지 올라가요. 우주가 물질과 정신, 지성과 생명의 다양한 형태로 된 단일한 에너지 사건이라는 것은 정말 새로운 사실이에요. 인류 역사의 위대한 인물 중 그 누구도 이 사실을 몰랐어요. 플라톤이나 아리스토텔레스, 이스라엘의 예언자들과 공자, 토마스 아퀴나스와 라이프니츠, 뉴턴 등 세상에 큰 업적을 남긴 그 누구도 이 사실을 몰랐죠. 우리는 경험적 관점에서 우주의 기원을 알아 가는 최초의 세대인 셈이죠. 우리는 밤하늘을 올려다보며 우주와 은하와 별들이 탄생하는 사건을 전체적으로 이해하는 최초의 인간이에요. 하나의 생물 종(種)으로서 인간의 미래가 우주 이야기에 새롭게 새겨질 거예요. 접기

P. 84 우주와 지구 안에 들어 있는 폭력을 통해 성취된 뛰어난 아름다움을 우리는 알고 있어요. 하지만 이와 동시에 인간에게도 같은 일이 일어날지 아직은 몰라요. 실제로 인간은 수천 년의 문명기 내내 거의 멈추지 않았어요. 인간이 지구 생명 체계에 유익한 새 가족인지 깊게 생각하지도 않았죠. 인간은 자아도취(narcissism)에 빠져 자신의 생존과 타고난 자기의 힘을 탐구하는 데만 집중했죠. 인간 활동을 평가할 수 있는 더 큰 세계관, 즉 별과 식물과 다른 모든 생명체를 포함한 보다 큰 우주 공동체라는 안목을 발전시키질 못했어요. 정확히 말하면, 생물 종種의 하나인 우리의 제한된 좁은 세계관 때문에 지구가 망가지고 있는 거죠. 만일 우리가 더 큰 세계적 안목을 원한다면, 지난 1천만 년 동안의 지구 역사를 살펴봐야 해요. 접기

P. 133 그래요. 죽음은 끔찍하죠. 그것을 하찮게 생각하지 마세요. 죽음 위에 당신의 하찮은 생각을 투영하지 마세요. 그러나 죽음의 인식을 연료나 램프처럼 이용하세요. 즉 당신 속에 있는 미지의 신비스러운 동굴로 당신을 안내해 줄 은밀한 안내자로서 죽음을 이용하는 거예요. 그러면 당신의 참자아를 끌어낼 수 있을 거예요. 당신의 창조성은 에너지를 얻기 위하여 죽음을 인식하는 걸 필요로 하죠. 근육을 만들려면 계속 운동을 하면서 고통과 스트레스로 좀 단련을 받아야 하는 것처럼, 당신도 아픔이 있어야 깨달을 수 있죠. 죽음에 대한 인식을 우주가 당신에게 주는 선물로 여기고 소중히 간직하세요. 매 순간 무한히 심오한 의미를 보게 해 주는 이런 방법이 없다면, 당신 인생을 살아가도록 이끌어 줄 힘이 어디에서 나올까요? 접기

---
추천글

과학자의 눈으로 신학을 하는 토마스 베리 신부님과 우주 이야기를 하고 있는 젊은이 브라이언 스윔 박사는 우주를 푸른 용에 비유하며 우리를 새로운 우주 신학으로 초대합니다.
- 강우일 (한국천주교주교회의장 주교) 


---

저자 및 역자소개
브라이언 스윔 (Brian Swimme) (지은이)


대중적 물리학자이며, 과학적 우주론 분야의 세계적 전문가이다. 1978년 미국 오리건 대학교에서 중력 역학에 관한 연구로 박사 학위를 취득했다. 이후로 우주 진화 역학만 아니라 과학적 우주론과 전통 종교의 관계, 우주 이야기(Universe Story)의 문화적 의미와 인류 역학 등을 연구했다. 1998년에는 새로운 우주 이야기에 관심을 갖는 과학자와 예술가, 생태학자, 종교학자, 교육자를 위한 국제 포럼 EES(Epic of Evolution Society)를 설립했다.

현재는 캘리포니아 융합학문 대학원 교수로 진화 우주론을 가르치며, 우주 이야기 센터를 운영하고 있다.

1982년 메튜 폭스와 함께 첫 책 『지구 문명 선언문』Manifesto for a Global Civilization을 썼다.


  • 『우주는 푸른 용』The Universe is a Green Dragon 외에 
  • 『우주 이야기』The Universe Story(토마스 베리와 공저), 
  • 『우주 속으로 걷다』Journey of the Universe(공저)가 우리말로 옮겨졌다. 




최근작 : <우주는 푸른 용>,<우주이야기> … 총 3종 (모두보기)

허찬란 (옮긴이)
저자파일

천주교 제주교구 사제이다.
1998년 사제 서품을 받고, 로마 교황청립 안토니오 대학교에서 가톨릭 사회교리를 수학했다.
미국 홀리네임즈 대학교와 캘리포니아 융합학문 대학원에서 새로운 우주론을 공부했다.
현재는 브라이언 스윔 박사와 우주 이야기를 탐구하고 있다.



출판사 제공 책소개



지금 당신의 창조성을 일깨우며
경이롭게 펼쳐지는 우주 이야기

자본이 모든 것을 판가름하는 것처럼 보이는 시대에 살면서, 자연과 하나가 되는 경험을 하기가 쉽지 않은 세상이 되어 버렸다. 그러나 머리를 들어 밤하늘의 별을 바라본 경험은 누구에게나 있을 것이다. 안개 낀 새벽 강변에서 거룩한 상념에 들거나 짙푸른 바다 앞에서 신선함을 호흡하고 깊은 숲에서 경외감에 빠져 본 경험도 있을 것이다.

『우주는 푸른 용』은 이러한 경험의 원천에 무엇이 있는지, 우리는 지금 어디로 향하고 있으며 어디로 향해 가야 하는지에 대해 알기 쉬운 대화체로 풀이해 준다. 우리의 우주적 여정을 감동적으로 전하는 이 우주 이야기는 과학에 근거한 최근의 우주론을 보여 주지만 딱딱한 과학서가 아닌 아름답고 색다른 영성 서적으로 다가온다. “인류 역사에서 가장 무서운 병에 걸린 우리는 물질적인 우주로부터 영적인 우주를 분리한 일이 정말 좋은 생각이었는지 물어야 한다.”(24쪽)

저자에 따르면, 우리의 우주적 여정은 한 종(種)으로서 우리가 참된 성숙에 이르는 과정이며, 이 길에서만, 그리고 오직 이 길만이 지구를 다시 꽃피게 할 것이다. 우리가 우주에 속해 있는 종이라는 성숙한 의식을 갖고 다른 생명체와 상호연관성을 의식한다면, 우리는 생태 위기에 놓인 지구를 살릴 수 있다고 낙관한다.

새로운 우주 신학으로 초대하는 이 책은 ‘생성 중인 우주’라는 관측에서 출발하여 우리의 출처와 우리의 본성과 우리의 미래에 대해 이야기한다. 지구적 차원에서 살아간다는 것과 우주적 차원에서 인간 생명이 지니는 의미를 곱씹어 보게 함으로써 우리의 시야와 사고를 한층 넓고 깊게 만들어 준다.

이 책에는 하느님이라는 말이 전혀 없다 (장 제목에 예외적으로 두 차례 나오지만, 이것은 역자의 친절한 번역일 뿐 원서에는 나오지 않는다). 아마도 브라이언 스윔은 하느님을 전혀 언급하지 않으면서 하느님에 대해 이야기하고자 했을지 모른다. 신앙인이라면 브라이언 스윔의 우주 이야기를, ‘하느님에 대한 말이 없는 하느님 이야기’로 이해해도 좋을 것이다.

이 책은 웅장하고 광대한 차원으로 독자를 초대하며 새로운 눈을 뜨게 함으로써 독자 역시 그 차원에 속해 있음을 알려 준다. 저자는 한국의 독자들을 위해 쓴 서문에서 인간 삶의 목적을 간결하게 제시한다. “우리는 우주 안에 잠재되어 숨겨진 아름다움을 낳기 위해 여기에 있다.”(17쪽) 접기





    


종교와 과학이 어떻게 만나는지... 우리 안의 신비를 끌어내어 줄 책이네요. 
shymoon 2019-12-13 공감 (0) 댓글 (0)


2020/01/28

Extraversion and introversion - Wikipedia

Extraversion and introversion - Wikipedia



Extraversion and introversion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Extraversion and introversion are typically viewed as a single continuum, so to be high in one necessitates being low in the other. Jung and the developers of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator provide a different perspective and suggest that everyone has both an extraverted side and an introverted side, with one being more dominant than the other. Virtually all comprehensive models of personality include these concepts in various forms. Examples include the Big Five model, Jung's analytical psychology, Hans Eysenck's three-factor model, Raymond Cattell's 16 personality factors, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, and the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator.
The traits of extraversion (or extroversion) and introversion are a central dimension in some human personality theories. The terms introversion and extraversion were popularized by Carl Jung,[1] although both the popular understanding and psychological usage differ from his original intent. 
Extraversion tends to be manifested in outgoing, talkative, energetic behavior, whereas introversion is manifested in more reserved and solitary behavior.[2] 
Rather than focusing on interpersonal behavior, however, Jung defined 
introversion as an "attitude-type characterised by orientation in life through subjective psychic contents", and 
extraversion as "an attitude-type characterised by concentration of interest on the external object".[3]


Extraversion and introversion - Wikipedia


Varieties


William McDougall discussed Jung's conception, and reached this conclusion: "the introverts are those in whom reflective thought inhibits and postpones action and expression: the extroverts are those in whom the energies liberated upon the stirring of any propensity flow out freely in outward action and expression."[4]

Extraversion

Extraversion (also spelled as extroversion[5]) is the state of primarily obtaining gratification from outside oneself.[6] Extraverts tend to enjoy human interactions and to be enthusiastictalkativeassertive, and gregarious. Extraverts are energized and thrive off being around other people. They take pleasure in activities that involve large social gatherings, such as parties, community activities, public demonstrations, and business or political groups. They also tend to work well in groups.[7] An extraverted person is likely to enjoy time spent with people and find less reward in time spent alone. They tend to be energized when around other people, and they are more prone to boredom when they are by themselves.

Introversion

Introversion is the state of being predominantly interested in one's own mental self.[6] Introverts are typically perceived as more reserved or reflective.[7] Some popular psychologists have characterized introverts as people whose energy tends to expand through reflection and dwindle during interaction.[8] This is similar to Jung's view, although he focused on mental energy rather than physical energy. Few modern conceptions make this distinction. Introverts often take pleasure in solitary activities such as reading, writing, or meditating. An introvert is likely to enjoy time spent alone and find less reward in time spent with large groups of people. Introverts are easily overwhelmed by too much stimulation from social gatherings and engagement, introversion having even been defined by some in terms of a preference for a quiet, more minimally stimulating external environment.[9] They prefer to concentrate on a single activity at a time and like to observe situations before they participate, especially observed in developing children and adolescents.[10] They are more analytical before speaking.[11]
----
Quiet: The Power of Introverts... author Susan Cain defines introversion and extraversion in terms of preferences for different levels of stimulation—distinguishing it from shyness (fear of social judgment and humiliation).[12]
Mistaking introversion for shyness is a common error. Introversion is a preference, while shyness stems from distress. Introverts prefer solitary to social activities, but do not necessarily fear social encounters like shy people do.[13] Susan Cain, author of the book Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking, argues that modern Western culture misjudges the capabilities of introverted people, leading to a waste of talent, energy, and happiness.[14] Cain describes how society is biased against introverts, and that, with people being taught from childhood that to be sociable is to be happy, introversion is now considered "somewhere between a disappointment and pathology".[15] In contrast, Cain says that introversion is not a "second-class" trait but that both introverts and extraverts enrich society, with examples including the introverts J. K. Rowling,[16] Isaac NewtonAlbert EinsteinMahatma GandhiDr. SeussW. B. YeatsSteven Spielberg, and Larry Page.[15]

Ambiversion[edit]

Although many people view being introverted or extraverted as mutually exclusive, most contemporary trait theories measure levels of extraversion-introversion as part of a single, continuous dimension of personality, with some scores near one end, and others near the halfway mark.[17] Ambiversion is falling more or less directly in the middle.[6][18] An ambivert is moderately comfortable with groups and social interaction, but also relishes time alone, away from a crowd. In simpler words, an ambivert is a person whose behaviour changes according to the situation they are in. In the face of authority or in the presence of strangers, the person may be introverted. However, in the presence of family or close friends, the person may be highly energetic or extraverted.

Relative prevalence[edit]

Cain further reports that studies indicate that 33 to 50% of the American population are introverts.[19] Particular subpopulations have higher prevalence, with a 6,000-subject MBTI-based survey indicating that 60% of attorneys, and 90% of intellectual property attorneys, are introverts.[20]

Measurement[edit]

The extent of extraversion and introversion is most commonly assessed through self-report measures, although peer-reports and third-party observation can also be used. Self-report measures are either lexical[2] or based on statements.[21] The type of measure is determined by an assessment of psychometric properties, and the time and space constraints of the research being undertaken.

Lexical self-reporting[edit]

Lexical measures use individual adjectives that reflect extravert and introvert traits, such as outgoing, talkative, reserved and quiet. Words representing introversion are reverse-coded to create composite measures of extraversion-introversion running on a continuum. Goldberg (1992)[22] developed a 20-word measure as part of his 100-word Big Five markers. Saucier (1994)[23] developed a briefer 8-word measure as part of his 40-word mini-markers. However, the psychometric properties of Saucier's original mini-markers have been found to be suboptimal with samples outside of North America.[2] As a result, a systematically revised measure was developed to have better psychometric properties, the International English Mini-Markers.[2] The International English Mini-Markers has good internal consistency reliabilities, and other validity, for assessing extraversion-introversion and other five-factor personality dimensions, both within and, especially, without American populations. Internal consistency reliability of the extraversion measure for native English-speakers is reported as a Cronbach's alpha (α) of 0.92, that for non-native English-speakers is α of 0.85.

Statement self-reporting[edit]

Statement measures tend to contain more words, and hence consume more research instrument space, than lexical measures. Respondents are asked the extent to which they, for example, "Talk to a lot of different people at parties or Often feel uncomfortable around others".[21] While some statement-based measures of extraversion-introversion have similarly acceptable psychometric properties in North American populations to lexical measures, their generally emic development makes them less suited to use in other populations.[24] For example, statements asking about talkativeness in parties are hard to answer meaningfully by those who do not attend parties, as Americans are assumed to do. Moreover, the sometimes colloquial North American language of statements makes them less suited for use outside America. For instance, statements like "Keep in the background" and "Know how to captivate people" are sometimes hard for non-native English-speakers to understand, except in a literal sense.

Eysenck's theory[edit]

Hans Eysenck described extraversion-introversion as the degree to which a person is outgoing and interactive with other people. These behavioral differences are presumed to be the result of underlying differences in brain physiology.[25] Eysenck associated cortical inhibition and excitation with the ascending reticular activation system (ARAS), a pathway located in the brainstem.[26] Extraverts seek excitement and social activity in an effort to raise their naturally low arousal level, whereas introverts tend to avoid social situations in an effort to avoid raising their naturally high arousal level too far. Eysenck designated extraversion as one of three major traits in his P-E-N model of personality, which also includes psychoticism and neuroticism.
Eysenck originally suggested that extraversion was a combination of two major tendencies, impulsiveness and sociability. He later added several other more specific traits, namely liveliness, activity level, and excitability. These traits are further linked in his personality hierarchy to even more specific habitual responses, such as partying on the weekend.
Eysenck compared this trait to the four temperaments of ancient medicine, with choleric and sanguine temperaments equating to extraversion, and melancholic and phlegmatic temperaments equating to introversion.[27]
Twin studies indicate that extraversion-introversion has a genetic component

Biological factors[edit]

The relative importance of nature versus environment in determining the level of extraversion is controversial and the focus of many studies. Twin studies have found a genetic component of 39% to 58%. In terms of the environmental component, the shared family environment appears to be far less important than individual environmental factors that are not shared between siblings.[28]
Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by variability in cortical arousal. He hypothesized that introverts are characterized by higher levels of activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused than extraverts. That extraverts require more external stimulation than introverts has been interpreted as evidence for this hypothesis. Other evidence of the "stimulation" hypothesis is that introverts salivate more than extraverts in response to a drop of lemon juice. This is due to increased activity in their ARAS, which responds to stimuli like food or social contact.[29]
Extraversion has been linked to higher sensitivity of the mesolimbic dopamine system to potentially rewarding stimuli.[30] This in part explains the high levels of positive affect found in extraverts, since they will more intensely feel the excitement of a potential reward. One consequence of this is that extraverts can more easily learn the contingencies for positive reinforcement, since the reward itself is experienced as greater.
One study found that introverts have more blood flow in the frontal lobes of their brain and the anterior or frontal thalamus, which are areas dealing with internal processing, such as planning and problem solving. Extraverts have more blood flow in the anterior cingulate gyrustemporal lobes, and posterior thalamus, which are involved in sensory and emotional experience.[31] This study and other research indicate that introversion-extraversion is related to individual differences in brain function. A study on regional brain volume found a positive correlation between introversion and grey matter volume in the right prefrontal cortex and right temporoparietal junction, as well as a positive correlation between introversion and total white matter volume.[32] Task-related functional neuroimaging has shown that extraversion is associated with increased activity in the anterior cingulate gyrus, prefrontal cortex, middle temporal gyrus, and the amygdala.[33]
Extraversion has also been linked to physiological factors such as respiration, through its association with surgency.[34]

Behaviour[edit]

Extraverts and introverts have a variety of behavioural differences. According to one study, extraverts tend to wear more decorative clothing, whereas introverts prefer practical, comfortable clothes.[35] Extraverts are more likely to prefer more upbeat, conventional, and energetic music than introverts.[36] Personality also influences how people arrange their work areas. In general, extraverts decorate their offices more, keep their doors open, keep extra chairs nearby, and are more likely to put dishes of candy on their desks. These are attempts to invite co-workers and encourage interaction. Introverts, in contrast, decorate less and tend to arrange their workspace to discourage social interaction.[37]
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.[38] 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".
Additionally, a study by Lippa (1978) found evidence for the extent to which individuals present themselves in a different way. This is called expressive behaviour, and it is dependent upon the individuals' motivation and ability to control that behaviour. Lippa (1978) examined 68 students who were asked to role-play by pretending to teach a math class. The students' level of extraversion and introversion were rated based on their external/expressive behaviours such as stride length, graphic expansiveness, the percentage of time they spent talking, the amount of time they spent making eye contact, and the total time of each teaching session. This study found that actual introverts were perceived and judged as having more extraverted-looking expressive behaviours because they were higher in terms of their self-monitoring.[39] This means that the introverts consciously put more effort into presenting a more extraverted, and rather socially desirable, version of themselves. Thus, individuals are able to regulate and modify behaviour based on their environmental situations.
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 "counter dispositional" ways in certain situations. For example, Brian Little's free trait theory[40][41] 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.

Implications[edit]

Acknowledging that introversion and extraversion are normal variants of behavior can help in self-acceptance and understanding of others. For example, an extravert can accept their introverted partner's need for space, while an introvert can acknowledge their extraverted partner's need for social interaction.
Researchers have found a correlation between extraversion and self-reported happiness. That is, more extraverted people tend to report higher levels of happiness than introverts.[42][43] Other research has shown that being instructed to act in an extraverted manner leads to increases in positive affect, even for people who are trait-level introverts.[44]
This does not mean that introverts are unhappy. Extraverts simply report experiencing more positive emotions, whereas introverts tend to be closer to neutral. This may be because extraversion is socially preferable in contemporary Western culture and thus introversion feels less desirable. In addition to the research on happiness, other studies have found that extraverts tend to report higher levels of self-esteem than introverts.[45][46] Others suggest that such results reflect socio-cultural bias in the survey itself.[11] Dr. David Meyers has claimed that happiness is a matter of possessing three traits: self-esteem, optimism, and extraversion. Meyers bases his conclusions on studies that report extraverts to be happier; these findings have been questioned in light of the fact that the "happiness" prompts given to the studies' subjects, such as "I like to be with others" and "I'm fun to be with," only measure happiness among extraverts.[11] Also, according to Carl Jung, introverts acknowledge more readily their psychological needs and problems, whereas extraverts tend to be oblivious to them because they focus more on the outer world.[1]
Although extraversion is perceived as socially desirable in Western culture, it is not always an advantage. For example, extraverted youths are more likely to engage in antisocial or delinquent behavior.[47][48] In line with this, certain evidence suggest that the trait of extraversion may also be related to that of psychopathy.[49][50] Conversely, while introversion is perceived as less socially desirable, it is strongly associated with positive traits such as intelligence[51] and "giftedness."[52][53] For many years, researchers have found that introverts tend to be more successful in academic environments, which extraverts may find boring.[54]
Research shows that behavioral immune system, the psychological processes that infer infection risk from perceptual cues and respond to these perceptual cues through the activation of aversive emotions, may influence gregariousness. Although extraversion is associated with many positive outcomes like higher levels of happiness, those extraverted people are also more likely to be exposed to communicable diseases, such as airborne infections, as they tend to have more contact with people. When individuals are more vulnerable to infection, the cost of being social will be relatively greater. Therefore, people are less extraversive when they feel vulnerable and vice versa.[55]
Although neither introversion nor extraversion is pathological, psychotherapists can take temperament into account when treating clients. Clients may respond better to different types of treatment depending on where they fall on the introversion-extraversion spectrum. Teachers can also consider temperament when dealing with their pupils, for example acknowledging that introverted children need more encouragement to speak in class while extraverted children may grow restless during long periods of quiet study.[citation needed]

Regional variation[edit]

Some claim that Americans live in an "extraverted society"[56] that rewards extravert behavior and rejects introversion.[57] This is because the U.S. is a culture of external personality, whereas in some other cultures people are valued for their "inner selves and their moral rectitude".[58] Other cultures, such as those in Japan, China and regions where Orthodox ChristianityBuddhismSufism etc. prevail, prize introversion.[11] These cultural differences predict individuals' happiness in that people who score higher in extraversion are happier, on average, in particularly extraverted cultures and vice versa.[59]
Researchers have found that people who live on islands tend to be less extraverted (more introverted) than those living on the mainland, and that people whose ancestors had inhabited the island for twenty generations tend to be less extraverted than more recent arrivals. Furthermore, people who emigrate from islands to the mainland tend to be more extraverted than people that stay on islands, and those that immigrate to islands.[59]
In the United States, researchers have found that people living in the midwestern states of North DakotaSouth DakotaNebraskaMinnesotaWisconsin, and Illinois score higher than the U.S. average on extraversion. Utah and the southeastern states of Florida and Georgia also score high on this personality trait. The most introverted states in the U.S. are MarylandNew HampshireAlaskaWashingtonOregon and Vermont. People who live in the northwestern states of IdahoMontana, and Wyoming are also relatively introverted.[60]

Relation to happiness[edit

As earlier stated, extraverts are often found to have higher levels of positive affect than introverts.[43][61][62] However, this relationship has only been found between extraversion and activated forms of positive affect.[63][64] There is no relationship between extraversion and deactivated (calm) forms of positive affect such as contentment or serenity, although one study found a negative relationship between extraversion and deactivated positive affect (i.e. a positive relationship between introversion and calm positive affect).[63] Moreover, the relationship between extraversion and activated positive affect is only significant for agentic extraversion, i.e. there is no significant relationship between affiliative extraversion and activated positive affect, especially when controlling for neuroticism.[63][65]
An influential review article concluded that personality, specifically extraversion and emotional stability, was the best predictor of subjective well-being.[66] As examples, Argyle and Lu (1990)[67] found that the trait of extraversion, as measured by Extraversion Scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), was positively and significantly correlated with positive affect, as measured by the Oxford Happiness Inventory. Using the same positive affect and extraversion scales, Hills and Argyle (2001)[68] found that positive affect was again significantly correlated with extraversion. Also, the study by Emmons and Diener (1986)[69] showed that extraversion correlates positively and significantly with positive affect but not with negative affect. Similar results were found in a large longitudinal study by Diener, Sandvik, Pavot, and Fujita (1992),[70] which assessed 14,407 participants from 100 areas of continental United States. Using the abbreviated General Well-Being Schedule, which tapped positive and negative affects, and Costa and McCrae's (1986).[71] short version of the NEO's Extraversion scale, the authors reported that extraverts experienced greater well-being at two points in time, during which data were collected: first between 1971 and 1975, and later between 1981 and 1984. However, the latter study did not control for neuroticism, an important covariate when investigating relationships between extraversion and positive affect or wellbeing.[72] Studies that controlled for neuroticism have found no significant relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being.[73] Larsen and Ketelaar (1991)[74] showed that extraverts respond more to positive affect than to negative affect, since they exhibit more positive-affect reactivity to the positive-affect induction, yet they do not react more negatively to the negative-affect induction.[75]

Instrumental view[edit]

The instrumental view proposes that personality traits give rise to conditions and actions, which have affective consequences, and thus generate individual differences in emotionality.[75][76]

Personality trait as a cause of higher sociability[edit]

According to the instrumental view, one explanation for greater subjective well-being among extraverts could be that extraversion helps in the creation of life circumstances, which promote high levels of positive affect. Specifically, the personality trait of extraversion is seen as a facilitator of more social interactions,[61][75][77] since the low cortical arousal among extraverts results in them seeking more social situations in order to increase their arousal.[78]

Social activity hypothesis[edit]

According to the social activity hypothesis, more frequent participation in social situations creates more frequent, and higher levels, of positive affect. Therefore, it is believed that since extraverts are characterized as more sociable than introverts, they also possess higher levels of positive affect brought on by social interactions.[79][80][81] Specifically, the results of Furnham and Brewin's study (1990)[62] suggest that extraverts enjoy and participate more in social activities than introverts, and as a result extraverts report a higher level of happiness. Also, in the study of Argyle and Lu (1990)[67] extraverts were found to be less likely to avoid participation in noisy social activities, and to be more likely to participate in social activities such as party games, jokes, or going to the cinema. Similar results were reported by DienerLarsen, and Emmons (1984)[82] who found that extraverts seek social situations more often than introverts, especially when engaging in recreational activities.
However, a variety of findings contradict the claims of the social activity hypothesis. Firstly, it was found that extraverts were happier than introverts even when alone. Specifically, extraverts tend to be happier regardless of whether they live alone or with others, or whether they live in a vibrant city or quiet rural environment.[43] Similarly, a study by Diener, Sandvik, Pavot, and Fujita (1992)[70] showed that although extraverts chose social jobs relatively more frequently (51%) than nonsocial jobs compared to introverts (38%), they were happier than introverts regardless of whether their occupations had social or nonsocial character. Secondly, it was found that extraverts only sometimes reported greater amounts of social activity than introverts,[82] but in general extraverts and introverts do not differ in the quantity of their socialization.[43] Similar finding was reported by Srivastava, Angelo, and Vallereux (2008),[83] who found that extraverts and introverts both enjoy participating in social interactions, but extraverts participate socially more. Thirdly, studies have shown that both extraverts and introverts participate in social relations, but that the quality of this participation differs. The more frequent social participation among extraverts could be explained by the fact that extraverts know more people, but those people are not necessarily their close friends, whereas introverts, when participating in social interactions, are more selective and have only few close friends with whom they have special relationships.[68]

Social attention theory[edit]

Yet another explanation of the high correlation between extraversion and happiness comes from the study by Ashton, Lee, and Paunonen (2002).[84] They suggested that the core element of extraversion is a tendency to behave in ways that attract, hold, and enjoy social attention, and not reward sensitivity. They claimed that one of the fundamental qualities of social attention is its potential of being rewarding. Therefore, if a person shows positive emotions of enthusiasm, energy, and excitement, that person is seen favorably by others and he or she gains others' attention. This favorable reaction from others likely encourages extraverts to engage in further extraverted behavior.[84] Ashton, Lee, and Paunonen's (2002)[84] study showed that their measure of social attention, the Social Attention Scale, was much more highly correlated with extraversion than were measures of reward sensitivity.

Temperamental view[edit]

Temperamental view is based on the notion that there is a direct link between people's personality traits and their sensitivity to positive and negative affects.[61][74][75]

Affective reactivity model[edit]

The affective reactivity model states that the strength of a person's reactions to affect-relevant events are caused by people's differences in affect.[74][85] This model is based on the reinforcement sensitivity theory by Jeffrey Alan Gray, which states that people with stronger behavioral activation system (BAS) are high in reward responsiveness and are predisposed to the personality trait of extraversion, while people with a stronger behavioral inhibition system (BIS) are lower in reward responsiveness and are more predisposed to personality trait of neuroticism and introversion.[86] Therefore, extraverts are seen as having a temperamental predisposition to positive affect since positive mood induction has a greater effect on them than on introverts, thus extraverts are more prone to react to pleasant effects.[30][74][85][87][88] For example, Gable, Reis, and Elliot (2000).[89] found in two consecutive studies that people with more sensitive BIS reported higher levels of average negative affect, while people with more sensitive BAS reported higher levels of positive affect. Also, Zelenski and Larsen (1999)[75] found that people with more sensitive BAS reported more positive emotions during the positive mood induction, while people with more sensitive BIS reported more negative emotions during the negative mood induction.[citation needed]

Social reactivity theory[edit]

The social reactivity theory alleges that all humans, whether they like it or not, are required to participate in social situations. Since extraverts prefer engaging in social interactions more than introverts, they also derive more positive affect from such situations than introverts do.[43][67][82] The support for this theory comes from work of Brian R. Little, who popularized concept of "restorative niches". Little claimed that life often requires people to participate in social situations, and since acting social is out of character for introverts, it was shown to harm their well-being. Therefore, one way to preserve introverts' well-being is for them to recharge as often as possible in places where they can return to their true selves—places Little calls "restorative niches".[90]
However, it was also found that extraverts did not respond stronger to social situations than introverts, nor did they report bigger boosts of positive affect during such interactions.[77][83]

Affective regulation[edit]

Another possible explanation for more happiness among extraverts comes from the fact that extraverts are able to better regulate their affective states. This means that in ambiguous situations (situations where positive and negative moods are introduced and mixed in similar proportions) extraverts show a slower decrease of positive affect, and, as a result, they maintained a more positive affect balance than introverts.[91] Extraverts may also choose activities that facilitate happiness (e.g., recalling pleasant vs. unpleasant memories) more than introverts when anticipating difficult tasks.[92]

The set-point model a.k.a. affect-level model[edit]

According to the set-point model, levels of positive and negative affects are more or less fixed within each individual, hence, after a positive or negative event, people's moods tend to go back to the pre-set level. According to the set-point model, extraverts experience more happiness because their pre-set level of positive affect is set higher than the pre-set point of positive affect in introverts, therefore extraverts require less positive reinforcement in order to feel happy.[88]

Pleasure-arousal relation[edit]

A study by Peter Kuppens (2008)[93] showed that extraverts and introverts engage in different behaviors when feeling pleasant, which may explain underestimation of the frequency and intensity of happiness exhibited by introverts. Specifically, Kuppens (2008)[93] found that arousal and pleasantness are positively correlated for extraverts, which means that pleasant feelings are more likely to be accompanied by high arousal for extraverts. On the other hand, arousal and pleasantness are negatively correlated for introverts, resulting in introverts exhibiting low arousal when feeling pleasant. In other words, if everything is going well in an extravert's life, which is a source of pleasant feelings, extraverts see such a situation as an opportunity to engage in active behavior and goal pursuit, which brings about an active, aroused pleasant state. When everything is going well for introverts, they see it as an opportunity to let down their guard, resulting in them feeling relaxed and content.[93]

Complications to the extraversion-happiness correlation[edit]

Though extraversion has consistently been shown to have a strong correlation with happiness and well-being, these findings are complicated by the presence of other personality traits that act as strong indicators of happiness.

Neuroticism and extraversion[edit]

In multiple studies, neuroticism has been shown to have an equal, if not larger, impact on happiness and subjective well-being than extraversion. One study classified school children into four categories based on their scores in assessments of extraversion and emotional stability (neuroticism).[94] The results showed no significant difference between the happiness levels of stable introverts and stable extraverts, while unstable extraverts and introverts both demonstrated significantly less happiness than their counterparts. In this study, neuroticism appeared to be the more salient factor for overall well-being.
Likewise, in later studies, researchers used assessment scales to test for categories such as self-esteem and life-goal orientation, which they had positively correlated with happiness. Participants' responses to these scales suggested that neuroticism actually had a larger impact than extraversion in measures of well-being.[95][96]

Other Big 5 factors and extraversion[edit]

Though extraversion and neuroticism seem to have the largest effect on personal happiness, other Big 5 personality factors have also been shown to correlate with happiness and subjective well-being. For example, one study showed that conscientiousness and agreeableness correlated about 0.20 with subjective well-being.[97] While the effect of these traits was not as strong as extraversion or neuroticism, it is clear that they still have some impact on happiness outcomes.
Similarly, interactions between extraversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness have demonstrated significant impacts on subjective-well being. In one study, researchers used three scales to assess subjective well-being. They found that extraversion only served as a predictor for one assessment, in conjunction with neuroticism, while the other two assessment outcomes were better predicted by conscientiousness and neuroticism.[98] In addition to the importance of including other factors in happiness assessments, this study also demonstrates the manner in which an operational definition of well-being changes whether extraversion emerges as a salient predictive factor.

Other contributing personality factors[edit]

There is also evidence that other non-trait elements of personality may correlate with happiness. For instance, one study demonstrated that various features of one's goals, such as progress towards important goals or conflicts between them, can affect both emotional and cognitive well-being.[99] Several other researchers have also suggested that, at least in more individualistic cultures, having a coherent sense of one's personality (and acting in a way that conforms to that self-concept) is positively related to well-being.[100][101][102] Thus, focusing solely on extraversion—or even extraversion and neuroticism—is likely to provide an incomplete picture of the relationship between happiness and personality.

Culture[edit]

In addition, one's culture may also influence happiness and overall subjective well-being. The overall level of happiness fluctuates from culture to culture, as does preferred expression of happiness. Comparing various international surveys across countries reveals that different nations, and different ethnic groups within nations, exhibit differences in average life satisfaction.
For example, one researcher found that between 1958 and 1987, Japanese life satisfaction fluctuated around 6 on a 10-point scale, while Denmark's fluctuated around 8.[103] Comparing ethnic groups within the United States, another study found that European Americans reported being "significantly happier" with their lives than Asian Americans.[104]
Researchers have hypothesized a number of factors that could be responsible for these differences between countries, including national differences in overall income levels, self-serving biases and self-enhancement, and approach and avoidance orientations.[105] Taken together, these findings suggest that while extraversion-introversion does have a strong correlation with happiness, it does not stand alone as a sole predictor of subjective well-being, and that other factors must be accounted for when trying to determine the correlates of happiness.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. Jump up to:a b Jung, C. G. (1921) Psychologische Typen, Rascher Verlag, Zurich – translation H.G. Baynes, 1923.
  2. Jump up to:a b c d Thompson, Edmund R. (2008). "Development and Validation of an International English Big-Five Mini-Markers". Personality and Individual Differences45 (6): 542–8. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.013.
  3. ^ Jung, Carl (1995). Memories, Dreams, Reflections. London: Fontana Press. pp. 414–5. ISBN 978-0-00-654027-4.
  4. ^ McDougall, W. (1923/1932). The Energies of Men: a Study of the Fundamentals of Dynamic Psychology, Methuen & Co. Ltd, London, p. 184.
  5. ^ "Is it extraversion or extroversion?"The Predictive Index. August 2, 2016. Retrieved 2018-02-21.
  6. Jump up to:a b c Merriam Webster Dictionary.
  7. Jump up to:a b "Extraversion or Introversion"The Myers & Briggs Foundation. Archived from the original on April 5, 2017. Retrieved April 6, 2015.
  8. ^ Helgoe, Laurie (2008). "Introvert Power: Why Your Inner Life is Your Hidden Strength". Naperville, Illinois: Sourcebooks, Inc.[page needed]
  9. ^ Cain, Susan, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking, Crown Publishing 2012: quoted by Szalavitz, Maia, "'Mind Reading': Q&A with Susan Cain on the Power of Introverts" (WebCite archive), Time Healthland, January 27, 2012; and Cook, Gareth"The Power of Introverts: A Manifesto for Quiet Brilliance" (WebCite archive), Scientific American, January 24, 2012.
  10. ^ Introversion Gale Encyclopedia of Childhood & Adolescence. Gale Research, 1998.
  11. Jump up to:a b c d Laney, Marti Olsen (2002), The Introvert Advantage: How to Thrive in an Extrovert World, Workman Publishing. ISBN 0-7611-2369-5.
  12. ^ Szalavitz, Maia, "‘Mind Reading’: Q&A with Susan Cain on the Power of Introverts"(Archived 2012-03-19 at WebCiteTime Healthland, January 27, 2012.
  13. ^ All About Shyness Archived September 12, 2016, at the Wayback Machine Meredith Whitten, Psych Central, August 21, 2001; Accessed 2007-08-02
  14. ^ Susan Cain. "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking"www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved October 5, 2015.
  15. Jump up to:a b "Book Review: Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking by Susan Cain". September 12, 2012. Retrieved October 5, 2015.
  16. ^ Cain, Susan (January 24, 2012). Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop TalkingISBN 9780307452207. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  17. ^ The OCEAN of Personality Personality Synopsis, Chapter 4: Trait Theory. AllPsych Online. Last updated March 23, 2004
  18. ^ Cohen, Donald; Schmidt, James P. (1979). "Ambiversion: Characteristics of Midrange Responders on the Introversion-Extraversion Continuum". Journal of Personality Assessment43 (5): 514–6. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4305_14PMID 16367029.
  19. ^ Cain, Susan (2012), Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking at page 3 (Introduction) and page 280 (note 11). • Goudreau, Jenna, "The Secret Power Of Introverts" (WebCite archive), Forbes, January 26, 2012.
  20. ^ Gordon, Leslie A. (January 1, 2016). "Most lawyers are introverted, and that's not necessarily a bad thing"ABA Journal. Archived at the Wayback Machine. Archived from the original on January 8, 2016.
  21. Jump up to:a b Goldberg, Lewis R.; Johnson, John A.; Eber, Herbert W.; Hogan, Robert; Ashton, Michael C.; Cloninger, C. Robert; Gough, Harrison G. (2006). "The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures". Journal of Research in Personality40 (1): 84–96. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007.
  22. ^ Goldberg, Lewis R. (1992). "The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure". Psychological Assessment4 (1): 26–42. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26.
  23. ^ Saucier, Gerard (1994). "Mini-Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg's Unipolar Big-Five Markers". Journal of Personality Assessment63 (3): 506–16. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6303_8PMID 7844738.
  24. ^ Piedmont, R. L.; Chae, J.-H. (1997). "Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the Five-Factor Model of Personality: Development and Validation of the NEO PI-R for Koreans". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology28 (2): 131–155. doi:10.1177/0022022197282001.
  25. ^ Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Thomas Publishing.[page needed]
  26. ^ Bullock, W. A.; Gilliland, K. (1993). "Eysenck's arousal theory of introversion-extraversion: A converging measures investigation". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology64 (1): 113–123. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.64.1.113.
  27. ^ Parish, Laura (November 1965). "The Eysenck Personality Inventory by H. J. Eysenck; S. G. B. Eysenck". British Journal of Educational Studies14 (1): 140. doi:10.2307/3119050JSTOR 3119050.
  28. ^ Tellegen, Auke; Lykken, David T.; Bouchard Jr, Thomas J.; Wilcox, Kimerly J.; Segal, NL; Rich, S (1988). "Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology54 (6): 1031–9. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.318.4777doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1031PMID 3397862.
  29. ^ "Lemon juice experiment"BBC. Retrieved June 4, 2016.
  30. Jump up to:a b Depue, RA; Collins, PF (1999). "Neurobiology of the structure of personality: Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion". The Behavioral and Brain Sciences22(3): 491–517, discussion 518–69. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99002046PMID 11301519.
  31. ^ Johnson, DL; Wiebe, JS; Gold, SM; Andreasen, NC; Hichwa, RD; Watkins, GL; Boles Ponto, LL (1999). "Cerebral blood flow and personality: A positron emission tomography study". The American Journal of Psychiatry156 (2): 252–7. doi:10.1176/ajp.156.2.252(inactive December 11, 2019). PMID 9989562.
  32. ^ Forsman, L. J., de Manzano, Ö., Karabanov, A., Madison, G., & Ullén, F. (2012). Differences in regional brain volume related to the extraversion–introversion dimension—a voxel based morphometry study. Neuroscience research, 72(1), 59–67.
  33. ^ Lei, Xu; Yang, Tianliang; Wu, Taoyu (November 9, 2015). "Functional neuroimaging of extraversion-introversion"Neuroscience Bulletin31 (6): 663–675. doi:10.1007/s12264-015-1565-1ISSN 1673-7067PMC 5563732PMID 26552800.
  34. ^ Shiner, Rebecca; Caspi, Avshalom (2003). "Personality differences in childhood and adolescence: Measurement, development, and consequences". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry44 (1): 2–32. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00101PMID 12553411.
  35. ^ Sharma, R. S. (1980). "Clothing behaviour, personality, and values: A correlational study". Psychological Studies25 (2): 137–42.
  36. ^ Rentfrow, Peter J.; Gosling, Samuel D. (2003). "The do re mi's of everyday life: The structure and personality correlates of music preferences"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology84 (6): 1236–56. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1236PMID 12793587.
  37. ^ Gosling, S. (2008). Snoop. New York: Basic Books.[page needed]
  38. ^ Fleeson, W.; Gallagher, P. (2009). "The Implications of Big Five Standing for the Distribution of Trait Manifestation in Behavior: Fifteen Experience-Sampling Studies and a Meta-Analysis"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology97 (6): 1097–1114. doi:10.1037/a0016786PMC 2791901PMID 19968421.
  39. ^ Lippa, R. (1978). "Expressive control, expressive consistency, and the correspondence between expressive behavior and personality". Journal of Personality46 (3): 438–461. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1978.tb01011.x.
  40. ^ Little, B. R. (1996). "Free traits, personal projects and idio-tapes: Three tiers for personality research". Psychological Inquiry8 (4): 340–344. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0704_6.
  41. ^ Little, B. R. (2008). "Personal Projects and Free Traits: Personality and Motivation Reconsidered". Social and Personality Psychology Compass2 (3): 1235–1254. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00106.x.
  42. ^ Myers, David G (1992). The Secrets of Happiness Psychology Today.
  43. Jump up to:a b c d e Pavot, William; Diener, Ed; Fujita, Frank (1990). "Extraversion and happiness". Personality and Individual Differences11 (12): 1299–306. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90157-M.
  44. ^ Fleeson, William; Malanos, Adriane B.; Achille, Noelle M. (2002). "An intraindividual process approach to the relationship between extraversion and positive affect: Is acting extraverted as 'good' as being extraverted?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology83 (6): 1409–22. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1409PMID 12500821.
  45. ^ Swickert, Rhonda; Hittner, James B.; Kitos, Nicole; Cox-Fuenzalida, Luz-Eugenia (2004). "Direct or indirect, that is the question: A re-evaluation of extraversion's influence on self-esteem". Personality and Individual Differences36 (1): 207–17. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00080-1.
  46. ^ Cheng, Helen; Furnham, Adrian (2003). "Personality, self-esteem, and demographic predictions of happiness and depression". Personality and Individual Differences34 (6): 921–42. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00078-8.
  47. ^ Rushton, Philippe; Chrisjohn, Roland (1981). "Extraversion, neurotiscism, psychoticism and self-reported delinquency: evidence from eight separate samples". Personality and Individual Differences2 (1): 11–20. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(81)90047-7.
  48. ^ Ryckman, R. (2004). Theories of Personality. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.[page needed]
  49. ^ Newman, Joseph; Widom, Cathy; Nathan, Stuart (1985). "Passive avoidance in syndromes of disinhibition: psychopathy and extraversion". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology48 (5): 1316–1327. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.48.5.1316.
  50. ^ Ghaderi, Davod; Borjali, Ahmad; Bahrami, Hadi; Sohrabi, Faramarz (2011). "Survey of the relationship between five factor model and psychopathic personality in a sample of male prisoners in Iran". Annals of Biological Research2 (6): 116–122.
  51. ^ Furnham, Adrian; Forde, Liam; Cotter, Tim (1998). "Personality and intelligence". Personality and Individual Differences24 (2): 187–92. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00169-4.
  52. ^ Gallagher, S. A. (1990). "Personality patterns of the gifted". Understanding Our Gifted3(1): 11–13.
  53. ^ Hoehn, L.; Birely, M.K. (1988). "Mental process preferences of gifted children". Illinois Council for the Gifted Journal7: 28–31.
  54. ^ Eysenck, H. J. (1971). Readings in Extraversion-Introversion. New York: Wiley.[page needed]
  55. ^ Schaller, Mark (October 31, 2011). "The behavioural immune system and the psychology of human sociality"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B366 (1583): 3418–3426. doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0029PMC 3189350PMID 22042918.
  56. ^ Diamond, Stephen A. (November 7, 2008). "The Therapeutic Power of Sleep"Psychology Today. Retrieved February 4, 2012.
  57. ^ "Quiet, Please: Unleashing 'The Power Of Introverts'". NPR. January 30, 2012. Retrieved February 4, 2012.
  58. ^ Cain, Susan. "The Power of Introverts". TED. Retrieved December 27, 2012.
  59. Jump up to:a b Fulmer, C. Ashley; Gelfand, Michele J.; Kruglanski, Arie W.; Kim-Prieto, Chu; Diener, Ed; Pierro, Antonio; Higgins, E. Tory (2010). "On 'Feeling Right' in Cultural Contexts: How Person-Culture Match Affects Self-Esteem and Subjective Well-Being". Psychological Science21 (11): 1563–9. doi:10.1177/0956797610384742PMID 20876880.
  60. ^ Rentfrow, Peter J.; Gosling, Samuel D.; Potter, Jeff (2008). "A Theory of the Emergence, Persistence, and Expression of Geographic Variation in Psychological Characteristics". Perspectives on Psychological Science3 (5): 339–69. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00084.xPMID 26158954Lay summary – WSJ.com (September 23, 2008).
  61. Jump up to:a b c McCrae, Robert R.; Costa, Paul T. (1991). "Adding Liebe und Arbeit: The Full Five-Factor Model and Well-Being"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin17 (2): 227–32. doi:10.1177/014616729101700217.
  62. Jump up to:a b Furnham, Adrian; Brewin, Chris R. (1990). "Personality and happiness". Personality and Individual Differences11 (10): 1093–6. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90138-H.
  63. Jump up to:a b c Smillie, L. D., DeYoung, C. G., & Hall, P. J. (2015). Clarifying the relation between extraversion and positive affect. Journal of Personality, 83(5), 564-574.
  64. ^ Yik, M. S. M., & Russell, J. A. (2001). Predicting the Big Two of affect from the Big Five of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 247-277.
  65. ^ Smillie, L. D., Geaney, J. T., Wilt, J., Cooper, A. J., & Revelle, W. (2013). Aspects of extraversion are unrelated to pleasant affective-reactivity: Further examination of the affective-reactivity hypothesis. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 580-587.
  66. ^ Diener, Ed; Suh, Eunkook M.; Lucas, Richard E.; Smith, Heidi L. (1999). "Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress". Psychological Bulletin125 (2): 276–302. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.
  67. Jump up to:a b c Argyle, Michael; Lu, Luo (1990). "The happiness of extraverts". Personality and Individual Differences11 (10): 1011–7. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90128-E.
  68. Jump up to:a b Hills, Peter; Argyle, Michael (2001). "Emotional stability as a major dimension of happiness". Personality and Individual Differences31 (8): 1357–64. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00229-4.
  69. ^ Emmons, Robert A.; Diener, Ed (1986). "Influence of impulsivity and sociability on subjective well-being". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology50 (6): 1211–5. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1211.
  70. Jump up to:a b Diener, Ed; Sandvik, Ed; Pavot, William; Fujita, Frank (1992). "Extraversion and subjective well-being in a U.S. National probability sample". Journal of Research in Personality26 (3): 205–15. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(92)90039-7.
  71. ^ Costa, Paul T.; McCrae, Robert R. (1986). "Cross-sectional studies of personality in a national sample: I. Development and validation of survey measures". Psychology and Aging1 (2): 140–3. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.1.2.140PMID 3267390.
  72. ^ Vittersø, J., & Nilsen, F. (2002). The conceptual and relational structure of subjective well-being, neuroticism, and extraversion: Once again, neuroticism is the important predictor of happiness. Social Indicators Research, 57(1), 89-118.
  73. ^ Vittersø, J., & Nilsen, F. (2002). The conceptual and relational structure of subjective well-being, neuroticism, and extraversion: Once again, neuroticism is the important predictor of happiness. Social Indicators Research, 57(1), 89-118.
  74. Jump up to:a b c d Larsen, Randy J.; Ketelaar, Timothy (1991). "Personality and susceptibility to positive and negative emotional states"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology61 (1): 132–40. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.1.132PMID 1890584.
  75. Jump up to:a b c d e Zelenski, John M.; Larsen, Randy J. (1999). "Susceptibility to Affect: A Comparison of Three Personality Taxonomies". Journal of Personality67 (5): 761–91. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00072PMID 10540757.
  76. ^ Watson, D. (2000). Mood and Temperament. New York, NY: Guilford Press.[page needed]
  77. Jump up to:a b Lucas, Richard E.; Le, Kimdy; Dyrenforth, Portia S. (2008). "Explaining the Extraversion/Positive Affect Relation: Sociability Cannot Account for Extraverts' Greater Happiness". Journal of Personality76 (3): 385–414. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00490.xPMID 18399958.
  78. ^ Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.[page needed]
  79. ^ Campbell, A.; Converse, P.; Rodgers, W. (1976). The quality of American life. New York, NY: Sage.[page needed]
  80. ^ Eysenck, H. J.; Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences. New York, NY: Plenum Press.[page needed]
  81. ^ Snyder, M. (1981). "On the influence of individuals on situations". In Cantor, N.; Kihlstrom, J. (eds.). Personality, cognition and social interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 309–29.
  82. Jump up to:a b c Diener, Ed; Larsen, Randy J.; Emmons, Robert A. (1984). "Person × Situation interactions: Choice of situations and congruence response models". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology47 (3): 580–92. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.3.580PMID 6491870.
  83. Jump up to:a b Srivastava, Sanjay; Angelo, Kimberly M.; Vallereux, Shawn R. (2008). "Extraversion and positive affect: A day reconstruction study of person–environment transactions". Journal of Research in Personality42 (6): 1613–8. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.05.002.
  84. Jump up to:a b c Ashton, Michael C.; Lee, Kibeom; Paunonen, Sampo V. (2002). "What is the central feature of extraversion? Social attention versus reward sensitivity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology83 (1): 245–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.245PMID 12088129.
  85. Jump up to:a b Tellegen, A. (1985). "Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report". In Tuma, A. H.; Maser, J. D. (eds.). Anxiety and the anxiety disorders. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 681–706.
  86. ^ Gray, J. A. (1994). "Personality dimensions and emotion systems". In Ekman, P.; Davidson, R. (eds.). The nature of emotions: Fundamental questions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 329–31.
  87. ^ Carver, C. S.; Sutton, S. K.; Scheier, M. F. (2000). "Action, Emotion, and Personality: Emerging Conceptual Integration". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin26 (6): 741–51. doi:10.1177/0146167200268008.
  88. Jump up to:a b Rusting, Cheryl L.; Larsen, Randy J. (1995). "Moods as sources of stimulation: Relationships between personality and desired mood states". Personality and Individual Differences18 (3): 321–329. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)00157-N.
  89. ^ Gable, Shelly L.; Reis, Harry T.; Elliot, Andrew J. (2000). "Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology78 (6): 1135–49. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1135PMID 10870914.
  90. ^ Little, Brian R. (2000). "Free traits and personal contexts: Expending a social ecological model of well-being". In Welsh, W. Bruce; Craik, Kenneth H.; Price, Richard H. (eds.). Person-environment Psychology: New Directions and Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. pp. 87–116. ISBN 978-0-8058-2470-4.
  91. ^ Lischetzke, Tanja; Eid, Michael (2006). "Why Extraverts Are Happier Than Introverts: The Role of Mood Regulation". Journal of Personality74 (4): 1127–61. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00405.xPMID 16787431.
  92. ^ Tamir, Maya (2009). "Differential Preferences for Happiness: Extraversion and Trait-Consistent Emotion Regulation". Journal of Personality77 (2): 447–70. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00554.xPMID 19220724.
  93. Jump up to:a b c Kuppens, Peter (2008). "Individual differences in the relationship between pleasure and arousal". Journal of Research in Personality42 (4): 1053–9. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.10.007.
  94. ^ Young, R; Bradley, M.T. (2008). "Social withdrawal: self-efficacy, happiness, and popularity in introverted and extraverted adolescents". Canadian Journal of School Psychology14 (1): 21–35. doi:10.1177/082957359801400103.
  95. ^ Hills, P.; Argyle, M. (2001). "Happiness, introversion-extraversion and happy introverts". Personality and Individual Differences30 (4): 595–608. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00058-1.
  96. ^ Hills, P; Argyle, M (2001). "Emotional stability as a major dimension of happiness". Personality and Individual Differences31 (8): 1357–1364. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00229-4.
  97. ^ DeNeve, KM; Cooper, H (1998). "The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being"Psychological Bulletin124 (2): 197–229. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.197PMID 9747186.
  98. ^ Hayes, N; Joseph, S (2003). "Big 5 correlates of three measures of subjective well-being". Personality and Individual Differences34 (4): 723–727. doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(02)00057-0.
  99. ^ Emmons, RA (1986). "Personal strivings: an approach to personality and subjective". Annual Review of Psychology51 (5): 1058–68. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.5.1058.
  100. ^ Cantor, N; Sanderson, CA (1999). "Life task participation and well-being: the importance of taking part in daily life". Well-Being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology: 230–243.
  101. ^ Higgins, ET; Grant, H; Shah, J. "Self regulation and quality of life: emotional and non-emotional life experiences". Well-Being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology: 244–266.
  102. ^ Scheier, MF; Carver, CS (1993). "On the power of positive thinking: the benefits of being optimistic". Current Directions in Psychological Science2 (1): 26–30. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770572.
  103. ^ Veenhoven, R (1993). Happiness in Nations: Subjective Appreciation of Life in 56 Nations 1946–1992. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Erasmus University.
  104. ^ Oishi, S (2001). "Culture and memory for emotional experiences: on-line vs. retrospective judgments of subjective well-being". Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering61.
  105. ^ Diener, E; Oishi, S; Lucas, R (2003). "Personality, Culture, and Subjective Well-Being: Emotional and Cognitive Evaluations Of Life". Annual Review of Psychology54: 403–425. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145056PMID 12172000.

External links[edit]