Introvert and extrovert scale

Introversion Scale

Introversion Scale Introversion Scale

This introversion scale was developed by McCroskey to be distinct from measures of communication apprehension. An examination of the literature on introversion indicated that other introversions scales have included items that were tapping apprehension about communication. Items were drawn from the work of Eysenck, with items which referenced communication excluded. This permits the measurement of introversion without the contamination of communication apprehension items and allows the examination of both introversion and communication apprehension as predictors of communication behaviors independently of each other. The correlations of this measure with the PRCA-24 have been around .30. Alpha reliability estimates have been above .80. Items to measure neuroticism are used as filler items and are not scored with the introversion items.

DIRECTIONS: Below are eighteen statements that people sometimes make about themselves. Please indicate whether or not you believe each statement applies to you by marking whether you:

Strongly Disagree = 1; Disagree 2; are undecided =3; Agree = 4; Strongly Agree = 5

_____1. Are you inclined to keep in the background on social occasions?

_____2. Do you like to mix socially with people?

_____3. Do you sometimes feel happy, sometimes depressed, without any apparent reason?

_____4. Are you inclined to limit your acquaintances to a select few?

_____5. Do you like to have many social engagements?

_____6. Do you have frequent ups and downs in mood, either with or without apparent cause?

_____7. Would you rate yourself as a happy-go-lucky individual?

_____8. Can you usually let yourself go and have a good time at a party?

_____9. Are you inclined to be moody?

_____10. Would you be very unhappy if you were prevented from making numerous social contacts?

_____11. Do you usually take the initiative in making new friends?

_____12. Does your mind often wander while you are trying to concentrate?

_____13. Do you like to play pranks upon others?

_____14. Are you usually a "good mixer?"

_____15. Are you sometimes bubbling over with energy and sometimes very sluggish?

_____16. Do you often "have the time of your life" at social affairs?

_____17. Are you frequently "lost in thought" even when you should be taking part in a conversation?

_____18. Do you derive more satisfaction from social activities than from anything else?

Scoring: To determine your score on the Introversion Scale, complete the following steps:

Step 1. Add scores for items 1 & 4

Step 2. Add the scores for items 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, & 18

Step 3. Complete the following formula:

Introversion = 12 - Total from Step 1 + Total from Step 2

Your score should be between 12 and 60. If you compute a score outside that range, you have made a mistake in computing the score. Note: Items 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 17 are not used in computing your introversion scale.

Individuals scoring above 48 are highly introverted; those scoring below 24 have low introversion (are extraverted). Those scoring between 24 and 48 are in the moderate range.

Sources:

Drawn from items recommended by:

Eysenck, H. J. (1970). Readings in extraversion-introversion: Volume I. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

Eysenck, H. J. (1971). Readings in extraversion-introversion: Volume II. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

Note: Items 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 17 are not scored. They are items recommended by Eysenck for measuring neuroticism.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation

Extraversion or Introversion

The first pair of psychological preferences is Extraversion and Introversion. Where do you put your attention and get your energy? Do you like to spend time in the outer world of people and things (Extraversion), or in your inner world of ideas and images (Introversion)?

Extraversion and Introversion as terms used by C. G. Jung explain different attitudes people use to direct their energy. These words have a meaning in psychology that is different from the way they are used in everyday language.

Everyone spends some time extraverting and some time introverting. Don't confuse Introversion with shyness or reclusiveness. They are not related.

Take a minute to ask yourself which of the following descriptions seems more natural, effortless, and comfortable for you?

Extraversion (E)

I like getting my energy from active involvement in events and having a lot of different activities. I'm excited when I'm around people and I like to energize other people. I like moving into action and making things happen. I generally feel at home in the world. I often understand a problem better when I can talk out loud about it and hear what others have to say.

The following statements generally apply to me:

I am seen as "outgoing" or as a "people person."
I feel comfortable in groups and like working in them.
I have a wide range of friends and know lots of people.
I sometimes jump too quickly into an activity and don't allow enough time to think it over.
Before I start a project, I sometimes forget to stop and get clear on what I want to do and why.

Introversion (I)

I like getting my energy from dealing with the ideas, pictures, memories, and reactions that are inside my head, in my inner world. I often prefer doing things alone or with one or two people I feel comfortable with. I take time to reflect so that I have a clear idea of what I'll be doing when I decide to act. Ideas are almost solid things for me. Sometimes I like the idea of something better than the real thing.

The following statements generally apply to me:

I am seen as "reflective" or "reserved."
I feel comfortable being alone and like things I can do on my own.
I prefer to know just a few people well.
I sometimes spend too much time reflecting and don't move into action quickly enough.
I sometimes forget to check with the outside world to see if my ideas really fit the experience.

Adapted from Looking at Type: The Fundamentals
by Charles R. Martin (CAPT 1997)

Types of human temperament - GBPOU RS (Y) "Vilyui Professional Pedagogical College named after N. G. Chernyshevsky"

Psychology knows two opposite types of personality: extroverts and introverts. The main criterion that distinguishes extroverts and introverts, Carl Gustav Jung puts the direction of movement of the libido. According to K. Jung, extraversion is manifested in the direction of the libido (vital energy) of a person to the outside world, in that the extravert prefers the social and practical aspects of life, operations with real external objects, and the introvert prefers immersion in the world of imagination and reflection. An extrovert is aimed at wasting their own energy, moving it towards surrounding objects, an introvert is aimed at accumulating, moving energy into the inner world. Introversion is one of the archetypal manifestations of the collective unconscious. Analyzing the differences in the concepts of two other prominent representatives of dynamic psychology, Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler, Jung believes that the essentially similar concepts of these authors differ due to the extraversion of their authors. If the first, according to Jung, has introversion, which makes him look for the mechanisms of the psyche in the depths of the inner world, then the second, being an extrovert, considers the human psyche in a social context, considering the desire for social superiority as the basis of libido. According to Jung, extraversion-introversion forms the basis of a number of independent psychological functions: thinking, feeling, sensation, intuition.

Hans Eysenck borrows the term "extroversion" from Jung when creating his dispositional model. Eysenck found that in different studies conducted by different research groups, personality parameters consistently vary in the degree of their orientation to social relations as opposed to orientation to reflection, experiences, feelings. These concepts are the poles of the superfactor - a complex of personality traits that correlate with each other, which is genetically determined. The typical Eysenck extrovert is sociable, optimistic, impulsive, has a wide circle of acquaintances and little control over emotions and feelings. The typical introvert is calm, shy, distant from everyone but close people, plans his actions in advance, loves order in everything and keeps his feelings under strict control. The Jungian term came in very handy in this situation. Moreover, it turned out that extraversion may be one of the basic personality traits, of which Eysenck eventually identified three.

In psychiatry, the typology of Leonhard is widespread, who borrowed the earliest interpretation of this term according to Jung and rethought it: according to Leonhard, an extrovert is a weak-willed person subject to outside influence, an introvert is a strong-willed person. At the same time, Leonhard's typology is psychiatric, not psychological, and refers primarily to pathologies. If we are not talking about pathologies, then close to the interpretation of Leonhard (but not Jung) of this term are such terms of psychology as the locus of control (internal and external), externalism and internalism (R.L. Akoff and Emery), etc. Subsequently extraversion as a personality trait shows its worth, persisting in such modern models as the Big Five (John et al., 2008) or HEXACO (Ashton et al., 2004). The terms "extraversion" and "introversion" are also used in the Myers-Briggs typology, in socionics and a number of other modern questionnaires and diagnostic techniques, where their interpretation has its own specifics.

Ambiverts (diaverts)

Since the frequency distribution in the normal population is centered on the middle section of the introversion-extraversion scale, most people can be classified as ambiverts.[1] An ambivert is an average person on this scale.[1]

INFLUENCE OF EMOTIONAL STRESS ON COLLAGEN METABOLISM IN PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT PROPERTIES OF EXTRAVERSION-INTROVERSION

IVANOV D.G.1, PODKOVKIN V.G.1

2 References: Samara State University, Samara, Russia, 443099, Russia, Samara, st. Chapaevskaya, 89. Type: journal article - scientific article Language: Russian.

Number: 10 Year: 2009 Pages: 10-15; JOURNAL: BASIC RESEARCH. Publisher: Publishing House "Academy of Natural Sciences" (Penza)

KEY WORDS: STRESS, EXTRAVERSION, INTROVERSION, COLLAGEN METABOLISM

ABSTRACT: The effect of emotional stress on collagen metabolism in people with various extraversion-introversion properties was studied. It has been shown that the reaction of the systems providing adaptation and activity of the processes of collagen metabolism under stress depend on the extraversion-introversion factor. The exam activated the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal system and increased the processes of collagen catabolism in ambivert students. In students of other types, the content of 11-OCS in the oral fluid did not increase during the exam, and the level of free hydroxyproline in the oral fluid decreased. Regardless of the properties of extraversion-introversion, the content of protein-bound hydroxyproline in the oral fluid decreased under the influence of emotional stress, which indicated the suppression of the activity of collagen anabolism processes in students.

Personality types - Introverts and extroverts

Psychological types of K. G. Yung · January 27, 2009

All psychological printing houses can be divided into two large groups : those that classify acquired mental qualities, and those that consider innate qualities. Here there is a fundamental divide between what a person is able to change and what he will have to put up with until the end of his days.

Most of the existing typologies belong to the first group - they describe rather types of behavior or, if you like, types of an established character, and typologies from the second group are few. In this article, we will talk about one of them - the most interesting and most valuable in practical application - about the theory of psychological types by Carl Jung.

To immediately cut off possible questions here, it must be said that Jung himself did not assert with absolute certainty that the types he proposed are indeed innate human properties. He was generally extremely cautious in such matters.

On the other hand, he commented on this that the psychological type of a child can be traced from the first years of his life, when the pressure of upbringing is not yet so great as to form any pronounced character traits.

In general, if we approach this issue with scientific rigor, the innate nature of the type has not been proven, but from a practical point of view, this idea can still be accepted, since real numerous observations show two points - firstly, the type really manifests itself very early, and secondly, during life the type does not change. With age and with maturation, the type can be smoothed out, but basically a person remains who he was - an introvert or an extrovert.

And since everyone will now start trying on types for themselves, here's another guideline - you can't be both an introvert and an extrovert mixed up. That doesn't happen. At our core, we always belong either to one or the other, but in certain areas of life we may well demonstrate qualities of the opposite type, so there is indeed room for confusion. We'll figure out.

Jung formulated his theory for quite a long time and painstakingly - this is not a fake sensation that the public is so greedy for, but a fundamental scientific research carried out in accordance with all the rules and with all rigor. So before dismissing that there are many such smart theoretical psychologists, take into account the fact that Jung occupies the same place in the world of psychology as Einstein in the world of physics. Jung did not study the "science of psychology" - he created it.

So, Jung's personality types are devoted to a separate book, almost the thickest of all he has written. It is called not very original: "Psychological types". There he gives a lot of justifications for his concept, based on examples from the history of art, philosophy, mythology and even biology.

I won't advise you to read it - without prior moral and intellectual preparation it will be too difficult to master it. But if there is a desire to join the original source, you can read the last section on the description of specific types. It reads simpler - almost like a horoscope, only in scientific language.

The main line in Jung's proof of the existence of two basic personality types boils down to the fact that at all times and in all cultures one can trace the presence of these two types - opposite and at the same time complementing each other (I will not list specific examples, inquisitive minds themselves will easily find them in that book).

One of the most obvious analogies here is the Eastern principle of the unity of the two principles "Yin" and "Yang". Introverts are more Yin, extroverts are more Yang. I say rather, because each person has both, but in different proportions - the question is the predominance of one or the other. That is, we can say that the introversion-extroversion scale is not a contrast of black and white, but a smooth gradient from one to the other. The Yin-Yang symbol, where one flows into the other, is just about that. Black and white, hot and cold, good and evil - all this is known only in contrast with its opposite. The same is true of psychological types. And one more introductory moment. Since the psychological type is determined by the degree of distance from the midpoint, it should be noted that one can be more or less an introvert, more or less an extrovert. That is, for example, two introverts can be introverts to varying degrees. This will be important when you start to have questions about what happens when two people of the same type enter into a communication (and relationship), but more on that later.

Jung's personality types

If we consider Jung's theory in all details, then, of course, everything is somewhat more complicated. The division into introverts and extroverts is obviously not enough. Two pronounced introverts can, however, be completely different in terms of their way of looking at the world and interacting with it. The same with extroverts - they are different.

Jung on this occasion introduces an additional concept - the primary mental function. There are four of them in total, and they are also divided into pairs of opposites: feeling and thinking, sensation and intuition. Thus, the type is determined by two main coordinates - turning inward (introversion) or outward (extraversion) and the mental function that prevails in him.

Accordingly, such combinations are obtained, such as, for example, an intuitive-introvert (Jung), a thinking extrovert (Freud), a feeling introvert (Melanie from Gone with the Wind), a feeling extrovert (Scarlett from the same place), and so on. Some types are more common, some less common.

There are some other nuances in Jung's theory - secondary function, division into rational and irrational, suppressed function, and so on, but we will not dive into such jungle - it will be of interest only to maniac psychologists. And now let's focus on the most important thing.

Who are introverts?

Jung uses the concept of psychic energy to define types, which extroverts draw from outside, and introverts from within. But this cannot be taken literally - as such, no psychic energy exists, it is only a metaphor that allows one to describe an intangible something.

The introvert turns inward. All the most important things in his life happen inside him. This does not mean that he does not see the world around him, he simply pays much less attention to it than to the inner world. And even looking outside, he looks at everything through the prism of himself.

This is not egocentrism, but rather isolation, isolation in oneself. His world is the world of his experiences, feelings and thoughts. There he goes to recuperate after a collision with external reality. The world outside brings him more trials than joys. But he knows his inner world, his refuge, like the back of his hand.

If you ask an introvert what is happening to him inside, he will not be able to describe it, because there are no such words or a lot of words are needed. And if you ask an extrovert about the same, he will not be able to say anything either, but only because his inner world is a dark forest for him.

And the same with the outer world. An introvert has to purposefully focus his attention on aspects of the outside world in order to effectively interact with it, while an extrovert, on the contrary, is completely absorbed in what is happening around him, and he can look into his soul only through an effort of will.

Introverts are calm, thoughtful, reasonable - their time flows slowly and even somehow viscous. They are slow, inert and often clumsy, which is why extroverts constantly make fun of them. At their best, introverts are level-headed, calm people who look deep into things, rather than jumping on top, as extroverts do. At their worst, introverts are familiar to everyone in the image of a typical loser nerd or computer geek - disheveled, unable to express his thoughts, in torn clothes (because he doesn’t care) and with thoughts constantly hovering somewhere far away. But an introvert does not mean a loser. Introverts become losers more often because modern society is a society of extroverts, and not every introvert finds an acceptable way to adapt to this world. On the other hand, extroverts suffer from another problem - they are "lucky", and this is no better than being a "loser", but that's a topic for another conversation.

In general, introverts are just as good as extroverts—both have their strengths and weaknesses. Both of them look at each other with some incomprehension, and they both constantly stumble due to the fact that the opposite type reacts in a completely unexpected way. Hence, there are many problems in communication between introverts and extroverts, but even more problems arise when communicating with people of the same type. Let's get back to this as well.

Introverts are less likely to take initiative in the outside world. They are reinsurers who are willing to measure seven times seven times before they act. Such caution also greatly hinders them in a society of extroverts, where not the smartest, but the most active wins.

On the other hand, introverts are good strategists. They see the situation deeper, further and more globally. Extroverts, on the other hand, are more tactical - they need the battle and victory here and now, and not in the long term.

Introverts are silent and passive - they gladly give the initiative to extroverts. It is more convenient for introverts to observe and comment from their dark corner than to climb onto the podium on their own and turn on the audience with their fire.

At school, introverts are loners or quiet people who are always somewhere on the sidelines, always somewhere on the outskirts or, at best, at the same time. They are well-mannered, cultured and often pathologically kind. It is easy to offend them, but they do not know how to fight back - they experience their defeats inside and rather put pressure on the guilt and pity of the offenders.

In a relationship, introverts also tend to fade into the background. And if this is an introverted man, then often, because of this peculiarity, he becomes henpecked, through which he suffers. Introvert women, by virtue of the same feature, on the contrary, feel more comfortable in relationships than extrovert women.

And so on, I hope the general image is clear. We will continue the topic of psychological types in other articles and in the comments, and I will replenish the list of characteristic features of both types along the way.

Who are extroverts?

Extroverts are everyone else who are not introverts. They are active, active, reckless and imprudent, which is why they often resemble a monkey with a grenade. This is their strength and this is their weakness.

In a free market society, extroverts feel like fish in water. They do not need to be explained that they need to be able to stand up for themselves and their ideas. They naturally strive for leadership and official status. Prizes and awards are more important to them than real achievements in themselves.

Unlike introverts, extroverts have a better rest in the company of friends - society does not tire them at all, but, on the contrary, invigorates, infuses new forces. For this reason, extroverts are rarely alone - they are always looking for the company of their own kind.

Extroverts are frivolous and superficial, but at the same time light, mobile and initiative. The initiative does not frighten them, because they do not think ahead, do not think about the consequences. They are one of those who are strong in hindsight and bite their elbows after the case. Because of this, introverts look at them with a wry smile - they warned ...

In their good manifestation, extroverts are sociable, optimistic, easy-going. It is extroverts who become the soul of the company, leaders of movements and activists. You can talk with them about anything and enjoy it - they always have something to tell, what news and gossip to share.

In the worst sense, extroverts are arrogant, willful, and selfish. Realists to the core, denying everything that is beyond their understanding. They are people of the crowd and public opinion is more important to them than their own, so they often look like opportunists and sycophants. They put their interests in the first place and therefore easily step over everyone who stands in their way. Introverts are more likely to step over themselves, but there is no righteousness in this - only self-pity and fear of someone else's indignation.

In a relationship, extroverts naturally tend to lead, and it's good when a man is an extrovert and a woman is an introvert. In all other cases, all sorts of difficulties begin due to the fact that the generally accepted idea of \u200b\u200bthe relationship between a man and a woman presupposes just such a couple.

Extroverts are talkative and even chatty, and together with their manner of acting without thinking about the consequences, they are very sharp on the tongue and quick to punish. They are emotional and expressive to the point of hysteria, while introverts are more prone to depression and apathy.

What follows from all this?

First of all, because there is often such a misunderstanding: being an extrovert is not luck, and being an introvert is not a tragedy. Both types are good and bad in exactly the same way - the main thing is to know your strengths and weaknesses in order to actively use one and find ways to compensate for others.

The psychological type is not a sentence, but the same feature as belonging to one sex or another. You need to learn to live with what you have, and not try to build yourself out of what you are not. This is especially true for introverts, who very often want to become extroverts and thereby betray their nature.

Of course, the theme of Jung's psychological types cannot be considered solved on this. There is so much more to tell that there is enough material for several voluminous articles, and I will certainly deal with it. There will be many more interesting things, but we will move from simple to complex.

Now about the practical application of the above.

The strongest psychological type affects relationships. For example, one could say that ALL happy pairs are made up of complementary types. Who is an introvert in a couple, and who is an extrovert, it does not matter, the main thing is that the types are different.

Two introverts are too bored together, because both expect initiative from each other, but both do not show it. And two extroverts are too “fun” together, because everyone wants everything at once, and the blanket very soon begins to burst at the seams.

Harmonious interaction is possible only between opposites. An introvert and an extrovert feel best in each other's company, but they do not always understand this, so they are looking for friends among representatives of their own species, and then they themselves do not know what to do with them. And the opposite type may seem somehow too different to mess with.

The same applies to friendships and professional relationships. Best friends and partners are of two opposite types. In general, there will be a separate article on the topic of relations between different types a little later.

Also, belonging to one or another type determines those areas of activity in which a person can reveal himself best. Extroverts, for example, are good speakers and collectivists, they are by nature "stage people" - they make the best inspirers and salesmen (of any scale). And introverts are closer to individual, analytical or creative work, one where you don’t have to constantly rush back and forth and talk incessantly.

Knowing your type helps you understand yourself and your predispositions, so let's decide and figure out what to do next. Questions and clarifications - in the comments. Continued in the next series.

There are such rare cases when the type is really blurred, and even an experienced psychologist cannot calculate it, but this does not happen often and - again! - do not attribute yourself to such special ones, do not flatter yourself. If the scales are hovering in the middle, this is only from a lack of information taken into account.

If you're having trouble identifying your type, take your time, let the question settle, and look at yourself in a historical perspective—from a young age to the present day. Try to find a common thread of your behavior that runs through your whole life.

Note that extroverts experience the greatest difficulty in determining their type - precisely because of the properties of this very type. To understand yourself, you need to be able to look into yourself, and extroverts are given a hard time, although they are completely unaware that they have some difficulties with this. It seems to them that everyone is arranged in the same way as themselves - and this is also a property of the extravert type. Use this as an additional hint.

introvert, extrovert or ambivert?

At university I was friends with two sociable girls. They didn't look alike, but they had something in common. As it seemed to me then, they were united by pronounced extraversion. As soon as they quietly stood at the wall in anticipation of a couple, a booming company immediately gathered around. In the first year, when no one else really knew anyone, their names were remembered first. Gather those wishing to speak at the bottom of the faculty or go to a strip club? Of course they are! How surprised I was when both girls recently independently announced, "I think I'm an introvert." If they consider themselves introverts, then who is everyone else?

ARE HORMONES TO BE THAT TOGETHER?

At the everyday level, there is complete confusion in understanding the terms "extrovert" and "introvert". We used to associate the first with sociability, and the second with a craving for solitude, as if that explains everything. While the issue is so controversial that there is no consensus even among psychologists. The first scale of extra- and introversion in the dictionary of psychological terms was introduced by Carl Gustav Jung. According to Jung, an extrovert is introduced into the outside world by all means, without giving in to the experience of reflection, and an introvert defends himself from the outside, relying only on his inner feelings. An extrovert pays attention to events, accumulates facts and acquaintances, chooses a profession that is guaranteed to bring him income in the near future. An introvert is focused on his reactions to the outside world. Facts are interesting to introverts not in themselves, but as a basis for the formation of judgments, therefore, outstanding inventors, scientists, and writers are obtained from introverts. If you ask an extrovert what the weather is today, he will actually answer: “Snowy, minus five.” An introvert will answer the same question subjectively: "I'm cold." According to Jung, it is the focus on the external or internal world that distinguishes an extrovert from an introvert. Note that this has nothing to do with sociability or a desire for solitude.

RIGHT IN THE CENTER

The game of “guess who is who at this party” is my friend Oleg's favorite pastime. He begins to closely observe newcomers to the company in order to make an authoritative verdict on their personality type in ten minutes. At the same time, Oleg stubbornly refuses to take into account the fact that most mentally healthy people are ambiverts.

The term "ambivert" was first proposed by Eysenck in 1947, referring to people who combine the hypersensitivity of introverts and the expansive sociability of extroverts. Twenty years earlier, in one of his lectures on extroverts and introverts, Jung noted: “There is, finally, a third group where it is very difficult to say where motivation comes from: from outside or from inside. This group is the most numerous. The psychologist emphasized that our conscious extraverted or introverted attitudes are always compensated by opposite unconscious ones. Therefore, the behavior of a shy person easily changes when he drinks. The conscious introverted attitude recedes and extraversion appears. As long as they work together, the person is balanced and harmonious. When they collide, neurosis begins. If we think of intro- and extraversion as a horizontal scale, most of us will be in its middle (ambivert) values. We can shift in one direction or another in extreme situations, but in ordinary life we are close to the center and react to the world alternately - either as introverts or as extroverts.

INTROVERT TIME

So thanks to the fathers of psychology for the great news: most of us are capable of anything! Listen carefully and speak contagiously, enjoy noisy companies and solitude, be interested in the facts of the outside world and pass them through yourself, creating something new. But the question remains: why then did so many of my sociable acquaintances abruptly begin to call themselves introverts? I found three explanations for this phenomenon. First, introversion is in vogue today. Some hundred years ago, extraversive thinking was considered fashionable and “correct” in European culture. This is not surprising - at the beginning of the last century, an encyclopedic mind was highly valued, capable of memorizing a large number of facts without giving in to their personal assessment. The same Jung, describing the features of an introvert, seems to justify him in front of an invisible extrovert - a typical representative of his generation.

FROM SIDE TO SIDE

In fact, the desire to sit in silence and solitude after a busy day is not a typical behavior of an introvert, but an ambivert. He is like a skier who balances on the slope, shifting his weight from one foot to the other. The trick is to be able to switch at will. Due to the fact that ambiverts do not know how to “transfer weight” from the extraverted side in time, they get carried away and they seriously begin to consider themselves one hundred percent introverts. Something similar happened to my college girlfriends, who got so tired of the role of throwing parties that they wanted to hide in a recreational shell. The key to the trick is to study your reactions. Over time, you will learn to catch alarm bells even before they turn into a siren. Is the party no longer fun? The last glass - and home! Without guilt and embarrassment for their lack of communication skills. Without letting the energy evaporate, the next day you will be able to communicate with more people with pleasure again. The rule also works the other way: are you already watching the sixth episode of Friends in a day without sticking your nose out from under the covers? Turn around. Your sociable friends will certainly be delighted with an invitation for coffee or a glass of wine.

Learn more