Why Don’t We Like Introverts?
Siyue Han
Sept 2021
I am an introvert. Virtual education was not as friendly to introverts as I expected. As I saw the window of “Join Breakout Room” pop up, I could feel the panic slowly crawling up my mind. The moment when my finger pressed on “Start Video” marked the start of my thirty minutes of attentive socializing. I had already developed some interactive skills that could make me appear socially natural — smiling, nodding, and frequent use of hand gestures to conceal my tight body. But still, in this novel way of communication, every time I accidentally talked over someone else, I would lower my voice off to silence, sliding into a slight awkwardness.
Such uncomfortableness was not ideal yet bearable and accompanied me long enough to become part of my life. I remember my faltering answer when my parents asked me how many friends I made on the first day of elementary school and my uneasiness whenever asked to “speak more and louder.” After I started to recognize myself as an introvert, I gradually came to realize that I felt uncomfortable not really for building social relationships, but for being an introvert — for the labels attached to this identity: “shy,” “lonely,” “anti-social,” and even “nerdy,” all of which contain some degree of negative connotation. TV shows and movies contribute significantly to perpetuating these stereotypes. Peter Parker, the introvert among superheroes, is depicted as a socially awkward loner at school; Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory is an extreme quirky nerd; Sherlock Holmes — despite his remarkable intelligence — is a sociopath who cannot empathize. Pop culture provides an incomplete and narrowly defined representation of introverts that almost makes introversion only acceptable along with extraordinary strength or intelligence. Why would these problematic representations exist and pervade, when close to half of the population are introverts? And ultimately, why don’t we like introverts?
The American culture in general possesses a strong bias against introverts. Heavily emphasizing individuality, the culture itself entails intensive self-expression and communication, thus always in favor of extroverts who enjoy speaking up. Not only do those charismatic leaders and politicians stand up on the stage and make stimulating speeches with appeals to ethos, but even college students are also required to publicly share their ideas on a daily basis. Part of our education is intentionally designed to reinforce our public communication skills. For most of my classes, the syllabus often clearly states that only students who actively engage in class discussions can earn full credit for participation. I have to push myself to promptly raise my hand as a proof of participating in the class, vigilant of any opportunities for speaking up, while what I really prefer is to think thoroughly before expressing my ideas. This “participation” requirement on the syllabus is an evidence of the inclination towards public communication in higher education. The society advocates extroversion, because it assumes that only through communication can people generate brilliant ideas and maximize their influence. However, introversion is a fluid spectrum with a general tendency for internal activity. Personally as a type of introvert, I could be both socially skilled and introverted. Hence, there is no direct correlation between introversion and inability to communicate. The popular belief, however, lacks openness in the cultural definition of introversion. The introverts prone to have spontaneous inside conversations are deemed as “anti-social” or “unwilling to cooperate;” those quiet but internally enriching people are stigmatized as “having nothing to contribute” in group work.
While collaboration and communication undoubtedly play an important role in exchanging ideas and diversifying perspectives, introverts’ independent way of thinking does have its social value, yet largely overlooked by society. Communication can incur costs in efficiency, as it takes a longer time for people to listen, process information, understand, and react than to concentrate and think individually. Thus, to conduct efficient conversations, many firms adopt a strategy requiring the employees to work independently before every meeting. The introverts’ social values are also exemplified in their role of balancing the team dynamics. I believe that every relationship, regardless of its size or cause, has a dominant side and a subordinate side in terms of power dynamics, and there is nothing superior or inferior with being either party. For example, in a small talk with someone you encounter, there will be one leading the conversation and the other more at the responsive side. In many of my project groups, the extroverts I have worked with are more likely to be the natural leaders at the more dominant side, who stand out by willingly displaying their talents, whereas introverts are often reluctant to voice their opinions, thereby following the rules their counterparts set. Admittedly, leaders are of paramount importance, but a successful team also needs introverted people who are often calm, practical, and supportive mediators. Although extroverts are popularly regarded as more effective leaders, research has shown that group performance does not benefit from an extroverted leader if the group members are proactive, because extroverts are less receptive to proactivity (Grant et al.). This result indicates the importance of “peacekeepers” in enhancing group performance, a role usually held by introverts. With a more reactive communication style, introverts moderate the relationships between teammates, alleviating conflicts and aggression caused by too much proactivity. Nevertheless, all these social contributions of introverts are underestimated by the society, since extroverts receive more attention in the spotlight.
Additionally, the society does not like introverts due partly to a widely shared but problematic definition of success — possession of more wealth and power. This type of success stereotypically tends to occur on professions in areas of business and politics, where people perceive extroverts as having a natural advantage because of their networking skills. Prior studies have found that US presidents are more likely to be ranked as “above average” if they are politically extroverted than introverted (Young and French), even though extroversion does not necessarily correlate with competence in leadership. This common perception of extroverts as having more potential to become conventionally “successful” has led to more opportunities directed to extroverts in education and workplace, resulting in less chance for introverts to be seen and heard. A 2016 report shows that highly extroverted people are 25% more likely to have a high-earning job (de Vries and Rentfrow). Then you might refute my assertion by listing some successful introverts in real life: Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and so on, many of whom thrive in the STEM world. Even introverted characters can make one of the greatest detectives in fiction like Sherlock or a superhero like Peter Parker. However, these introverted people all share a common trait of having exceptional intelligence or capacity in a certain field. They are usually appreciated as introverts only for their remarkable strengths; on the contrary, extroversion itself is viewed as an inherent strength. People’s admiration for these famous introverts comes from already knowing they are successful with good reputation, wealth, or (super)power, with a side-note saying “also, they are introverts” as if being introverted and successful were something unusual. While I agree that introverts have no less ability to succeed, I want to suggest that introverts deserve to enjoy equal recognition for who they are, not only for what they are capable of.
As I hope that these misconceptions of introverts will be obsolete one day with the progress of civilization, I am also alarmed to notice that some modern ideas could actually reinforce these “bad takes.” For instance, if we look at introversion from a gender perspective, the traditional gender roles expect men to be stronger in voicing their opinions and women to be the “quiet” ones and always listen. Contrarily, modern feminists tend to view self-expressive women as strong and independent, compared to quiet women often regarded as unconfident or obedient to the old traditions. In this light, the modern perspective has less tolerance of introversion especially on women. Back to the distance-learning setting on Zoom, where everyone’s faces were shown in a line, the extroverted girls able to lead discussions would keep popping up on the main screen; they were assertive and articulate as the feminist prototype of this century. Introverts like me then felt more pressured to appear communicative and “catch up” with our extroverted counterparts under the modern expectations on young women. However, the reality is that silence does not necessarily indicate passive submission but may just be a sole preference for introverts. The intertwinement of gender and ex/introversion requires more caution in making analysis or judgements, as the association between the two identities is usually ambiguous.
Introversion should not be a disadvantage to overcome, just because it is negatively depicted by the mainstream culture. A diverse and inclusive society will be mindful of their biases towards introverts in educational and professional settings and appreciate the value of different personality traits. Aware of all the intellectual and social value of introverts, we could strive to leverage introverts’ strengths by creating a more introvert-friendly environment, rather than force them to assimilate into extroversion.
Apart from the society to be more open in judgement, introverts ourselves should embrace and celebrate our personal identity, as often times introverts ourselves involve in perpetuating the dominant biases as well. Introverts growing up with extroverts loudly propagating their strengths gradually form internalized bias, undervaluing their own capabilities. As the problematic representations of introverts take time to dissipate, introverts with a positive mindset will not let whether the society like us or not affect our self-esteem and freedom of choice. We cannot ignore our strengths through quietness. The next time I open Zoom, hopefully I could channel the familiar uncomfortableness into a sense of pride in my ability to reconcile the internal and external world.
Works Cited
De Vries, Robert, and Jason Rentfrow. “A Winning Personality: The Effects of Background on Personality and Earnings.” The Sutton Trust. 2016. www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Winning-Personality-FINAL.pdf.
Grant, Adam M., et al. “Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee proactivity.” Academy of Management Journal, 54:3. 2011. 528–550.
Young, Thomas J., and Laurence A. French. “Judged Political Extroversion-Introversion and Perceived Competence of U.S. Presidents.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 83:2. 1996. 578.
Siyue Han is from Changzhou, China and studies in the Olin Business School at Washington University in St. Louis.