SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Every time we open our mouths, we unwittingly reveal our personalities.
If you overheard a conversation on a bus, do you think you could tell from the words that were used and the topics discussed, the personality of the people who were chatting? What about if I showed you a short story? Could you glean something about the character of the author from their language?
We're often reminded "choose your words carefully" – well it turns out the words themselves may reveal far more than what we're actually trying to say. There's mounting evidence that our personality is written, quite literally, in the language that we use, from the tweets we send to our choice of email address.
Not all findings are particularly surprising. Those who score highly on extroversion really are a lot louder and chattier than their more introverted peers. They also tend to speak more quickly. Female extroverts, but not males, are more likely to have group chats, while introvert men (but not women) spend more time talking to themselves.
But introverts and extroverts also use language very differently. A few years ago, a group of researchers led by Camiel Beukeboom at VU University, Amsterdam, asked a group of 40 volunteers to look at photos of different social situations and describe out loud what was going on. They found that extroverts' language tended to be more abstract and "loose", while introverts spoke in more concrete terms. In other words, introverts tend to be a lot more specific.
Extroverts say: "This article is excellent"
Introverts say: "This article is very informative"
In line with this, other research has found that introverts tend to use more articles (the/a) – which, by definition, refer to individual objects or events. They also tend to be more cautious in their language: that is, they use more hedging (perhaps, maybe), and more quantifiable terms, such as referring to specific numbers.
Extroverts say: "Let's get some food"
Introverts say: "Perhaps we could go for a sandwich"
All of this makes psychological sense. Most extroverts enjoy the fast life, being more likely to drink, sleep around and take risks than introverts; every time they open their mouths, too, extroverts are prepared to take greater risks with the accuracy, spontaneity and reach of what they say.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 23 2017, @07:43PM (4 children)
The results of this study seem like a journey in confirmation bias.
Should it not be obvious that whatever measurement they used to measure extroversion vs introversion, might also be selecting disproportionately for other traits? For instance ineloquence and lack of precision in language seems more like something one would expect from individuals with a lower level of education or 'intelligence.' And that in turn obviously does not mean introversion = intelligence, extroversion = stupidity. It again could be a different curve. Perhaps of all individuals of lower intelligence extroverts are overrepresented, and among individuals with higher intelligence introverts are overrepresented. And of course that in turn begs yet another question of a possible response or sampling bias in the survey methodology.
Ugh, this is why I think papers in psychology are rarely worth anything. There's rarely if ever any sort of clear causal connection and for that matter our lack of any sort of 'first principles' of psychology makes the lack of any causality essentially a given. So it's essentially a nonstop stream of 'well that's mildly amusing, but please never even flirt with the possibility of actually applying this to anything where we would assume the conclusions of this paper have any merit or value whatsoever.'
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 23 2017, @08:02PM (1 child)
I totally disagree with the article and examples given. According to the "Keirsey Temperament Test" I'm an INTJ, yet I talk like the Extrovert examples. Maybe IQ should have been factored in, as many professionals (Doctors) have said I'm highly intelligent even though I didn't have a higher education. The same professionals said most people they meet are dumb but are ignorant of it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 23 2017, @09:34PM
"I totally disagree that people tend to be shorter than 2 meters. I saw this really tall dude once."
"I totally disagree that cigarettes increase the likelihood of lung cancer. My grandpa has been smoking his whole life and he's still healthy at 95."
See how silly that sounds? The article uses phrases like "tend to" and "are more likely to", it doesn't give you absolutes that should apply to every single introvert and extrovert. One datapoint doesn't refute the article, you're going to need something more scientifically rigorous for that.
Mind you, I'm not saying that the conclusions are definitively correct -- as a STEM major, I'm obliged to look down on social sciences. :) It's just that using some anecdata to deny statistics and probabilities is, at best, misguided...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 23 2017, @08:04PM (1 child)
Case in point: Scientologist. Fairly well-read, or at least enough to use the phrase "begs the question" incorrectly. http://begthequestion.info/ [begthequestion.info] Smooth enough to say "rarely" when clearly means "absolutely always and forever not." One star. Would not date again.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday July 23 2017, @10:56PM
When in L.A., I came across Scientology books somebody had left in the laundromat. The writing style and complexity was so idiotic it made my head hurt. Only weak-minded fools would be drawn into that mess. As one recurring example of horrors I saw within those books, the meaning of any word more than 3 syllables long would actually be explained in a footnote. For example, the word "Alligator" would have a footnote explaining that it was a "large swamp-dwelling reptile." And when you have footnotes to explain things for you, that means you're reading something smart.
Yeah, I get it, some people feel lost and want to understand the meaning of the world around them, they want purpose. The best option for those is to read the classics, which is the cheapest and easiest option ordering used books from Amazon. The second-best option is to seek counseling, although this is impossible without money or medical insurance. The third-best option is to embrace a less-judgemental and more mainstream form of Christianity*, with the kind of churches that have those "we welcome everybody" signs outside.
* But not any of those wacko religions like Bahai, Mormonism, Buddhism, Judaism, or Islam.