INTROVERTS AND EXTROVERTS

BY MAX FREYD

/ . Walter Thompson Co., New York

These two terms as applied to complementary types of

personality have their origin with Jung, although he probably
drew upon preceding writers in his formulations. He first
presented the concepts in his ' Psychology of the Unconscious'
and later elaborated his views in his 'Analytical Psychology.'
Recently he has expanded his opinions on these types of
personality to the scope of a volume (which will not be re-
ported upon here). Since Jung's original contribution these
concepts have been showered with attention, especially by
writers of the psychoanalytic schools. Among those who have
discussed the concepts at length, or who mention them in
their writings, are Nicoll, Tansley, Hinkle, Kempf, White,
Wells, Downey, McDougall, and Allport. The terms are
increasing in vogue among laymen, and may often be encoun-
tered in non-technical articles. It becomes necessary, there-
fore, to examine closely the sense in which the terms are used,
and to decide whether or not they are to be received into the
fold of legitimate psychological categories.
Definitions of the Terms.—None of the writers seems to
have attempted a concise definition of the two terms, each
contenting himself with descriptions and explanations. The
introvert, according to practically all of the writers, is charac-
terized by a withdrawal from reality and a great emphasis on
the thought processes, whereas in the extrovert we have the
tendency to face reality and the ready issuance of thought
processes into overt action. The reality which these writers
infer, or to which they refer, is social reality or the social
environment. The following definitions are probably fair
composites of the various opinions.
Introvert: An individual in whom exists an exaggeration
of the thought processes in relation to directly observable
social behavior, with an accompanying tendency to withdraw
from social contacts.
74
 INTROVERTS AND EXTROVERTS 75

Extrovert: An individual in whom exists a diminution

of the thought processes in relation to directly observable so-
cial behavior, with an accompanying tendency to make social
contacts.
Descriptions of the Introvert and the Extrovert.—The most
appropriate source for the description of the two types is
Jung. He sees in the hysteric and the dementia praecox
patient opposing types of reaction systems, characterized
in the one instance by a centrifugal and in the other a centrip-
etal tendency of the libido, or the individual's store of energy.
These are pathological extremes,of reaction systems that are
found to a lesser extent in every normal person. We are all
predominantly either introverted or extroverted. We say
that a person tends to be extroverted "when he gives his
fundamental interest to the outer or objective world, and
attributes an all-important and essential value to it; he is in-
troverted, on the contrary, when the objective world suffers
a sort of depreciation, or want of consideration, for the sake
of the exaltation of the individual himself, who then mono-
polizing all the interest, grows to believe no one but himself
worthy of consideration" (8, p. 288).
The following extracts illustrate McDougall's treatment
of the concepts.
" The well-marked extroverts are those whose emotions flow out easily into bodily
expression and action. They are the vivid, vivacious, active persons who charm us by
their ease and freedom of expression, their frankness, their quick sympathetic responses.
They are little given to introspective brooding; they remain relatively ignorant of
themselves; for they are essentially objective, they are interested directly and primarily
in the outer world about them. When and if they break down under strain, their
trouble takes on the hysteric type, the form of dissociations, paralyses, anesthesias,
amnesias; in spite of which they may remain cheerful, active, and interested in the
world.
The introvert, on the other hand, is slow and reserved in the expression of his
emotions. He has difficulty in adequately expressing himself. His nervous and mental
energies, instead of flowing out freely to meet and play upon the outer world, seem apt
to turn inward, determining him to brooding, reflection, deliberation before action.
And, when he is subject to strain, his energies are absorbed in internal conflicts; he
becomes dead to the outer world, languid, absorbed, self-centered, and full of vague
distress" (10, p. 85).
Nicoll goes into considerable detail in his interpretation of
the two types. The following extract gives his attitude
toward the problem of extroversion.
76 MAX FREYD

" Extroversion to some people presents no difficulties. They come in contact with
life eagerly, spontaneously, without preparation or plan. If they show any timidity
at all, the slightest encouragement has an immense effect upon them. They are that
large group of people who are sociable and who accept social values unquestioningly.
They are fond of amusement and are not greatly burdened by the problems of this
world. Theyflowout into action and into emotional contact very easily; they express
sympathy, delight, sorrow, appreciation, disgust, indignation, and jealousy without
any difficulty. There is plenty of emotional play about their facial expressions and
gestures when they are talking. They love movement, bustle, and excitement, and
respond to what is going on around them with great facility. Studied closely, it is
possible to see that between their feelings and the expression of these feelings there is
little or no barrier" ( u , p. 139).
The secret of the character of the extrovert lies in the last
sentence. He is no philosopher, arguing why and wherefore—
he acts on the spur of the moment. As a consequence he is
always getting into ticklish positions which the introvert by
superior forethought would have avoided. This impulsiveness
of action makes the extrovert throw himself into the heart of
things as a cooperator, not as a spectator, especially on social
occasions. Extroverts "have little self-knowledge from an
analytical point of view. They know themselves by the
effects they produce in the external world." For this reason
we find extroverts often leading inconsistent lives, succeeding
in spite of apparent but unconscious inconsistencies in their
daily behavior which would trouble the conscience of an
introvert.
The introvert, according to Nicoll, finds life continuously
hostile. He is asocial—his interest turns persistently inward
and away from contact with the world. His main problem
is to find a means of extroversion, and unless he finds it he
may live in a world of phantasy. The introvert prefers to
read of a thing rather than experience it.
" The introvert type, in its most characteristic expression, is reserved, outwardly
cold, guarded, watchful, and difficult to understand. Unlike the extrovert, who hides
little, the introvert hides everything because he dreads the exposure of his emotions,
because they are too raw and intense. They have not been worked up into useful feel-
ings. . . . He reveals himself only to his most intimate friends, and then only in part.
He is thoroughly aware of his inner life, and is a keen and serious critic of himself. His
tendencies lie in the direction of self-depreciation, which he often counterbalances by
an outer air of self-appreciation. His approach to everything is critical and suspicious.
. . . Anxiety is a constant state of mind with him; he is anxious about the future and
anxious about the present. Fear is the predominant factor behind his psychology, and
this causes him, when in a position of responsibility, to leave nothing to chance. . . ."
(II, p. 147).
 INTROVERTS AND EXTROVERTS 77

Since the introvert knows himself better than the extrovert, he

will be the more apt to feel the justice of accusations against
him, which in the case of the extrovert would arouse a protest.
" To the introvert the extrovert is a source of amazement; while to the extrovert
the introvert is an object of impatient speculation and uncertainty" ( n , p. 149).
Allport defines the types as follows:
" The extroverted person is one whose mental images, thoughts, and problems
find ready expression in overt behavior. Mental conflicts trouble him but little, and
he appears to have nothing to repress or to avoid. The introvert, on the Mother hand,
dwells largely in a realm of imagination, creating inwardly a more desirable ideal world
rather than adjusting himself outwardly to the real one. He is not always a misfit,
however, for given sufficient ability, his internal or covert reactions may be the vision
of the poet or artist. On the whole he takes many things too personally, is anxious and
self-searching, if not actually afraid of the repressions and conflicts which have not
found a salutory neural outlet or resolution" (x, p. 12).

Kempf (9, p. 112) would say that introverts tend to be

moody, self-conscious, irritable, eccentric, cautious and delib-
erative, and uncreative. They belong to the 'shut-in' type.
" Fear of permitting the affect free play, such as in curiosity,
friendliness, love seeking, prevents it from attaining practical
contact with reality and the environment, and forces it to
use endogenous forms of counterstimulation, as day-dreams,
imaginations, hallucinations, etc." The extrovert, by infer-
ence, will possess the opposing characteristics.
Wells (17, p. 41) uses the term introversion to denote the
avoidance of unpleasant external effort by seeking satisfac-
tions within the self, in imagery and day-dreaming. Intro-
version is merely one of the ways in which unpleasant ex-
periences are avoided.
Hinkle (5) adds little to these statements in a descriptive
way, although she makes several important theoretical con-
tributions. She accepts Jung's original formulation, but sub-
divides both introverts and extroverts into three groups;
the objective, the simple, and the emotional or subjective.
Objective introverts or extroverts "possess little or no differ-
entiation of the subjective functions of feeling or intuition,"
whereas in the emotional introvert and the subjective ex-
trovert the subjective or emotional factor is strong. Intro-
verts and extroverts may be confused through the assump-
78 MAX FREYD

tion by one of the types of the traits of the opposite type

because of the prevailing family or national psychology. One
type may assume the characteristics of the other type through
unconscious identification, especially with an admired parent
of the other type. This assumption cannot be maintained
long without manifesting itself to the careful observer. Hinkle
also identifies introversion with femininity (p. 130).
The writer has collected at times from several psychol-
ogists of standing and from graduate students in psychol-
ogy, lists of what they considered the traits of the introvert
and the extrovert. There is considerable agreement among
the various contributors, which would point to a popular
recognition and identification of the types were it not for the
fact that these men had learned of the types from the same
literary sources. The list is interesting in itself and is given
below in condensed form. Only the traits of the introvert are
given, since those of the extrovert would be merely the oppo-
sites of these. The descriptive terms apply to tendencies
shown by introverts.
1. Blushes frequently; is self-conscious.
2. Avoids all occasions for talking before crowds; finds it difficult to express him-
self in public.
3. Prefers to work alone rather than with people; prefers to work at tasks that do
not bring him into contact with people.
4. Dislikes and avoids any process of selling or persuading anyone to adopt a
certain point of view (except in the religious field).
5. Takes up work which requires painstaking and delicate manipulation.
6. Hesitates in making decisions on ordinary questions that arise in the course of
the day.
7. Introspects; turns his attention inward.
8. Depreciates his own abilities, but assumes an outward air of conceit.
9. Is critical of others.
10. Is extremely careful about the friends he makes; must know a person pretty
thoroughly before he calls him a friend.
n . Limits his acquaintances to a select few. (This may be beyond his control.)
i s . Has ups and downs in mood without apparent cause.
13. Has ups and downs in mood with apparent cause.
14. Works by fits and starts.
15. Worries over possible misfortunes.
16. Feels hurt readily; apparently sensitive about remarks or actions which have
reference to himself.
17. Is outspoken; says what he considers the truth regardless of how others may
take it.
 INTROPERTS AND EXTROVERTS 79

18. Keeps in the background on social occasions; avoids leadership at social affairs
and entertainments.
19. Is absent-minded.
20. Is reticent and retiring; does not talk spontaneously.
21. Shrinks when facing a crisis.
22. Prefers to work things out on his own hook; hesitates to accept or give aid.
23. Is meticulous; is extremely conservative about his dress and painstaking about
his personal property.
24. Prefers participation in competitive intellectual amusements to athletic games.
25. Is a poor loser; considerably upset and indisposed after the loss of a competi-
tive game.
26. Makes mistakes in judging the character and ability of others.
27. If he unburdens at all, he does so only to close personal friends and relatives.
28. Indulges in self-pity when things go wrong.
29. Day-dreams.
30. Limits his acquaintances to members of his own sex.
31. Is persistent in his beliefs and attitudes.
32. Shrinks from actions which demand initiative and 'nerve.'
33. Gets rattled easily; loses his head in excitement or moments of stress.
34. Expresses himself better in writing than in speech,
35. Is governed by reason rather than impulse or emotion. Is a good rationalizer.
36. Derives enjoyment from writing about himself.
37. Is thrifty and careful about making loans.
38. Is conscientious.
39. Resists discipline and orders.
40. Admires perfection of form in literature.
41. Is sentimental.
42. Rewrites his social letters before mailing them.
43. Pays serious attention to rumors.
44. Believes in 'mind' cures; accepts an idealistic philosophy.
45. Talks to himself.
46. Keeps a diary.
47. Is strongly motivated by praise.
48. Is selfish.
49. Is slow in movement.
50. Prefers to read of a thing rather than experience it.
51. Is suspicious of the motives of others.
52. Is effeminate (if a man).
53. Is a radical; wants to change the world instead of adjusting himself to it.
54. Is creative of new and sometimes eccentric ideas and things.

Theories of Introversion and Extroversion.—Few of the

writers on the subject mention the causes of introversion and
extroversion or the psychological theories which underlie the
states.
Tansley gives a sketchy account of the theory of the in-
troversion and extroversion. According to him,
80 MAX FREYD

"the process of extroversion is the primitive biological function of the mind. Biologi-
cally the mind and its powers only have significance so far as they can be used in life.
They were developed in relation to the world in which the organism lived and their
nature was determined, as we have seen, by the environment of the species, to which
they are intimately adapted. The process of introversion is primarily a sign of lack of
such adaptation. For one reason or another the psychic energy of the mind fails to
find its natural outlets, and being thus cut off from the external world it develops an
internal world of its own. In the sequel, however, this internal development has proved
of immense value in enriching human life by its secondary reactions with the external
world" (13, p. 88).

Tansley also makes the contribution that the basic mind-

structures on which the two types rest are probably inherited,
and are easily recognized in childhood. A happy balance of
the two tendencies in which lies the hope of a satisfactory
mental development must be achieved in childhood. After
adolescence the proper balance becomes much more difficult
to attain, although his superior mental quality enables the
introvert the more readily to acquire this balance. Hinkle
also asserts that the types are born, not made.
McDougall, reasoning on the observation that children of
the same parents are indifferently introverted or extroverted,
concludes that the tendencies are inherited. The children
are brought up in the same environment—therefore any
temperamental differences which they display must be due to
heredity. The opposite conclusions could be drawn from the
same premises. It is questionable, furthermore, if all children
of the same parents are brought up in the same environment.
Families usually move about from one locality to another
and their financial status does not remain fixed. The attitude
of the family toward the youngest or oldest child may have
an important influence in shaping his character.
Kempf would account for introversion at least in part
by a predisposition to affective dissociation. By affective
dissociation is meant in brief the following: The socialized
interests of the individual are in constant conflict with self-
indulgent affective cravings and in the main are dominant,
but when the self-indulgent cravings are powerful and the
socialized interests are weakened or depressed, the former will
break through in the form of errors, forgetting, and undesira-
ble thoughts. In complete affective dissociation the self-
 INTROVERTS AND EXTROVERTS 8l

indulgent cravings break through the resistance of the indi-

vidual while he is not aware that they are doing so. Affective
introversion takes place when an affective disturbance occurs
but the prompt spontaneous response is inhibited and an
outward appearance of indifference is maintained.
White prefers to think of introversion as a regression to an
earlier way of thinking.
" The introverted person is one who, instead of transferring his libido to external
objects, receives, so to speak, these objects, or their effects, within himself and so he
views the world from within, he considers the world according to the effect it has upon
him. Taking our viewpoint from the external world, this is brought about by the
process of what is called introjection or an entering into the individual of influences
from without. . . .
Introversion, at least when pathological, tends to bring about a retracing of the
•tages along which the psyche has come. . . . The viewpoint, it is believed, is a valu-
able one, but in its application the process of thinking should be kept in mind rather
than the content of thought. The view maintained here is that in the introversion
types of psychoses the patient reverts to ways of thinking that belong to earlier stages
of development. . . .
Introversion brings about a return to a less clearly denned individuality and a
greater range of identification with the environment. Withdrawal from reality is a
withdrawal from contact at higher levels but a return to a phylogenetically older and
more diffuse form of contact" (18, p. 232-236).

This is to be contrasted with the quotation from Tansley

cited above, to the effect that "the process of extroversion is
the primitive biological function of the mind." Little can
result from an atavistic interpretation of either of the types.
Except in their extreme form, both have their logical place in
the modern social structure. The consensus seems to be that
introversion and extroversion are the result of inherited pre-
dispositions. The extrovert is a calloused individual who
makes a good impression on others and cares little what
others say about him. The introvert, on the other hand, is
readily rebuffed by his social environemnt, and in time de-
velops an asocial 'set.' His sensitiveness steers him from
society and he takes to philosophic, religious, artistic, or
mechanical tasks. His ability in these lines may lead him to
fame or to institutional care. The extrovert likewise may be
either a social lion or a maniac.
None of the writers has mentioned the possibility of a
glandular explanation of introversion and extroversion,
6
82 MAX FKBYD

although it seems easy to trace an analogy between these

types of personality and the functions of the thyroid, adrenal,
or sex glands. They have also apparently overlooked the
possibility that introversion may result in an individual who
suffers from some physical defect of which he is constantly
reminded in childhood; in a person who belongs to a despised
minority; in a stranger in a foreign land; or in a petted or
only child.
Examples of the Introvert and the Extrovert.—McDougall
would say that the Mediterranean type (Latin Race) is
essentially extroverted and that the Nordic type (Germanic
Race) is introverted. Hinkle disagrees with this in calling
England and the United States extroverted and Germany and
France introverted nations. Kempf claims that Orientals
are introverted. Nicoll informs us that among the extroverts
are the great actresses, most of the great popular actors, all
the great rhetoricians, and the majority of the great preachers;
the great adventurers, the great bluffers, the great squander-
ers and humbugs, the people who seem to stand beyond the
reach of reason and logic. Hinkle is more specific in calling
Wilson an introvert and Roosevelt an extrovert.
To this we may add that the character types played by
Douglas Fairbanks are usually broadly extroverted, and that
the introverted trend is shown very decidedly in Strindberg's
autobiographical novel, 'A Son of a Servant.'
Types of Personality Analogous to the Introvert and the
Extrovert.—Jung supports his exposition by citing from writers
on personality and character mention of opposing types
which are analogous to the introvert and the extrovert. The
first analogy is with James' distinction between the tender-
minded and the lough-minded individual (6, ch. i). The
tender-minded person is rationalistic, intellectualistic, ideal-
istic, optimistic, religious, free-willist, monistic, and dogmati-
cal. The tough-minded person is an empiricist; sensationalis-
tic, materialistic, pessimistic, irreligious, fatalistic, pluralistic,
and sceptical. The tender-minded person corresponds to
the introvert and the tough-minded to the extrovert.
A second analogy is with Ostwald's division of savants-
 INTROVERTS AND EXTROVERTS 83

and men of genius into classicists and romanticists (12, n t h

Lecture). The classicists, in whom the introverted tenden-
cies are easily identified, 'are slow to react, they produce
with much difficulty, are little capable of teaching or of ex-
ercising direct personal influence, and lacking enthusiasm are
paralyzed by their own severe criticism, living apart and
absorbed in themselves, making scarcely any disciples, but
producing works of finished perfection which often bring
them posthumous fame' (8, p. 292). The romanticists, on
the contrary, are quick and abundant in their production of
projects and ideas, are excellent teachers, have much personal
influence, and are possessed of a contagious enthusiasm and
ardor.
Several other less important analogies are mentioned by
Jung, but need not be summarized here. In the psychological
literature, however, there exist numerous references to types
which are somewhat similar to the introvert and the extrovert.
One .of the most important is the distinction which James
makes between the explosive and the obstructed wills (7, Vol.
2. p. 537). The explosive will is described as native to a
normal type of character 'in which impulses seem to discharge
so promptly into movements that inhibitions get no time to
arise.' Persons of this type are animated and talkative, and
are possessed of great social abilities. Latins and Celts are
most commonly apt to be of the explosive type. The persons
of obstructed will exhibit the opposing characteristics. They
are more given to thought, they inhibit their reactions in
order to allow thought to take place, but carry it too far.
They are at times given to day-dreaming. The introvert
corresponds, of course, to the person of obstructed will, and
the extrovert to the person of explosive will.
Distinctions similar to the one drawn by James are to be
found in the writings of other psychologists. Watson (15,
p. 332) distinguishes several different types of 'reactors.'
The impulsive reactor is one who is plunged into action imme-
diately by every stimulus. 'Thinking' does not occur at all
or if it does occur, it comes too late to influence the act. The
deliberative reactor is slow and at times fails to react. First
84 MAX FREYD

one tendency and then another is predominant with the

result that action is hindered or abolished. There is a balanced
type in whom action always takes place after the competing
tendencies have run their course.
Downey (3) has utilized James' distinction in classifying
her tests of volitional and temperamental traits.
Baldwin (2) would classify people into two types, the
sensory and the motor, basing his classification upon a pre-
ceding one by Ribot. The motor individual is prompt, quick,
and unreflective,—he jumps to conclusions. He is dominated
by habit and is very responsive to suggestion. The sensory
individual is passive, contemplative, non-suggestible, with-
drawn, and possesses physical inertia.
The writer (4) made a comparison of men who chose an
occupation which brought them into contact with others and
which demanded considerable social ability, with men who
chose for their life work an occupation which demanded
mechanical skill almost entirely. The differences between
these two groups brought out by a long series of tests and
questionnaires and a rating scale indicated that the group
that we shall call the socially inclined excelled the mechani-
cally inclined in excitability, self-confidence, open-hearted-
ness, present-mindedness, good-nature, adaptability, talka-
tiveness, neatness in dress, and quickness to make friends.
The mechanically inclined were somewhat more self-conscious,
conceited, and careful of details in their work, and were ca-
pable of making finer coordinations. The conclusions reached
in this study were not that the two represented types, but
rather that they represented the extremes of a normal dis-
tribution curve of mechanical-social inclination, most people
showing very slight inclination in one direction or the other.
More will be said of this concept of extremes later. The
socially inclined group seems to be related to the extrovert
and the mechanically inclined to the introvert.
Do Introverts and Extroverts Belong to Types? In spite of
the strong criticism which the term 'types' has received at the
hands of statisticians and psychologists, there is nothing to
indicate that it will go out of use. It recurs frequently in
 INTROVERTS AND EXTROVERTS 85

psychological literature and is a common word in conversa-

tion. If the existence of types could be proved it would be a
great advance in psychology. The psychologist may certainly
be envious when he compares his few ill-defined classifica-
tions of human beings with the more objective and complex
classifications used by the zoologist. The difficulty, of course,
lies in the fact that psychology is a subdivision of zoology and
its data are more limited in range and therefore more difficult
to classify. Its data are furthermore less tangible and stable
than the data of sciences which are concerned with structure
rather than behavior.
If we assume that types are characterized by having a
certain amount of any one ability or combination of abilities,
then we should expect each type to be differentiated from
other types on the distribution curve of the ability or abilities
in the general population. Each type would be represented by
a mode in the distribution curve. Thorndike (14, Vol. 3, ch.
15 and 16) in a statistical discussion of types, shows that the
distributions of single abilities or combinations of abilities
are almost invariably unimodal, arguing for the existence of
but one type—mediocrity. He says, furthermore: " I t is
very, very hard to find any case of a negative correlation
between desirable mental functions. Divergence toward
what we vaguely call better adaptation to the world in any
respect seems to be positively related to better adaptation in
all or nearly all respects" (14, vol. 3, p. 362). The most prob-
able condition in any individual is one of mediocrity in most
traits, with slight variations toward extremes in the remainder
of the traits.
There is a sense in which the concept of types may be
retained while still accepting the normal distribution of abili-
ties, although the word 'extremes' should be substituted for
'types.' We may conceive of the distribution curve as
attenuated by two opposing forces, and as a person is sub-
ject to one or the other of these influences he will score to one
or the other side of the central tendency. If the forces do
not act upon him or if they neutralize each other, he will
score near the measure of central tendency. The two opposing
86 MAX FREYD

forces may be called tendencies. The extreme individuals

whom people tend to resemble may be described as those two
persons whose scores in the ability or combination of abilities
lie at the two remote extremes of the distribution curve of the
general population. Or they may be conceived as hypotheti-
cal individuals who do not exist, or who lie at points on the
distribution curve beyond the most remote point at which an
individual has been known to score.
With some modification, this is the manner in which
Weininger (16) views the absolute male and the absolute
female and the intermediate manifestations in all human
beings. All human beings tend to resemble the absolute male
or the absolute female, but these are creations which have no
actual existence. The tendency is determined by the relative
strength of resemblance to the absolute male or female. Most
people will show a 6light tendency in one direction or another,
and as the strength of the tendency becomes greater the
frequency becomes less.
In some such sense as this lies the hope of harmonizing the
concept of introvert and extrovert types with statistical facts.
But there are other important theoretical matters which
must be cleared up before the concepts can lay claim to a
place in a scientific psychology. The writers must come to
an agreement on the ability or constellation of abilities by
which the extrovert-introvert opposition is identified. They
must satisfy themselves that there are no other oppositions
of personality extremes involving other combinations of
traits, which may be fully as important as extrovert-introvert.
Since the number of such oppositions is practically limitless,
the thing may easily be reduced to absurdity. These matters
of theory should be resolved in clear-cut terms and not in the
verbiage of the psychoanalyst.
Following upon this is the problem of measuring the
extent of the two tendencies in any individual. This reduces
itself to the question: How may one differentiate between
the extrovert and the introvert behavioristically? Apparent
absorption in thought is not necessarily a criterion of intro-
version, unless the effects on overt behavior are studied.
 INTROFERTS AND EXTROVERTS 87

Certainly we should find difficulty in learning anything ac-

curate about this attitude of thinking from the individual
himself, for other psychoanalytic mechanisms such as ration-
alization interfere to color any report which he may make.
The distinction between the two types or extremes must rest
basically upon readily identified abilities or traits.
The theory of introversion and extroversion has opened up
an interesting field of speculation, but as yet it has failed
almost wholly to attract the experimenter. To find a place
in the body of psychological knowledge the theory must be
expressed with less inconsistency and with more attention to
experimental evidence. The field seems a promising one for
the psychological investigator.
REFERENCES
1. ALLPORT, F. H., AND ALLPORT, G. W. Personality Traits: Their Classification
and Measurement. / . Abn, Psyckol. and Soc. Psychol., 1921,16, 6-40.
2. BALDWIN, J. M. The Story of the Mind. New York, 1902.
3. DOWNEY, J. E. The Will Profile. 2d Ed., Univ. of Wyoming, Department of
Psychology, BulL No. 3, 1919.
4. FRBYD, M. The Personalities of the Socially and the Mechanically Inclined. (To
be published in the Psychol. Monog.)
5. HINKLE, B. M. A Study of Psychological Types. Psychanal. Rev., 1922, 9,
107-197.
6. JAMES, WM. Pragmatism. New York, 1907.
7. JAMES, WM. Psychology. 2 Vols. New York, 1890.
8. JUNG, C. G. Analytic Psychology. Trans, by C. E. Long. London, 1916.
9. KEMPF, E. J. The Autonomic Functions and the Personality. New York, 1921,
10. MCDOUGALL, WM. IS America Safe for Democracy? New York, 1921.
11. NICOLL, M. Dream Psychology. London, 1921.
12. OSTWALD, W. Grosse Manner. Leipzig, 1910.
13. TANSLEY, A. G. The New Psychology. London, 192a
14. THORNDIKE, E. L. Educational Psychology. 3 vols. New York, 1914.
15. WATSON, J. B. Psychology from the Standpoint of a Behaviorist. Philadelphia,
1919.
16. WUNINCEJL, 0 . Sex and Personality. London, 1916.
17. WELLS, F. L. Mental Adjustments. New York, 1917.
18. WHITE, WM. A. Mechanisms of Character Formation. New York, 1916.