A comparison of the common‐sense and ‘scientific’ conceptions of extroversion—introversion

Abstract

From research on the organization of implicit personality theory, and on the fakability of psychometrically sophisticated scales a general argument about the conceptual overlap between implicit personality theory and 'scientific' theories of personality is developed. This is tested in the case of the common-sense conception of extroversion-introversion, and that of Eysenck. The convergent validity of these two conceptions are found to be high enough to support the argument. The implications of the argument are discussed in relation to the correspondences between implicit personality theory and personality theory, and the finctions of personality theory in psychology and implicit personality theory in everyday life.

The relationship between higher order models and everyday conceptions of personality

“…For example, Semin et al, (1981a) showed that the common sense conception of extraversion-introversion has a high degree of conceptual overlap with its 'scientific' counterpart as developed by Eysenck (1 970a, b;Eysenck and Eysenck, 1976). Furthermore, a number of investigations (e.g.…”

“…Recent studies, however, throw a doubtful light on both the empirical validity and the rationale underlying this assertion, namely that hypothetico-deductive models of personality supersede common sense conceptions of personality. For example, Semin et al, (1981a) showed that the common sense conception of extraversion-introversion has a high degree of conceptual overlap with its 'scientific' counterpart as developed by Eysenck (1 970a, b;Eysenck and Eysenck, 1976). Furthermore, a number of investigations (e.g.…”

Lay theories of the causes of alcoholism

“…Considerably less work has gone into implicit, 'lay' theories for the causes of alcoholism which often differ considerably from the explicit ' academic ' theories of academic psychologists or medical researchers. More recently there has been some interest in lay theories of various well-known psychological concepts : delinquency (Furnham & Henderson, 1983); depression (Rippere, 1981); extraversion (Semin et al, 1981); mental health (Nunnally, 1961); and neuroticism (Furnham, 1984). Nearly all of these studies have highlighted both interesting differences and also certain similarities between the views of the layman and the academic.…”

Lay theories of delinquency

“…However, considerably less work has gone into implicit 'lay' theories of delinquency which often differ considerably from explicit theories of the academic criminologists, psychologists or sociologists. There has been some recent social psychological interest in lay concepts of well known psychological concepts: depression (Rippere, 1981); extraversion (Semin, Rosch and Chassen, 1981); intelligence (Sternberg et al, 1981); mental health (Nunnally, 1961); and neuroticism (Furnham, 1982a). Rock (1979) with special reference to delinquency has elegantly described the relationship between implicit, common-sense and explicit theories thus: 'Ideas of anomie, differential, association, relative deprivation, functional interdependence, conflict and labelling theory may all be found in folk wisdom, early tracts and conventional explanation.…”