Quiet Flourishing: The Authenticity and Well-Being of Trait Introverts Living in the West Depends on Extraversion-Deficit Beliefs

  • Rodney B. LawnEmail author
  • Gavin R. Slemp
  • Dianne A. Vella-Brodrick
Research Paper


Introversion–extraversion is a particularly salient personality trait, whereby “extraverts” are known to be more outgoing, bold, assertive, active, and cheerful than “introverts”. These extraverted attributes are socially desirable in individualistic Western cultures, and some evidence suggests that extraverts experience better person-environment fit and greater well-being than introverts in these cultures. However, what remains unclear is how living in a context that values and emphasises extraversion may impact upon the well-being of introverts, and how introverts might improve their well-being. This study aimed to explore this question via a moderated mediation model. Adult participants in Australia (N = 349) completed scales of trait introversion–extraversion, dispositional authenticity, and well-being. The extent to which participants wanted to be more extraverted than they were currently—labelled an extraversion-deficit belief—was also measured. Participants overwhelmingly indicated that they lived in a society where extraversion was more socially desirable than introversion, and most participants held extraversion-deficit beliefs. Moderated mediation analysis showed that higher trait introversion–extraversion predicted well-being directly as well as indirectly via dispositional authenticity, but this indirect pathway depended on extraversion-deficit beliefs. Extraversion-deficit beliefs were more important for the authenticity and well-being of introverts than for extraverts. Overall, we interpret our findings to mean that introverts in the West might be more authentic, and hence boost their overall well-being, if they can change their beliefs to become more accepting of their introversion.


Introversion Extraversion Well-being Authenticity Beliefs Self-discrepancy 



This research was financially supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (fee offset) Scholarship, and by a Melbourne Research Scholarship stipend bestowed to the first author by the University of Melbourne.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval for Research Involving Human Participants

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.


  1. Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 116–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1998). Carl Rogers’ helping system: Journey and substance. London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Bastian, B., Kuppens, P., De Roover, K., & Diener, E. (2014). Is valuing positive emotion associated with life satisfaction? Emotion, 14(4), 639–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Identity, self-concept, and self-esteem: The self lost and found. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 681–710). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cain, S. (2012a). Quiet: The power of introverts in a world that can’t stop talking. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  7. Cain, S. (2012b). Susan cain: The power of introverts [Video file]. Retrieved from Accessed 9 Apr 2018.
  8. Darlington, R. B., & Hayes, A. F. (2017). Regression analysis and linear models: Concepts, applications, and implementation. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  9. Davidson, L. (2004). Integrity [authenticity, honesty]. In C. Peterson & M.E.P. Seligman (Eds.), Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification (pp. 249–271). Washington, DC, and New York, NY: American Psychological Association, and Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Davidson, B., Gillies, R. A., & Pelletier, A. L. (2015). Introversion and medical student education: Challenges for both students and educators. Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal, 27(1), 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Cybernetic big five theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  13. Dweck, C. S. (2008). Can personality be changed? The role of beliefs in personality and change. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(6), 391–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fleeson, W. (2001). Toward a structure-and-process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 1011–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fleeson, W. (2007). Situation-based contingencies underlying trait-content manifestation in behavior. Journal of Personality, 75(4), 825–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fleeson, W., & Wilt, J. (2010). The relevance of Big Five trait content in behaviour to subjective authenticity: Do high levels of within-person behavioural variability undermine or enable authenticity achievement? Journal of Personality, 78(4), 1353–1382.Google Scholar
  17. Fulmer, C. A., Gelfand, M. J., Kruglanski, A. W., Kim-Prieto, C., Diener, E., Pierro, A., et al. (2010). On “feeling right” in cultural contexts: How person-culture match affects self-esteem and subjective well-being. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1563–1569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Furnham, A., & Henderson, M. (1982). The good, the bad and the mad: Response bias in self-report measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 3(3), 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Furnham, A., & Henderson, M. (1983). The mote in thy brother’s eye, and the beam in thine own: Predicting one’s own and others’ personality test scores. British Journal of Psychology, 74(3), 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., et al. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(1), 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hayes, A. F., & Cai, L. (2007). Using heteroskedasticity-consistent standard error estimators in OLS regression: An introduction and software implementation. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 709–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Higgins, E. T. (2000). Social cognition: Learning about what matters in the social world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(1), 3–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2001). Happiness, introversion–extraversion and happy introverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 595–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Personality and culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(1), 52–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hogan, R. (1983). A socioanalytic theory of personality. In M. Page (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1982: Personality—current theory and research (Vol. 29, pp. 55–89). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hudson, N. W., & Roberts, B. W. (2014). Goals to change personality traits: Concurrent links between personality traits, daily behaviour, and goals to change oneself. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 68–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. International Personality Item Pool: A scientific collaboratory for the development of advanced measures of personality traits and other individual differences ( Internet Web Site.
  31. John, O. P. (1990). The “Big Five” factor taxonomy: Dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 66–100). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  32. Johnson, J. A. (2014). Measuring thirty facets of the Five Factor Model with a 120-item public domain inventory: Development of the IPIP-NEO-120. Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Joshanloo, M., & Weijers, D. (2014). Aversion to happiness across cultures: A review of where and why people are averse to happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 717–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). The subjective well-being of America’s youth: Toward a comprehensive assessment. Adolescent & Family Health, 4(1), 3–11.Google Scholar
  35. Krueger, R. F., & Markon, K. E. (2014). The role of the DSM-5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically based approach to classifying personality and psychopathology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 477–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lamers, S. M. A., Westerhof, G. J., Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster, P. M. T., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2010). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the mental health continuum-short form (MHC-SF). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(1), 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Little, B. R. (2014). Me, myself, and us: The science of personality and the art of well-being. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  38. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Maltby, J., Wood, A. M., Day, L., & Pinto, D. (2012). The position of authenticity within extant models of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 269–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 376–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McCrae, R. R. (2009). The physics and chemistry of personality. Theory & Psychology, 19(5), 670–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1988). Age, personality, and the spontaneous self-concept. Journal of Gerontology, 43(6), S177–S185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1991). Adding Liebe und Arbeit: The full five-factor model and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 227–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., & Personality Profiles of Cultures Project. (2005). Personality profiles of cultures: Aggregate personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 407–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McGregor, I., McAdams, D. P., & Little, B. R. (2006). Personal projects, life stories, and happiness: On being true to traits. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(5), 551–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Medlock, G. (2012). The evolving ethic of authenticity: From humanistic to positive psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 40, 38–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pavot, W., Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1990). Extraversion and happiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 11(12), 1299–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Peterson, C. (2012). A quiet positive psychology [Blog post]. Retrieved from Accessed 25 Mar 2015.
  50. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M.E.P. (Eds.) (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Washington, DC, and New York, NY: American Psychological Association, and Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Robinson, O. C., Lopez, F. G., Ramos, K., & Nartova-Bochaver, S. (2012). Authenticity, social context, and well-being in the United States, England, and Russia: A three country comparative analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(5), 719–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ryff, C. D. (1987). The place of personality and social structure research in social psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1192–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schlegel, R. J., & Hicks, J. A. (2011). The true self and psychological health: Emerging evidence and future directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(12), 989–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  57. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Rawsthorne, L. J., & Ilardi, B. (1997). Trait self and true self: Cross-role variation in the Big-Five personality traits and its relations with psychological authenticity and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1380–1393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Slabu, L., Lenton, A. P., Sedikides, C., & Bruder, M. (2014). Trait and state authenticity across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(9), 1347–1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Smallenbroek, O., Zelenski, J. M., & Whelan, D. C. (2017). Authenticity as a eudaimonic construct: The relationships among authenticity, values, and valence. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(2), 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Smillie, L. (2015). The introvert ‘quiet revolution’ is not what it seems [Blog post]. Retrieved from Accessed 21 July 2015.
  62. Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 138–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Terracciano, A., Abdel-Khalek, A. M., Adam, N., Adamovova, L., Ahn, C. K., Ahn, H. N., et al. (2005). National character does not reflect mean personality trait levels in 49 cultures. Science, 310(5745), 96–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vazire, S. (2010). Who knows what about a person? The self-other knowledge assymetry (SOKA) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vella-Brodrick, D. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2009). Three ways to be happy: Pleasure, engagement, and meaning—Findings from Australian and US samples. Social Indicators Research, 90(2), 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Winter, D. G., John, O. P., Stewart, A. J., Klohnen, E. C., & Duncan, L. E. (1998). Traits and motives: toward an integration of two traditions in personality research. Psychological Review, 105(2), 230–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wood, D., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2007). Normality evaluations and their relation to personality traits and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 861–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Baliousis, M., & Joseph, S. (2008). The authentic personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the authenticity scale. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 55(3), 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zelenski, J. M., Sobocko, K., & Whelan, D. C. (2014). Introversion, solitude, and subjective well-being. In R. J. Coplan & J. C. Bowker (Eds.), The handbook of solitude: Psychological perspectives on social isolation, social withdrawal, and being alone (pp. 184–201). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Positive Psychology, Melbourne Graduate School of EducationThe University of MelbourneCarltonAustralia

Personalised recommendations