Will the real factor of extraversion-introversion please stand up? A reply to Eysenck.

Abstract

Eysenck insisted that his Extraversion (E) factor is second-order variable, resting on two first-order factors: S (Sociability) and R (Rhathymia, or impulsiveness as opposed to seriousness and self-restraint). Evidence is presented in this reply for the independence of S and R, as shown when proper measurement scales are used. Evidence is also provided for the affiliation of R with Factor T (Thoughtfulnes s), which serves as the basis for different secondorder factor that has better claim to the label of Extraversion. Eysenck's own factor-analytic results fail to support his claimed second-order factor. H. J. Eysenck's (1977) response to my treatment (J. P. Guilford, 1975) of his factor of Extraversion- Introversion (E) was not unexpected ; it was very critical. I did not, as he said, reject extraversion as a meaningful dimension of personality, but rather Eysenck's conception of it, which I assume he had in mind in making the statement. I did, and do, reject his conception, and I proposed instead that Extraversion is second-order factor involving first-order factors R (Restraint vs. Rhathymia) and T (Thoughtfulnes s) rather than R and S (Sociability), which he maintains. Evidently Eysenck was not sufficiently impressed with the limited, although strong, evidence provided. In this presentation I emphasize this major issue, supply additional evidence for the proper components of my dimension of extraversion (in my paper it was called introversion-extraversion), and react to some minor points at issue. I do not attempt to make this reply comprehensive, but devote most of the limited space to my topical question.

Keywords

Related Publications