Quiet Flourishing: Exploring Beliefs about Introversion-Extraversion, and Identifying Pathways to Optimal Well-Being in Trait Introverts Rodney Bruce Lawn Postgraduate Diploma in Psychology Melb Bachelor of Business Monash ORCID® identifier: 0000-0002-1627-4765 Doctor of Philosophy November 2019 Melbourne Graduate School of Education The University of Melbourne Submitted in total fulfilment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy ABSTRACT Introversion-extraversion is a fundamental, socially consequential personality trait. Introverts are typically described as “quiet”, “reserved”, and “withdrawn”, and contemporary theories and models of personality traits regard introversion as merely a lack of extraversion. Introverts generally have lower levels of well-being than their extraverted counterparts and this has typically been attributed to direct effects of temperament, whereby extraverts are more dispositionally inclined to engage positively with the world. However, some recent evidence suggests that, in individualistic Western cultures that value personal agency and expressiveness, the positive relationship between trait extraversion and well-being might be due in part to extraverts experiencing better person–environment fit; a view that is also reflected in popular literature. However, it remains unclear how living in these cultures might specifically impact the well-being of introverts in terms of their identity, happiness, and psychosocial functioning. A narrative literature review revealed that there is scant research on the well-being implications for introverts of their apparent lack of person– environment fit in Western cultures, and whether there are possibilities for volitional change in their well-being. Consequently, this PhD thesis investigates this identified gap via two complementary studies; using a self-report survey among an Australian adult sample. Study One (N = 399) explores lay beliefs about the character strengths and weaknesses of introverts and extraverts. In light of individualistic Western values, this novel descriptive-exploratory approach finds support for a cultural preference for extraversion. In this cultural context, Study Two (N = 349) uses a moderated mediation model to test a hypothesised alternative, eudaimonic pathway to well-being for trait introverts—via authenticity as a mediator but moderated by participants’ beliefs about ii their own “actual” versus “ideal” levels of introversion-extraversion. Overall, this thesis unearths new evaluative-based perspectives on how introverts are perceived and characterised in a cultural context where extraversion is the ideal, and in this context also finds evidence to suggest that beyond direct effects of personality traits there might be an indirect, conditional pathway to well-being for introverts who are comfortable with their own level of introversion. Aside from providing new insights into the identity and lived experience of introverts in contemporary Western culture, this thesis signposts some relevant, promising, and practical constructs for use in future investigation of relations between trait introversion and well-being, using models and measures that embrace contemporary approaches in personality and positive psychology. Moreover, it does so among a population where very little in this line of research has been conducted. iii DECLARATION This thesis comprises only my own original work towards the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, except where indicated in the Preface. Due acknowledgement has been made in the text of this thesis to all other material used. This thesis is fewer than the maximum word limit in length, exclusive of tables and figures, References lists, and Appendices. iv PREFACE The first drafts of Chapters One, Two, Four, and Six in this thesis were written by me. Subsequent edits, including those made in response to reviews of each of these chapters by my supervisors, were also performed by me. Empirical Chapters Three and Five in this thesis (both presented in article format; refer publication status below) were carried out in collaboration with my principal supervisor Professor Dianne Vella-Brodrick and my co-supervisor Dr. Gavin Slemp. I am the primary author of these two empirical chapters, as follows: The first drafts of these chapters were written by me, and I contributed more than 50% of their content. I was primarily responsible for the planning, execution, and (in the case of Chapter Five) preparation of the work for publication. Subsequent editing of these chapters, in response to my supervisors’ and (in the case of Chapter Five) journal editors’ reviews, was performed by me. My supervisors provided advice and guidance as required on the planning, execution, and preparation of these two empirical chapters, including reviewing the format and content of the draft manuscripts, assisting with some statistical analyses, and (in the case of Chapter Five) assisting with navigating the publication process. Accordingly, for empirical Chapters Three and Five, the required “Declaration for a thesis with publication” and “Co-author authorisation form” documents have been signed and submitted separately along with this thesis. v The publication status of empirical Chapters Three and Five, both presented in article format in this thesis (i.e., as Studies One and Two respectively), is as follows: Chapter Three (Study One) is unpublished material not submitted for publication. Chapter Five (Study Two) is an author accepted manuscript. This is a post-peer- review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Journal of Happiness Studies. The final publication is available at link.springer.com: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10902-018-0037-5 In preparing this thesis, the author was financially supported by: an Australian Government Research Training Program (fee offset) Scholarship; a Melbourne Research Scholarship stipend bestowed by the University of Melbourne; and a studentship prize (Gerry Higgins Studentship in Positive Psychology 2019), kindly donated by Mr. John Higgins in honour of his father Mr. Gerry Higgins and awarded by the Melbourne Graduate School of Education. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS No virtue in this world is so oft rewarded as perseverance. — Bobby Jones Writing a PhD thesis is an enormous undertaking, requiring the investment of much time and effort as well as providing a unique opportunity to develop both personally and professionally. In my case at least it would not have been possible without the support of several key people who have been with me along the way, and whom I wish to gratefully acknowledge here. First, I sincerely thank my two supervisors. Their energy and enthusiasm is inspiring, and their experience invaluable. My principal supervisor Professor Dianne Vella-Brodrick has been a constant source of encouragement and expertise since I first approached her with the beginnings of my topic idea a few years ago. Dianne has since provided countless insights on the process of getting from there to here, and I have really appreciated her focused and compassionate approach to overseeing my PhD. Dianne has managed to bring out the best in me as a graduate student; she always seemed to know when I needed a nudge in the right direction and when to leave me to my own devices. My co-supervisor Dr. Gavin Slemp has likewise been a constant source of encouragement and expertise. I have very much appreciated his ongoing interest in my topic, and I have really enjoyed our many stimulating discussions about psychology along the way. I thank Dianne and Gavin both very much for welcoming me so warmly and readily as a student into the Centre for Positive Psychology, and for providing such a balance of support and challenge throughout; I have learnt a lot from both of them and I feel very fortunate to have had them as my guides. vii My other Advisory Committee members, Associate Professor Peggy Kern and Professor Nick Haslam, have also provided important insights and encouragement throughout. I thank them sincerely for their valuable suggestions and feedback at my progress reviews; they have helped to make my thesis better and their wise, gentle guidance has contributed to making my PhD experience enjoyable and beneficial. My thanks also go to the leaders, along with all the staff and fellow graduate students, at the Centre for Positive Psychology (both past and present), who have contributed positively to my PhD experience by creating such a stimulating and friendly learning environment. I also take this opportunity to acknowledge the late Associate Professor Jenny Boldero, of the Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, who supervised my honours-level thesis in psychology and encouraged me to consider doing a PhD. Of course an endeavour that involves such a substantial, sustained investment of time and effort also requires a conducive home environment, and I sincerely thank my wonderful wife Suzie for her ceaseless encouragement and assistance. She has been my number one supporter as I have navigated the inevitable ups and downs of the PhD process, and I am eternally grateful for the myriad, selfless ways in which she has shared this experience and helped me reach my goal. I also thank my inspirational children Erin and Anthony. Erin was a helpful sounding-board when I was refining my early topic ideas, and I have drawn much motivation from her ongoing encouragement of my research and her professional approach to her own work. Thanks also to the rest of my family and my friends, who have all shared