Personality Cafe banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just curious, am I the only introvert out here who prefers to be in a group setting vs one on one with a friend? I find there is less pressure for me to come up with conversation, and I feel more comfortable chiming in and bouncing off other people. When it's one on one I don't always have something to say... and even if they are extroverted, conversation can lull. Don't get me wrong, I prefer deep relationships, and that's easier to achieve just with one friend, but it's sometimes hard for me to converse :sad:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
Nah I get that. As someone with social anxiety, it's often very helpful to be in group settings because the attention is not on you and you don't actually have to propel the conversation yourself. People are hard, and conversations can be troublesome. I've met plenty of introverts that would be inclined to agree with you.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,441 Posts
No. I do not dislike "groups" because of: "Oh my god 3 other humanoids {{{{{(self-destructs)}}}}".

I only dislike group(s) when they are dysfunctional or I sense the 'dysfunctionality/incompetency' from a mile away; if all the specimens are working together productively, sharing ideas, and are functional, I prefer group to "one-on-one", simply for the vast share of ideas, opinion, and open discussion - and stuff just gets done faster. I love functional teamwork; it is such a breeze compared the unnecessarily 'hard on myself' opposition.

I have no strong preference for either over the other. I also do not mind working alone on projects, and if such an option is present - and I feel completely competent/capable without (group), I see no reason to work with one. I have never much understood the heavy emphasis on either preference. My fixation is the "what gets me finished (&) out of here faster", not the dealing with the social aspect. I have no clue why the social aspect or 'relationship' part is relevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
759 Posts
I understand here you're coming from, but I find conversing one-on-one much easier than talking to a mass of people.

Six pairs of eye on me while I make up my mind, throwing into consideration everybody's politics and values, what they're sensitive about and not sensitive about, just to get a message across that doesn't make someone feel patronised because I disagree with them, whilst noticing someone from the corner of my eye furrowing their eyebrows, simultaneously processed with another train of thought as to what made them tick, or seeing someone pull out their phone to talk to see what somebody else is saying? The mere thought of it makes me dizzy.

One-on-one, or a group of 3, is ideal for me. Inside jokes are created, the moments are more intense and valuable, and less time is wasted. I think you know if you've got an amazing friendship when the two of you can sit silently together for an hour, and not feel the slightest degree of awkwardness, nor the need to talk.

If it's a project, I still prefer one-on-one or a group of three, but that might be more to do with control issues because the work is less distributed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blurrygirl

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
I have considerable anxiety over being a non-presence in social situations, since it seems like people will just forget I am there and I will be a fifth wheel. As such I feel like I need to be contributing in an equitable fashion. That is the biggest reason I struggle with group settings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
897 Posts
I prefer a group. Four is my magic number. Just enough that the conversation keeps flowing but everyone can still get a word in, and even if two people pair off, nobody is left being a third wheel because they can just start talking to the fourth member.

I have social anxiety and seriously dread silences/lulls, so one on one is not my ideal. I also find that I'm very focused on the other person's needs when it's just the two of us, constantly trying to keep them happy and comfortable. It can actually get really uncomfortable if they're not doing it back because I begin to feel like their servant or something. I like groups because I'm much better at controlling the power dynamic in them and the responsibility for other people's happiness doesn't lie solely on me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
I definitely prefer group settings over one-on-one conversations for the same reasons you already mentioned. There's always this need for me to constantly keep the other person entertained and interested, it leads to me overthinking everything they do and say and leaves me exhausted. Group conversations can actually be quite recharging, I can be more myself, I don't always need to say something. I need to get comfortable with the people first, so I'd always prefer it to be people I already know and kinda know what they're about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daiz

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I prefer small groups over one-on-one, unless it is a close friend. I can hang out with my closest friends one-on-one, people who don't expect constant conversation, who I can sit with in companionable silence.

But, yes, if it is not a close friend, I prefer hanging out in groups. That way I can sit back in silence when I have nothing to say, and then add to the conversation when I like. But it also depends on the setting too. If it is a choice between hanging out with a close friend at a club, or hanging out with a group of work-friends at one person's house, I'll choose the group of friends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,561 Posts
Just curious, am I the only introvert out here who prefers to be in a group setting vs one on one with a friend? I find there is less pressure for me to come up with conversation, and I feel more comfortable chiming in and bouncing off other people. When it's one on one I don't always have something to say... and even if they are extroverted, conversation can lull.
Agree with this. I still find it very hard to bounce off of what other people say and get my input out, but I do appreciate that there is less pressure on me to speak in a group setting. One-on-one I'm obligated to talk more even when I have nothing to say, which isn't a good feeling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Definitely group settings, for all the reasons mentioned in here and also because you can get so many interesting perspectives at once, much more opportunities for humor/bonding and it’s much easier to latch onto something, build from the more that’s there versus one-on-one. Just overall more interesting conversation(s)/interaction(s) all around. I’m a horrible conversationalist naturally so unless the person I’m with is very chatty themselves, a one-on-one interaction with me is gonna be a lot of sitting in silence unfortunately.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,201 Posts
Group = no friggin' way. Not in a million years.

One on one = Well, okay if I must. If forced.

All alone = paradise. Playtime!
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top