Thus, whether one’s personality is extraverted or introverted represents an
adaptive choice (though probably not a conscious choice). One option
(extraversion) is to benefit from seeking out and influencing other people,
supported by appropriate social skills, including social problem solving (cf.
Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2000). A second option (introversion) is to follow a
more self-sufficient path, requiring a greater degree of reflection and sustain-
ing goal-directed activity in the absence of social reinforcement. A third op-
tion (ambiversion) is to follow a middle course, supported by moderate profi-
ciency at both types of skill. The effects of extraversion–introversion on
intellectual performance may be seen as concomitants of these adaptive
choices. Extraverts perform better on intelligence tests in arousing conditions
(Revelle, 1993) as a by-product of adaptation to demanding, potentially
stressful social encounters. Extraversion may also relate to the quality of in-
tellectual functioning directed explicitly toward social problem solving, as ev-
idenced by data relating the trait to social skills and related components of
emotional intelligence (Matthews et al., 2003; Saklofske, Austin, & Minski,
2003). However, the reliance of this work on self-report means that a more
definite conclusion must await the results of studies that link the cognitive
skills of extraverts to objective social behaviors. Similarly, introverts’ advan-
tages in reflective problem solving are a consequence of a more self-reliant
adaptive orientation, that supports the systematic intellectual study required
by college students (Furnham & Heaven, 1999).
Neuroticism and Trait Anxiety
The cognitive-adaptive framework also gives us a new perspective on the
closely related traits of neuroticism and trait anxiety. The literature on these
traits often gives the impression that they represent deficits in functioning,
linked to excessive negative affect. For example, there is extensive evidence
showing that negative affect is linked to poorer performance on ability tests,
although correlation magnitudes are modest (Zeidner, 1998; Zeidner &
Matthews, 2000). Negative affectivity (in the form of both anxiety and de-
pression) is also associated with impairments in social problem solving
(Belzer, D’Zurilla, & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002), which may contribute to clini-
cal disorder. The deficit view may be true for extreme levels of neuroticism,
but, in non-clinical populations, the evidence points toward a more subtle
view of the adaptive significance of neuroticism (Matthews, Derryberry, &
Siegle, 2000). In particular, there may be adaptive advantages to maintaining
awareness of subtle, disguised, or delayed threats, that allows the person to
avoid or prepare for danger.
A cognitive-adaptive account of trait anxiety can be sketched as for
extraversion–introversion. Figure 6.4 shows correlates of trait anxiety and
neuroticism at: (a) different levels of abstraction, and (b) within each of the
152 MATTHEWS AND ZEIDNER