See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324503633

Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and Preferred Teaching and

Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

Article · December 2017

CITATIONS READS

15 19,396

4 authors:

Laurie Murphy Nina B Eduljee

Saint Joseph's College of Maine Saint Joseph's College of Maine
18 PUBLICATIONS 141 CITATIONS 34 PUBLICATIONS 243 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Karen Croteau Suzanne Parkman

Saint Joseph's College of Maine University of Southern Maine
66 PUBLICATIONS 1,588 CITATIONS 9 PUBLICATIONS 49 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Health and Well-being of Masters World Cup Field Hockey Players View project

A Study of Undergraduate Student Preferences for Teaching and Classroom Participation Methods View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Laurie Murphy on 01 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Psychosocial Research
Vol. 12, No. 2, 2017, 437-450

Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and

Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot
Study
Laurie Murphy, Nina B. Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

ABSTRACT
This pilot study examined the relationship between personality type (extraversion,
introversion) and preferences for specific teaching and classroom methods with 73
(39 male, 34 female) undergraduate college students. Participants were administered
the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator®, Form M (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk,
& Hammer, 1998), items that measured preferred teaching modalities, as well as
preferences for classroom participation activities. No significant differences were
obtained between personality type and preferred teaching methods in the classroom
(p > .05). Both extraverts and introverts indicated the same preferences for
participation activities preferred in the classroom. Significant differences were
obtained for only one item “engaging in discussion with other students” between
personality type and level of agreement with classroom participation activities.

Key words: Personality type, Extraversion, Introversion, Teaching methods,

Classroom participation

INTRODUCTION
One of the instructor’s key roles is to facilitate learning, inside and outside of the
classroom. The instructor makes many course design decisions, ranging from identifying
and delivering content, creating assignments and assessments and choosing how time
is best spent in the classroom with the students (Brinthaupt, Clayton, Draude, & Calahan,
2014; Chamarro-Premuzic, Furnham, & Lewis, 2007). While the structure of assignments
and assessments may direct how a student spends their time outside the classroom,
the instructor’s careful selection of teaching modalities have an opportunity to make a
positive impact during student class time (Kharb, Samanta, Jindal, & Singh, 2013).

Corresponding author. Email : lmurphy@sjcme.edu

ISSN 0973-5410 print/ISSN 0976-3937 online
©2017 Prints Publications Pvt. Ltd.
http//www.printspublications.com
438 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Instructors may choose from a variety of teaching modalities, ranging from the
traditional lecture to interactive discussions, demonstrations, small group work and
partner activities to individual work, all performed during class time (Roehling, Kooi,
Dykema, Quisenberry, & Vandlen, 2011; Tanner, 2013)
The types of teaching modalities chosen by instructors generally vary depending
on the instructor and the discipline. Some disciplines may require classroom time
that focuses solely on hands-on experiential learning or simulations to foster
knowledge and skill, like Exercise Science, Nursing or Environmental Science (Harder,
2010). Other disciplines such as Theology or Psychology may utilize lecture more
frequently to ensure retention and consistent application of learned knowledge. In
the classroom, some instructors may be more comfortable with a lecture format while
others may prefer to use classroom discussion, experiential activities or group work.
Despite the discipline or instructor’s chosen methodology, students may have their
own individual preferences for teaching modalities. Understanding and using
modalities that students prefer could potentially increase student engagement,
improve learning, and motivation, and result in higher levels of student success
(Murphy, Gray, Straja, & Bogert, 2004; Malek, Hall, & Hodges, 2014; Shaari, Yusoff,
Ghazali, Osman, & Dzahir, 2014).
Prior research indicates that the types of modalities preferred by students may
differ depending on their personality type. For example, extraverts may prefer activities
like classroom discussions, working with other students, and opportunities to interact
with the teacher. Introverts, on the other hand may prefer activities like listening, lab
work, and reflecting before answering teachers’ questions (Lawrence, 2009). However,
limited research has investigated the relationship between student’s personality type
and preferred classroom teaching or participation methods (Chamorro-Premuzic,
Furnham, and Lewis, 2007).
Personality Type
Jung (1924/2016) developed the concept that every individual has a psychological
type and in his research, he indicated that there is an extraverted type and an
introverted type. Informed by Carl Jung’s thinking, Myers and Myers (1980/1995)
adapted his work to help individuals understand their preference for either
extraversion or introversion. Woosley (2001) distinguishes between extraversion
and introversion as:
People who prefer extroversion attend to the outside world; giving and
receiving their energy there by interacting with people and the environment.
They are likely to prefer to communicate and work out ideas by talking.
They prefer to learn through doing and talking it through with others. They

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and 439
Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

tend to have a wide variety of interests and to take the initiative in work
and in relationships. They tend to be sociable and express themselves well.
People who prefer introversion focus their energies on their inner world of
ideas and experiences. They get their energy from their inner world through
reflection. They tend to prefer communication through writing and to work
out ideas through reflection. This is also their preferred way to learn. People
who prefer introversion tend to be private. They will take the initiative in
things that are very important to them (p.14).

These extraversion-introversion (E-I) differences have an impact on how students

become engaged during classroom time, the actions or steps they take to learn and
understand course content, and the way they process information (Lawrence, 1997;
Ruth-Sahd, 2014). When considering the needs of students, extraverts require a high
level of stimulation to remain interested while introverts work best when given time
to reflect and process before engaging in classroom activities (Myers, McCaulley,
Quenk, & Hammer, 2009).

Personality Type and Preferred Teaching Methods

Numerous studies have examined the relationship between personality type and
preferred teaching methods in the classroom. Novelli and Fernandes (2007) investigated
preferred teaching techniques with 180 undergraduate biomedical and 540 graduate
medical students in a biochemistry course, while focusing on student preferences for
two types of teaching modalities. Using a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire (1 = strongly
disagree, 5 = strongly agree), students stated their preference for teacher explanation/
blackboard classes and for PowerPoint/slide-projection classes. Teacher explanation
via blackboard was the preferred choice among students and the researchers speculated
that the high density of information on PowerPoint/slides likely affected student’s
attention.

In a study examining the extent to which Big Five personality traits (Costa &
McCrae, 1992) and learning preferences explain preferences for teaching methods,
Chamorro-Premuzic, Furnham, and Lewis (2007) found a link between students’
personality and their preferred teaching methods with 221 British medical students.
Their findings indicated a significant and negative relationship between extraversion
and preferences for independent study (r = -.14), but not between extraversion and
lectures (r = -.06) and extraversion and discussion groups (r = .01). Introverted students
tended to favor solitary study time, and that “students appear to have a strong
preference both for and against certain teaching methods which suit their temperament,
ability, and experience” (p.249).

J. Psychosoc. Res.
440 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Personality Type and Preferred Classroom Participation

Limited studies examining the relationship between personality type and student
participation in the classroom have found interesting results. In a study with 20
international students (10 introverted, 3 extroverted, 7 undetermined), Lee (2005)
examined the relationship between personality type and students attitudes towards
participation. The results indicated that differences were obtained based on culture.
Indonesian students indicated their desire to study independently, while the “other
students distributed their preferences evenly on studying independently and in groups”
(p. 3). No significant relationship was obtained between student personality type and
participation (r = .09) and participation and gender (r = -23).
Caspi, Chajut, Saporta, and Beyth-Marom (2005) conducted an investigation into
214 university students’ willingness to participate and actual participation in two
different instructional environments and whether this participation was a result of
their personality. The results demonstrated a difference in participation in the classroom
versus web-based instructional environment (WBIE). In the classroom environment,
students that were participating were extroverts, while as “students who participated
solely in the WBIE are more introverted than students who did not participate in
either class or the WBIE” (p. 137). Thus, instructional design may have an impact on a
student’s opportunity to participate and instructors may avoid embarrassing students
who are less likely to participate in classroom discussion.

OBJECTIVES OF THE PRESENT STUDY

The purpose of this study was to investigate differences in personality type, preferred
teaching methods, and classroom participation activities. Three objectives were examined:
1. Would there be differences between personality type and preferred teaching
methods?
2. What do extraverts and introverts consider to be classroom participation activities?
3. Would there be differences between personality type and level of agreement
with classroom participation activities?

METHODOLOGY
Sample
A total of 73 students from a liberal arts college in the northeast were surveyed. The
students ranged in age from 18-23 (mean age = 19.66, SD =1.29). The mean age for
males was 19.51 (SD = 1.46) and for females was 19.82 (SD = 1.05). Background
information for the students is presented in Table 1.

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and 441
Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

Table 1
Participant background information

n (%)

Are you?
Male 39 (53.4)
Female 34 (46.6)
Are you an?
Extravert 40 (54.8)
Introvert 33 (45.2)
Class Standing?
Freshman 23 (31.5)
Sophomore 11 (15.1)
Junior 25 (34.2)
Senior 14 (19.2)
What is your major?
Business 25 (34.2)
Education 16 (21.9)
Exercise Science/Sports Management 18 (24.4)
Other 14 (19.3)

MEASURES

Participants completed two instruments that measured personality type and student
preferences for classroom teaching and participation methods which are described
below:
Personality Type
Extraverted and introverted personality type was determined using the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator® (Form M) that measures a person’s preference on the extraversion-
introversion dichotomy. The instrument is self-administered and consists of 93 forced
choice items with two options for each item. The instrument meets and exceeds the
standards for psychological instruments in terms of its reliability. The Internal
Consistency Reliability of Form M for ages 18-21 (n=89) for the E-I dichotomy is .91
(Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998).

J. Psychosoc. Res.
442 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Student Preferences for Preferred Classroom Teaching Methods and Participation

Activities
This instrument consisted of three parts aimed at assessing participant responses on
preferred teaching methods and classroom participation activities.
Classroom Teaching Methods
This section consisted of 27 items that assessed level of agreement on a 5 point Likert
Scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree) to indicate preferred teaching methods
used by the professor in the classroom. The items were clustered thematically such
that there were nine clusters of items. These included: lecture (5 items), films (2
items), classroom discussion (4 items), experiential activities (2 items) games/
demonstrations (2 items), student presentations (3 items), case studies (3 items), quizzes
(3 items), and research (3 items). Items for this section were adapted from research by
Rivkin & Gim (2013), Mathew & Pillai (2013), Chamorro-Premuzic, Furnham, & Lewis
(2007), Novelli & Fernandes (2007). The reliability of the instrument as demonstrated
by Cronbach’s  was .700.
Preferences with Classroom Participation Activities
This section consisted of 9 items where students were asked to indicate all activities
that counted as classroom participation. Examples of items include: asking the professor
questions, taking notes, volunteering to answer the professor’s questions, actively
participating in organized classroom group activities, and listening.
Level of Agreement with Classroom Participation Activities
This section consisted of 9 items and asked participants to indicate their level of
agreement on a 5 point Likert scale (where 1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree)
to statements about their participation with the activities in the classroom. Some
examples of items include: asking the professor questions, taking notes, internally
processing information shared by the professor, engaging in discussion with other
students, and listening. The reliability of this instrument as demonstrated by
Cronbach’s  was .539.

RESULTS
Personality Type and Preferred Teaching Methods
Means and standard deviations were computed for personality type (extravert,
introvert) and preferred teaching methods in the classroom. A closer look at the
individual items indicates that both extraverts and introverts indicated the greatest
disagreement with the following items: unscheduled quizzes, lecture (professor talks)

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and 443
Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

Table 2

ANOVA summary for personality type and preferred teaching methods

Preferred Teaching Method Extraverta Introvert a F p

(n = 40) (n = 33)

Lecture
Lecture (professor talks) with no visuals 3.87 (.99) 3.85 (.93) .014 NS
Lecture (professor talks) with handwritten notes 2.62 (.86) 2.67 (.99) .037 NS
Lecture (professor talks) plus visual - PowerPoint 2.00 (.67) 1.91 (.52) .397 NS
Lecture (professor talks) plus visual - overhead 2.65 (1.1) 2.24 (.86) 2.915 NS
Lecture (professor talks) with student interaction 2.02 (.86) 2.12 (.96) .203 NS
Films
Watching a short film – 20 minutes or less 2.25 (.80) 2.27 (.83) .014 NS
Watching a long film – 20 minutes or more 2.73 (1.0) 2.64 (.96) .137 NS
Classroom Discussion
Professor leads a classroom discussion on readings 2.50 (.87) 2.67 (.73) .735 NS
Free flowing whole classroom discussion 2.40 (.92) 2.39 (.10) .001 NS
Professor teaches by questioning students 2.73 (.98) 3.03 (1.0) 1.641 NS
Guest speaker (related to course topic) 2.05 (.90) 2.09 (.91) .037 NS
Experiential Activities
All experiential activities – groups of three or more 2.37 (.86) 2.64 (.89) 1.594 NS
All experiential activities - pairs 2.32 (.85) 2.55 (.93) 1.095 NS
Games/Demonstrations
Games in the classroom 2.10 (.92) 2.30 (.95) .846 NS
Demonstrations and practice 2.03 (.73) 2.00 (.70) .022 NS
Student Presentations
Individual 2.93 (.91) 3.06 (1.02) .354 NS
Pair of students 2.50 (.93) 2.67 (.92) .581 NS
Groups of three or more 2.68 (1.11) 2.79 (1.05) .194 NS
Case Studies
Individual participation 2.83 (1.05) 2.94 (.89) .241 NS
Pair of students 2.55 (.98) 2.64 (.82) .161 NS
Groups of three or more 2.80 (1.09) 2.79 (.92) .003 NS

J. Psychosoc. Res.
444 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Quizzes
On the readings 2.83 (1.03) 2.91 (.91) .133 NS
Unscheduled quizzes 4.37 (.80) 4.21 (.74) .794 NS
Weekly quizzes 2.73 (.98) 3.00 (.90) 1.518 NS
Research
Library research using experiential activities 3.32 (.99) 3.42 (.83) .208 NS
Information search using technology 2.73 (.84) 2.76 (.33) .024 NS
Course readings in the classroom 2.78 (.92) 2.79 (.85) .004 NS
a
Student responses measured using a 5-point Likert scale where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree,
3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree.

with no visuals, and library research using experiential activities. The greatest level of
agreement for both extraverts and introverts was indicated for the following items:
lecture (professor talks) plus visual - PowerPoint, demonstrations and practice, and
guest speaker (related to course topic). The results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA)
indicated that no significant differences were obtained between personality type and
preferred teaching methods (Table 2).
Table 3 reports intercorrelations among personality type and the nine clusters of
the preferred teaching methods in the classroom. No significant relationships were
obtained between personality type and the nine clusters of the preferred teaching methods.
Films were significantly correlated with experiential activities and games/demonstrations.
Lecture was significantly correlated with classroom discussion, quizzes, and research.
Classroom discussion was significantly correlated with experiential activities, student
presentations, case studies, quizzes, and research. Experiential activities were significantly
correlated with games/demonstrations, student presentations, case studies and quizzes.
Student presentations were correlated with case studies, quizzes, and research.

Table 3
Intercorrelations among personality type and the nine clusters of the preferred
teaching methods

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Personality Type - -.08 -.02 .09 .14 .06 .09 .03 .05 .03

2 Lecture - .08 .28* -.04 .01 .01 .13 .33** .25*

3 Films - .13 .27* .29* .15 .22 .14 .22

4 Classroom Discussion - .26* .13 .47** .36** .43** .35**

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and 445
Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

5 Experiential Activities - .44** .41** .37** .23* .19

6 Games/Demonstrations - .32** .31** .14 .20

7 Student Presentations - .49** .46** .43**

8 Case Studies - .33* .34**

9 Quizzes - .57**

10 Research -

*p < .05, **p < .01

Personality Type and Activities Considered Classroom Participation

Table 4 indicates that extraverts (92.5%) and introverts (84.8%) indicated their highest
preference for the preferred classroom participation activities: “Volunteering to answer
Professor’s questions” and “Actively participating in organized classroom activities.”
Both extraverts and introverts considered “Professor selects you to answer a question”
and “Internally processing information shared by professor” as their least preferred
classroom participation activity.

Table 4
Number (%) for Extraverts and Introverts and Activities Considered Classroom
Participation
Classroom Participation Activity Extravert Introvert
(n = 40) (n = 33)

Professor selects you to answer a question 23 (57.5) 23 (69.6)

Volunteering to answer Professor’s questions 37 (92.5) 28 (84.8)

Engaging in discussions with other students 33 (82.5) 26 (78.7)

Asking the professor questions 36 (90.0) 26 (78.7)

Listening 32 (80.0) 26 (78.7)

Taking notes 32 (80.0) 25 (75.7)

Internally processing information shared by professor 17 (42.5) 19 (57.5)

Actively participating in organized classroom group activities 37 (92.5) 28 (84.8)

Actively participating in organized classroom individual activities 33 (82.5) 26 (78.7)

J. Psychosoc. Res.
446 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Personality Type and Level of Agreement with Classroom Participation Activities

Means and standard deviations were computed for personality type (extravert,
introvert) and level of agreement with preferred classroom activities (Table 5). Both
extraverts and introverts indicated their highest level of agreement for “Engaging in
discussion with other students” and “Listening” and their highest level of disagreement
for “Professor selects you to answer a question” and “Taking notes”. The results of
the analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated a significant difference was obtained for
extraverts and introverts for only one item: Engaging in discussion with other students”
(p = .05).

Table 5
ANOVA Summary for Personality Type and Preferred Classroom Activities

Preferred Classroom Activity Extravertb Introvertb F

(n = 40) (n = 33)

Professor selects you to answer a question 3.87 (.99) 3.85 (.93) .73

Volunteering to answer professor’s questions 2.62 (.86) 2.67 (.99) 3.29

Engaging in discussion with other students 2.00 (.67) 1.91 (.52) 3.96*

Asking the Professor questions 2.65 (1.1) 2.24 (.86) .78

Listening 2.02 (.86) 2.12 (.96) .12

Taking notes 2.73 (.98) 3.03 (1.0) .23

Internally processing information shared by Professor 2.25 (.80) 2.27 (.83) .05

Actively participating in organized classroom group activities 2.73 (1.0) 2.64 (.96) 2.09

Actively participating in organized classroom individual activities 2.50 (.87) 2.67 (.73) 2.42
b
Student responses measured using a 5-point Likert scale where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree,
3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree
* p = .05

DISCUSSION
This pilot study investigated personality type for the MBTI dichotomy of extraversion
and introversion and students’ preferences for classroom teaching methods and
participation activities. Interestingly, no significant differences were obtained between
extraverts and introverts for preferred classroom teaching methods. Both groups
indicated their highest level of agreement for “lecture (professor talks) with student

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and 447
Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

interaction”, “demonstrations and practice”, and “guest speaker related to course topics.”
Both groups also indicated their highest disagreement for “unscheduled quizzes”,
“lecture (professor talks) with no visuals”, and “library research using experiential
activities.” This is a surprising finding given previous research indicates that there are
differences in classroom teaching preferences between extraverts and introverts.
Lawrence (1997) indicated that introverts tend to be visual and auditory learners and
prefer lecture formats, while as Allchin, Engler, & Dzurec (2006) state that “Extraverts
find energy in the environment, particularly through their interactions with others.
They tend to be expressive and outgoing, often speaking before they think about the
words they are saying” (p. 4).
Correlations among personality type and the nine clusters of the preferred teaching
methods indicated that no significant relationships were obtained. Lecture was
significantly correlated with only classroom discussion, quizzes, and research.
Interactive teaching techniques like classroom discussion were significantly correlated
with other interactive activities like hands-on experiential activities like student
presentations, case studies, and research. Other activities like case studies were
significantly correlated with quizzes and research; games/demonstrations were
significantly correlated with student presentations and case studies; and quizzes were
significantly correlated with research. Thus, when teachers use different techniques in
the classroom and adjust and tailor their instruction to accommodate the needs of
their students, it can increase both students’ achievement and the enjoyment of learning
(Capretz, 2003).
For classroom participation activities, both extraverts and introverts indicated
similar preferences with what they considered to be classroom participation activities.
The highest preference was noted for activities that tended to be more interactive (like
volunteering to answer questions and actively participating in organized classroom
activities), and the lowest preference was for activities that could be considered less
interactive (professor selects you to answer a question and internally processing
information shared by the professor).
In terms of preferred classroom participation activities, a significant difference
between extraverts and introverts was found for one activity “engaging in discussion
with other students.” This finding is not surprising, since extraverts crave and thrive
on interaction with other people and opportunities to connect/interact are energizing
to them (Myers, 2015). On the other hand, introverted students prefer time to reflect
and think when posed with a task to complete or problem to solve. Introverts do their
best work privately and alone; however, introverted students appreciate the opportunity
to get feedback from a fellow student (Lawrence, 1997) as well as they “may learn best
in an environment that is quiet and free from intense stimulation” (Schmeck & Lockhart,
1983; p. 55).

J. Psychosoc. Res.
448 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Limitations of the Study

This pilot study is not without limitations. First, students were recruited from a limited
number of academic majors and it is recommended that the study be conducted with
students from a broader range of majors. This will provide us with a better understanding
of the relationship between academic major, teaching methods, and participation activities.
Second, since the sample size was small, it was not possible to determine differences in
personality styles across different class standing (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior)
and future research should include a representative sample of students from students as
they progress through the college curriculum. Third, the professor’s teaching style in the
classroom was not examined in the study. This can be problematic for some students who
may feel left out (Capretz, 2003). Thus, we recommend that the professor’s teaching style
be examined to determine if the learning needs of all students can be met in the classroom.
Suggestions for Future Research
While this study provides valuable information for researchers and educators,
additional research is needed to further explore and understand how educators could
evaluate, modify or adapt their usual or preferred teaching methods to meet the needs
of both extraverted and introverted students in their classrooms. Thus, it is
recommended that professor’s consider how to incorporate a variety of teaching
modalities in their classroom to enrich the student experience, while providing an
opportunity for all students to experience alternative teaching methods and broadening
the student and professor’s view of what is considered participation in the classroom.
Ongoing investigation of students’ needs based on personality type will assist educators
in identifying methods and variables that may promote student acceptance of a wide
variety of classroom teaching and participation methods.

FUNDING
This research was supported by CPP, Inc. Publisher of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®
Instrument with discounted assessments and through a Grant from Saint Joseph’s
College, Standish, Maine.

REFERENCES
Allchin, L., Engler, A. J., and Dzurec, L. C. (2006). Comparing psychological type and explanatory
between nursing students and clinical faculty: A Pilot study. School of Nursing Scholarly Works,
40. http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/son_articles/40

Brinthaupt, T. M., Clayton, M. A., Draude, B. J., and Calahan, P. T. (2014). How should I offer this
course? The course delivery decision model (CDDM). MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching, 10(2), 326-336.

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 Extraversion and Introversion Personality Type and 449
Preferred Teaching and Classroom Participation: A Pilot Study

Capretz, L. F. (2003). Teachers are from heaven, students are from hell – true or false? Industry &
Higher Education, 17, 417-422.

Caspi, A., Chajut, E., Saporta, K., and Beyth-Marom, R. (2005). The influence of personality on social
participation in learning environments. Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 129-144.

Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A. and Lewis, M. (2007). Personality and approaches to learning
predict preference for different teaching methods. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 241–
250.

Costa, P.T., Jr., and McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-
Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manuals. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Harder, B. N. (2010). Use of simulations in teaching and learning in health sciences: A systematic
review. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(1), 23-28.

Kharb, P., Samanta, P. P., Jindal, M., and Singh, V. (2012). The learning styles and preferred teaching
– learning strategies of first year medical students. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 7(6),
1089-1092.

Jung. C. G. (2016). Psychological types or the psychology of individuation. Mansfield Centre, CT: Martino
Publishing (Original work published in 1924).

Lawrence, G. (1997). Looking at Type and Learning Styles. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of
Psychological Type, Inc.

Lawrence, G. (2009). People types & tiger stripes: Using psychological type to help students discover their
unique potential. 4th Edition. Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc.

Lee, P. (2005). Students’ personality type and attitudes towards classroom participation. Proceedings
of the CATESOL State Conference, California State University, Los Angeles, USA.

Malek, N. P., Hall, J. C., and Hodges, C. (2014). A review and analysis of the effectiveness of alternative
teaching methods on student learning in economics. Perspectives on economic Education Research,
9(1), 75-85.

Mathew, B. A., and Pillai. (2013). Student’s preferences in teaching and learning methods in classroom:
A cross-sectional survey. Global Journal for Research Analysis, 5(4), 200-201.

Murphy, R. J., Gray, S. A., Straja, S. R., and Bogert, M . C. (2004). Student learning preferences and
teaching implications. Journal of Dental Education, 68(8), 859-866.

Myers, I., McCaulley, M., Quenk, N., and Hammer, A. (1998). MBTI® Form M Mountain View, CA:
CPP, Inc.

Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., and Hammer, A. L. (2009). MBTI Manual: A guide to the
development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.

J. Psychosoc. Res.
 450 Laurie Murphy, Nina Eduljee, Karen Croteau and Suzanne Parkman

Myers, I. B., and Myers, P. B. (1995). Gifts differing. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press
(Original work published in 1980).

Myers, I. B. (2015). Introduction to Myers-Briggs Type. 7th Edition, CPP, Inc.

Novelli, E. L., and Fernandes, A. A. H. (2007). Students’ preferred teaching techniques for biochemistry
in biomedicine and medicine courses. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35(4), 263-266.

Rivkin, A., and Gim, S. (2013). Student preferences regarding teaching methods in a drug-induced
diseases and clinical toxicology course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(6), 123.

Roehling, P. V., Kooi, T. L. K., Dykema, S., Quisenberry, B., and Vandlen, C. (2011). Engaging the
millennial generation in class discussions. College Teaching, 59, 1-6.

Ruth-Sahd, L. A. (2014). Responding to quiet students: Implications for educators and advisors. Adult
Education Research Conference, http://new prairiepress/aerc/2014/papers/77.

Schmeck, R. R., & Lockhart, D. (1983). Introverts and extraverts require different learning environments.
Educational Leadership, 40(5), 209-216.

Shaari, A. S., Yusoff, N. M., Ghazali, I. M., Osman, R. H., and Dzahir, N. F. M. (2014). The relationship
between lecturers’ teaching style and students’ academic engagement. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 118, 10-20.

Tanner, K. D. (2013). Structure matters: Twenty-one teaching strategies to promote student engagement
and cultivate classroom equity. CBE Life Science Education, 12(3), 322-331.

Woosley, E. R. (2001). A look at the relationships between MBTI psychological types and mode
conflict styles. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download? doi=10.1.1.391.
3418&rep=rep1&type=pdf

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Laurie Murphy, Assistant Professor — Department of Business, Saint Joseph’s College, 278 Whites Bridge Road,
Standish ME 04084, USA

Nina B. Eduljee, Professor — Department of Psychology, Saint Joseph’s College, 278 Whites Bridge Road,
Standish ME 04084, USA

Karen Croteau, Professor — Department of Sport and Exercise Science, Saint Joseph’s College, 278 Whites
Bridge Road, Standish ME 04084, USA

Suzanne Parkman, Assistant Professor — Department of Nursing, Saint Joseph’s College, 278 Whites Bridge
Road, Standish ME 04084, USA

J. Psychosoc. Res.

View publication stats