Kroencke · Journal of personality and social psychology 2023 · longitudinal and experience sampling study · n=6296

Extraversion, social interactions, and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: Did extraverts really suffer more than introverts?

Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study

Prospective longitudinal and experience-sampling observational cohort studies

PubMed 37589686 · doi:10.1037/pspp0000468 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Researchers investigated whether the positive link between extraversion and well-being during COVID-19 restrictions was driven by social participation (mediation by interaction frequency) or social reactivity (moderation by interaction benefit). They analyzed three datasets using preregistered multilevel structural equation models: an international longitudinal cohort (Study 1: 4,622 participants, 10,523 assessments) and two experience sampling studies (Study 2: 293 participants, 29,536 assessments; Study 3: 1,381 participants, 61,492 assessments).

What was found

The abstract reports directional outcomes without specific numeric effect sizes or confidence intervals. Extraversion maintained a robust positive relationship with well-being despite pandemic restrictions. The social participation hypothesis received partial support across datasets, whereas the social reactivity hypothesis was not consistently supported at the broad trait level. Exploratory analyses showed reactivity effects for specific sub-facets (sociability predicting activated positive affect). Reductions in social interactions (such as fewer face-to-face contacts or interactions with friends) were unrelated to extraversion, and extraverted individuals did not suffer disproportionately more from these reductions than introverts.

Why it matters

These findings challenge the common assumption that extraverts experienced uniquely severe psychological harm from pandemic lockdowns, demonstrating that the well-being advantage of extraversion persisted even under conditions of severe social contact restriction.

Limits

The abstract provides no point estimates, effect sizes, or test statistics. Measures relied on subjective self-report. Key findings supporting social reactivity emerged only from exploratory sub-facet analyses rather than the primary preregistered models, and observational designs cannot definitively establish causality.

Cited by