IEI are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than ILI.
When meeting someone knew, IEI are not as likely as ILI to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. IEI know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). IEI, in contrast with ILI, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather IEI immediately establish the necessary emotional distance in contact and can regulate it if needed. To bridge the gap between poorly acquainted people in a group IEI amp up the emotional tone; this can be mutually experienced happiness or misfortune. The name and title of the person are of secondary relevance to IEI and their relationship with the other person.
ILI are more likely to believe in objective truths than IEI. That is, ILI are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than IEI.
IEI are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than ILI. That is, this relativity is perceived by IEI as an extenuation of the differing beliefs, opinions, intentions, etc. of each person.
When something is perceived by ILI as being incorrect, they are more likely (than IEI) to tell the person who made the error what they did wrong and how to do it the right way. ILI are focused on who made the error and helping them to correct the mistake.
When something is perceived by IEI as being incorrect, they are more likely (than ILI) to ask why it was done that way. Instead of necessarily trying to correct the person who made the error, IEI attempt to understand the person's reason for their decision/action.
ILI tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like IEI. E.g., ILI see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. IEI are more likely to internally separate out having fun with other activities, although the two can be interchanged at a high frequency.
The "comparison and verification of concepts" is a more common phenomenon among IEI than ILI. This comparison not only concerns IEI methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. IEI are attuned to the fact that different people might understand and interpret different concepts and terms differently. They perceive terminology as well as actions of other people as part of the subjective concept inseparable from personal opinion, position, intent, etc. In contrast to ILI who perceive terminology as "objective," IEI understand personal differences behind terminology (this applies even to well established terms) and they attempt to compare and verify them.
ILI are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as IEI. ILI assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and ILI often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than IEI, ILI apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; ILI consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.
ILI are more likely (than IEI) to use special rituals or other culturally accepted formalities when forming relationships with others. What that means is that the emotional proximity and relationship status for ILI be more externally predetermined. Additionally, ILI generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than IEI. ILI tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than IEI, and ILI assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
IEI are more likely (than ILI) to seek new and novel experiences rather than returning to something already lived through. They will generally only re-read a book, re-watch a movie, or revisit the same place if they have forgotten it or are hoping to learn something new from it.
ILI are more likely than IEI to use "emotional anchors" that resonate with their internal emotional condition. These emotional anchors could be a book, a movie, a place, a song, etc. ILI use these anchors to strengthen their inner emotional state and thus will repeat the experience: e.g., re-reading a book, re-watching a movie, continually going back to a place to experience the emotions associated with it.
When developing a plan of action or process, ILI tend to see themselves as "within the process"; they are immersed in it. Often because of this, they have more difficulty managing several plans at once. On the other hand, IEI tend to place themselves "outside of the process"; they dissociate from it. For them the process or situation is something external from themselves.
When working on a project, IEI experience more discomfort (than ILI) if the project does not have a clearly delineated end-goal or result. This happens because IEI have more difficulty monitoring and understanding how the project is developing than ILI because they are outside of the process.
When conversing, ILI types are inclined to communicate in the form of monologues, where each party has "its turn." Because of that they subconsciously attempt to transform a dialogue into a series of monologues. Conversely, IEI tend to prefer more of a question and answer style format.
ILI are more likely than IEI to perceive and distinguish themselves primarily through personal qualities. ILI focus on individualism more than IEI.
ILI attitude towards a specific person (more so than IEI) is based on their personal characteristics (authority, intellect, personal achievements, etc.) ILI recognize superiority of certain individuals drawing from their personal qualities
IEI, more than ILI, frequently perceives and defines themselves and other people through group associations. IEI focus on collectivism over individualism.
When IEI form opinions of others, these opinions are formed under the influence of their attitude towards the group to which the person belongs. To IEI, it is incomprehensible how it is possible to belong to two opposing groups at the same time:, i.e., "you're either with us, or with them and against us."
IEI are often able to form quicker opinions of others they have just met than ILI. This is based on the ability of IEI to draw conclusions about the person based on the groups the person belongs to; ILI are more reluctant to make these inferences.
ILI are more likely to make decisions based on logical reasons than IEI, who are more likely to make decisions based on their own feelings.
IEI are often better at solving and minimizing interpersonal problems, where as ILI often struggle understanding them.
ILI are often more interested in studying systems, structures, and functionality than IEI.
IEI tend to prefer using persuasion as a means of convincing others to do something, where as ILI prefer to use argumentation as a means of convincing others.
IEI are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than ILI. However ILI in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than IEI.
ILI place greater value on their interests than IEI. For example, ILI will maintain high levels of energy and focus on an interest they value, even deprioritizing their other resources to maintain the interest. For example, ILI may spend a large amount of energy on an interest they value, often to the detriment of their time, sleep, relationships, money, etc.
IEI place greater value on their resources than ILI. For IEI, resources like their money, time, sleep, etc., fall into their "inner personal space," and the IEI will be more likely to deprioritize an interest if it starts to drain these resources too much.
ILI pay more particular attention to aspects of a situation or plan that are insufficient or lacking. This can be interpreted by others as ILI having a negative assessment of various situations and events (.e.g, "the glass is half empty). On the other hand, IEI pay more attention to what is actually present in a situation, and this can be interpreted as an affirmative or positive manifestation of the surrounding world, situations, possibilities, and prospects (e.g. "the glass is half full").
When assessing an option or available choice, IEI tend to focus more on how the choice could benefit them (what it would potentially yield) than ILI would. On the other hand, ILI would be more cognizant of the potential risks and potential losses that may accompany the decision that IEI may unconsciously minimize.
