LSE are more likely to make decisions based on logical reasons than ESE, who are more likely to make decisions based on their own feelings.
ESE are often better at solving and minimizing interpersonal problems, where as LSE often struggle understanding them.
LSE are often more interested in studying systems, structures, and functionality than ESE.
ESE tend to prefer using persuasion as a means of convincing others to do something, where as LSE prefer to use argumentation as a means of convincing others.
ESE are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than LSE. However LSE in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than ESE.
LSE place greater value on their interests than ESE. For example, LSE will maintain high levels of energy and focus on an interest they value, even deprioritizing their other resources to maintain the interest. For example, LSE may spend a large amount of energy on an interest they value, often to the detriment of their time, sleep, relationships, money, etc.
ESE place greater value on their resources than LSE. For ESE, resources like their money, time, sleep, etc., fall into their "inner personal space," and the ESE will be more likely to deprioritize an interest if it starts to drain these resources too much.
LSE are more likely (than ESE) 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.
ESE are more likely than LSE 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. ESE 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.
LSE pay more particular attention to aspects of a situation or plan that are insufficient or lacking. This can be interpreted by others as LSE having a negative assessment of various situations and events (.e.g, "the glass is half empty). On the other hand, ESE 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, ESE tend to focus more on how the choice could benefit them (what it would potentially yield) than LSE would. On the other hand, LSE would be more cognizant of the potential risks and potential losses that may accompany the decision that ESE may unconsciously minimize.
When conversing, ESE 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, LSE tend to prefer more of a question and answer style format.
LSE are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than ESE.
When meeting someone knew, LSE are not as likely as ESE to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. LSE know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). LSE, in contrast with ESE, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather LSE 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 LSE 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 LSE and their relationship with the other person.
ESE are more likely to believe in objective truths than LSE. That is, ESE are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than LSE.
LSE are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than ESE. That is, this relativity is perceived by LSE as an extenuation of the differing beliefs, opinions, intentions, etc. of each person.
When something is perceived by ESE as being incorrect, they are more likely (than LSE) to tell the person who made the error what they did wrong and how to do it the right way. ESE are focused on who made the error and helping them to correct the mistake.
When something is perceived by LSE as being incorrect, they are more likely (than ESE) to ask why it was done that way. Instead of necessarily trying to correct the person who made the error, LSE attempt to understand the person's reason for their decision/action.
ESE tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like LSE. E.g., ESE see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. LSE 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 LSE than ESE. This comparison not only concerns LSE methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. LSE 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 ESE who perceive terminology as "objective," LSE understand personal differences behind terminology (this applies even to well established terms) and they attempt to compare and verify them.
ESE are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as LSE. ESE assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and ESE often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than LSE, ESE apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; ESE consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.
ESE are more likely (than LSE) 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 ESE be more externally predetermined. Additionally, ESE generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than LSE. ESE tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than LSE, and ESE assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
LSE are more likely than ESE to perceive and distinguish themselves primarily through personal qualities. LSE focus on individualism more than ESE.
LSE attitude towards a specific person (more so than ESE) is based on their personal characteristics (authority, intellect, personal achievements, etc.) LSE recognize superiority of certain individuals drawing from their personal qualities
ESE, more than LSE, frequently perceives and defines themselves and other people through group associations. ESE focus on collectivism over individualism.
When ESE form opinions of others, these opinions are formed under the influence of their attitude towards the group to which the person belongs. To ESE, 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."
ESE are often able to form quicker opinions of others they have just met than LSE. This is based on the ability of ESE to draw conclusions about the person based on the groups the person belongs to; LSE are more reluctant to make these inferences.
When developing a plan of action or process, ESE 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, LSE 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, LSE experience more discomfort (than ESE) if the project does not have a clearly delineated end-goal or result. This happens because LSE have more difficulty monitoring and understanding how the project is developing than ESE because they are outside of the process.
