SLI are rmore relaxed in their natural state than ESI. However SLI will mobilize and concentrate when needed to accomplish an objective. After the task has been completed, SLI demobilize again. This state of demobilization is the natural state of SLI.
When contemplating a task, it takes SLI longer time to mobilize than ESI; i.e., SLI prefer to spend some time in a more natural state of relaxedness which will then prepare them to subsequently mobilize and concentrate at the crucial moments, improving their performance.
When working on a project, SLI are more likely than ESI to break up larger tasks into several stages. Then SLI mobilize to carry out each stage (and demobilize between the stages).
When getting ready to start a project, SLI spend more time planning and preparing for the project than ESI. In particular, SLI spend more time discussing the plan, discussing options and ways to approach the project, etc.)
When describing their reasoning for their actions, SLI (more so than ESI) tend describe how and why they came to a certain decision, and focus less on the timing and initiation of the action.
When it comes to completing a task, ESI are more likely than SLI to mobilize for longer periods of time. Specifically, ESI tend to mobilize for an action early and stay mobilized for a longer period of time after the task has been completed. For ESI, this state of readiness is their natural state.
ESI are more likely than SLI to tackle a task in its entirety, rather than breaking it up into smaller separate stages.
When doing a task, ESI are inclined to work for the sake of the result (for example, a reward or bonus for completing the task). In contrast to SLI, ESI can renounce their comforts and conveniences for this; ESI evaluate their place of work by looking at what returns they get for the effort they invested (e.g., monetary, prestige, etc.).
When describing why they undertook a project, ESI are more likely than SLI to focus on the moment when a decision is made and to speak in detail about the stages of its implementation.
When discussing work, ESI are more likely than SLI to focus on the fruits of their labor, about what their effort will yield. SLI on the other hand are more likely to focus on the environment they work in, e.g., their work conditions, conveniences, commute time, etc.
SLI are more likely to make decisions based on logical reasons than ESI, who are more likely to make decisions based on their own feelings.
ESI are often better at solving and minimizing interpersonal problems, where as SLI often struggle understanding them.
SLI are often more interested in studying systems, structures, and functionality than ESI.
ESI tend to prefer using persuasion as a means of convincing others to do something, where as SLI prefer to use argumentation as a means of convincing others.
ESI are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than SLI. However SLI in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than ESI.
SLI place greater value on their interests than ESI. For example, SLI will maintain high levels of energy and focus on an interest they value, even deprioritizing their other resources to maintain the interest. For example, SLI may spend a large amount of energy on an interest they value, often to the detriment of their time, sleep, relationships, money, etc.
ESI place greater value on their resources than SLI. For ESI, resources like their money, time, sleep, etc., fall into their "inner personal space," and the ESI will be more likely to deprioritize an interest if it starts to drain these resources too much.
When planning to complete something, SLI are more likely to focus their attention on the goal itself, overlooking and deprioritizing the individual actions needed to reach that goal. On the other hand, ESI tend to focus their attention on the each action; i.e., they're focused on how each decision and choice is being made (towards reaching the goal), in a step by step process.
ESI are able to change and make adjustments to their goals more easily than SLI (depending on how progress is being made, etc.). SLI on the other hand, prefer to stick with their original goals.
SLI tend to judge their available options by how likely the option will help them reach their goal. If a choice no longer helps SLI reach their goals, it will be dismissed and discontinued. On the other hand, ESI prefer to continue pursuing their current option, opting to adjust their ultimate goal in order to fit the current choice.
ESI are more likely than SLI to perceive and distinguish themselves primarily through personal qualities. ESI focus on individualism more than SLI.
ESI attitude towards a specific person (more so than SLI) is based on their personal characteristics (authority, intellect, personal achievements, etc.) ESI recognize superiority of certain individuals drawing from their personal qualities
SLI, more than ESI, frequently perceives and defines themselves and other people through group associations. SLI focus on collectivism over individualism.
When SLI form opinions of others, these opinions are formed under the influence of their attitude towards the group to which the person belongs. To SLI, 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."
SLI are often able to form quicker opinions of others they have just met than ESI. This is based on the ability of SLI to draw conclusions about the person based on the groups the person belongs to; ESI are more reluctant to make these inferences.
ESI tend to plan ahead, making decisions early. On the other hand, SLI tend to prefer a wait and see, more spontaneous approach.
SLI are relatively more flexible and tolerant than ESI.
ESI are relatively more rigid and stubborn than SLI.
SLI are comfortable making changes and adjustments to their decisions quite frequently. ESI, on the other hand, prefer to not make changes to their decisions.
ESI tend to put more effort than SLI into finishing any new project they start.
SLI tend to start more tasks and other projects than ESI, but the SLI are less likely to complete all of them.
ESI tend to have stiffer more angular movements. SLI tend to have more relaxed fluid movements.
SLI tend to have a more democratic leadership style than ESI.
ESI tend to have a more authoritarian, hierarchical leadership style than SLI.
SLI have a relatively higher stress tolerance than ESI. ESI often struggle with continually changing situations more than SLI do.
ESI tend to perceive events in an episodic manner, i.e., they see events evolve in discrete states rather than continuous changes. On the other hand, SLI tend to perceive events in a continuous sequence; i.e., they see events evolving fluidly rather that one state to the next.
When describing the stages of an event, SLI are more likely to focus on how stage A leads to stage B, how stage B leads to stage C, etc. ESI, on the other hand, focus more on the stages themselves without necessarily seeing or emphasizing the transitions or causes and effects of the stages to the extent that SLI do.
When describing reality, ESI are more likely to talk about the properties and structure of reality. SLI are more likely to describe reality as movements, interactions, and changes.
ESI pay more particular attention to aspects of a situation or plan that are insufficient or lacking. This can be interpreted by others as ESI having a negative assessment of various situations and events (.e.g, "the glass is half empty). On the other hand, SLI 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, SLI tend to focus more on how the choice could benefit them (what it would potentially yield) than ESI would. On the other hand, ESI would be more cognizant of the potential risks and potential losses that may accompany the decision that SLI may unconsciously minimize.
