Well folks, I read the article (only once) and immediately thought it explained a lot about the way I have felt and the way I have organised my 88 years lived so far. I then read the description found by googling otrovert to my wife (one of the very few I feel close to) and asked " Do you think this seems a bit like me?" She laughed and said "100% like you!".

I was wondering if anyone else on the forum would feel the same after reading some googled information :-

An otrovert is an emerging personality concept for an emotionally independent individual who easily socializes but has no desire to fit into groups or follow the collective "hive mind". Coined by psychiatrist Dr. Rami Kaminski, the term combines otro (Spanish for "other") and vert (to turn). [1, 2]

Key Characteristics

• Socially Adept, Not an Outcast: They are friendly and can navigate social settings, but they don't draw their identity or self-worth from peer validation. [1]

• Not an Introvert or Extrovert: Unlike introverts, they aren't necessarily drained by people; unlike extroverts, they don't gain energy from crowds. [1]

• Depth Over Breadth: They prefer intimate, one-on-one relationships rather than identifying with broad political, social, or communal groups. [1, 2]

• Independent Thinkers: They often march to the beat of their own drum and have a strong capacity for original, autonomous thought. [1, 2]

The Debate Around the Trait

Because this is a very new framework introduced in Dr. Kaminski’s book, The Gift of Not Belonging, it is not an officially established clinical diagnosis or formal category in traditional personality psychology. [1, 2]

• The Appeal: Many people who feel they never quite fit into clubs, cliques, or communal groups find the concept deeply validating and liberating. [1, 2]

• The Skepticism: Some psychologists and commentators, as discussed in University of Michigan Psychology News, suggest it is less of a groundbreaking biological "type" and more of a specific configuration of already-known traits like extreme individualism.[1, 2]

• Community Sentiments: On discussion forums like Reddit, users express mixed opinions; while many resonate strongly with the idea, others feel it's simply a new label for traits already covered by existing classifications. [1]

7 sites

• Are You an Otrovert?What Belonging Means and What It Doesn't

  Are You an Otrovert? What Belonging Means and What It Doesn't — A New Trio of Beings * An “otrovert” embodies the personality trai...

  Medium

• Enter the Otrovert - LinkedIn

  If Kaminski is correct, it adds further fuel to the debate about why or whether we need to pin labels on people. There's an argume...

  LinkedIn

• Otrovert - Wikipedia

  * Origin. Kaminski introduced the term in his 2025 book, The Gift of Not Belonging, and it appears in his writing about belonging,

  Wikipedia

10 minutes ago, OldTony said:

Do you think this...

Why it's not accepted in social science

• Lack of empirical data: The term is too new to be supported by peer-reviewed, empirical studies or diagnostic manuals. [1, 2]

• Personality dimensions: Academic psychologists generally classify personality along continuous dimensions, like the Big Five personality traits, rather than isolated categories. [1]

• Expert skepticism: Experts, such as Dr. Aidan Wright at the University of Michigan, note that it is highly unlikely that "otroversion" will be classified as a new, distinct personality type. [1]

• Overlaps with existing concepts: On psychology forums and in academic discussions, some experts argue that it simply overlaps with existing concepts (like ambiversion) or traits of neurodivergence, such as high-masking autism. [1, 2]

The Bottom Line

While the concept resonates with many individuals who feel different from group dynamics, it remains an informal, conversational label rather than a formally recognized psychological construc

"The Bottom Line

While the concept resonates with many individuals who feel different from group dynamics, it remains an informal, conversational label rather than a formally recognized psychological construc"

Thank you iNow, I can accept completely what you say. Whether the concept does or does not deserve its own classification the fact is the description resonates strongly with me and I and I am wondering if it resonates with others on a science forum.