Being shy with groups of people vs. one-to-one interaction

[Double J]

Hi,

 

I don't know if some of you have experienced this, but I'm seeking some feedback. I'm the type of person that isn't shy whatsoever to interact with someone in a one-to-one fashion. This semester I've already spoken to several people in my classes that way. When I'm dealing with one (and sometimes even two) people this way, I don't mind taking the initiative in being the first one to talk.

 

However, when dealing with a group of people (4 or more, particularly if they know each other well), I am not as sociable. This includes dinner table situations when there are various people present, when I'm doing a 5-person group project, etc. As the number of people involved grows, I seem to become more of a "social loafer" and prefer to let other people do the talking.

 

I am unsure if this questions my ability to be self-confident around a growing number of individuals. I don't know if it's the possibility of saying something dumb and having more people look down upon me because of it (as opposed to just having 1 or 2 people present).

 

My g/f and I went on a cruise the other day. The cruise was sponsored by her college (where she also happens to work) and at the table we were surrounded by her female co-workers and acquaintances. I was at least hoping that some of those girls would take their boyfriends so that I'd be able to talk to them, but none of them did. I felt very left out and uninterested in socializing with them. Now, if the table would have consisted of my g/f and I, and only ONE OR TWO of those girls as opposed to 5, I'm sure I would have been more talkative.

 

Anyways, my point is that with me, less people = more sociability on my part. That's just how I've always been.

 

Is anyone else this way? I would love to read others' comments. Thanks.

[Siriana]

That's normal.

A very small amount of people is so socially gifted that they're capable to entertain 5 people they don't know well.

I wouldn't worry.

If it was a group of people you know well I am shure you wouldn't have any problems with it.

[Celadon]

I'm the same way, supernova, although over time I've learned some skills to help me interact in groups as well.

 

To explain why one-to-one is more interesting than group situations: I think it's both skill and motivation at play. Skill = in a group you have to be louder, generally funnier or more opinionated, and more energetic. Sometimes the conversation is also more superficial and flows less logically.

 

Motivation = If you notice someone hogging all the attention (or trying to) that can be pretty demoralizing. In that situation, I lose interest in socializing. It feels like "survival of the fittest" (or loudest). Very irritating and not at all fun. If you're not in the center of the conversation, it's not really all that engaging. Some people are happy to just sit on the sidelines and listen. I don't happen to be like that.

 

I prefer one-to-one, because I rarely have a bad time, like I do in groups sometimes. I remember this jerk of a guy, he joined a bunch of my friends one time, and admittedly, he was very funny. But he was, in fact, a jerk (I knew how he'd treated one of my best friends) and some of my friends knew that too. Still, they ate up all his stories, his jokes, etc. It was pretty hard for me to enjoy myself because I felt the whole group dynamic was just "wrong" somehow. Not that I felt he should have been shunned, just not enjoying such attention.

[JourneyMan]

I am the same as well. I prefer one-to-one interactions, it feels much more natural for me, and I express more. However, when there is a group of people, there is an element of self-consciousness, which increases with the number of people present. I do not enjoy becoming the centre of attention, with all eyes on me, it just increases the pressures on you to perform. Yet, I would like to be the centre of attention, as I am the kind of person who likes to be in control.

 

I can feel inadequate, if others hog all the attention. It makes you seem as if you are inept at conversation, and that your position in the group is lower than the rest. Almost as if you could walk out, and nobody would even notice your absense.

 

What also complicates matter in groups, is the politics of it. It becomes a game of power, and those who are more confident and outspoken, automatically are natural players at it, and they tend to monopolise all the attention. They are seen by others to have more social value. So the rest of the "sheep" in the group, kiss-up to them.

 

What should be meaningful conversation to stimulate our minds and gain a greater understanding of the topic, turns into a game of politics, with each person trying to score points. The actual topics rarely ever matter. It's all about furthering your own game. Those of us who cannot play have to take back-seat. The rest of the group has no problem talking away, while you sit there, seemingly part of the group, but not actually there. I've always found that to be incredibly inconsiderate.

[Double J]

wow you guys really hit it on the head. I agree with everything you've said. As the number of people grows, there just seems to be less attention directed at you, the conversations become less serious (and a lot more mindless chit-chat), etc. It seems like you don't get to know a person as profoundly when dealing with a group, because you have to be talking or paying attention to a multiple number of people. That's one reason, for example, that many people oppose group dates.

[Siriana]

Oh, and there is no warrancy that people who are easily noticed in a group are good on one to one talk as friends.

Maybe yes, maybe no.

We all have our weeknesses and strong points.

[GQstatus]

I believe most people, in general, are more "comfortable" with 1on1 situations. It's easier to just focus, on each other. Rather than trying to keep up with a big group of people.

 

Don't feel unsocialable in a group of people you don't know that well. If you were around 5 good friends, it would be different, because you all know eachother.

 

Sometimes you just have to force yourself to speak up in situations like that. The more you do it, the more you will come accustomed to it.

[Celadon]

Oh, and there is no warrancy that people who are easily noticed in a group are good on one to one talk as friends.

Maybe yes, maybe no.

We all have our weeknesses and strong points.

That is a very good point!

[astaro]

I believe most people, in general, are more "comfortable" with 1on1 situations. It's easier to just focus, on each other. Rather than trying to keep up with a big group of people.

 

Don't feel unsocialable in a group of people you don't know that well. If you were around 5 good friends, it would be different, because you all know eachother.

 

Sometimes you just have to force yourself to speak up in situations like that. The more you do it, the more you will come accustomed to it.

 

 

i dont agree with you, first of all i know multiple people who excel at shining in large crouds but are completely lost when you attempt to have an actual conversation.

 

as was said above, the problem for me (and as it looks for a lot of others here) is that conversations that involve high numbers of people just seem less interesting. when i sit with one person and talk the conversation is mostly less shallow and involves more "real" issues which just intrest me a great deal more.