The main purpose of the study was to determine the extent personality type influences social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. The design of the study was a descriptive survey research. A sample of 220 individuals was drawn from a population of 149,603 individuals in Asaba Metropolis of Delta State using stratified random sampling technique. The instrument used for data collection was a 14-item researchers developed structured questionnaire titled: Influence of Personality Type on Social Shock (IPTSS) Among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. The instrument was subjected to face-validity by three experts, one from Measurement and Evaluation in College of Education, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike Abia State and two from the Department of Educational Foundations, Guidance and Counseling, University of Uyo. A reliability coefficient of 0.79 internal consistency was obtained using Cronbach Alpha Reliability. The questionnaire was administered to the respondents by the researchers and only 200 copies were retrieved out of the 220 copies administered. The mean and standard deviation were used to answer the two research questions, while t-test statistic was used to test the hypotheses at .05 level of significance. The findings of the study revealed that introversion had high extent influence while extroversion had very high extent influence on social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State, and that there was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent introversion and extraversion influence social shock. Based on these findings, it was recommended among others that awareness campaign on social shock should be driven by Delta State Government which will help individuals irrespective of their personality type to adjust positively to social shock as they are predisposed to experience it.

Keywords: social shock, personality type, extroversion, introversion, metropolis

As societies progressively go through pre-industrial, transitional, industrial, and post-industrial stage of development, there arose inherent experience and problems associated therewith which individuals are predisposed to unprecedentedly. Some of these unprecedented experience and problems are evident among individuals’ social, economic, cultural, religious, habitual lives, values and belief system within the society. Others range from diseases, conflicts, famine and wars that tend to face individuals in such a given society. The polarisation of these besetting problems and notably the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (known as COVID-19) all over the globe have overtime now reduced the rate at which individuals coexist in their immediate society. Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State are not exceptional from these problems despite the fact that they are individuals of different social strata. The aforementioned problems have overtime induced Asaba Metropolitan to express social shock in recent time going by the new order of the society they live in.

A shock can be defined as an unexpected or unplanned manifestation which may have either a positive or negative effect on an individual.¹ According to Akarowhe,¹ shock is often used in the negative perspective in any given situation. However, it is worth noting that there is a positive perspective of shock. He buttressed his point by contending that shock is a time frame or period from which an individual experience a negative precedent to a period of positive precedent.¹ Notwithstanding, social shock is a construct that can be traced back to the early concept of ‘social shock absorbers’ of the late nineteen century. Social shock absorbers were necessitated to redefine the economic downturn, state welfare and employment involving labour in the early Italy state during the nineteen centuries. It was concerned with the introduction of new measures to deal with the job crisis ‘mobility’, the procedures for the use of the other shock absorbers were simplified and, in the case of the wages guarantee fund (cassa integrazione guadagni), the categories of employee covered were increased.²

Brent³ noted that it would be a mistake, however, maintaining that income and polarization (that is, economic hardship, unemployment, lower income and social polarization) are the main factors of social shock. These factors or polarizations aid social shock but they are not sufficient factors which may induce it. Among other factors that generated it, were more important than transformation, with all of its requirements, collided head on with dominant values, cultural habits and social behavioural patterns.³ It is pertinent to point out that, factors that induce social shock tend to be more elaborate as stated, given the fact that it revolves rounds an individual daily life and the society itself. These factors may range from economic, social, religious, cultural norms, government policies among other values domicile in a particular society. The aforementioned may constitute the bases for the meaning or defining social shock.

Social shock is a disarray state of emotional behaviour caused by a miss-normal among a set group of individuals or an activity in a particular society. This emotional disarray behaviour is implicitly and explicitly observed. Thus, social shock may connote a social confusion among individuals in a given society, hence leading to social apathy. It is worth noting that terrorism, conflict, war, outbreak of diseases, famine, living in hostile environment, injustice, nepotism, corruption among other vices that threatened societal coexistence may aid social shock among individuals in a particular society. The polarization of the forgoing is due to the fact that they tend to distort man’s social interaction and relation in all spheres of human endeavour within and outside a society hence threatening their survival.

Social shock is an imbalance that surfaces in societal daily life induced by factors within and outside a given society which tends to influence one behaviour positively or negatively. This may be due to the fact that, it tends to instigate psychological trauma such as fear and anxiety among individuals hence impeding their social coexistence given the latter problems or difficulties they might experience. Social shock could be explained as an apathy associated with people in a social environment. Hence, it may trigger high social isolation, rejection, apathy among individuals’ coexistence in a given society irrespective of their psychological type. Psychological type which comprises of innate potentials and characteristics of an individual may exert an influence on the extent one tends to experience social shock.

Personality type refers to the psychological classification of different types of individuals.⁴ Personality type is an indispensable component in understanding an individual behaviour within a particular social setting and society at large. It is a measure for grouping people into different psychological characteristics and their inherently predisposition anticipated from them. Personality type may influence an individual’s deposition to his/her environment and relation in a society. Basically, individuals may be categorized into two personality type namely introverts or introversion; and extroverts or extroversion. No single individual possesses these two categories of personality type at any given point in one’s life. Hence, it is worth noting that either of them is dominant from birth to death in the life of an individual. Individuals with similar personality type are expected to respond to social shock in same depositional attributes.

Introverts are not shy people, given the fact that they can command good social relation from their friends and other members of the society. In the views of Suliman,⁵ an introvert means a person who is more concerned with his own emotions and feelings than in issues outside himself. This implies that they are more focused on personal issues than other person's issues. Nussbaum⁶ found that introverts have good social and group working skills. Hence, introverts are individuals that tend to be more likely energized by being alone than being in the mix of other individuals. Introverts do not fear social encounters, but their social interaction may be limited because they want time alone and prefer talking with one person at a time.⁷ By inference, they are likely engulfed with low social shocks in a given society. This may be due to the fact that, introverted students report less perceived support from fellow students than the more active students.⁸ He buttressed his finding by noting that in group activities, introverts work together to co-construct solutions to problems, they listen to one another's suggestions and are less attached to their own ideas than extroverts.⁸ This finding was in line with findings of Dunsmore,⁹ who found that introverted learners were more successful than their extrovert counterparts. In light of this, introvert individuals may have some innate potentialities to sustain themselves against social shock in a given society. On the contrary, introverts may find it difficult to communicate with other classmates, which may lead other people not wanting to socialize with introvert students and consequently lowering their self-esteem.⁸

Extroverts are people that can command higher social relation in their everyday life within a given society. According to Doeven-Eggens et al.¹⁰ in their study found that extroversion is beneficial for social relations, because extraverted individuals are socially skilled and have a preference for interaction. This may be advantageous to them, given the fact that it would help them to be informed of immense problems within the society that may induce them to shock, thus they tend to device mechanism for quicker adjustment. Conversely, Hakimi, Hejazi and Lavasani¹¹ found that the relationship between extroversion and academic achievement was negative. They buttress their findings by noting that it may be due to the fact that, extroverted people are more likely to be impetuous, impulsive at solving problems, talkative, distracted and externally-motivated, and thus they are more prone to lower academic achievement.¹¹ By inference, these discrepancies tend to induce them to experience much of social shock.

Accordingly, Sahinidis, Frangos and Fragkos¹² noted that extroversion is related to higher contact frequency, greater importance as well as higher emotional closeness towards friends. This indicates that, they have some innate potentialities that could assist them to thrive in their social coexistence among others in a particular society. The light of the forgoing supplemented Mund, Jeromimus and Never¹³ assertion, that extroversion is characterised by the experience of more frequently positive affective states, gregariousness, sociability, and assertiveness. In any given society, a sample on the rating of social relation and affection, they tend to score higher than others who may not be in extroversion group.

Naturally man as a social animal is made to associate and interact with each other irrespective of their personality type. Occasions and events have occurred that try to up-turn such social relation and affection. The current novel coronavirus which is ravaging the lives of man all over the world has made World Health Organisation (WHO) as well as health specialists recommend physical and social distancing as one of the ways to prevent the spread of the virus. The responses of individuals to this new order of social relation (social and physical distancing) and other shocks in the society irrespective of their personality type (introversion or extroversion) called for this paper, ‘The extent of the influence of personality type on social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State’.

The following research questions guided the study.

1. What was the extent introversion influence social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State?
2. What was extent extraversion influence social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State?

Null hypotheses

The following null hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance.

1. There was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent introversion influence social shock.
2. There was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent extroversion influence social shock.

A descriptive survey research design was adopted for the study. The study was conducted in Asaba Metropolis, Delta State. A sample of 220 individuals (113 male and 107 female) were drawn from a population of 149,603 individuals in Asaba Metropolis using a stratified random sampling technique. The instrument used for data collection was a14-item researchers developed structured questionnaire titled: Influence of Personality Type on Social Shock (IPTSS) among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. The questionnaire was divided into two sections (I and II). Section I contained the personal data of the respondents, while section II was grouped into two clusters (1-2) and contained item statements which addressed the variables on introversion and extroversion respectively. The response options were: Very High Influence (VHI) - 4 points, High Influence (HI) - 3 points, Moderate Influence (MI) - 2 points, and Little Influence (LI) - 1 point. The instrument was subjected to face-validity by three experts, one from Measurement and Evaluation in College of Education, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Abia State and two from the Department of Educational Foundations, Guidance and Counselling, University of Uyo, Uyo. A reliability coefficient of 0.79 internal consistency was obtained using Cronbach Alpha Reliability. The questionnaire was administered to the respondents by the researchers and only 200 copies were retrieved out of the 220 copies distributed. The mean and standard deviation were used to answer the two research questions, while t-test statistic was used to test the hypotheses at .05 level of significance. The extent of the influence of personality type on social shock was determined using real limits of numbers as follows: Very High Influence (VHI) – 3.50 - 4.00, High Influence (HI) – 2.50 - 3.49, Moderate Influence (MI) – 1.50 - 2.49 and Little Influence (LI) – 0.50 - 1.49. These real limits were applied to research questions. Conversely, in testing the null hypotheses at .05 level of significance, H_O was accepted at the expense of H_a when P-value was greater than the alpha value of 0.05, otherwise H_O was rejected.

Research question 1

What was the extent introversion influence social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State?

The results presented in Table 1 showed that the items on introversion had the cluster mean of 2.57. This indicated that introversion had high extent influence on social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. All the items had their mean above the cut-off point of 2.00 except the item on more concerned about one’s personal issues with the lowest mean ($\overline{X}$ = 1.51). Notably the item on less perceived support from others had the highest mean ($\overline{X}$ = 3.51). In addition, the standard deviation ranged from 0.76 – 1.90, this indicated that the respondents were divergent in their responses.

Research question 2

What was the extent extroversion influence social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State?

The results presented in Table 2 showed that the items on extroversion had the cluster mean of 3.55. This indicated that extroversion had very high extent influence on social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. All the items had their mean above the cut-off point of 2.00. The item on preference for interaction had the highest mean ($\overline{X}$ = 3.80), followed by the item on higher emotional closeness with it’s mean ($\overline{X}$ =3.78). More so, the standard deviation ranged from 0.75 - 1.72 which indicated that the respondents were convergent in their responses.

Hypothesis 1

There was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent introversion influence social shock.

Data in Table 3 revealed a P-value of 0.088 which was greater than 0.05 alpha value. Since the P-value of 0.088 was greater than 0.05 alpha value, the null hypothesis stated was not rejected. Therefore, there was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent introversion influence social shock.

Hypothesis 2

There was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent extroversion influence social shock.

Data in Table 4 revealed a P-value of 0.061 which was greater than 0.05 alpha value. Since the P-value of 0.061 was greater than 0.05 alpha value, the null hypothesis stated was upheld. Therefore, there was no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent extroversion influence social shock.

The result of research question one indicated that introversion had high extent influence on social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. The hypothesis one tested showed that there was no significant difference in the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent introversion influence social shock. This findings was in line with the finding of Tuovinen⁸ who found that introverts may find it difficult to communicate with other classmates, which may lead to other people not wanting to socialize with introvert students and consequently lower their self-esteem. This finding may be due to discrepancies such as less perceived supports from others which may inevitably make them to experience high social shock.

The result of the research question two indicated that extroversion had very high extent influence on social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. The hypothesis two tested showed that there was no significant difference in the mean responses of male and female Asaba Metropolitan on the extent extroversion influence social shock. This finding corroborated with the findings of Doeven-Eggens et al.¹⁰ who found that extroversion is beneficial for social relations and that extraverted individuals are socially skilled and have a preference for interactions. This tends to allow them to come in contact with individuals and enjoy some benefits associated therewith that would help them adjust immensely to problems that may accustomed social shock.

Based on the findings of the study, it could be concluded that personality types influence social shock among Asaba Metropolitan of Delta State. Hence, the present study informed the Delta State Government and other stakeholders to take into consideration personality type of Deltans in formulating policies since most of their policies may trigger social shock for Asaba Metropolitan especially in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic in which they are advised to observe physical and social distancing.

Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations were made:

1. Awareness campaign on social shock should be driven by Delta State Government and National Orientation Agency (NOA). This will help individuals irrespective of their personality type to adjust positively to social shock they tend to experience.
2. Counselling, psychiatry and psychotherapy centres should be established within the metropolis. It will serve as an insightful centre for individuals to consult whenever they are facing social shock and it’s induced challenges.
3. Educational institutions within the state should invent social shock as a concept in their learning curriculum. This will help learners and individuals to learn on how to adjust positively to social shock as it occurs.

None.

The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

1. Akarowhe K. Effects and Remedies to Cultural Shock on the Adolescent Students. Sociol Int J. 2018;2(4):306‒309.
2. Marco T. Italys System of Social Shock Absorbers Examined. Eurofound. 1998.
3. Berend TI. Social Shock in Transforming Central and Eastern Europe. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 2017;40(3):269–280.
4. Wikipedia. Personality Type. 2020.
5. Suliman HAF. The Role of Extrovert and Introvert Personality in Second Language Acquisition. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) 2015;e2279–0837.
6. Nussbaum EM. How Introverts Versus Extroverts Approach Small-group Argumentative Discussions. The Elementary School Journal. 2002;102(3):183–197.
7. Helgoe L. Revenge of the Introvert. Psychology Today. 2010;43:54.
8. Tuovinen S. Introverted but Socially Engaged in School Learning: The Interaction Between Introversion and Social Engagement and its Role in WSSSell-being. Master Thesis. 2019.
9. Dunsmore JA. An Investigation of the Predictive Validity of Broad and Narrow Personality Traits in Relation to Academic Achievement. A dissertation Ph D. University of Tennessee, Knoxville. 2005.
10. Doeven-Eggens L, De Fruyt F, Hendriks JAA, et al. Personality and Personal Network Type. Personality and Individual Difference. 2008;45(7):689–693.
11. Hakimi S, Hejazi E, Lavasani GM. The Relationships Between Personality Traits and Students’ Academic Achievement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2011;29:836–845.
12. Sahinidis GA, Frangos CC, Fragkos CK. The Relationship between Personality Type and Academic Performance. The Case of Greek University Students. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference: Qualitative and Qualitative Methodologies in the Economics and Administrative Science Athens, May, 2013;333–344.
13. Mund M, Jeromimus BF, Never FJ. Personality and Social Relationship: As Thick as Thieves. In: Johansen C, editor. Your Personality makes you ill: Scientific Proof or Wishful Thinking? San Diego: Elsevier. 2018. p. 153–183.