Are You Really An “Otrovert” Or Just Tired Of Everyone’s Boxes?

You know the type. They host the dinner, pour the wine, keep the conversation moving, then go home and feel like they spent the evening watching their own life from the ceiling. TikTok has decided they are not introverts or extroverts, but “otroverts”.

Videos list the signs. You can work a room but feel like an observer. You like one to one more than groups. You are invited in and often liked, yet you stay a step outside the core. Comments fill with “This is me” and “I finally have a word”.

Before we adopt another label, it helps to ask some harder questions.

What is an “otrovert” actually describing.
Where does it sit in the wider language of personality and values.
Does it change anything practical for people, brands, spaces or workplaces.

This is not a defence or a takedown. It is an attempt to put the concept in context and see what, if anything, it adds.

What “otrovert” is trying to name

The word comes from psychiatrist Dr Rami Kaminski. He runs The Otherness Institute and has written a book on “otherness” as a psychological pattern. “Otro” is Spanish for “other”, “vert” echoes introvert and extrovert. The label signals a person turned toward otherness.

In Kaminski’s description, an otrovert tends to:

• Function well socially, sometimes quite charming
• Prefer one to one or very small groups
• Be comfortable alone, often needing solitude
• Feel enduring distance from groups, even when welcomed
• Be relatively immune to peer pressure and group emotion
• Trust their own judgement first and the crowd second

What is missing is as important as what is there. This is not framed as shyness, social anxiety or social skills deficit. Many people who resonate with “otrovert” work in public roles, run teams, host events. The pattern is internal. They do not fully feel like part of “we”.

So the term is trying to name a stance. Present and engaged, yet not fused with the group.

Most people can think of at least one friend or colleague who fits that pattern. Some recognise themselves instantly.

A second axis: otherness and group identification

Public personality talk usually gives you one social axis.

Axis 1: Introvert – Extrovert

• Introverts recharge in low stimulation settings and often prefer smaller groups.
• Extroverts recharge through social contact and activity.

That axis says nothing about how you relate to groups as groups.

You can be an introvert who loves being part of a tight-knit club.
You can be an extrovert who never feels they truly belong anywhere.

So it helps to picture a second axis.

Axis 2: Otherness – Group identification

• High otherness
  You stay mentally separate from the group mind, even when you are liked and included. You do not quite merge into “we”.
• High group identification
  You feel most yourself inside “us”, and easily sync with group stories, rituals and moods.

Put the axes together and you get four broad styles.

1. Introvert, high group identification
   The quiet loyalist. Hates noise, loves being part of a clear “us”.
2. Introvert, high otherness
   The watcher on the edge. One to one is home, groups are fieldwork.
3. Extrovert, high group identification
   The classic joiner. Loves team rituals, company slogans, shared emotion.
4. Extrovert, high otherness
   The warm host who can run the room and still feel like a visitor.

Most self described “otroverts” sit in box 2 or 4. What they share is high otherness, not a specific position on introvert or extrovert.

Is this a real trait or just a neat story

Psychology uses a stricter test of “real” than TikTok.

A personality trait is usually treated as established when:

1. The definition is clear and tight.
2. There is a scale that measures it reliably.
3. Large datasets show that the scale is not just duplicating existing traits.

The Big Five model, associated with Costa and McCrae, clears that bar. Openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism have decades of data behind them across countries and cultures.

Elaine Aron’s idea of the highly sensitive person has a more modest evidence base. Sensory processing sensitivity has been measured and studied, and there is live debate about how distinct it really is from existing traits.

Right now, otroversion has:

• A narrative definition and self test
• A book and The Otherness Institute as its hub
• Media coverage and strong anecdotal resonance

What it does not yet have is a widely used, validated scale plus large comparative datasets.

So the honest position is:

At this stage, “otrovert” is an early narrative category for a recognisable pattern, not a fully validated trait on the same footing as the Big Five.

That does not make it useless. It just tells you how heavily to lean on it.

How it connects to existing trait ideas

You can already describe most of what “otrovert” points at with existing language.

Big Five

An “otrovert pattern” might look like:

• Moderate or high extraversion
• High openness
• Lower agreeableness to group norms, while still caring about individuals
• Moderate neuroticism linked to tension with groups

So you can translate it into the standard trait dialect if you need to.

Ambiverts

Ambiverts sit in the middle of the introvert–extrovert axis. Adam Grant’s research in sales found that ambiverts often outperform classic introverts and extroverts, probably because they listen more and adapt better. A lot of people who identify with “otrovert” likely live in that ambivert band; they move in and out of social energy fairly easily, but are selective about the form.

Need for uniqueness and social identity

Consumer psychology talks about need for uniqueness, a construct from Snyder and Fromkin, which measures how much you want to stand apart from others. Social identity research studies how tightly people tie their sense of self to groups. Marilynn Brewer’s optimal distinctiveness work looks at the tension between wanting to belong and wanting to be unique.

Put those together:

• High need for uniqueness
• Low identification or fusion with any one group

and you are very close to the “high otherness” side of the axis.

So otroversion is not built out of nothing. It is a new label for a particular bundle of sensitivities that already sit inside existing models.

Where traits end and other models begin

Traits are only one way to map people. They say “how you tend to react”. Other model families look at different questions.

Values

Values models ask what matters most to you and how you weigh trade offs.

• Schwartz’s theory arranges values in a circle of tensions, such as openness to change versus conservation.
• Inglehart’s work with the World Values Survey tracks shifts from survival values to self expression as societies change.
• Commercial systems like Values Segments group people by attitudes to status, security, fairness and change using survey data.

Values help predict which causes, products and policies someone will support, and how they justify those choices.

Sociographics and context

Sociographics layer in life stage and situation: age, region, job role, family structure, digital habits. Two people with similar traits and values can behave very differently if one is a 23 year old renter in a share house and the other is a 60 year old carer in regional Australia.

Culture and mindset

Cultural models zoom out further.

• Hofstede style dimensions talk about individualism versus collectivism, comfort with hierarchy, comfort with uncertainty.
• Commercial cultural maps describe how groups handle rules, time, authority and change.

These describe the “background settings” of a person’s world.

Put together, you get a layered picture:

1. Traits: how you tend to react.
2. Values: what you think matters.
3. Sociographics: the situation you live in.
4. Culture and mindset: the shared habits around you.

Otroversion belongs firmly in layer one. Its value is in how it modifies the others.

Why any of this helps an actual person

Most people do not wake up asking for a cleaner taxonomy. They want their life to feel less punishing and confusing.

Knowing whether you lean introvert, extrovert, ambivert, or high otherness is only useful if it changes how you live.

Normalising your stance

If you have spent years being told that you are “too distant”, “too intense” or “never really one of us”, it is easy to treat your distance from group emotion as a defect.

Naming high otherness can do something simple and important. It can let you say, without apology:

“I am fine with people. I just do not melt into groups”.

That small shift in language can reduce shame and defensiveness.

Planning your social diet

Introverts already know they need more quiet. Extroverts know they need regular connection. If you recognise high otherness, you add another layer.

You can ask:

• Which group situations genuinely serve you.
• How often you can do them before you feel scraped out.
• What mix of one to one, small groups and solitude keeps you steady.

That might change how you approach conferences, offsites, committees, holidays, even extended family events. It becomes planning, not random burnout.

Having cleaner conversations

Labels can make hard things easier to say. It is often less fraught to tell a partner, friend or manager:

“I get overwhelmed by strong group identities. I am more loyal to the work and to one to one connections than to the social rituals”.

than to dodge every drinks event and hope people do not take it personally.

The only real trap is freezing around the label. “I am an otrovert, so I cannot do X” is more limiting than “I tend to stay outside the group mind, so I need to choose carefully when and how I join in”.

Why marketers should care about high otherness

Now take this into the world where you are not just a person, you are a data point.

Marketers already segment by demographics, values and behaviour. The otherness axis asks a new question inside those segments.

Compare two customers who look similar on paper:

• Similar age, income and education
• Similar values around, say, sustainability and fairness
• Same suburb, same digital platforms

One is high in group identification.
One is high in otherness.

They may buy the same product for the same reasons. Their social signatures will be different.

The high group identification customer:

• Likes “join our community” language
• Enjoys clubs, loyalty programs and public affiliation
• Posts with the hashtag, wears the merch, comes to events

The high otherness customer:

• May be just as loyal in practice
• Actively avoids anything that smells of fandom or tribe
• Rarely shows up in public engagement metrics

If your dashboards only measure visible community behaviour, you will over invest in keeping high group identification customers happy and under design for high otherness customers who might be more stable and profitable over time.

Designing with high otherness in mind might mean:

• Offering low profile ways to stay close, like plain email updates rather than community platforms
• Using language that respects individual judgement rather than group validation
• Treating restraint and privacy as valid ways of relating to the brand, not as indifference

You do not need a formal “otrovert segment” to do this. You just need to remember that not all loyal customers look like fans.

Retail and hotels: the edge of the room

Physical spaces signal their social expectations through design. Volume, layout, signage and staff behaviour all send messages about who the place is for.

Many modern stores, venues and hotels are tuned to extroverts with high group identification. Loud music. Open plans. Central bars. Communal tables. Staff trained to engage constantly.

If you assume that a meaningful slice of your customers are high in otherness, you will tune the space differently.

In retail, that might include:

• Clear sightlines so people can scan the space before stepping into the flow
• Edges and alcoves where you can browse without constant approach
• Simple, legible information that lets you compare options quietly
• Staff training built around “offer once, then step back” as a normal pattern

In hospitality, it might mean:

• Smaller, semi private seating zones that still feel like prime real estate
• Optional, not compulsory, participation in “experiences” or group activities
• Staff who can read “we are happy here on our own” and respect it

Design like this helps more than “otroverts”. It supports anxious guests, autistic guests, older people, introverts, parents with overloaded kids, and anyone having a day where they cannot face being “on”. It widens the ways someone can belong to the space.

Workplaces: culture fit and the cost of misreading outsiders

Workplaces are where our labels around introvert and extrovert usually get wheeled out. The otherness axis adds something sharper.

Most organisations quietly reward high group identification. The people who love the slogans, attend every social event and enjoy “team spirit” are treated as culture carriers. Those who stay at the edge of social life or question the group mood are often labelled negative or “not a team player”.

If some of those edge dwellers are high in otherness rather than disengaged, misreading them has a cost.

You lose:

• Early warnings about ethical drift
• Early signals about risk and overconfidence
• One of the few natural checks on groupthink

The employees who never fully melt into “we” are often the first to notice when something feels off, precisely because they are not swept along.

Taking that seriously might mean:

• Decoupling performance and promotion from enthusiasm for social events
• Building leadership programs that include one to one and small group formats, not only big workshops
• Creating explicit channels where dissent and awkward questions are invited and protected
• Paying attention to who spots problems early, and noticing how they relate to group identification

Ambivert research already suggests that people who sit between extremes can outperform caricature extroverts in sales and persuasion because they balance talking and listening. High otherness employees may carry a similar advantage in judgement, if the culture stops punishing their stance.

So, are you really an “otrovert”

“Otrovert” is not a magic key. It is a new word for a pattern that shows up in older research under different names.

Used lightly, it can help you see that:

• How social you are and how much you join are different questions.
• You can enjoy people and still keep your distance from “we”.
• There is nothing inherently wrong with standing half a step to the side.

Used too heavily, it can become another fixed identity to defend.

For you personally, the useful questions are:

• In which settings do you consistently feel like an engaged outsider.
• What improves when you treat that stance as legitimate rather than flawed.

For anyone designing brands, spaces or workplaces:

• Where have you confused loud belonging with real commitment.
• Where might your smartest, most ethical people and customers be the ones who never quite join the cheer squad.

TikTok will keep inventing labels. Some will fade in a week. Some will stick. The real work is not to collect them, but to ask which ones reveal patterns that help us make better decisions about how we live together, and how we design for the many different ways people stand, and refuse to stand, inside the groups that claim them.