<p>I agree with @AlwaysConfused that this sounds very like someone with Asperger's.</p>

<p>However, if you want a more "neutral" term, would <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introvert" rel="noreferrer">Introvert</a> help?</p>

<p>Such a person - an <code>Ixxx</code> on the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator" rel="noreferrer">Myers-Briggs scale</a> - typically finds their "energy levels" drain when in groups of people, and recharge when they are on their own.  </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T09:53:01.137Z
2019-09-05T09:53:01.137Z
user7761803
<p>Imagine a person who:</p>

<ul>
<li>Mostly prefers written communication (email, instant messaging) to making phone/video calls or seeing face-to-face</li>
<li>Hardly ever watches videos on the internet. Prefers reading</li>
<li>At college/uni, instead of attending lectures/seminars, would successfully study things on their own using the recommended materials, and would always pass the exams</li>
<li>Would rather sort things out themselves instead of asking for help/directions</li>
<li>Are great at working from home</li>
<li>Generally does not socialise and are very happy to stay on their own / keep to themselves</li>
<li>Avoids living in cities and prefers rural low-to-zero populated areas</li>
<li>Does not hate people but just finds most of them rather boring or being nuisance</li>
<li>Despite all the above, are very positive and friendly when communicating face-to-face and are very valued within their professional circle</li>
</ul>

<p>I have been trying to find a term to describe such a person but so far all terms that I found seem to bear a negative connotation or identify a disorder. There is no negativity or disorder here as the person does not feel stress or disability and are very happy with what they are.</p>

<p>Examples of terms that are close but do not match for reasons explained:</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum" rel="noreferrer">Autism spectrum</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome" rel="noreferrer">Asperger syndrome</a> are both defined as "disorders" with "difficulties". The person does not have any difficulties: they do appear socialising and communicating just fine — when they need it for some purpose other than socialising/communicating itself;</li>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misanthropy" rel="noreferrer">Misanthrope</a> actually hates people (which makes the term regarded as rather negative). The subject person does not. They simply avoid seeing people unnecessarily;</li>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recluse" rel="noreferrer">Recluse</a> is a very close call, but it describes a person who <em>does</em> live that way without conveying anything of whether they <em>want</em> to live that way. A very social party goer may hide away and be a recluse if a gang is after them. Conversely, the subject person who, despite their preference, lives in a big city and participates in social drinks at work just because it secures their career cannot be called "recluse";</li>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loner" rel="noreferrer">Loner</a> is another good word but it is not sufficiently neutral. As the linked article says, "<em>the modern term "loner" can be used with a negative connotation in the belief that human beings are social creatures and those that do not participate are deviant.</em>"</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T05:29:30.943Z
Welcome to Psychology.SE. As you are looking for a definition which is nothing to do with psychological or neurological disorders, I think this question would be more suited to English Language Learners or English Language Usage. I would also suggest giving examples of words you think don't fit your criteria and why. How do they bear a negative connotation?
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T07:43:12.567Z
@ChrisRogers the definition I am after may not have anything to do with disorders but it certainly has a lot to do with psychological or neurological considerations. Say why does the subject person find uni lectures boring and studies more efficiently on books?
Greendrake
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T14:32:13.810Z
"Reserved" could be the word you are looking for?
Tony
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T22:02:32.903Z
I think some of the traits you are asking about may not necessarily be as linked as it may seem, for example many people prefer low-population areas but like face-to-face conversation, especially with people close to them rather than strangers. As far as "why does the subject person find uni lectures boring and studies more efficiently on books?" - this topic is usually addressed in educational literature in terms of *learning styles* and also need not necessarily fit with all the other traits you describe. It sounds like you are describing a *person*.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T22:02:35.543Z
See also https://psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2374/not-all-observations-necessarily-need-a-term-in-psychology
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-05T22:20:43.310Z
I thin that the word you are searching for is "normal".
Anon E Mouse
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-06T02:28:34.590Z
Wow... you've just about perfectly described me.  The only exception is that when I recently did a post-graduate course at uni, I preferred to attend the lecture in person, rather than view the lecture video afterwards, or just study the notes.  But this is because there are generally real learnings that you can get from some live lectures that you cannot get from other ways (even from videos of the same lecture).  I know that one of the lecturers deliberately made sure that this was the case.  So the answer to your question is **"me"**.  Continued...
Son of a Beach
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-09-06T02:32:04.313Z
...I suspect I may be borderline aspergers or not-quite aspergers (for other reasons), but it doesn't bother me, and I don't consider it a disorder, or particularly negative, but rather as simply a set of character traits.  So something along the lines of **"sub-aspergers"** or **"near-aspergers"** if that was actually a term.
Son of a Beach
<social-psychology><terminology>
Is there a neutral term for people who tend to avoid face-to-face or video/audio communication?
Greendrake
# Is there a neutral term for people who tend to avoid face-to-face or video/audio communication?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-09-05)

Imagine a person who:

* Mostly prefers written communication (email, instant messaging) to making phone/video calls or seeing face-to-face
* Hardly ever watches videos on the internet. Prefers reading
* At college/uni, instead of attending lectures/seminars, would successfully study things on their own using the recommended materials, and would always pass the exams
* Would rather sort things out themselves instead of asking for help/directions
* Are great at working from home
* Generally does not socialise and are very happy to stay on their own / keep to themselves
* Avoids living in cities and prefers rural low-to-zero populated areas
* Does not hate people but just finds most of them rather boring or being nuisance
* Despite all the above, are very positive and friendly when communicating face-to-face and are very valued within their professional circle

I have been trying to find a term to describe such a person but so far all terms that I found seem to bear a negative connotation or identify a disorder. There is no negativity or disorder here as the person does not feel stress or disability and are very happy with what they are.

Examples of terms that are close but do not match for reasons explained:

* [Autism spectrum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum) and [Asperger syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome) are both defined as "disorders" with "difficulties". The person does not have any difficulties: they do appear socialising and communicating just fine — when they need it for some purpose other than socialising/communicating itself;
* [Misanthrope](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misanthropy) actually hates people (which makes the term regarded as rather negative). The subject person does not. They simply avoid seeing people unnecessarily;
* [Recluse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recluse) is a very close call, but it describes a person who *does* live that way without conveying anything of whether they *want* to live that way. A very social party goer may hide away and be a recluse if a gang is after them. Conversely, the subject person who, despite their preference, lives in a big city and participates in social drinks at work just because it secures their career cannot be called "recluse";
* [Loner](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loner) is another good word but it is not sufficiently neutral. As the linked article says, "*the modern term "loner" can be used with a negative connotation in the belief that human beings are social creatures and those that do not participate are deviant.*"

**Tags:** social-psychology, terminology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Welcome to Psychology.SE. As you are looking for a definition which is nothing to do with psychological or neurological disorders, I think this question would be more suited to English Language Learners or English Language Usage. I would also suggest giving examples of words you think don't fit your criteria and why. How do they bear a negative connotation?  
> **username_0**: @ChrisRogers the definition I am after may not have anything to do with disorders but it certainly has a lot to do with psychological or neurological considerations. Say why does the subject person find uni lectures boring and studies more efficiently on books?  
> **username_2**: "Reserved" could be the word you are looking for?  
> **username_3**: I think some of the traits you are asking about may not necessarily be as linked as it may seem, for example many people prefer low-population areas but like face-to-face conversation, especially with people close to them rather than strangers. As far as "why does the subject person find uni lectures boring and studies more efficiently on books?" - this topic is usually addressed in educational literature in terms of *learning styles* and also need not necessarily fit with all the other traits you describe. It sounds like you are describing a *person*.  
> **username_3**: See also https://psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2374/not-all-observations-necessarily-need-a-term-in-psychology  
> **username_4**: I thin that the word you are searching for is "normal".  
> **username_5**: Wow... you've just about perfectly described me.  The only exception is that when I recently did a post-graduate course at uni, I preferred to attend the lecture in person, rather than view the lecture video afterwards, or just study the notes.  But this is because there are generally real learnings that you can get from some live lectures that you cannot get from other ways (even from videos of the same lecture).  I know that one of the lecturers deliberately made sure that this was the case.  So the answer to your question is **"me"**.  Continued...  
> **username_5**: ...I suspect I may be borderline aspergers or not-quite aspergers (for other reasons), but it doesn't bother me, and I don't consider it a disorder, or particularly negative, but rather as simply a set of character traits.  So something along the lines of **"sub-aspergers"** or **"near-aspergers"** if that was actually a term.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2019-09-05. Score: 6

I agree with @AlwaysConfused that this sounds very like someone with Asperger's.

However, if you want a more "neutral" term, would [Introvert](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introvert) help?

Such a person - an `Ixxx` on the [Myers-Briggs scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator) - typically finds their "energy levels" drain when in groups of people, and recharge when they are on their own.


---

