I think the main issue here is how we define “shy” is not really clear here.
Now I am not suggesting that we don’t fully agree on the definition of what “shyness” is, rather I am suggesting that shyness is likely a spectrum; akin to introversion in HEXACO personality models (or big five).
So consider this : if you put shyness in a spectrum of level 0 to 100, where 100 is the most shy person possible; and 0 not shy at all; Where would you put the threshold bar?
Would you say level 1 is shy, because the person exhibits “some” level of shyness?
Or would you say they need to hit the threshold level where they are more shy than the majority of the general population, i.e. dividing the population to 50:50 of shy vs not shy?
Or would you say they need to exhibit shyness to a more majorly extent; to be defined as being “actually shy”? So say 20% of the population would be shy as a result?
The information as presented does not clarify any of this. So we could all have internally different “definition” of “shyness”, even if we could all be agreeing on what “shyness” actually is.
So How would all this matter?
Imagine an extreme situation where a person who believes one is shy if one exhibits ANY level of shyness. He would be believing that the most people are shy by default. Therefore, the probability of shy salespeople would be higher for him, even after considering that shy people are less likely to be a salesperson.
Or imagine the other side of the situation where a person belives you need to exhibit at least level 90 shyness to be considered shy. And also lets say, the statement < the more shy you get, the less likely you’d be a salesperson. > is true (This could be an another rabbit hole, since its likely to be non-linear relationship, but i think we could all agree on the general tendency). There would be lesser shy salespeople for this person.
In reality we would all be somewhere in between these two extreme scenarios, but at some point the hand tips and favors the other side depending on what you believe “shyness” actually is.
I think the main issue here is how we define “shy” is not really clear here.
Now I am not suggesting that we don’t fully agree on the definition of what “shyness” is, rather I am suggesting that shyness is likely a spectrum; akin to introversion in HEXACO personality models (or big five).
So consider this : if you put shyness in a spectrum of level 0 to 100, where 100 is the most shy person possible; and 0 not shy at all; Where would you put the threshold bar?
Would you say level 1 is shy, because the person exhibits “some” level of shyness?
Or would you say they need to hit the threshold level where they are more shy than the majority of the general population, i.e. dividing the population to 50:50 of shy vs not shy?
Or would you say they need to exhibit shyness to a more majorly extent; to be defined as being “actually shy”? So say 20% of the population would be shy as a result?
The information as presented does not clarify any of this. So we could all have internally different “definition” of “shyness”, even if we could all be agreeing on what “shyness” actually is.
So How would all this matter?
Imagine an extreme situation where a person who believes one is shy if one exhibits ANY level of shyness. He would be believing that the most people are shy by default. Therefore, the probability of shy salespeople would be higher for him, even after considering that shy people are less likely to be a salesperson.
Or imagine the other side of the situation where a person belives you need to exhibit at least level 90 shyness to be considered shy. And also lets say, the statement < the more shy you get, the less likely you’d be a salesperson. > is true (This could be an another rabbit hole, since its likely to be non-linear relationship, but i think we could all agree on the general tendency). There would be lesser shy salespeople for this person.
In reality we would all be somewhere in between these two extreme scenarios, but at some point the hand tips and favors the other side depending on what you believe “shyness” actually is.