Are you an introvert, extrovert… or otrovert?

For decades, personalities have been sorted into two categories: introvert or extrovert. Inward or outward. Recharge alone or recharge in a crowd. But what if neither label quite fits? A new term circulating in psychological circles, and increasingly across social media, is challenging Carl Jung’s binary. It is called the “otrovert.” And for a generation caught between hyper-connection and quiet alienation, it is striking a nerve.

Facing a Different Direction

Coined in 2023 by psychiatrist Dr. Rami Kaminski, the word blends the Spanish “otro” (other) with the Latin-rooted “vert” (to turn). Literally, it means: one who faces another direction.

The modern paradox is this: otroverts appear socially integrated. They can hold the spotlight. They can network. They can charm a room. But they are often described as “aloof,” “hard to read,” or “independent to a fault.” They avoid rigid group identities, political tribes, ideological echo chambers, even social cliques, out of resistance to surrendering their mental autonomy.

Where introverts face inward and extroverts face outward, otroverts face elsewhere. They do not define themselves through groups. They do not hunger for belonging in the way mainstream psychology insists all humans do. They can move fluidly between crowds and solitude, but feel fully owned by neither.

But Aren’t We Wired to Belong?

For decades, research has reinforced one central truth: humans need belonging. Maslow placed love and belonging just above safety in his hierarchy of needs. Attachment theory tells us secure bonds are foundational to emotional regulation. Neuroscience shows that social rejection activates brain regions associated with physical pain.

Kaminski’s framework does not deny attachment, particularly in infancy, where it is biologically essential. But it draws a controversial distinction: attachment and belonging are not the same thing. Otroverts, according to the theory, attach “enough”, but do not fuse. Their sense of self does not hinge on group approval. Rejection stings less because belonging was never the primary currency.

One of the more intriguing psychological claims about otroverts is their form of empathy. Because their sense of self is firmly delineated, they do not confuse another person’s feelings with their own. They can step into someone’s perspective without drowning in it. It is empathy with boundaries.

A Label or Liberation?

Of course, skepticism is warranted. Psychology has no shortage of buzzwords. The risk with any new personality label is over-identification, mistaking a nuanced theory for a total identity. But the appeal of “otrovert” lies less in clinical precision and more in psychological permission. Permission to not force yourself into extroversion if you thrive on independence and to relish in the emotional space you sometimes crave.

Maybe the question is not whether you are an introvert, extrovert, or otrovert. Maybe it is this: Are you belonging because you want to, or because you are afraid not to? That distinction might matter more than we think.