[jacobolus]

> thinks they know everything, but really doesn't have a clue

This is a somewhat separate problem from whether someone is an interrupter or not, though conversational style can have an influence on when miscommunication is likely to happen.

> They don't let you explain critical detail about something because 'they got it they got it'

Well-meaning non-interrupters who “think they know everything but really don’t have a clue” can just as easily miss critical details, when the speaker wrongly assumes they understand something but never stops to verify that. At least the interrupter typically makes their ignorance obvious, giving others a chance to prepare some response/workaround.

* * *

In my experience it is entirely possible for both interrupters and non-interrupters to be (or not be) empathetic, perceptive, conscientious, detail-oriented, knowledgeable, humble, presumptuous, judgmental, aggressive, ...

[quanticle]

It seems like it would be a separate problem, but in my experience, the two are linked. The person who is interrupting is interrupting because they're highly confident in their own viewpoint. We like to think that confidence must necessarily be correlated with how true our view is, but that isn't the case. There are some people who are equally confident of all of their views, no matter how much or how little evidence they have for those views. It's those people who interrupt, even though they don't have a clue.

[Sammi]

You're describing a barker not an interrupter. A barker will insist on continuing their own rant to their own end, so they cannot be corrected. The interrupter will let themselves be interrupted in turn, so they can always be corrected.

[entropicdrifter]

^ This. In my family, the quickest way to find out if you're wrong is to assert something that's false. It may not surprise you to find out that both of my parents were once programmers.