The world in black and white: Ostracism enhances the categorical perception of social information

In two experiments, ostracized individuals showed more pronounced categorical perception of inclusion- and exclusion-related stimuli. Specifically, ostracism enhanced the ability to distinguish between-category differences (e.g., between happy and angry faces) relative to within-category differences (e.g., between two happy expressions). Participants were socially included or excluded via Cyberball (a virtual ball-tossing task). In Experiment 1, ostracized participants showed greater perceptual acuity in distinguishing between subtly happy and angry expressions combined with a reduced ability to discriminate expressions within each expression category. Experiment 2 found analogous categorical perception effects for targets varying on the dimension of race. Importantly, this effect was specific to social information; categorical perception of non-social objects was not qualified by social exclusion. These results suggest that ostracism exacerbates categorical perception, attuning perceivers to the differences between various inclusion- and exclusion-related categories relative to within category acuity, making the world appear more ‘black-and-white’ than it might otherwise.     

Priming third‐party ostracism increases affiliative imitation in children

Human beings are intensely social creatures and, as such, devote significant time and energy to creating and maintaining affiliative bonds with group members. Nevertheless, social relations sometimes collapse and individuals experience exclusion from the group. Fortunately for adults, they are able to use behavioral strategies such as mimicry to reduce their social exclusion. Here we test whether children, too, increase their imitation following an experience of ostracism. Given humans’ profound need to belong, we predicted that the mere hint of social exclusion – even third‐party social exclusion – would be sufficient to increase affiliative imitation in 5‐year‐olds. As predicted, children primed with videos in which one shape was ostracized by a group of other shapes subsequently imitated the actions of a model more closely than children in a control condition. These findings highlight just how sensitive humans are to social exclusion and demonstrate that children, like adults, modify their social behavior in response to ostracism.     

Cold-blooded loneliness: social exclusion leads to lower skin temperatures

Being ostracized or excluded, even briefly and by strangers, is painful and threatens fundamental needs. Recent work by Zhong and Leonardelli (2008) found that excluded individuals perceive the room as cooler and that they desire warmer drinks. A perspective that many rely on in embodiment is the theoretical idea that people use metaphorical associations to understand social exclusion (see Landau, Meier, & Keefer, 2010). We suggest that people feel colder because they are colder. The results strongly support the idea that more complex metaphorical understandings of social relations are scaffolded onto literal changes in bodily temperature: Being excluded in an online ball tossing game leads to lower finger temperatures (Study 1), while the negative affect typically experienced after such social exclusion is alleviated after holding a cup of warm tea (Study 2). The authors discuss further implications for the interaction between body and social relations specifically, and for basic and cognitive systems in general.     

“I Feel Your Pain”: The effects of observing ostracism on the ostracism detection system

Ostracism—being ignored and excluded—is a painful experience with negative psychological consequences. Social psychologists ( [Kerr and Levine, 2008] and [Spoor and Williams, 2007] ) argue humans have an evolved system for automatically detecting cues of ostracism and exclusion. Detection elicits pain and threats to fundamental needs. We hypothesize simply observing ostracism will cause negative affect and need threat in the observer. Participants observed a three-player Cyberball game; a target player was included or ostracized, and participants were either instructed to take the perspective of this player or given no such instructions. Participants observing ostracism reported negative affect and need threat. Our results indicate that ostracism detection is even more powerful than previously suggested, because vicariously, we feel the pain of others’ ostracism as our own.     

Virtually ostracized: studying ostracism in immersive virtual environments

Electronic-based communication (such as Immersive Virtual Environments; IVEs) may offer new ways of satisfying the need for social connection, but they also provide ways this need can be thwarted. Ostracism, being ignored and excluded, is a common social experience that threatens fundamental human needs (i.e., belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence). Previous ostracism research has made use of a variety of paradigms, including minimal electronic-based interactions (e.g., Cyberball) and communication (e.g., chatrooms and Short Message Services). These paradigms, however, lack the mundane realism that many IVEs now offer. Further, IVE paradigms designed to measure ostracism may allow researchers to test more nuanced hypotheses about the effects of ostracism. We created an IVE in which ostracism could be manipulated experimentally, emulating a previously validated minimal ostracism paradigm. We found that participants who were ostracized in this IVE experienced the same negative effects demonstrated in other ostracism paradigms, providing, to our knowledge, the first evidence of the negative effects of ostracism in virtual environments. Though further research directly exploring these effects in online virtual environments is needed, this research suggests that individuals encountering ostracism in other virtual environments (such as massively multiplayer online role playing games; MMORPGs) may experience negative effects similar to those of being ostracized in real life. This possibility may have serious implications for individuals who are marginalized in their real life and turn to IVEs to satisfy their need for social connection.     

When ostracism leads to aggression: The moderating effects of control deprivation

We hypothesized that increasing or decreasing levels of control in an ostracized individual could moderate aggressive responding to ostracism. Participants were either ostracized or included in a spontaneous game of toss, and then exposed to a series of blasts of aversive noise, the onsets over which they had either control or no control. Aggression was defined as the amount of hot sauce participants allocated to a stranger, knowing the stranger did not like hot foods, but would have to consume the entire sample. Ostracized participants without control allocated more than four times as much sauce as any other group; ostracized participants who experienced restored control were no more aggressive than either of the groups who were included. Aggressive responding to ostracism may depend on the degree to which control needs are threatened in the target, and is discussed in terms of Williams’s (2001) needs threat model of ostracism.     

Social exclusion lowers working memory capacity in gay-men but not in heterosexual-men

Because sexual orientation is a crucial factor in social discrimination, this study assessed how the working memory capacity of gay-men and heterosexual-men is affected by a social exclusion event (N = 88). To manipulate the experience of social exclusion participants were included or excluded from a game of Cyberball. To assess working memory capacity, participants had to recall a series of letters while performing math problems in an automated version of the operation span task. The results of this small study, showed the sexual orientation of participants interacted with variations in belonging such that being ostracized (but not being included) lowered the working memory capacity of gay-men relative to heterosexual-men. Implications for research on belonging, social exclusion, and stereotype threat are discussed.     

Being ostracized versus out of the loop: Redundant or unique predictors of variance in workplace outcomes?

Based on the existing research, being excluded from information (i.e., being out of the loop) produces similar consequences as being ignored or excluded from activities. Consequently, one might wonder whether it is necessary to measure or study different types of exclusion in the workplace context, rather than just assessing a single type of exclusion. The current research investigated the associations between two types of workplace exclusion (i.e., being ostracized and being left out of the loop) and various workplace outcomes, with the purpose of determining whether these different types of exclusion predict unique or redundant variance in these workplace outcomes. In Study 1, we obtained a better model fit when we assigned items measuring out-of-the-loop experiences at work to a different factor than items assessing experiences with ostracism at work. In Study 2, we observed that measuring employees' experiences with being out of the loop predicted unique variance in workplace outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction), above and beyond experiences with ostracism at work. Relative weight analyses suggested that both ostracism and out-of-the-loop experiences were equally important predictors of these outcomes. Together, these studies indicate that being ostracized and being left out of the loop may be distinct exclusion experiences and better predictions about workplace outcomes can be made by assessing both types of exclusion. On a practical level, measuring different types of exclusion may prove useful, because organizations may need to implement different interventions for addressing distinct types of exclusion.     

Ostracism,resources, and the perception of human motion

Is perception of human motion affected by psychosocial resources? According to the Resources and Perception Model, perception is jointly affected by subjective threat and psychosocial resources that buffer threat. Two experiments tested whether social threat (i.e., ostracism) and psychosocial resources affect perception of human motion. Observers attempted to identify human movement in ambiguous point‐light displays after being ostracized or not ostracized. Additionally, trait resources (self‐esteem plus social support) were measured (Studies 1 and 2), and self‐affirmation was manipulated (Study 2). Study 1 showed that ostracism reduced sensitivity for detecting human motion but not among people with ample trait resources. Study 2 replicated this ostracism‐by‐trait resources interaction. It also showed that self‐affirmation improved human motion perception for all included participants but only benefited ostracized participants with ample trait resources. These studies show that a basic visual skill—detecting human motion—is jointly affected by social threats and psychosocial resources.     

Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else

Can laughter cause social pain? Given the host of ways exclusion is communicated, we examined if exclusive laughter could produce the aversive consequences accordant with social exclusion. Using a validated recall paradigm, participants recounted a time of exclusive or inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday (control condition). Participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more ostracized, increased social pain, thwarted basic needs, worsened mood, reduced relational evaluation, and increased temptations to aggress compared to inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday; there were generally no significant differences between the inclusive laughter and a typical Wednesday. Participants recalling exclusive laughter also felt more verbally and emotionally bullied, demonstrating empirically, for one of the first times, a link between social exclusion and bullying.     

Cyberostracism: effects of being ignored over the Internet

Ostracism is such a widely used and powerful tactic that the authors tested whether people would be affected by it even under remote and artificial circumstances. In Study 1, 1,486 participants from 62 countries accessed the authors' on-line experiment on the Internet. They were asked to use mental visualization while playing a virtual tossing game with two others (who were actually computer generated and controlled). Despite the minimal nature of their experience, the more participants were ostracized, the more they reported feeling bad, having less control, and losing a sense of belonging. In Study 2, ostracized participants were more likely to conform on a subsequent task. The results are discussed in terms of supporting K. D. Williams's (1997) need threat theory of ostracism.     

不同博弈情境下社会排斥对社会决策的影响作用

本研究借助经典的最后通牒博弈范式(UG)和独裁者博弈范式(DG),将回应者/接受者作为研究对象,考察了不同公平条件、平等条件下社会排斥对社会决策的影响作用。实验结果发现:(1)在面对高不公平性的分配方案时,被排斥组比被接纳组更倾向于拒绝接受该分配方案;(2)被排斥组对高不公平性分配方案的满意度要显著低于被接纳组;(3)被排斥组在不平等的博弈(DG)条件下对分配方案的满意度显著低于平等博弈(UG)条件下对分配方案的满意度。本研究结果说明,社会排斥情境下的被试对公平与平等因素更加敏感:在高不公平条件下,被排斥的个体表现出更少的合作互惠行为,甚至不惜放弃自身经济利益,也要惩罚博弈对方的不公平行为;此外,在不平等的博弈条件下,被排斥的个体产生了更多的消极情绪体验。本文的研究结果提高了社会决策研究的生态效度和传统决策模型的预测效度,有利于更加完整透彻地了解社会决策的影响因素。     

Are you looking my way? Ostracism widens the cone of gaze

Ostracized individuals demonstrate an increased need for belonging. To satisfy this need, they search for signals of inclusion, one of which may be another person’s gaze directed at oneself. We tested if ostracized, compared to included, individuals judge a greater degree of averted gaze as still being direct. This range of gaze angles still viewed as direct has been dubbed “the cone of (direct) gaze”. In the current research, ostracized and included participants viewed friendly-looking face stimuli with direct or slightly averted gaze (0°, 2°, 4°, 6°, and 8° to the left and to the right) and judged whether stimulus persons were looking at them or not. Ostracized individuals demonstrated a wider gaze cone than included individuals.     

Alone and without purpose: Life loses meaning following social exclusion

Four studies (N = 643) supported the hypothesis that social exclusion would reduce the global perception of life as meaningful. Social exclusion was manipulated experimentally by having a confederate refuse to meet participants after seeing their videotaped introduction (Study 1) and by ostracizing participants in a computerized ball-tossing game (Study 2). Compared to control condition and acceptance conditions, social exclusion led to perceiving life as less meaningful. Exclusion was also operationalized as self-reported loneliness, which was a better predictor of low meaning than other potent variables (Study 3). Study 4 found support for Baumeister’s model of meaning (1991), by demonstrating that the effect of exclusion on meaning was mediated by purpose, value, and positive self-worth.     

Ostracism Reduces Reliance on Poor Advice from Others during Decision Making

Decision making is rarely context‐free, and often, both social information and non‐social information are weighed into one's decisions. Incorporating information into a decision can be influenced by previous experiences. Ostracism has extensive effects, including taxing cognitive resources and increasing social monitoring. In decision making situations, individuals are often faced with both objective and social information and must choose which information to include or filter out. How will ostracism affect the reliance on objective and social information during decision making? Participants (N = 245) in Experiment 1 were randomly assigned to be included or ostracized in a standardized, group task. They then performed a dynamic decision making task that involved the presentation of either non‐social (i.e. biased reward feedback) or social (i.e., poor advice from a previous participant) misleading information. In Experiment 2, participants (N = 105) completed either the ostracism non‐social condition or social misleading information condition with explicit instructions stating that the advice given was from an individual who did not partake in the group task. Ostracized individuals relied more on non‐social misleading information and performed worse than included individuals. However, ostracized individuals discounted misleading social information and outperformed included individuals. Results of Experiment 2 replicated the findings of Experiment 1. Across two experiments, ostracized individuals were more critical of advice from others, both individuals who may have ostracized them and unrelated individuals. In other words, compared with included individuals, ostracized individuals underweighted advice from another individual but overweighed non‐social information during decision making. We conclude that when deceptive objective information is present, ostracism results in disadvantageous decision making. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

社会排斥对视觉工作记忆容量的影响

采用变化探测范式,考察社会排斥对非社会和社会性刺激视觉工作记忆容量的影响。发现社会排斥组的无意义图形视觉工作记忆容量显著小于社会接纳组,而对生物运动和面孔的记忆容量却显著大于社会接纳组。说明社会排斥对不同属性刺激的视觉工作记忆容量影响不同:社会排斥会损害与归属需要无关的非社会性刺激的记忆容量,而提高与归属需要有关的社会性刺激的记忆容量。     

Group belongingness and collective action: Effects of need to belong and rejection sensitivity on willingness to participate in protest activities

Engaging in political protests are becoming increasingly common, and considering the potential, individual, costs and the low probability of affecting the political outcome, it is necessary to understand the motivations behind such actions. The desire to be part of a social group is deeply rooted in human nature, and previous research proposes that the groups one belongs to may influence the decision to engage in protests. We build on this research and suggest that social exclusion, individual fear of exclusion and need to belong interact in explaining who is likely to become engaged. In two studies, one natural experiment and one lab‐experiment, we show that social exclusion increase willingness to participate in protests for individuals high in both rejection sensitivity and need to belong. We conclude that contextual factors, such as exclusion or marginalization should be considered in relation to individual level personality factors when explaining who is likely to become engaged in political protests. These results are important since they suggest that some people engage in politics simply due to social reasons and are less ideologically motivated.     

Feelings of control during social exclusion are partly accounted for by empathizing personality

It has been demonstrated that social exclusion, or ostracism, results in a decrease in four fundamental human needs: belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence. We replicated these results, and examined how empathizing and systemizing cognitive styles accounts for variation in the experience of social exclusion (self-reported distress and the four fundamental needs) during an internet ball toss game. Participants’ standardized combined score (D Score) from the Empathizing Quotient (EQ-S) and Systemizing Quotient (SQ-S) (Wakabayashi et al., 2006) was a significant predictor of the decrease in the fundamental need, control. In other words, empathizers reported feeling less in control compared to systemizers during the ball toss game regardless of exclusion or inclusion. These findings suggest that individuals who score high on empathizing struggle more with the lack of control when involved in an situation where they do not have influence over the social interaction in which they are taking part.     

Choosing what I want or keeping what I should: The effect of decision strategy on choice consistency

We examine decision-makers’ consistency vis-à-vis their own priorities in a multi-choice task, using either an inclusion or exclusion strategy to reduce a set of alternatives. Four studies demonstrate that people’s decisions are more consistent with their priorities when using an exclusion vs. an inclusion strategy to screen alternatives. Moreover, this effect was stronger for less knowledgeable than for more knowledgeable decision-makers. We examined two possible mechanisms behind this phenomenon. First, we suggest that the process of thinking about the positive aspects of the alternatives (associated with inclusion) encourages the decision-maker to more favorably evaluate options initially given low marks, resulting in less consistency with preferences. We also show that under exclusion, people tend to select the alternatives that they think they should choose, while under inclusion they tend to choose options that are more in line with what they would like to have but which may be perceived as luxuries.