Orders to Shoot (a Camera): Effects of Ostracism on Obedience

Research suggests that ostracism increases susceptibility to indirect forms of social influence (e.g., conformity). Yet, no study to date has explored whether the effects of ostracism extend to the most direct form of social influence—obedience. We investigated whether ostracized individuals would be more likely to obey a direct command to do something effortful in uncomfortable conditions. Participants (N = 62) were randomly assigned to be included or ostracized in Cyberball, or assigned to a control condition. They were then approached by the experimenter and commanded to go outside when temperatures were below 30°F and take 39 unique and creative photographs in the cold of winter. Ostracized participants were more likely to obey the experimenter’s command to be creative when taking photographs. No differences in obedience emerged between the inclusion and the control condition. We provided evidence completing the social influence “trifecta”: ostracism increases susceptibility to conformity, compliance, and now, obedience.     

Investigating how ostracizing others affects one’s self-concept

Abstract

Social relationships are connected with an individual’s self-concept, so events that influence one’s relationships subsequently influence one’s self-concept. Ostracism, being excluded and ignored, is an aversive experience involving both a target (the one being ostracized) and source (the one ostracizing). We will discuss previous limitations of source paradigms and how we addressed them when developing our paradigms. We will also highlight current source research, from a co-edited special issue, and how this research is relevant to an individuals’ self-concept. Lastly, we will suggest how cognitive dissonance work can ground source research within a larger theoretical framework and inspire future research. We consider how one’s self-concept influences cognitive dissonance related to knowingly harming others through ostracism.     

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.     

The visual influence of ostracism

Reflecting the fundamental human need to establish and maintain positive connections with others, it has been suggested that an Ostracism Detection System is sensitized to targets by which one has been ostracized. Evidence supporting the operation of this system has yet to be provided, however. Accordingly, using binocular rivalry to explore attentional processing, here, we considered the extent to which targets previously associated with ostracism dominate visual awareness. Participants initially performed a virtual ball‐tossing game (i.e., Cyberball) in which they were “ostracized” or “included” by the other players. Afterwards, the faces of these players were presented together with houses in a binocular rivalry task. The results revealed that targets associated with ostracism (vs. inclusion) dominated longest in visual awareness.     

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.     

Linguistic ostracism causes prejudice: Support for a serial mediation effect

ABSTRACT

This research investigated the effects of linguistic ostracism, defined as any communication setting in which a target individual (or group) is ostracized by another individual (or group) in a language that the target has extremely limited ability to understand. Participants were included or ostracized by their group members during a computer-mediated group discussion. Half of the ostracized participants were linguistically ostracized via their group members conversing with one another in a language the participant did not know well (Spanish Ostracism: SO), or in a language the participant did know well (English Ostracism: EO). SO participants reported feeling less similar than both included and EO participants. SO participants also reported being angrier and expressed more prejudice than included participants (and EO participants using effect size estimates). Results also provided support for the hypothesized serial mediation model. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for intergroup relations.     

The myth of regaining control: Ostracism increases superstitious tendencies

Whether and how interpersonal experiences predispose people to show superstitious tendencies have been largely unexamined by past studies. By adopting a multimethod approach, three studies tested (a) whether ostracism increases superstitious tendencies through thwarted perceived control, (b) whether the dispositional need for closure moderates the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies and (c) whether restoring ostracized people's thwarted control weakens their superstitious tendencies. The results revealed that ostracized participants had higher superstitious tendencies than nonostracized participants did (Studies 1–3). Moreover, thwarted control mediated the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies (Study 2). In addition, the dispositional need for closure moderated the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies, such that the effect was stronger among participants with a high need for closure (Studies 1–2). Finally, restoring ostracized participants' perceived control weakened the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies (Study 3). Altogether, these findings feature the essential role of thwarted perceived control in understanding the link between ostracism and superstitious tendencies and the implication of control restoration in weakening the link. They also highlight the importance of dispositional characteristics in moderating people's responses to superstitions following ostracism and related forms of interpersonal maltreatment.     

Ostracism drives group moralization and extreme group behavior

ABSTRACT

Sharing beliefs, particularly moral beliefs, is a way to establish social connections. We hypothesized that ostracism leads people who are high in the need to belong to adhere to the moral beliefs of an ingroup, and that moralizing the beliefs of one’s group increases the willingness to endorse extreme behavior on behalf of the group. Across two studies, participants were ostracized or included, rated the moral relevance of their group values, and indicated their endorsement of extreme behavior on behalf of the group. Across studies, ostracism increased group moralization in participants high in the need to belong. In Study 2, group moralization translated into endorsement of extreme behavior. Our findings suggest that morality serves a binding function that may be channeled into extreme behaviors. (120 words)     

Is Viewing Ostracism on Television Distressing?

ABSTRACT

Being ostracized can be a painful and distressing experience and can lead to subsequent aggression by the victim. However, it is unknown whether watching someone else be ostracized either in real life or on television is similarly distressing. The purpose of the current study was to examine what type of distress (if any) is induced after viewing ostracism on television. The study consisted of 50 participants, half who viewed a movie clip containing ostracism and half who viewed a control clip. Physiological and self-report data revealed that viewing ostracism was distressing to participants. In particular, participants who viewed the ostracism clip reported a lower sense of belonging, self esteem, and mood, and a greater increase in heart rate and skin conductivity than those who viewed the control clip.     

With partners like you,who needs strangers? Ostracism involving a romantic partner

Being ostracized by others threatens the satisfaction of fundamental needs, although less so when individuals first are reminded of a close relationship. What remains unknown is the effect of being ostracized directly by a relationship partner, which may vary depending on attachment security. We examined how a partner's involvement in ostracism affects need satisfaction and relationship evaluations, and explored attachment security. One hundred and twenty‐seven couple members played Cyberball in a between‐subjects experiment manipulating ostracism and partner involvement. Need satisfaction was more strongly affected by the partner's presence (vs. absence). Individuals evaluated their relationship more negatively as a function of partner ostracism and high attachment avoidance. Attachment anxiety was associated with lower need satisfaction. The results highlight relational expectations and influences on belonging needs.     

When inclusion costs and ostracism pays, ostracism still hurts

Recent research indicates that ostracism is painful even in the face of mitigating circumstances. However, in all previous experiments, there have been no costs to inclusion or benefits for ostracism. If being included meant losing money and being ostracized meant retaining money, would individuals still be distressed when ostracized? In 2 studies, the authors attempted to "load the dice" against inclusion in favor of ostracism. Participants played a variant of Cyberball called euroyberball (pronounced Euroball), in which ostracism and inclusion were crossed with whether the participants earned or lost money for each ball toss they received. In 2 experiments, the authors found that even when being ostracized meant retaining more money than the other players, it was painful. In Study 2, the authors also introduced conditions in which participants were overincluded. In these conditions, participants were sensitive to financial incentives. However, even then participants felt worse when given no positive attention than when given punitive attention.     

配偶排斥对女性离婚意愿的影响：愤怒与婚姻满意度的链式中介作用

为了探讨配偶排斥对女性离婚意愿的影响,以及愤怒情绪和婚姻满意度在其中的中介作用,对543名已婚女性施测了社会排斥体验量表、特质愤怒问卷、婚姻满意度问卷以及离婚意愿问卷。中介效应检验结果表明,配偶排斥显著正向预测女性的离婚意愿,愤怒情绪和婚姻满意度分别在二者之间起中介作用,同时配偶排斥还顺序地先通过导致愤怒情绪增加,再使得婚姻满意度降低这一链式路径对女性的离婚意愿产生影响。未来可以通过减少配偶排斥以及减弱愤怒情绪和提升婚姻满意度的途径来增加婚姻稳定性。     

Clarifying the Relationship Between Ostracism and Relational Devaluation

We examine how three perspectives on relational devaluation relate to needs threat following ostracism. In two experiments with 179 first-year psychology students, distress was greatest when participants were ostracized without any prior throws, and distress decreased linearly with increasing prior inclusion. In Experiment 3, using 76 first-year psychology students, we manipulated expectations of exclusion and found expectations predicted distress following ostracism, suggesting ostracism's distress can be influenced by norm-based expectations of inclusion, and that progressive relational devaluation is not a necessary condition for ostracism's distress.     

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.     

Exploring the Effects of Ostracism on Performance and Intrinsic Motivation

Two experiments investigated the effects of ostracism on performance and intrinsic motivation. Participants were either included or ostracized via an online ball-tossing game and then completed two trials of an interesting word-search task. Later, they engaged in a free-choice trial designed to assess their intrinsic motivation for the word-search task. Results indicated that ostracized participants performed more poorly and experienced lower positive mood and relatedness than included participants. Although no direct effects of ostracism on intrinsic motivation were found, in both studies ostracism indirectly affected intrinsic motivation through positive mood, such that ostracism led to poorer mood and, in turn, lower intrinsic motivation. Implications for future research on ostracism in organizations are discussed.     

工作场所排斥与员工角色内外行为：归属感的中介作用

为考察工作场所排斥（包括上司排斥与同事排斥）与员工角色内行为和角色外行为（组织公民行为）之间的关系,以及归属感在上述关系中的中介作用,本研究采用问卷调查法,分两次对全职工作一年以上的员工进行施测,前后共获得247份有效匹配数据,经统计分析后发现：（1）上司排斥与同事排斥均显著地负向预测员工角色内外行为,即工作场所排斥水平越高,角色内行为和角色外行为的表现越差。（2）归属感在上司排斥、同事排斥与员工角色内行为之间发挥了完全中介作用,即工作场所排斥会破坏员工的归属感,最终降低角色内行为。（3）归属感在上司排斥和角色外行为的关系中发挥了完全中介作用,但在同事排斥与角色外行为的关系中仅存在部分中介作用,说明工作场所排斥在一定程度上会破坏员工的归属感,最终影响其角色外行为表现。     

Unity with(in) Plurality: Rawls’s Idea of Public Justification Reinterpreted

Abstract

This paper explores and interprets Rawls’s idea of public justification by analysing the types of reasons that citizens use when engaged in public justification of a political conception of justice. In particular, I focus on the distinction between “consensual” and “distributive” modes of justification. Some critics have argued that Rawls is unclear whether he is relying on “consensual” or “distributive” forms of reasoning; others argue that Rawls shifts inconsistently between them. I attempt to clarify this puzzle. I show that consensual and distributive modes of public reasoning are not mutually exclusive to each other. On the contrary, they are introduced as necessary components of public justification in Rawls’s theory. Thus, his model is consensual-cum-distributive. I also suggest some reasons why this model can better account for the liberal idea of pluralism, and how it offers a more realistic moral and political psychology, giving the account greater epistemic virtue than its alternatives.     

Is inclusion a valid control for ostracism?

Considerable knowledge about ostracism’s impact comes from research using Cyberball, an online ball-tossing game. In Cyberball, the inclusion condition is the control condition, to which ostracism is compared. The assumption is that Cyberball-inclusion is not affirming and represents an expected level of inclusion. However, without a no-inclusion control condition, it is unclear whether inclusion elevates need satisfaction, whether ostracism depresses need satisfaction, or both. We introduce Cybertree—a control condition designed to provide a similar experience to Cyberball without inclusion. Individuals playing Cybertree did not differ from included individuals in terms of feeling ostracized, level of need satisfaction, and mood. Both Cyberball inclusion and Cybertree differed significantly from ostracized individuals. We conclude that Cyberball inclusion is a reasonable control group for Cyberball ostracism but discuss research questions that may benefit from the use of Cybertree.     

The effect of power on susceptibility to emotional contagion

Abstract

This study explored two questions: Do people tend to display and experience other people's emotions? If so, what impact does power have on people's susceptibility to emotional contagion? We speculated that the powerless should pay more attention to their superiors (than their superiors pay to them) and should thus be especially likely to “catch” their superion' emotions as well. College students, given the role of “teacher” (powerful person) or “learner” (powerless person), observed videotapes of another (fictitious) subject relating an emotional experience. They were asked what emotions they felt as they watched their partner describe the happiest and saddest event in his life. In addition, they were videotaped as they watched the tape. As predicted, clear evidence of emotional contagion was obtained in this controlled laboratory setting. However, a direct (rather than inverse) relation between power and emotional contagion was found. Powerful subjects were more likely to display their subordinate's feelings than subordinates were to display those of the powerful other. Several possible explanations for these unexpected results were proposed.     

Recalling an Attachment Event Moderates Distress After Ostracism

Ostracism is known to cause psychological distress. Studies have indicated that immediate distress is resistant to individual differences and situational factors, but delayed reactions are more sensitive to moderation. Because attachment orientation is inextricably tied to rejection and inclusion, we hypothesized that attachment orientation would moderate both immediate and delayed ostracism effects and that recalling an attachment event compatible with a person's attachment internal working model would moderate the distress of a laboratory ostracism experience. In two experiments, 158 individualistic (secular Jewish) and 190 collectivistic (ultra‐Orthodox Jewish) participants played Cyberball with two other ostensible in‐group players. Distress was measured immediately after the game and 30 minutes later. The results show that less anxious and more avoidant individualistic but not collectivistic participants were less distressed by ostracism. After the delay, recall of an attachment event compatible with the participants' internal working model eliminated distress in both individualistic and collectivistic ostracized participants as measured on the needs satisfaction scale. Among individualistic participants, avoidants, who are known to avoid meaningful attachments, were less distressed by ostracism; anxious participants, who seek proximity, were more distressed. Recalling a compatible attachment event may be a mechanism that reduces individuals' perceptions of threats to their fundamental needs. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology