Being excluded by one means being excluded by all: Perceiving exclusion from inclusive others during one-person social exclusion

Mitigating the affective and cognitive consequences of social exclusion: an integrative data analysis of seven social disconnection interventions

BACKGROUND

Being socially excluded has detrimental effects, with prolonged exclusion linked to loneliness and social isolation. Social disconnection interventions that do not require direct support actions (e.g., "how can I help?") offer promise in mitigating the affective and cognitive consequences of social exclusion. We examine how various social disconnection interventions involving friends and unknown peers might mitigate social exclusion by buffering (intervening before) and by promoting recovery (intervening after).

METHODS

We present an integrative data analysis (IDA) of five studies (N = 664) that systematically exposed participants to exclusion (vs. inclusion) social dynamics. Using a well-validated paradigm, participants had a virtual interaction with two other people. Unbeknownst to participants, the other people's behavior was programmed to either behave inclusively toward the participant or for one to behave exclusively. Critically, our social disconnection interventions experimentally manipulated whether a friend was present (vs. an unknown peer vs. being alone), the nature of interpersonal engagement (having a face-to-face conversation vs. a reminder of an upcoming interaction vs. mere presence), and the timing of the intervention in relation to the social dynamic (before vs. during vs. after). We then assessed participants' in-the-moment affective and cognitive responses, which included mood, feelings of belonging, sense of control, and social comfort.

RESULTS

Experiencing exclusion (vs. inclusion) led to negative affective and cognitive consequences. However, engaging in a face-to-face conversation with a friend before the exclusion lessened its impact (p < .001). Moreover, a face-to-face conversation with a friend after exclusion, and even a reminder of an upcoming interaction with a friend, sped-up recovery (ps < .001). There was less conclusive evidence that a face-to-face conversation with an unknown peer, or that the mere presence of a friend or unknown peer, conferred protective benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide support for the effectiveness of social disconnection interventions that involve actual (i.e., face-to-face) or symbolic (i.e., reminders) interactions with friends. These interventions target momentary vulnerabilities that arise from social exclusion by addressing negative affect and cognitions before or after they emerge. As such, they offer a promising approach to primary prevention prior to the onset of loneliness and social isolation.

Distinct dynamic behavioural response to social exclusion in male patients with a history of alcohol dependence

Social exclusion contributes to alcohol consumption, whereas the development of alcohol dependence (AD) can in turn lead to the social exclusion of people with AD. Previous research observed altered neural responses to experimentally induced social exclusion (i.e., Cyberball game) in patients with AD. In addition, inflammation has been associated with both social behaviours and AD. Our study aimed to investigate the dynamic behavioural response and the inflammatory effects of social exclusion in male patients with a history of AD. To this end, we analysed dynamic changes in ball tossing during a partial exclusion Cyberball game and the cytokine interleukin (IL)-1b in saliva in 31 male patients who had a history of AD and 29 gender-matched healthy controls without AD. Participants were included in the first 2 min of the Cyberball game and then excluded by one of the two co-players in the proceeding 5 min. Saliva was collected three times: one before and two after the Cyberball game. Across groups, participants passed the ball more often to the excluder during the partial exclusion period. Analysis using piece-wise linear mixed models showed that patients rapidly increased ball tosses to the excluder upon exclusion, which lasted to the late response phase, whereas the early behavioural response to exclusion took longer for controls. There was no significant change of salivary IL-1b level to exclusion in either patients or controls. The results indicate a distinct dynamic behavioural response to social exclusion in male patients with a history of AD.

Experience of loneliness on well-being among young individuals: A systematic scoping review

A systematic scoping review was conducted to explore the current evidence on the experience of loneliness influencing well-being among youths. The electronic databases Scopus, APA PsycINFO, Emerald Insight and One Search were used to identify relevant studies, followed by an analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract, and of the index terms used to describe the article. Reference lists of all shortlisted articles were searched for additional studies. 20 studies (quantitative, qualitative and mixed) published in the English language were identified for inclusion. Findings illustrate that the experience of loneliness is a complex, evolutionary process influenced by relational and environmental factors. Results from the studies identified factors that promote lower experience of loneliness and better well-being in future life stages. Future research can substantiate the issues related to young individuals being socially isolated from others for a prolonged duration.

Dynamics of the immediate behavioral response to partial social exclusion

Social rejection and exclusion (ostracism) represent main stressors in daily life and even threaten mental and physical health. Abundant data from subjective measures in social exclusion paradigms are available, but the dynamic behavioral response is largely unexplored. Here, we applied modified variants of the Cyberball paradigm in two consecutive experiments to investigate the adaptive behavioral and emotional reactions to partial social exclusion. In experiment 1, 68 healthy participants (females, mean age 24.76 ± 4.05 years) played 2 min inclusion, 5 min partial exclusion and 2 min total exclusion. In experiment 2, 94 healthy participants (48 females, mean age 34.50 ± 12.08 years) underwent an experimental condition (2 min inclusion, 10 min partial exclusion) and a control condition (12 min inclusion only) in randomized order. In experiment 1, behavioral responses to partial exclusion showed two characteristics: (1) an immediate increase in ball passes to the excluding player followed (2) by a later return of participants’ behavior to baseline. This finding was replicated for both genders and in comparison to a control condition in experiment 2. The dynamic behavioral response observed here may point to overlapping principles of cooperation in this ball tossing paradigm and serves as a novel experimental proxy.

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 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.

The Effects of Group Membership on College Students' Social Exclusion of Peers and Bystander Behavior

Bystanders represent one major avenue for reducing the incidence and severity of social exclusion, yet little research has examined behavioral measurement of bystander intervention. Utilizing the most common low risk form of exclusion, this study examined how group membership impacts college students' behavioral response to a peer's social exclusion through an Internet-based ball tossing game (N = 121). Participants played the game with three other virtual players, in which two of these players excluded the third player. Results demonstrated increased inclusive behavior towards the excluded peer across study conditions. This inclusion was strengthened when the excluded player was in the participant's in-group. Participants displayed an initial preference for in-group members, although attitudes towards all peers improved after the shared activity. Findings point to the interaction of social norms of inclusion, group membership, and changes in familiarity in determining bystander responses to social exclusion. In low-risk exclusion, group membership maintains an impact but does not provide sufficient motivation to counteract the social norm of inclusivity. The implication of bystander actions for promotion of community and future research are discussed.

The role of group size in reactions to ostracism and inclusion

Three experiments examined the effects of group size on reactions to ostracism and inclusion. Participants engaged in an online introduction activity with 2 or 6 other people and received likes from everyone (inclusion) or no one (ostracism). In Studies 1 and 2, group size had a significant effect on need satisfaction only when participants were ostracized, with larger groups threatening needs to a greater extent. These effects were evident during and immediately after the task, but not after a reflection period and delay. In Study 3, being ostracized by a larger group increased sadness and anger only when ostracism was public. Together, these results indicate that people react more negatively to ostracism by larger groups, but do not reap greater benefits in terms of need satisfaction or affect when included by larger groups. Implications for the ostracism literature and social media use are discussed.

Unanimous versus partial rejection: How the number of excluders influences the impact of ostracism in children

Previous research has shown that ostracism-the experience of being ignored and excluded-has negative effects on all of us, young and old. Using a Cyberball paradigm, the present research replicates the effects of ostracism on the moods (anger, anxiety, happiness, and anger) and fundamental needs (belongingness, control, meaningful existence, and self-esteem) of children (Study 1) and then extends the literature by examining the role of the number of ostracizers and inclusive members in this process by randomly assigning children to conditions varying in degree of ostracism (Study 2). Results of both studies showed that experiencing ostracism strongly and negatively affected all moods and fundamental needs-with the exception of anxiety. Study 2 in addition showed that the ratio of excluders to inclusive group members had different effects across outcomes. In all cases, complete ostracism produced the worst outcomes, suggesting that the presence of even a single ally reduces children's distress. For sadness, unanimous ostracism seemed particularly toxic. In some cases, facing two ostracizers produced significantly worse outcomes than only one, suggesting that consensual rejection might drive the negative effects on happiness, and sense of belonging, control, and meaningful existence. For self-esteem, only one ostracizer (in the presence of two inclusive members) was sufficient to induce a negative effect. Aggr. Behav. 43:190-203, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cognitive distortions mediate depression and affective response to social acceptance and rejection

BACKGROUND

The emotional context insensitivity (ECI) hypothesis suggests individuals with depression have blunted affective responses to both positive and negative events. We tested ECI in a social context to examine how depression relates to affective responses to social acceptance and rejection outcomes. Furthermore, we aimed to identify cognitive mechanisms linking depression with affective response to social feedback. Finally, we tested whether these processes are similar for social anxiety.

METHOD

90 participants (age 18-26 years; 53 women) completed the two-visit Chatroom task. At Visit 1 they rated their expectations about being liked by 60 peers. At Visit 2 they completed self-reports of depressive and social anxiety symptoms, and of cognitive flexibility, then received acceptance or rejection feedback from each peer and rated their affective response.

RESULTS

Greater depressive symptoms related to negative expectancy bias, lower cognitive flexibility, and less positive affective response to acceptance, but did not relate to rejection. Negative expectations and cognitive flexibility mediated the relationship between depressive symptoms and affective response for acceptance; only negative expectations mediated rejection responses. These cognitive mechanisms were not related to social anxiety.

LIMITATIONS

A community sample was used to assess depression. Rumination and current mood state were omitted as potential predictors of affective response.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support the ECI framework. Depression but not social anxiety interferes with positive and negative affect through cognitively mediated dampening of emotional response to social acceptance and rejection. Emotion regulation strategies in depression therapy can target social flexibility to improve alignment of affective reactions to social outcomes.

Odd one out: social ostracism affects self-reported needs in both sleep-deprived and well-rested persons

Previous research suggests that sleep deprivation may heighten normal reactions to an aversive social encounter. In this study, we explored how 24 h of sleep deprivation may influence responses to ostracism. Ninety-six healthy young adults were randomly allocated to either the sleep-deprivation or well-rested condition, wherein they engaged in two rounds of a ball-tossing game (Cyberball) programmed so that they would be included or ostracized. As compared with being included, being ostracized reduced participants' fulfillment of four essential needs (to belong; to have control; to have self-esteem; and to have a meaningful existence); participants also showed poorer mood and had poorer perceptions of their co-players. These effects were not influenced by sleep deprivation. Taken together, our findings suggest that sleep deprivation does not influence immediate distress responses to ostracism.

When you don't quite get what you want: psychological and interpersonal consequences of claiming inclusion

People's success or failure to gain inclusion in groups may result from their own actions or the actions of others. Two studies compared the personal and interpersonal consequences of inclusion and exclusion when they resulted from these two processes. People's own failure to "claim" inclusion in a computerized ballgame was equally detrimental for fundamental needs and made people equally unlikely to behave prosocially to group members, as being denied inclusion by others. In contrast, the beneficial effects of inclusion depended on the process with which it was obtained, and meta-perceptions of warmth mediated these differences; people who succeeded to claim inclusion thought their interaction partners liked them less than people who were granted inclusion, and as a result, their fundamental needs were satisfied less, and they behaved less prosocially.

Dissociable brain mechanisms for processing social exclusion and rule violation

Social exclusion inherently involves an element of expectancy violation, in that we expect other people to follow the unwritten rule to include us in social interactions. In this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we employed a unique modification of an interactive virtual ball-tossing game called "Cyberball" (Williams et al., 2000) and a novel paradigm called "Cybershape," in which rules are broken in the absence of social exclusion, to dissociate brain regions that process social exclusion from rule violations more generally. Our Cyberball game employed an alternating block design and removed evoked responses to events when the participant was throwing the ball in inclusion to make this condition comparable to exclusion, where participants did not throw. With these modifications, we replicated prior findings of ventral anterior cingulate cortex (vACC), insula, and posterior cingulate cortex activity evoked by social exclusion relative to inclusion. We also identified exclusion-evoked activity in the hippocampi, left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, and left middle temporal gyrus. Comparing social exclusion and rule violation revealed a functional dissociation in the active neural systems as well as differential functional connectivity with vACC. Some overlap was observed in regions differentially modulated by social exclusion and rule violation, including the vACC and lateral parietal cortex. These overlapping brain regions showed different activation during social exclusion compared to rule violation, each relative to fair play. Comparing activation patterns to social exclusion and rule violation allowed for the dissociation of brain regions involved in the experience of exclusion versus expectancy violation.