Not all rejections are alike; competence and warmth as a fundamental distinction in social rejection

Social Rejection but Not Ostracism Increases Cognitive Effort Avoidance

Purpose

Social exclusion has been found to have a significant impact on cognitive control processing. However, the existing research on this topic has yielded inconsistent findings, possibly due to variations in the type of exclusion and individuals' cognitive effort. Two studies were conducted to explore the influence of social rejection and ostracism on cognitive effort avoidance.

Participants and Methods

Study 1 involved forty-six adults who were randomly divided into a rejection group and a control group using a get-acquainted paradigm. The demand selection task (DST) was used to measure cognitive effort avoidance. In Study 2, forty-eight adults were recruited, Cyberball and DST paradigms were used to evoke ostracism and test cognitive effort avoidance, respectively.

Results

The results of study 1 showed that individuals who were socially rejected by their partners exhibited impaired response accuracy of cognitive control and increased cognitive effort avoidance. This indicates that social rejection has a negative impact on cognitive control processing and that individuals may be more likely to avoid cognitive effort when experiencing social rejection. The results of study 2 showed that ostracism had an impact on both response speed and accuracy, but it did not significantly affect cognitive effort avoidance. This indicates that social rejection affects cognitive control processing differently than ostracism, and individuals are more likely to avoid cognitive effort when experiencing social rejection.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that social rejection and ostracism have different effects on cognitive effort, which may contribute to the inconsistent cognitive performance during social exclusion. Future research may explore the underlying mechanisms that lead to these differences and examine how individuals can mitigate the negative effects of social exclusion on cognitive control processing.

Do targets of ostracism truthfully communicate their emotional reactions to sources?

Ostracism triggers negative emotions such as sadness, anger, and hurt feelings. Do targets of ostracism truthfully share their emotions with the sources of ostracism? Drawing on past research on social-functional accounts of emotions and interpersonal emotion regulation, we investigated the possibility that targets may misrepresent their emotions (i.e., gaming emotions). We conducted three experiments (N = 1058; two pre-registered) using an online ball-tossing game, in which participants were randomly assigned to be included or ostracized. Consistent with the literature, we found that ostracized individuals were more hurt, sad, and angry than included individuals. However, we found little and inconsistent evidence that ostracized (vs included) individuals misrepresented their emotional reactions to the sources. Further, Bayesian analyses offered more support against misrepresentation of emotions. These findings suggest that targets of ostracism truthfully communicated their social pain to the sources.

A daily-life study of interpersonal stressors and alcohol use in individuals with borderline personality disorder and community controls

BACKGROUND

Interpersonal stressors (ISs) are major factors in relapse in alcohol use disorder (AUD) and are theorized to play a role in drinking behaviors. Past work has examined this association using ecological momentary assessment (EMA), but the unique effects of rejections and disagreements on alcohol use are unknown. Research suggests the two ISs functionally differ and may display distinct associations with drinking. Further, these associations may differ in people with borderline personality disorder (BPD), a population reporting frequent IS and co-occurring AUD.

METHODS

113 drinkers (community: n = 59; BPD: n = 54) reported alcohol use and ISs using EMA for 21 days. Using generalized estimating equations, we expected that rejection and disagreement would predict increased likelihood of drinking each day. We examined both cumulative (throughout each day) and immediate momentary effects of ISs predicting subsequent drinking on that same day. Further, we predicted that these associations would be stronger in individuals with BPD.

RESULTS

Greater rejections throughout the day were associated with a reduced likelihood of drinking that day (OR = 0.56, 95 % CI:[0.32, 0.97], p < .040). In contrast, disagreements immediately prior to drinking were associated with an increased likelihood of drinking that day (OR = 0.60, 95 % CI:[1.02, 2.50], p = .039). However, the effect of disagreement on drinking was moderated by BPD diagnosis (OR = 2.56, 95 % CI:[1.13, 5.80], p = .025), such that the effect was only present for individuals with BPD.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing ISs as an aggregate predictor may mask potentially opposite effects on alcohol use. Additionally, disagreements may be a risk factor for subsequent alcohol use in BPD.

Modulation of behavioral and brain responses to visual perspective taking by social rejection: Evidence from electrophysiology

Visual perspective taking (VPT) is crucial for reasoning about other people's mental states. To explore the modulation of behavioral and neural responses to visual perspective taking by social rejection, we firstly manipulated rejection using get-acquainted oral communication and a two-person visual perspective task, then explored how the experience of social rejection affected the behavioral and neural responses during the follow-up classical one-person visual perspective task. The subjective rating and behavior results showed that social rejection increased individuals' negative affect level and feelings of need-threat, decreased self-regulation and impulsive control. The event-related potentials (ERP) and standardized low resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA) results mainly showed that the increased parietal late slow wave (LSW) showed greater activities in SPL and rTPJ after social rejection. Moreover, compared with making judgments from self-perspective, making judgments from other-perspective yielded later TP450 and greater late frontal wave (LFW). In addition, the left LFW of socially rejected group showed more positive amplitude for other-inconsistent condition than that for other-consistent condition. These results suggested that social rejection might decrease impulsive control behaviorally, as well as increase neural processing of perspective taking, including visual-spatial perspective taking (indexed by the LSW), calculating of the self and other perspectives (indexed by the TP450), and processing of others' visual perspectives (indexed by the LFW). Our findings provide powerful evidence on neural mechanism underlying how social rejection modulates visual perspective taking, and support the model of social monitoring system, in that socially rejected individuals motivate to attend more carefully to social cues, such as other people's perspective.

Did You Reject Me for Someone Else? Rejections That Are Comparative Feel Worse

Rejections differ. For those who are rejected, one important difference is whether they are rejected for someone else (comparative rejection) or no one at all (noncomparative rejection). We examined the effect of this distinction on emotional reactions to a rejection in four studies ( N = 608), one of which was fully preregistered. Our results show that comparative rejections feel worse than noncomparative rejections and that this may be because such rejections lead to an increased sense of exclusion and decreased belonging. Furthermore, we found evidence that, by default, people react to a rejection as though it were comparative-that is, in the absence of any information about whether they have been rejected for someone or no one, they react as negatively as if they were rejected for someone. Our discussion focuses on the implications of these findings, including why people often seek out information in the wake of a rejection.

When Praising Yourself Insults Others: Self-Superiority Claims Provoke Aggression

We tested the prediction, derived from the hubris hypothesis, that bragging might serve as a verbal provocation and thus enhance aggression. Experiments 1 and 2 were vignette studies where participants could express hypothetical aggression; Experiment 3 was an actual decision task where participants could make aggressive and/or prosocial choices. Observers disliked an explicit braggart (who claimed to be “better than others”) or a competence braggart as compared with an implicit braggart (who claimed to be “good”) or a warmth braggart, respectively. Showing that explicit and competence bragging function as verbal provocations, observers responded more aggressively to the explicit and competence braggart than to the implicit and warmth braggart, respectively. They did so because they inferred that an explicit and a competence braggart viewed other people and them negatively, and therefore disliked the braggart. Rather than praising the self, braggarts are sometimes viewed as insulting others.

Interpersonal problems and negative affect in Borderline Personality and Depressive Disorders in daily life

Theories of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) suggest that interpersonal problems in BPD act as triggers for negative affect and, at the same time, are a possible result of affective dysregulation. Therefore, we assessed the relations between momentary negative affect (hostility, sadness, fear) and interpersonal problems (rejection, disagreement) in a sample of 80 BPD and 51 depressed outpatients at 6 time-points over 28 days. Data were analyzed using multivariate multi-level modeling to separate momentary-, day-, and person-level effects. Results revealed a mutually reinforcing relationship between disagreement and hostility, rejection and hostility, and between rejection and sadness in both groups, at the momentary and day level. The mutual reinforcement between hostility and rejection/disagreement was significantly stronger in the BPD group. Moreover, the link between rejection and sadness was present at all three levels of analysis for the BPD group, while it was localized to the momentary level in the depressed group.

Anger and sadness as adaptive emotion expression strategies in response to negative competence and warmth evaluations

Previous literature suggested that anger and sadness may be necessary to restore social bonds in the face of immediate relationship threat. The present research compared the social effectiveness of expressing anger and sadness in response to a negative personal evaluation. Results indicated that target anger in response to a negative competence evaluation, and target sadness in response to a negative warmth evaluation, had the most positive effects on the evaluators' subjectively perceived persuasiveness of the targets' communication (Study 1) and on the subjectively perceived fluency of the interaction by both interaction partners (Study 2). Results are discussed in light of the social functionality of emotion expression and the importance of interpersonal emotion congruency with evaluation content.

The relation between schizotypy and early attention to rejecting interactions: The influence of neuroticism

OBJECTIVES

Schizotypy relates to rejection sensitivity (anxiety reflecting an expectancy of social exclusion) and neuroticism (excessive evaluation of negative emotions). Positive schizotypy (e.g., perceptual aberrations and odd beliefs) and negative schizotypy (e.g., social and physical anhedonia) could relate to altered attention to rejection because of neuroticism.

METHODS

Forty-one healthy individuals were assessed on positive and negative schizotypy and neuroticism, and event-related potentials during rejecting, accepting and neutral scenes. Participants were categorised into high, moderate and low neuroticism groups. Using temporo-spatial principal components analyses, P200 (peak latency = 290 ms) and P300 amplitudes (peak latency = 390 ms) were measured, reflecting mobilisation of attention and early attention, respectively.

RESULTS

Scalp-level and cortical source analysis revealed elevated fronto-parietal N300/P300 amplitude and P200-related dorsal anterior cingulate current density during rejection than acceptance/neutral scenes. Positive schizotypy related inversely to parietal P200 amplitude during rejection. Negative schizotypy related positively to P200 middle occipital current density. Negative schizotypy related positively to parietal P300, where the association was stronger in high and moderate, than low, neuroticism groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive and negative schizotypy relate divergently to attention to rejection. Positive schizotypy attenuates, but negative schizotypy increases rejection-related mobilisation of attention. Negative schizotypy increases early attention to rejection partly due to elevated neuroticism.

Greater positive schizotypy relates to reduced N100 activity during rejection scenes

Social anxiety due to rejection sensitivity (RS) exacerbates psychosis-like experiences in the general population. While reduced dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) activity during social rejection in high schizotypy has suggested self-distancing from rejection, earlier stages of mental processing such as feature encoding could also contribute to psychosis-like experiences. This study aimed to determine the stage of mental processing of social rejection that relates to positive schizotypy. Forty-one healthy participants were assessed for schizotypy and RS. Event-related potential amplitudes (ERPs) were measured at frontal, temporal and parieto-occipital sites and their cortical sources (dACC, temporal pole and lingual gyrus) at early (N100) and late (P300 and late slow wave, LSW) timeframes during rejection, acceptance and neutral scenes. ERPs were compared between social interaction types. Correlations were performed between positive schizotypy (defined as the presence of perceptual aberrations, hallucinatory experiences and magical thinking), RS and ERPs during rejection. Amplitude was greater during rejection than acceptance or neutral conditions at the dACC-P300, parieto-occipital-P300, dACC-LSW and frontal-LSW. RS correlated positively with positive schizotypy. Reduced dACC N100 activity during rejection correlated with greater positive schizotypy and RS. Reduced dACC N100 activity and greater RS independently predicted positive schizotypy. An N100 deficit that indicates reduced feature encoding of rejection scenes increases with greater positive schizotypy and RS. Higher RS shows that a greater tendency to misattribute ambiguous social situations as rejecting also increases with positive schizotypy. These two processes, namely primary bottom-up sensory processing and secondary misattribution of rejection, combine to increase psychosis-like experiences.

Age Differences in Reactions to Social Rejection: The Role of Cognitive Resources and Appraisals

OBJECTIVES

Social rejection is a negative social experience individuals of all ages may encounter in everyday life. It is unclear whether social rejection affects older adults more or less than younger adults. This study investigated age differences in reactions following a direct rejection and the moderating effects of cognitive resources and appraisals.

METHOD

Eighty-three younger (18-26 years) and 53 older (60-86 years) adults engaged in an online interview during which they were either accepted or rejected seemingly by another participant. We examined participants' self-reported mood before and after the interview as well as verbal self-complexity.

RESULTS

Older adults reported greater increases in hurt feelings following rejection than younger adults. The age difference was further moderated by cognitive resources and appraisals. Among older rejected adults, those who were poorer in processing speed and those who appraised the rejection more negatively felt more hurt feelings. Older rejected adults were also rated lower in self-complexity than older accepted adults, whereas younger rejected adults and accepted adults did not differ.

DISCUSSION

The findings are largely consistent with life-span developmental theories and highlight the importance of cognitive processes when examining age differences in experiencing social rejection.