One-tailed tests: Let's do this (responsibly).

When preregistered, one-tailed tests control false-positive results at the same rate as two-tailed tests. They are also more powerful, provided the researcher correctly identified the direction of the effect. So it is surprising that they are not more common in psychology. Here I make an argument in favor of one-tailed tests and address common mistaken objections that researchers may have to using them. The arguments presented here only apply in situations where the test is clearly preregistered. If power is truly as urgent an issue as statistics reformers suggest, then the deliberate and thoughtful use of preregistered one-tailed tests ought to be not only permitted, but encouraged in cases where researchers desire greater power. One-tailed tests are especially well suited for applied questions, replications of previously documented effects, or situations where directionally unexpected effects would be meaningless. Preregistered one-tailed tests can sensibly align the researcher's stated theory with their tested hypothesis, bring a coherence to the practice of null hypothesis statistical testing, and produce generally more persuasive results. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Mixing Misery and Gin: The Effect of Alcohol Administration on Ostracism Response.

Williams's need-threat model proposes that ostracism responses are reflexive and, because of their evolutionary significance, difficult to diminish. Alcohol is widely consumed in social contexts and for reasons of coping with social stress, and major theories of alcohol propose that intoxication disrupts cognitive appraisal of environmental threats, leading to stress relief. Surprisingly, though, no well-powered experimental research has examined the impact of alcohol intoxication on distress from social ostracism. In three studies across two independent laboratories (N = 438), participants were randomly assigned to receive either an alcoholic or nonalcoholic (i.e., no-alcohol control or placebo) beverage and were exposed to an ostracism (or social inclusion) manipulation. Results, which emerged as remarkably consistent across all studies, indicated strong and consistent effects of ostracism on mood and needs satisfaction among both intoxicated and sober participants. Findings have important implications for ostracism theory and speak to boundary conditions for alcohol's ability to relieve stress.

People systematically overlook subtractive changes.

Improving objects, ideas or situations-whether a designer seeks to advance technology, a writer seeks to strengthen an argument or a manager seeks to encourage desired behaviour-requires a mental search for possible changes1-3. We investigated whether people are as likely to consider changes that subtract components from an object, idea or situation as they are to consider changes that add new components. People typically consider a limited number of promising ideas in order to manage the cognitive burden of searching through all possible ideas, but this can lead them to accept adequate solutions without considering potentially superior alternatives4-10. Here we show that people systematically default to searching for additive transformations, and consequently overlook subtractive transformations. Across eight experiments, participants were less likely to identify advantageous subtractive changes when the task did not (versus did) cue them to consider subtraction, when they had only one opportunity (versus several) to recognize the shortcomings of an additive search strategy or when they were under a higher (versus lower) cognitive load. Defaulting to searches for additive changes may be one reason that people struggle to mitigate overburdened schedules11, institutional red tape12 and damaging effects on the planet13,14.

Alcohol, Affect, and Aggression: An Investigation of Alcohol's Effects Following Ostracism.

OBJECTIVE: Ostracism is distressing to those who experience it and people are motivated to find ways to cope, including self-medication or aggression. However, we know little about how alcohol intoxication may affect individuals' reactions to ostracism. This study investigates predictions informed by Alcohol Myopia Theory to observe how alcohol influences changes to one's affect, basic needs fulfillment, and aggression following ostracism. METHOD: Participants (N = 97) were randomly assigned to either consume an alcohol, placebo, or nonalcohol beverage, and then participate in a game that simulated ostracism. Following this, participants engaged in a task wherein they were able to aggress against an ostensible ostracizer. Affect and basic psychological needs were measured at baseline, post-ostracism, and post-aggression timepoints. RESULTS: Results indicated that all groups reacted adversely to ostracism and experienced partial recovery toward baseline for negative and positive affect and basic psychological needs. Further, alcohol facilitated recovery across these outcomes post-aggression for participants who felt more intoxicated. Alcohol, relative to the control beverages, increased ostracizer-directed aggression intensity for low trait physically aggressive, but not highly aggressive, people. CONCLUSION: This randomized study provides novel preliminary evidence suggesting that alcohol enhances aggressive urges toward ostracizers in those who are not typically aggressive. Those who feel more drunk when intoxicated, compared to those who feel less so, may experience greater recovery from ostracism after aggressing toward an ostracizer hinting at potentially pleasurable effects that must be replicated in future studies.

Who gets ostracized? A personality perspective on risk and protective factors of ostracism.

Ostracism, excluding and ignoring others, results from a variety of factors. Here, we investigate the effect of personality on the likelihood of becoming a target of ostracism. Theorizing that individuals low in conscientiousness or agreeableness are at risk of getting ostracized, we tested our hypotheses within 5 preregistered studies: Four experiments investigating participants' willingness to ostracize targets characterized by different personality traits and a reverse correlation face modeling study where we determined and subsequently validated the stereotypical face of an ostracized person. A survey study within a representative German data panel further corroborated our findings. In line with our hypotheses, persons low in conscientiousness or agreeableness provoke more ostracism intentions (Studies 1, 2, and 4), are more likely to be actually ostracized by others (Study 3), represent the stereotype of an "ostracizable" person (Study 5), and report experiencing more ostracism (Study 6). Effects remained stable even after controlling for likability of the target (Study 2 and 4). Moreover, being described as negative on 1 personality dimension could not be compensated by being described as positive on the other (Study 4). In exploratory analyses, we further investigated the effects of openness to experience, neuroticism, and extraversion. In sum, we find evidence that personality affects the likelihood of becoming a target of ostracism, and that especially low agreeableness and conscientiousness represent risk factors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Ostracism Increases Automatic Aggression: The Role of Anger and Forgiveness.

While research on the "ostracism-aggression" link has focused on controlled processes in aggression, little effort has been devoted to examining the relation between ostracism and automatic aggression. Based on theories of aggression, we found that ostracized participants reported higher levels of automatic aggression than included participants (Studies 1 and 2). Furthermore, the association between ostracism and automatic aggression was mediated by anger and was especially prominent for people low in forgiveness (as compared to people high in forgiveness; Study 3). The implications of these findings are discussed.

Improving Psychological Science through Transparency and Openness: An Overview.

The ability to independently verify and replicate observations made by other researchers is a hallmark of science. In this article, we provide an overview of recent discussions concerning replicability and best practices in mainstream psychology with an emphasis on the practical benefists to both researchers and the field as a whole. We first review challenges individual researchers face in producing research that is both publishable and reliable. We then suggest methods for producing more accurate research claims, such as transparently disclosing how results were obtained and analyzed, preregistering analysis plans, and publicly posting original data and materials. We also discuss ongoing changes at the institutional level to incentivize stronger research. These include officially recognizing open science practices at the journal level, disconnecting the publication decision from the results of a study, training students to conduct replications, and publishing replications. We conclude that these open science practices afford exciting low-cost opportunities to improve the quality of psychological science.

Cell phone-induced ostracism threatens fundamental needs.

Cell phones are useful tools with both practical and social benefits. However, using them in the context of face-to-face conversations may be problematic. We consider this behavior a form of ostracism and test its effects on the satisfaction of basic psychological needs for belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence. In Study 1 participants who recalled a time in which a friend was checking a cell phone during a serious conversation reported feeling more ostracized (ignored and excluded), greater pain, and threat to basic needs than participants recalling a conversation without a cell phone interruption or a control event. Study 2 replicated and extended this effect: Cell phone-induced ostracism's effects were partially mediated by decreased feelings of relational evaluation, and threatened basic needs both in serious and casual conversation contexts. Findings from both studies also indicated that cell phone-induced ostracism hurts women more so than men.

When Silence Is Not Golden: Why Acknowledgment Matters Even When Being Excluded.

Following ostracism, individuals are highly sensitive to social cues. Here we investigate whether and when minimal acknowledgment can improve need satisfaction following an ostracism experience. In four studies, participants were either ostracized during Cyberball (Studies 1 and 2) or through a novel apartment-application paradigm (Studies 3 and 4). To signal acknowledgment following ostracism, participants were either thrown a ball a few times at the end of the Cyberball game, or received a message that was either friendly, neutral, or hostile in the apartment-application paradigm. Both forms of acknowledgment increased need satisfaction, even when the acknowledgment was hostile (Study 4), emphasizing the beneficial effect of any kind of acknowledgment following ostracism. Reinclusion buffered threat immediately, whereas acknowledgment without reinclusion primarily aided recovery. Our results suggest that minimal acknowledgment such as a few ball throws or even an unfriendly message can reduce the sting of ostracism.

Disagreeableness as a Cause and Consequence of Ostracism.

Ostracism's negative consequences have been widely documented, but research has yet to explore the personality characteristics of its targets that precipitate ostracism. Based on theories of the functions of ostracism, we found that people are more willing to ostracize disagreeable targets than more agreeable targets (Studies 2 and 3). This outcome was mediated by participants' interpersonal trust toward the target, and was especially strong for people who highly endorse fairness as a foundation for morality (Study 4). Ironically, the experience of ostracism induced a state of disagreeableness: the very characteristic that elicits ostracism from others (Study 5). This relationship was mediated by feelings of anger (Study 6). Findings indicate disagreeableness is a particularly negative outcome of ostracism, because it leads to further ostracism.