It will (never) stop hurting: Do repeated or chronic experiences of exclusion lead to hyper- or hyposensitive psychological responses?

Unlike one-time lab manipulations of exclusion, in real life, many people experience exclusion, from others and from groups, over extended periods, raising the question of whether individuals could, over time, develop hypo- or hypersensitive responses to chronic exclusion. In Study 1, we subjected participants to repeated experiences of inclusion or exclusion (three Cyberball games, time lag of three days, N = 194; 659 observations). We find that repeatedly excluded individuals become hypersensitive to inclusion, but not to exclusion. Study 2 (N = 183) tested whether individuals with chronic experiences of real-world exclusion show hypo- or hypersensitive responses to a novel episode of exclusion. In line with Study 1, exclusion hurt to the same extent regardless of baseline levels of chronic exclusion in daily life. However, chronically excluded individuals show more psychological distress in general. We discuss theoretical and practical implications for dealing with chronically excluded individuals and groups.

Effects of an open-label placebo intervention on reactions to social exclusion in healthy adults: a randomized controlled trial.

Social exclusion, that is being left out by others, can have adverse consequences for individuals' psychological well-being. Even short-term experiences of social exclusion strongly threaten basic psychological needs and cause so-called social pain. Prior research suggests an overlap between the experience of social and physical pain that, amongst others, is reflected by the effectiveness of physical pain treatments in alleviating social pain. Drawing upon these prior findings, we here explore whether open-label placebos, which have previously been found to be effective in reducing physical pain, can alleviate social pain following social exclusion. Seventy-four healthy participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions in a 2 × 2 between-subjects design: First, they either received an open-label placebo intervention or no treatment. Second, they either experienced inclusion or exclusion by their co-players in the interactive ball-tossing game Cyberball. We find that excluded participants in the open-label placebo condition experienced significantly less hurt feelings compared to those in the control condition (Cohen's d = 0.77). There was no effect of treatment for need threat. The findings suggest new possibilities to alleviate social pain, which is of particular interest in the context of preventing destructive and maladaptive behaviors in situations where functional coping strategies are unavailable.

Social pain by non-social agents: Exclusion hurts and provokes punishment even if the excluding source is a computer.

Prior research has shown that being excluded by computer-agents in experimental exclusion paradigms threatens individuals' basic needs to a similar extent as being excluded by humans. It is less clear, however, why this similarity between computer and human exclusion occurs, and whether it applies only to reactions immediately after the exclusion event (reflexive stage), or also to reactions that occur further downstream (e.g., reflective stage). Four studies (N = 1048) with three different exclusion paradigms provide several key insights: First, the similarity between computer and human exclusion is robust and pervasive, as Bayesian analyses provide consistent support that the source of exclusion (human vs. computer) does not affect reflexive need satisfaction. Second, this similarity also extends to reflective reactions and punishing behavior. Finally, the present studies extend our knowledge about the processes underlying this similarity by uncovering the role of anthropomorphism. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

The role of motivation in the association of political ideology with cognitive performance.

Previous research reports a negative association between individuals' tendency to endorse right- versus left-wing socio-cultural views and performance in cognitive tasks. We hypothesized that this association results to some extent from explicit epistemic preferences and low motivation to perform well in such tasks, rather than resulting from low ability only. In two studies we found support for this hypothesis. In Study 1, we show that part of the association of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) with performance in the cognitive reflection task (CRT) could be explained by the motivational construct of need for cognition. In Study 2, we experimentally manipulated the motivation of participants by providing (vs. not providing) monetary incentives in the CRT and documented an improvement in the performance of participants high in RWA but not of participants low in RWA. The crucial role of ideology-based motivational differences in the context of cognitive performance is discussed.