1 / 15

Do ostracized people ostracize ? The effects of ostracism in relation to retaliation

Do ostracized people ostracize ? The effects of ostracism in relation to retaliation. Hayal Yavuz, Yasemin Abayhan , Savaş Ceylan, Deniz Şahin, Orhan Aydın, Alp Giray Kaya, Gonca Çiffiliz Hacettepe University , Department of Psychology Social Psychology Laboratory

akeem-hardin
Download Presentation

Do ostracized people ostracize ? The effects of ostracism in relation to retaliation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Do ostracizedpeopleostracize? Theeffects of ostracism in relationtoretaliation Hayal Yavuz, Yasemin Abayhan, Savaş Ceylan, Deniz Şahin, Orhan Aydın, Alp Giray Kaya, Gonca Çiffiliz Hacettepe University, Department of Psychology SocialPsychologyLaboratory Thisresearchbenefitedfrom a grantfrom TUBITAK, project no. 109K094

  2. What is ostrasicm? • Ostracism, refers to being ignored, excluded and/or rejected by other individuals or groups independent of offering a justification or being a target of negative reactions (Williams, 2007). • Because of the social nature of human, lack of social contact is stressful for human beings. • Research had shown that ostracism evokes a variety of negative emotions such as sadness, anger and hostility as well as the experience of social pain (Chow, Tiedens & Govan,2008; DeWall et al., 2009; Eisenberger, Lieberman & Willams, 2003; Twenge et al., 2007). Chow, R.M., Tiedens, L.Z., & Govan, C. (2008). Excluded feelings: Emotional responses to social ostracism predict aggressive reactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 896-903. DeWall, C.N., Twenge, J.M., Gitter, S.A.,& Baumeister, R.F. (2009). It’s the thought that counts: The role of hostile cognition in shaping aggressive responses to social exclusion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 45-59. Eisenberger, N.I., Lieberman, M.D., & Williams, K.D. (2003). Does rejection hurt: An Fmrı study of social exclusion. Science, 302, 290-292. Twenge, J.M., Baumeister, R.F., DeWall, N.C., Ciarocco, N.J., Bartels, M.J. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 56-66. Williams, K.D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 425-452

  3. NeedThreat Model • According to NeedThreat Model (Williams, 1997); ostracismthreatenesfourfundamental needs; -self-esteem, -belongingness, -perceived control -meaningful existence • Therefore, individuals act to fortify or replenish their thwarted needs by antisocial behaviors such as aggression, bullying, counter productive actions and violent acts or prosocial behaviors like cooperation, helping and organizational citizenship (Twenge, 2005; Williams,2007). Twenge, J.M. (2005). When does social rejection lead to aggression? The influence of situations, narcissicm, emotion, and replenishing connections. In K.D. Williams, J.P. Forgas, & W.von Hippel (Eds.). The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection and bulyyinu. (pp.201-212). New York: Psychology Press. Williams, K.D. (1997). Social ostracism. R.M. Kowalski (Ed.), Aversive interpersonal behaviors içinde (s. 133-170). New York: Plenum. Williams, K.D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 425-452

  4. Theaim of thestudy… • The current study investigates the behavioral and emotional responses of ostracized people according to their self reports and their retaliation or helping behaviors by using both Cyberball and Brainstorming Paradigm.

  5. Methods • Participants -49 volunteer students; Therefore; 36 participants (18 m; 18 f) -In brainstorming session, participants accompanied by three confederates. Confederates were instructed about how to behave in a week long training.

  6. Methods • DependentVariables • Behavioralresponses of participants (scoredbyjudges on observational form; 36 possiblebehaviorswerelisted on the form such as “remindstherules of brainstormingtotheostracizer” or “stop writing” etc.) • Emotionalresponses (self-report- PositiveandNegativeAffect Schedule (PANAS), Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). • Needthreats (self report- NeedThreatScale, Van Beest & Williams, 2006).

  7. Methods • Procedure • 2 disjointstudies • Coverstory of Cyberball: Participantsweretoldthatthegoals of theresearchweretounderstandmentalvisualizationandtheywouldplay an online game of tosswiththreeotherparticipants. • Cyberball:Thecyberballparadigmused in thisstudyforostracizetheparticipants.

  8. Methods c) Cover story of Brainstorming: -Brainstorming sessions for generating ideas. -4 different people from Hacettepe University. -Brainstorming rules. d) Brainstorming: -Ostracize one of the confederates. -Confederate try to speak with them and complain about the situation.

  9. Results • ManipulationChecks of theStudy • ManipulationChecks of Cyberball: b) ManipulationChecks of Brainstorming: Debriefingquestions

  10. Results • Effects of ostrasicm on dependentvariables • Effects of ostrasicm on emotionalresponses: • Cronbachalphacoefficientsforbothpositiveandnegativeemotions. Therewere no significantmaineffects of ostracism on bothnegativeandpositiveemotions, F (1, 36) = .73, p>.05, ²= .08.

  11. Results • Effects of ostrasicm on needthreatscale: -Cronbach’salphacoefficientsforeachneed; Therewere no significantmaineffects of ostracism on needthreats, F(1, 36) = .91, p> .05, ²= .10.

  12. Results • Effects of ostrasicm on behavioral responses: *p < .06; **p < .05; ***p < .01

  13. Discussion • According to ostracism literature being ostracized had an effect on emotional responses and four fundamental needs (Smith & Williams, 2004;Williams, Cheung & Choi, 2000; Zadro, Williams & Richardson, 2004,). • The current study suggests that being ostracized doesn’t change the participants emotional responses and doesn’t threat their four fundamental needs. Smith, A., & Williams, K. D. (2004). R U There? Effects of ostracism by cell phone messages. Group Dynamics:Theory, Research, and Practice, 8, 291-301. Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., & Choi, W. (2000).CyberOstracism: Effects of being ignored over the Internet.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 748-762. Zadro, L., Williams, K. D., & Richardson, R. (2004). How low can you go? Ostracism by a computer lowersbelonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40,560-567.

  14. Discussion • The participants who are ostracized in cyberball sessions are much more sensitive to the cues of ostracism. • Therefore they try to ignore the ostracizer less frequently than the participants in the control condition and even emphatize the ostracized confederates by approving their complains.

  15. Discussion • They are actively try to intervene the situation by points the paper to the ostracizer by pen or finger. • Limitations: We need to collect data on no-ostracism brainstorming sessions. And some of our measures may need to be revised due to cronbach alpha’s coefficients lower than .70.

More Related