Choice availability and incentive structure determine how people cope with ostracism

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Experimental Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI:10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104707
Anneloes Kip, Thorsten M. Erle, Willem W.A. Sleegers, Ilja van Beest
{"title":"Choice availability and incentive structure determine how people cope with ostracism","authors":"Anneloes Kip, Thorsten M. Erle, Willem W.A. Sleegers, Ilja van Beest","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People vary greatly in their responses to being ignored and excluded by others (i.e., ostracism). Based on previous research, responses to ostracism are typically classified as prosocial, antisocial, and withdrawal behavior. However, studying these behaviors in isolation can limit our understanding of the decision-making process behind these behaviors. Offering multiple response options provides deeper insights into response preferences. Additionally, using a cost-benefit approach to assess behavioral outcomes provides a useful framework for understanding response preferences beyond the mere availability of choices. In five pre-registered experiments (total <ce:italic>N</ce:italic> = 2145), we manipulated the availability of choice options and incentive structure of different behavioral responses towards the source of ostracism. Our findings reveal that when all options were equally non-costly, ostracized individuals preferred prosocial behaviors (Studies 1–3). When withdrawal offered solitude rather than inactivity, it became just as likely as prosocial responses (Study 4). Despite the potential risk of losing future rewards, withdrawal even became the dominant choice when prosocial and antisocial options incurred immediate costs (Study 5). These findings show how experimental changes can shift the perceived meaning of responses. Overall, our work highlights the importance of considering both choice variety and a cost-benefit framework in understanding coping behaviors in social exclusion research.","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"112 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104707","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People vary greatly in their responses to being ignored and excluded by others (i.e., ostracism). Based on previous research, responses to ostracism are typically classified as prosocial, antisocial, and withdrawal behavior. However, studying these behaviors in isolation can limit our understanding of the decision-making process behind these behaviors. Offering multiple response options provides deeper insights into response preferences. Additionally, using a cost-benefit approach to assess behavioral outcomes provides a useful framework for understanding response preferences beyond the mere availability of choices. In five pre-registered experiments (total N = 2145), we manipulated the availability of choice options and incentive structure of different behavioral responses towards the source of ostracism. Our findings reveal that when all options were equally non-costly, ostracized individuals preferred prosocial behaviors (Studies 1–3). When withdrawal offered solitude rather than inactivity, it became just as likely as prosocial responses (Study 4). Despite the potential risk of losing future rewards, withdrawal even became the dominant choice when prosocial and antisocial options incurred immediate costs (Study 5). These findings show how experimental changes can shift the perceived meaning of responses. Overall, our work highlights the importance of considering both choice variety and a cost-benefit framework in understanding coping behaviors in social exclusion research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
2.90%
发文量
134
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology publishes original research and theory on human social behavior and related phenomena. The journal emphasizes empirical, conceptually based research that advances an understanding of important social psychological processes. The journal also publishes literature reviews, theoretical analyses, and methodological comments.
期刊最新文献
Consume humanity: Eating anthropomorphic food leads to the dehumanization of others Women underrepresented or men overrepresented? Framing influences women's affective and behavioral responses to gender gap in political leadership Going at it alone: Zero-sum beliefs inhibit help-seeking Choice availability and incentive structure determine how people cope with ostracism AI as a companion or a tool? Nostalgia promotes embracing AI technology with a relational use
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1