Andrew H. Hales

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.

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.

Death as a metaphor for ostracism: social invincibility, autopsy, necromancy, and resurrection

Abstract Metaphors can be powerful tools for theory building in psychological sciences. I entertain death as a theoretical metaphor for ostracism and explore the degree to which they share key properties. Death is universal (we all die), caused (by some things and not others), totally non-functional (the dead cannot do or experience anything) and irreversible (death is permanent). Ostracism, in some of its forms, shares these key properties. If ostracism is social death then it follows that: (1) never being ostracised constitutes social invincibility, (2) pondering the reasons why one was ostracised constitutes a social autopsy, (3) receiving even trace amounts of acknowledgement, while being otherwise totally ostracised constitutes social necromancy and (4) being reincluded constitutes social resurrection. These four constructs are discussed along with new research questions and predictions that arise from them.