Nilüfer Aydin

Turning to God in the Face of Ostracism: Effects of Social Exclusion on Religiousness

The present research proposes that individuals who are socially excluded can turn to religion to cope with the experience. Empirical studies conducted to test this hypothesis consistently found that socially excluded persons reported (a) significantly higher levels of religious affiliation (Studies 1, 2, and 4) and (b) stronger intentions to engage in religious behaviors (Study 2) than comparable, nonexcluded individuals. Direct support for the stress-buffering function of religiousness was also found, with a religious prime reducing the aggression-eliciting effects of consequent social rejection (Study 5). These effects were observed in both Christian and Muslim samples, revealing that turning to religion can be a powerful coping response when dealing with social rejection. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

The Relationship Between Religious Identity and Preferred Coping Strategies: An Examination of the Relative Importance of Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Coping in Muslim and Christian Faiths

Religious affiliation has consistently been shown to help individuals cope with adversity and stressful events. The present paper argues that this proposition is valid for both Christians and Muslims, but that these religious identities foster different types of coping. In accordance with historical, cultural, and psychological accounts, it is proposed that the Christian core self is relatively individualistic, whereas the Muslim core self is oriented more toward the collective. As a consequence, it is hypothesized that when confronted with a stressful life event, Muslims are more likely to adopt interpersonal (collective) coping strategies (such as seeking social support or turning to family members), while Christians are more likely to engage intrapersonal (individualistic) coping mechanisms, such as cognitive restructuring or reframing the event. Evidence from the literature on coping strategies is reviewed and systematized. Evidence lend support to the analysis by indicating that Muslims indeed tend to use an interpersonally oriented (collective) coping style when dealing with adversity, whereas Christians are more likely to employ intrapersonally oriented (individualistic) strategies when facing comparable scenarios. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

The Different Behavioral Intentions of Collectivists and Individualists in Response to Social Exclusion

We investigated how participants with collectivistic and individualistic orientation cope with social exclusion on a behavioral level. In Studies 1 and 2, we found participants with more individualistic orientation to indicate more antisocial behavioral intentions in response to exclusion than in response to inclusion; however, participants with more collectivistic orientation did not differ in their behavioral intentions between exclusion and inclusion. In the third and fourth study, we replicated our findings across cultures: German and U.S. participants indicated more antisocial and avoiding behavioral intentions under exclusion than under inclusion, whereas Turkish and Indian participants did not differ in their behavioral intentions between exclusion and inclusion. In Studies 3 and 4, only German and U.S. participants were significantly affected by exclusion, showing more negative mood, which correlated with their behavioral intentions. In Study 4, the different behavioral intentions of collectivists and individualists were mediated by a different threat experience. The findings emphasize the role of self-construal and culture, as well as the self-threat inherent in exclusion.

Exclude Me if You Can Cultural Effects on the Outcomes of Social Exclusion

We examined how individualistic versus collectivistic cultural backgrounds affected the psychological experience of social exclusion. We found that Turkish, Chinese, and Indian participants (collectivistic background) differed in their experience of social exclusion from German participants (individualistic background): German participants experienced lower fulfillment of psychological needs in response to social exclusion, whereas Turkish, Chinese, and Indian participants were affected to a lesser extent (Turkey, India, Hong Kong) or not at all (mainland China) by social exclusion manipulations. Testing two different explanatory mechanisms in Study 3, we found that the difference in dealing with social exclusion was not associated with activating social representations in participants with collectivistic background but with exclusion being associated with more threat in participants with individualistic background. In Study 4, cultural differences emerged also on the physiological level: German participants’ heart rates were increased when excluded, whereas Chinese participants showed no change in heart rate during exclusion. The results are discussed regarding their implications for the role of self-construal and culture when dealing with the threat of social exclusion.

Sugar or spice: Using I3 metatheory to understand how and why glucose reduces rejection-related aggression

Social rejection can increase aggression, especially among people high in rejection sensitivity. Rejection impairs self-control, and deficits in self-control often result in aggression. A dose of glucose can counteract the effect of situational factors that undermine self-control. But no research has integrated these literatures to understand why rejection increases aggression, and how to reduce it. Using the I(3) model of aggression, we proposed that aggression would be highest under conditions of high instigation (rejection), high impellance (high rejection sensitivity), and low inhibition (drinking a beverage sweetened with a sugar substitute instead of glucose). As predicted, aggression was highest among participants who experienced social rejection, were high in rejection sensitivity, and drank a placebo beverage. A dose of glucose reduced aggression, especially among rejected people high in rejection sensitivity. These findings point to the importance of self-control in understanding why social rejection increases aggression, and how to prevent it.

Sugar or Spice

Social rejection can increase aggression, especially among people high in rejection sensitivity. Rejection impairs self-control, and deficits in self-control often result in aggression. A dose of glucose can counteract the effect of situational factors that undermine self-control. But no research has integrated these literatures to understand why rejection increases aggression, and how to reduce it. Using the I(3) model of aggression, we proposed that aggression would be highest under conditions of high instigation (rejection), high impellance (high rejection sensitivity), and low inhibition (drinking a beverage sweetened with a sugar substitute instead of glucose). As predicted, aggression was highest among participants who experienced social rejection, were high in rejection sensitivity, and drank a placebo beverage. A dose of glucose reduced aggression, especially among rejected people high in rejection sensitivity. These findings point to the importance of self-control in understanding why social rejection increases aggression, and how to prevent it.

Psychological effects of risk glorification in the media: Towards an integrative view

Media contents that glorify risk-taking (e.g., video games that simulate illegal street racing, TV depictions of dangerous extreme sports or stunts) are becoming increasingly popular. Theory and research suggest that risk glorification is associated with risk-taking among the audience. Until recently the evidence was limited in three ways: First, most studies, being correlational, did not permit clear causal inferences. Second, we did not know the strength of the effect of different types of media and different types of risk-taking outcomes. Third, early research did little to isolate the underlying psychological processes that mediate the pernicious effects of risk glorifying media formats. In order to address these open questions we review the results of an experimental programme of research and the findings of a comprehensive meta-analysis. The main findings are that (a) the risky media contents do indeed have causal force; (b) according to our meta-analysis active participation in risk glorifying media interfaces has a larger effect than passive consumption; (c) psychological processes include the priming of risk-related constructs, effects of risk-positive situational heuristic cues, perceived social norms, personal risk habituation, and changes in the recipients self-concept. To integrate these findings we propose a theoretical framework derived from broad-range socio-cognitive models. We conclude with a discussion of possible directions for future research.

Social exclusion and xenophobia: Intolerant attitudes toward ethnic and religious minorities

The present research investigates the effects of social exclusion on attitudes toward ethnic and religious minorities. Native-born German participants who were socially excluded rather than included reported greater approval for stricter legislation regarding the naturalization of immigrants (Study 1), reported greater prejudice against openly observant Muslims (Studies 2 and 3), and stronger agreement with the view that immigrants are financial burdens to the state (Study 4). Social exclusion threatens the sense of personal control, which in turn leads to stronger rejection of stigmatized outgroups (Study 3). When perceived control was experimentally enhanced, the social exclusion effect disappeared (Study 4). The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Suddenly included: Cultural differences in experiencing re-inclusion

In the current research, we examined whether re-inclusion (i.e. the change from a previous state of exclusion to a new state of inclusion) was perceived differently by people with individualistic and collectivistic cultural backgrounds. Individualists (German and Austrian participants) but not collectivists (Chinese participants) experienced re-inclusion differently than continued inclusion: While collectivistic participants did not differentiate between both kinds of inclusion, individualistic participants showed reduced fulfilment of their psychological needs under re-inclusion compared to continued inclusion. The results moreover revealed that only participants from individualistic cultures expressed more feelings of exclusion when re-included than when continually included. These exclusionary feelings partially mediated the relationship between the different states of inclusion and basic need fulfilment.

Center of Excellence Kulturen sowie professionelle ethikorientierte Führung als Voraussetzung für ökonomischen Erfolg

Als Grundlage fur den nationalen und internationalen Erfolg sozialer und kommerzieller Organisationen konnen so genannte Center of Excellence Kulturen dienen. Das sind Kulturen, die sich aus mehreren Subkulturen zusammensetzen und von erfolgreichen Teams, Abteilungen und Unternehmen praktiziert werden. Center of Excellence Kulturen ermoglichen Spitzenleistungen durch die Aktivierung der Mitarbeiter und hohe Innovativitat. In diesem Beitrag beschreiben wir aus dem Pool der Center of Exellence Kulturen die wichtigsten Kulturen, die unseres Erachtens fur die Fuhrung der Zukunft besonders relevant sind, (z. B. Kundenorientierungskultur, Kulturen des kritischen Rationalismus, Zivilcouragekultur). Zusatzlich ist eine professionelle Unternehmens- und Mitarbeiterfuhrung eine zentrale Grundlage, damit diese Kulturen uberhaupt initiiert und aufrecht erhalten werden konnen. Wir postulieren hier unser Prinzipienmodell der Fuhrung und Motivation, das letztlich auf ethikorientierte Fuhrung hinauslauft.