When It’s Okay That I Don’t Play: Social Norms and the Situated Construal of Social Exclusion

Being excluded and ignored has been shown to threaten fundamental human needs and cause pain. Such reflexive reactions to social exclusion have been conceptualized as direct and unmoderated (temporal need threat model of ostracism). Here, we propose an extension and argue that reflexive reactions depend on how social exclusion situations are construed. If being excluded is understood as a violation of an inclusion norm, individuals will react with pain and threat. In contrast, if being excluded is consistent with the prevailing norm, the exclusion situation is interpreted as less threatening, and negative reflexive reactions to ostracism should be attenuated. Four studies empirically support this conceptual model. Studies 3 and 4 further show that to guide situated construal, the norm has to be endorsed by the individual. In both Studies 1 and 3, the effect of the norm is mediated by the objective situation’s subjective construal

The subjective construal of social exclusion : an integrative model

Research on social exclusion has mainly focused on situations in which exclusion is highly ambiguous and represents a violation of prevailing inclusion norms. However, it has rarely been accounted for that social exclusion situations are subjectively construed by the involved actors. In this dissertation, I suggest that subjective reactions to exclusion are cognitively mediated and do not necessarily depend on objective qualities of the exclusion experience. I further present a construal-based model of social exclusion that frames the construal of social exclusion as a function of norm consistency (whether social exclusion is consistent with or violating social norms) and the adopted perspective (targets, sources, and observers). This dissertation contains four manuscripts, which emphasize the important role of subjective construal. Rudert, Hales, Greifeneder, and Williams (2016) showed that minimal acknowledgement affects the subjective experience of exclusion more strongly than the objective amount of exclusion. Rudert and Greifeneder (2016) demonstrated that targets’ negative reactions to exclusion are attenuated if exclusion is perceived as consistent with compared to violating the prevailing social norm. Rudert, Janke, and Greifeneder (2016) investigated subjective exclusion experiences as a reaction to an anti-immigration popular vote in Switzerland and demonstrated differences due to personal norms and attitudes. Finally, Rudert, Reutner, Greifeneder, and Walker (2017) showed that observers’ moral judgment of social exclusion experiences is affected by facial characteristics of the excluded target. All manuscripts are discussed in terms of the presented model together with additional lines of research that can be derived from a perspective of subjective construal

Bedrohung der Zugehörigkeit: Soziale Ausgrenzung in Organisationen

Die Zugehörigkeit zu sozialen Gruppen ist ein zentrales menschliches Bedürfnis. Bereits kleinste Anzeichen davon, ausgeschlossen zu sein oder ignoriert zu werden, können dazu führen, dass Menschen sich in ihrer Zugehörigkeit bedroht und verletzt fühlen. Werden Menschen häufig ausgegrenzt, kann dies schwerwiegende Folgen nach sich ziehen, wie Depressionen, „innere Kündigung“ oder aggressives Verhalten. In Organisationen ist Ausgrenzung ein häufiges Phänomen und kann verschiedene Gründe haben: Bestrafung für ein Fehlverhalten des Betroffenen, rollen- und normbedingter Ausschluss aufgrund von Hierarchien und Arbeitsteilung sowie unbewusster Ausschluss, bei welchem Betroffene einfach übersehen werden. Investitionen in das Zugehörigkeitsgefühl und organisationale Maßnahmen, welche die Risiken sozialen Ausschlusses senken, können sich somit nachhaltig positiv sowohl auf das Wohlbefinden des einzelnen Organisationsmitglieds als auch auf die Effizienz der Organisation als Ganzes auswirken

Following the crowd in times of crisis: Descriptive norms predict physical distancing, stockpiling, and prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic

Individuals engage in a variety of behavioral responses to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, from complying with or transgressing against physical distancing regulations, to stockpiling or prosocial behavior. We predicted that particularly descriptive social norms are important in driving pandemic-related behavior as they offer guidelines in times of insecurity and crisis. To investigate this assumption, we conducted a longitudinal survey with two measurement points ( n = 1,907) in Germany during the spring of 2020. Results show that descriptive norms (perceived behavior of close others) positively predicted future transgression against distancing regulations, stockpiling, and prosocial behavior over time. In our analysis, we account for previous behavior as well as other potential predictors (subjective threat, personality). In sum, our findings highlight the power of descriptive norms in increasing compliance with pandemic-related regulations and promoting future prosocial behavior

Faced with exclusion: Perceived facial warmth and competence influence moral judgments of social exclusion

The current research investigates how facial appearance can act as a cue that guides observers' feelings and moral judgments about social exclusion episodes. In three studies, we manipulated facial portraits of allegedly ostracized persons to appear more or less warm and competent. Participants perceived it as least morally acceptable to exclude a person that appeared warm-and-incompetent. Moreover, participants perceived it as most acceptable to exclude a cold-and-incompetent looking person. In Study 2, we also varied the faces of the excluding group (i.e., the ostracizers). Results indicate that typical ostracizers are imagined as cold-and-incompetent looking. Study 3 suggests that the effect of a target's facial appearance on moral judgment is mediated by feelings of disgust. In sum, people's moral judgment about social exclusion can be influenced by facial appearance, which has many implications in intergroup research, such as for bystander intervention

Knowing one’s place : parental educational background influences social identification with academia, test anxiety, and satisfaction with studying at university

First-generation students (i.e., students whose parents did not attend university) often experience difficulties fitting in with the social environment at universities. This experience of personal misfit is supposedly associated with an impaired social identification with their aspired in-group of academics compared to continuing-generation students (i.e., students with at least one parent with an academic degree. In this article, we investigate how the postulated differences in social identification with the group of academics affect first-generation students’ satisfaction with studying and test anxiety over time. We assume that first-generation students’ impaired social identification with the group of academics leads to decreased satisfaction with studying and aggravated test anxiety over the course of the first academic year. In a longitudinal study covering students’ first year at a German university, we found that continuing-generation students consistently identified more strongly with their new in-group of academics than first-generation students. The influence of social identification on test anxiety and satisfaction with studying differed between groups. For continuing-generation students, social identification with the group of academics buffered test anxiety and helped them maintain satisfaction with studying over time. We could not find these direct effects within the group of first-generation students. Instead, first-generation students were more sensitive to effects of test anxiety on satisfaction with studying and vice versa over time. The results suggest that first-generation students might be more sensitive to the anticipation of academic failure. Furthermore, continuing-generation students’ social identification with the group of academics might have buffered them against the impact of negative experiences during the entry phase at university. Taken together, our findings underscore that deficit-driven approaches focusing solely on first-generation status may not be sufficient to fully understand the importance of parental educational background for students’ well-being. More specifically, continuing-generation students might reap benefits from their parental educational background. These benefits widen the social gap in academia in addition to the disadvantages of students with first-generation status. In sum, understanding the benefits of continuing-generation status has important implications for interventions aiming to reduce social class gaps in academia

Who's to Blame? Dissimilarity as a Cue in Moral Judgments of Observed Ostracism Episodes

When observing an ostracism episode, observers may wish to know whether ostracism is justified or not. If ostracism appears unjustified, observers will likely blame the sources and sympathize with the target; if it appears justified, observers will likely blame and devalue the target. Here we introduce the “social dissimilarity rule,” which holds that observers base their moral judgments on dissimilarities between the members of the observed group. In five studies, participants either recalled observed ostracism episodes or observed group interactions in which one group member was ostracized (e.g., in a chat or a group-working task). Results show that if similar persons exclude a dissimilar target (target is an “odd-one-out”), observers attribute ostracism to malicious motives of the ostracizers, such as ingroup favoritism, and devalue the ostracizers. However, if ostracism cannot be explained by social dissimilarity between the sources and the target, observers assume that the target is being punished for a norm deviation (punitive motive) and devalue the target. Use of the social dissimilarity rule was neither moderated by cognitive load (Study 3) nor by the perceived essentiality of the group distinction (Study 4). But if participants knew that the target previously deviated from a norm, knowledge about the situation had a stronger effect on moral judgments (Study 5) than social dissimilarity. These findings further our understanding of how observers make moral judgments about ostracism, which is important given that an observer’s moral judgment can strongly impact bystander behavior and thus target recovery and well-being

Abundance and scarcity: classical theories of money, bank balance sheets and business models, and the British restriction of 1797‐1818.

The thesis looks through the lens of bank balance sheet accounting to investigate the structural change in the British banking system between 1780 and 1832, and how classical quantity theorists of money attempted to respond to the ensuing financialisation of the wartime economy with its growing reliance on credit funded with paper-based instruments (the ‘Vansittart system’ of war finance). The thesis combines contributions to three separate fields to construct a holistic historical example of the challenges faced by monetary economists when ‘modelling’ financial innovation, credit growth, ‘fringe’ banking, and agent incentives – at a time of radical experimentation: the suspension of the 80-year-old gold standard (“the Restriction”). First, critical text analysis of the history of economics argues that the 1809-10 debate between Ricardo and Bosanquet at the peak of the credit boom, bifurcated classical theory into two timeless competing policy paradigms advocating the ‘Scarcity’ or ‘Abundance’ of money relative to exchange transactions. The competing hypotheses regarding the role of money and credit are identified and the rest of the thesis examines the archival evidence for each. Second, the core of the thesis contributes to the historical literature on banking in relation to money by reconstructing a taxonomy of bank business models, their relationships with the London inter-bank settlement system, and their responses to the Restriction - drawing on some 17,000 mostly new data points collected from the financial records of London and Country banks. The final section contributes to the economic history of money by constructing aggregated views of total bank liabilities from the firm-level data, scaled to recently available British GDP estimates. These are examined to establish (with hindsight) the relative merits and lacuna of the competing theoretical hypotheses postulated by political economists. It was the period of deleveraging after 1810 that revealed the lacuna of both paradigms