Seeking solitude after being ostracized:A replication and beyond

Individuals may respond to ostracism by either behaving prosocially or antisocially. A recent paper provides evidence for a third response: solitude seeking, suggesting that ostracized individuals may ironically engage in self-perpetuating behaviors which exacerbate social isolation. To examine this counterintuitive response to ostracism, we conceptually replicated the original paper in three studies (N = 1,118). Ostracism experiences were associated with preference for solitude across four samples (Study 1), and being ostracized increased participants’ desires for solitude (Studies 2 and 3). Extending beyond the original paper, we demonstrated that only the experience of being ostracized, but not ostracizing others or the feeling of conspicuousness, triggered the desire for solitude. Diverging from the original paper, trait extraversion did not moderate the effect of ostracism on solitude desires. Taken together, the current research provides additional and stronger empirical evidence that solitude seeking is a common response to ostracism

Understanding Why Some Whistleblowers are Venerated and Others Vilified

Whistleblowers are individuals who witness a moral infraction committed within their organization and report this infraction publicly to hold the group accountable. Whistleblowers often face ridicule, vilification, and exclusion both within their group and sometimes within broader society. Thus, whistleblowers put themselves at personal risk to adhere to their moral code and protect others; these criteria commonly classify someone as a hero. We argue diverse reactions to whistleblowers are influenced by numerous situational factors that influence perceptions of a whistleblower’s intentions as well as the expected consequences of their whistleblowing. Whether a whistleblower is viewed as a virtuous reformer (i.e., hero) or a harmful dissident may depend partly on the degree to which individuals believe that there is a discrepancy between an organization’s lived values and their stated values. While whistleblowers ostensibly provide evidence that this discrepancy exists, cognitive dissonance processes may forestall acceptance of this evidence in many cases. Believing that one is affiliated with a corrupt organization—while one also believes that they are a good, moral and adequate person—may lead to uncomfortable experiences of dissonance. It may be easier for many to reduce this dissonance by disparaging or discounting whistleblowers, rather than altering their own actions (which may involve becoming a whistleblower themselves) to reflect their personal values

Helicopter Parents and Landing Pad Kids: Intense Parental Support of Grown Children

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/92448/1/j.1741-3737.2012.00987.x.pd

Translation and validation of an Italian language version of the Religious Beliefs and Mental Illness Stigma Scale (I-RBMIS)

The aim of this study is to validate the Italian version of the Religious Beliefs and Mental Illness Stigma Scale (I-RBMIS): a self-report measure of religious beliefs that may contribute to stigma regarding mental disorders. Scale validation included: linguistic validation; pilot test for understandability; face validity; factor analysis as test of dimensionality; Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test to evaluate sample sampling adequacy; internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha; scale validity was assessed through concurrent criterion validity using as gold standard the Italian version of Attribution Questionnaire 27 and mental health knowledge schedule; A total of 311 people agreed to participate in the study. Face validity showed that 13 items out of 16 were completely understandable while only three items (4, 9 and 13) highlighted small lexical concerns. The average compilation time was under 4 min. Bartlett’s test for sphericity was statistically significant (Χ2 = 1497.54; df = 120; p < 0.001). Cronbach's alpha values were acceptable both for the entire questionnaire (0.80) and for the morality/sin subscale (0.73), whereas it was slightly below the standard cutoff for the spiritually oriented causes/treatments (0.68). Scale validity showed a positive correlation between I-RBMIS and AQ-27-I, and a negative correlation between I-RBMIS and MAKS-I. I-RBMIS demonstrated good psychometric properties to assess stigmatizing religious beliefs toward mental illness in general population

Rehabilitation and protection: Beneficial uses of ostracism in groups

Ostracism—being excluded and ignored—is a painful, pervasive phenomenon (Williams, 2009). Most social psychological research has focused on the ill effects of ostracism on targets, but has ignored the motives for using ostracism. The goal of the present research is to examine the group\u27s use of ostracism as a form of social control for managing a burdensome group member. I argue there are two primary motives for why groups use ostracism on a burdensome group member: To rehabilitate this member in the short term and to protect the group by ejecting this member who harms the group\u27s long-term goals. Studies 1a and 1b provided an initial demonstration of participants\u27 use of ostracism on a burdensome group member, as well as established rehabilitative and protective motives for ostracism. Study 2 investigated how participants respond to a burdensome group member they cannot rehabilitate due to an external factor (i.e., poor connection speed during an online group interaction). Participants ostracized a burdensome member regardless of attribution, but were less likely to endorse rehabilitative motives for a burdensome member who could not rehabilitate. Finally, Study 3 examined how participants responded to a burdensome group member that either rehabilitated or persisted in being burdensome after being ostracized in an initial group interaction. Participants re-included a burdensome player that rehabilitated in the second interaction, and indicated this re-inclusion was to reward the target player for changing behavior. Participants continued to ostracize a target player who was burdensome in both interactions, and they were more likely to endorse protective motives after the second interaction than the first. This program of research represents substantial theoretical and empirical advancement in an understudied area of research—namely, understanding the factors that motivate ostracism in group interactions

When Nobody “Likes” You: Perceived Ostracism Through Paralinguistic Digital Affordances Within Social Media

This research explores the processes of perceived ostracism ensuing from a lack of feedback via paralinguistic digital affordances (PDAs), the one-click tools (e.g., Likes and +1s) which are one of the most used features of social media, provided to an individual’s posted social media content. The positive and negative psychological outcomes of social media communication have been well-documented. However, as social media have become entrenched as some of our most common communication channels, the absence of communication via social media has been underexplored and may have negative psychological and communicative outcomes. We utilized focus groups ( N  = 37) to examine perceptions of ostracism when individuals did not receive PDAs to their posted content across social media platforms. Participants reported feeling excluded only when they did not receive PDAs from select relationally close or socially superior network members, suggesting audience targeting and expectations when posting. Users frequently attributed low PDA counts to system and content factors. These results contribute to a developing understanding of the psychological effects of lack of communication via social media and provide insight for future research, demonstrating that social exclusion may not manifest from a complete lack of social interaction but rather may occur when individuals do not receive expected or desired feedback