Social cues establish expectations of rejection and affect the response to being rejected

James H. Wirth, Michael J. Bernstein, Eric D. Wesselmann, Angie S. LeRoy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Violating one’s expectations of inclusion may influence the pain of rejection. This is supported by neurological evidence on expectation violation processing (Somerville, Heatherton, & Kelley, 2006). We asked: Can an expectation of a specific social outcome affect how it feels to be rejected or included? We tested the premise that expectations for the outcome of an interaction are derived from social information. Participants were either liked or disliked following a get-acquainted exercise (Study 1), or were given inclusionary versus exclusionary cues (Study 2) or no social information (Study 3) in an imagined scenario before being rejected or included. Rejection felt worse than inclusion; however, we found rejected individuals felt increasingly worse after receiving inclusionary cues than receiving exclusionary cues. Included individuals felt an increase in need satisfaction and reduced negative affect when they initially expected to be rejected compared to when they expected to be included.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)32-51
Number of pages20
JournalGroup Processes and Intergroup Relations
Volume20
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Cues
inclusion
need satisfaction
Interpersonal Relations
pain
Pain
scenario
Rejection (Psychology)
Rejection
interaction
Processing
evidence
Inclusion

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Cultural Studies
  • Communication
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{5464c30f0f614b95b7fffd4a23fe14e9,
title = "Social cues establish expectations of rejection and affect the response to being rejected",
abstract = "Violating one’s expectations of inclusion may influence the pain of rejection. This is supported by neurological evidence on expectation violation processing (Somerville, Heatherton, & Kelley, 2006). We asked: Can an expectation of a specific social outcome affect how it feels to be rejected or included? We tested the premise that expectations for the outcome of an interaction are derived from social information. Participants were either liked or disliked following a get-acquainted exercise (Study 1), or were given inclusionary versus exclusionary cues (Study 2) or no social information (Study 3) in an imagined scenario before being rejected or included. Rejection felt worse than inclusion; however, we found rejected individuals felt increasingly worse after receiving inclusionary cues than receiving exclusionary cues. Included individuals felt an increase in need satisfaction and reduced negative affect when they initially expected to be rejected compared to when they expected to be included.",
author = "Wirth, {James H.} and Bernstein, {Michael J.} and Wesselmann, {Eric D.} and LeRoy, {Angie S.}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1368430215596073",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "32--51",
journal = "Group Processes and Intergroup Relations",
issn = "1368-4302",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "1",

}

Social cues establish expectations of rejection and affect the response to being rejected. / Wirth, James H.; Bernstein, Michael J.; Wesselmann, Eric D.; LeRoy, Angie S.

In: Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, Vol. 20, No. 1, 01.01.2017, p. 32-51.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Social cues establish expectations of rejection and affect the response to being rejected

AU - Wirth, James H.

AU - Bernstein, Michael J.

AU - Wesselmann, Eric D.

AU - LeRoy, Angie S.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Violating one’s expectations of inclusion may influence the pain of rejection. This is supported by neurological evidence on expectation violation processing (Somerville, Heatherton, & Kelley, 2006). We asked: Can an expectation of a specific social outcome affect how it feels to be rejected or included? We tested the premise that expectations for the outcome of an interaction are derived from social information. Participants were either liked or disliked following a get-acquainted exercise (Study 1), or were given inclusionary versus exclusionary cues (Study 2) or no social information (Study 3) in an imagined scenario before being rejected or included. Rejection felt worse than inclusion; however, we found rejected individuals felt increasingly worse after receiving inclusionary cues than receiving exclusionary cues. Included individuals felt an increase in need satisfaction and reduced negative affect when they initially expected to be rejected compared to when they expected to be included.

AB - Violating one’s expectations of inclusion may influence the pain of rejection. This is supported by neurological evidence on expectation violation processing (Somerville, Heatherton, & Kelley, 2006). We asked: Can an expectation of a specific social outcome affect how it feels to be rejected or included? We tested the premise that expectations for the outcome of an interaction are derived from social information. Participants were either liked or disliked following a get-acquainted exercise (Study 1), or were given inclusionary versus exclusionary cues (Study 2) or no social information (Study 3) in an imagined scenario before being rejected or included. Rejection felt worse than inclusion; however, we found rejected individuals felt increasingly worse after receiving inclusionary cues than receiving exclusionary cues. Included individuals felt an increase in need satisfaction and reduced negative affect when they initially expected to be rejected compared to when they expected to be included.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85006513319&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85006513319&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1368430215596073

DO - 10.1177/1368430215596073

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85006513319

VL - 20

SP - 32

EP - 51

JO - Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

JF - Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

SN - 1368-4302

IS - 1

ER -