Vicarious ostracism and control in young children

Social exclusion: differences in neural mechanisms underlying direct versus vicarious experience

Social exclusion stands as a source of social discord and holds substantial research value. Prior investigations on social exclusion have overlooked the interactive relationship between the excluded individuals and the observers. Hence, this study comparatively explores the neural mechanisms underlying the psychological responses of two distinct roles within the same social exclusion context. A total of 35 pairs (19 pairs of females) participated in the experiment. Within each pair, one individual assumed the role of a socially excluded participant (target), while the other acted as a social exclusion observer. Targets engaged in an online ball-passing game where controlled ball allocations to the participants created an exclusion scenario. Meanwhile, observers spectated the targets playing the game. Throughout the ball-passing activity, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) recorded the blood oxygen data in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and temporoparietal junction (TPJ) of both participants. Our findings revealed varied levels of rejection sensitivity elicited by direct or observed social exclusion experiences. Additionally, distinct patterns of neural activation were observed: targets displayed conditional differences in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), while male observers exhibited conditional activation differences in the mPFC, and female observers showed conditional activation differences in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). This study juxtaposes the behavioral and neural activation variances between targets and observers within the same social context, offering a novel perspective on investigating the neural mechanisms of social exclusion.

Vicarious ostracism reduces observers' sense of agency

Previous findings revealed that social ostracism reduces people's implicit sense of agency. Based on theoretical claims that observed behavior of others may be cognitively represented similarly to one's own behavior, we conducted two experiments to test whether people's own sense of agency can also be impaired by observed social exclusion of others. In Experiment 1, participants recalled episodes referring to vicarious ostracism or inclusion before completing a temporal interval estimation task to assess intentional binding effects (an established implicit measure of the sense of agency). In Experiment 2, participants immersed into a newly designed virtual Cyberball game, in which they witnessed a vicarious ostracism or inclusion scenario, before completing a Libet-style temporal estimation task and an agency questionnaire (an explicit measure of the sense of agency). The findings show, for the first time, that vicarious ostracism reduces both implicit and explicit measures of agency in observers.

The myth of regaining control: Ostracism increases superstitious tendencies

Whether and how interpersonal experiences predispose people to show superstitious tendencies have been largely unexamined by past studies. By adopting a multimethod approach, three studies tested (a) whether ostracism increases superstitious tendencies through thwarted perceived control, (b) whether the dispositional need for closure moderates the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies and (c) whether restoring ostracized people's thwarted control weakens their superstitious tendencies. The results revealed that ostracized participants had higher superstitious tendencies than nonostracized participants did (Studies 1-3). Moreover, thwarted control mediated the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies (Study 2). In addition, the dispositional need for closure moderated the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies, such that the effect was stronger among participants with a high need for closure (Studies 1-2). Finally, restoring ostracized participants' perceived control weakened the effect of ostracism on superstitious tendencies (Study 3). Altogether, these findings feature the essential role of thwarted perceived control in understanding the link between ostracism and superstitious tendencies and the implication of control restoration in weakening the link. They also highlight the importance of dispositional characteristics in moderating people's responses to superstitions following ostracism and related forms of interpersonal maltreatment.