The eye of the ostracised: investigating changes in attention and affect following and during single- and multiple-episodes of ostracism and inclusion

Abstract

Humans, like many animals, are social beings. The denial of social interaction though exclusion has many adverse psychological effects, which can lead to physical and mental health consequences. In this thesis the phenomenon of ostracism (i.e., being ignored and excluded, often without an explicit causal declaration) was investigated, which was induced by the computer ball-toss game Cyberball. There were two primary aims of the experiments described in this thesis. The first was to explore attention changes following ostracism. Attention was measured for the personally meaningful threat of the source (i.e., perpetrator) following ostracism, using eyetracking and a facial Stroop task. In addition, eyetracking was used to measure participant‟s attention during ostracism, both for the sources and for themselves (i.e., desire for self-awareness). The results showed that when attention was measured by eyetracking, being ostracised led participants to avoid both the sources and themselves upon initial detection that ostracism was occurring. Attention for the sources recovered by the end of Cyberball while avoidance of self persisted. There was no effect of being ostracised on attention for sources following the conclusion of ostracism when measured by eyetracking. However, when attention was measured using the facial Stroop task, targets (i.e., victims) of ostracism remained hypervigilant towards the personally meaningful threat of the source, but not other threat stimuli. The second primary aim was to investigate whether prior and subsequent experiences of inclusion would reduce the aversive impact of ostracism. Specifically, the potential ameliorative effect of inclusion following ostracism and the potential protective benefit of inclusion prior to ostracism were examined. Further, the potential additive effects of two episodes of ostracism were also investigated. Regardless of whether participants thought that the sources in the second game were the same people as game 1, different people, or computer controlled, an ameliorative effect and no protective benefit was found for inclusion. Therefore, inclusion is a potential strategy for reducing the aversive impact of ostracism, but only if inclusion occurs after ostracism. In addition, there was only limited evidence that two episodes of ostracism had additive aversive effects. Potential clinical implications of these findings are explored.