وصل شده اما وصل نشده: نظرات افراد و واکنش به طرد شدگی بصورت آنلاین و حضوری

We conducted two studies to examine perceptions of, and reactions to, ostracism occurring either in-person or online. In study 1, participants read a vignette describing either in-person or online ostracism, then estimated their psychological and interpersonal responses as if they experienced such ostracism. Participants anticipated experiencing distress, and this was consistent across ostracism method. Ostracism method did predict negative affect (NA), with greater NA increases anticipated for in-person exclusion, compared to online. A significant interaction between gender and ostracism method predicted anticipated belonging. Males anticipated higher belonging in the in-person condition (relative to online); females anticipated more belonging in the online condition. In study 2, participants experienced in-person or online ostracism during a brief interaction with study confederates. Both conditions elicited similar reports of low inclusion, high exclusion, and significant decreases in positive and negative affect. Ostracism method qualified self-esteem (SE) results; chat room participants indicated an increase in SE following ostracism, whereas in-person participants reported a slight decrease. Males and females were similarly affected by both conditions. These studies demonstrate that online experiences of ostracism may be as meaningful as those experienced in person. Whether this finding generalizes to those with less technological familiarity should be examined further.

Imagine interacting with two acquaintances who suddenly begin interacting only with each other and seem to ignore your presence. This may be considered a rather benign example of everyday ostracism. That is, opposed to being rejected (which more explicitly reflects dislike or non-belonging) a person is ostracized when the excluded individual is simply ignored, as if he or she did not exist (Williams, 2007). How would this situation make you feel at that moment? Moreover, would it make a difference whether this interaction (or, rather, lack of involvement in the interaction) occurred in-person or via more remote communication methods such as the internet? Exploring these questions was the main objective of the current project. It has been repeatedly suggested that belonging is a fundamental human need (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and that being excluded impedes the fulfillment of four primary needs: belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence (Williams, 1997). There is ample empirical evidence to support such assertions, as exclusion has been shown to lead to immediate unpleasant outcomes more generally. Specifically, exclusion has been related to thwarted needs, lowered self-esteem, lower positive affect, and higher negative affect (Williams, 2007), as well as decreases in cognition/self-regulation, increased aggression, and retaliatory behaviors (Baumeister, Brewer, Tice, & Twenge, 2007).

The type of individuals assessed in this study may have had a profound impact on how remote communication (and exclusion via remote communication) was perceived. Specifically, students who are in college now have grown up with these remote sources of communication and are likely to utilize them more frequently in every-day college life for both personal and academic endeavors. In utilizing an age group that has always had this technology available to them, interactions within these domains are not only familiar, but the norm. Thus, they may not differentiate the meaningfulness of remote communication from in-person. Individuals lacking experience with and/or access to technological resources may not be comfortable using technology. Thus, they may not adopt the same level of connection via these methods that more technologically savvy individuals have. Further research should assess whether individuals with less technological familiarity would respond in similar ways.