Ostracism, the process of socially ignoring and excluding certain people, has attracted attention in recent years. Most studies have looked at full ostracism, in other words, when everyone in a group ignores a person. However, in real life, people are usually only partially ostracized – excluded by some members of a group and not by others. The present study is one of the first to provide an in-depth examination of reactions when different forms of partial ostracism occur in a group. It looks at partial ostracism in a field study and an experimental study. In the field study I proposed that because targets of partial ostracism receive mixed signals from their group, it is easier for them to interpret ostracism as an external event rather than internal; whereas in full ostracism because all the signs received by the target are the same, the target cannot interpret the act of ostracism in different ways. The results of the field study indicate that partial ostracism is not only more common than full ostracism at work, but targets of partial ostracism also make fewer internal attributions than do targets of full ostracism. The experimental study examined two dimensions of partial ostracism: activity exclusion (AE) and people exclusion (PE). Results indicate that as AE increases, i.e. targets are excluded from more activities, targets make fewer internal attributions, feel more threats to their basic needs (mediated by internal attributions), and have more desire to help others. As PE increases, targets feel more threats to their needs and put less effort into group tasks. Comparing AE and PE simultaneously, AE makes a difference in targets’ well-being while PE affects targets’ efforts in group tasks
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TORONTO/oai:tspace.library.utoronto.ca:1807/32659 |
| Date | 20 August 2012 |
| Creators | Banki, Sara |
| Contributors | Berdahl, Jennifer |
| Source Sets | University of Toronto |
| Language | en_ca |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds