This article was downloaded by: [Case Western Reserve University] On: 03 December 2014, At: 05:33 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Journal of Social Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20
Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else a
Stephanie V. Klages & James H. Wirth a
b
University of North , Florida
b
The Ohio State University at Newark Accepted author version posted online: 20 Sep 2013.Published online: 13 Dec 2013.
To cite this article: Stephanie V. Klages & James H. Wirth (2014) Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else, The Journal of Social Psychology, 154:1, 8-13, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2013.843502 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2013.843502
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
The Journal of Social Psychology, 154: 8–13, 2014 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0022-4545 print / 1940-1183 online DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2013.843502
Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
STEPHANIE V. KLAGES University of North Florida
JAMES H. WIRTH The Ohio State University at Newark
ABSTRACT. Can laughter cause social pain? Given the host of ways exclusion is communicated, we examined if exclusive laughter could produce the aversive consequences accordant with social exclusion. Using a validated recall paradigm, participants recounted a time of exclusive or inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday (control condition). Participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more ostracized, increased social pain, thwarted basic needs, worsened mood, reduced relational evaluation, and increased temptations to aggress compared to inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday; there were generally no significant differences between the inclusive laughter and a typical Wednesday. Participants recalling exclusive laughter also felt more verbally and emotionally bullied, demonstrating empirically, for one of the first times, a link between social exclusion and bullying. Keywords: bullying, exclusive laughter, laughter, social exclusion, social pain
LAUGHTER IS KNOWN TO PALLIATE PAIN (Zillmann, Rockwell, Schweitzer, & Sundar, 1993), but can laughter alternatively cause pain? We aimed to establish the consequences of exclusive laughter, specifically exclusive laughter leading to feelings of social exclusion and feeling bullied. Laughter can communicate the integration or distancing (excluding) of members within a group (Keyton & Beck, 2010). For instance, Eibl-Eibesfeldt (1970) specified that, “in its original form laughing seems to unite against a third party,” (p. 132, italics original), suggesting that laughter could communicate social exclusion. This notion is plausible, given that exclusion is communicated in diverse manners, such as the silent treatment (Williams, Shore, & Grahe, 1998). Many forms of social exclusion cause individuals to experience social pain in response to the threat or actual loss of social connections (e.g., Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003; MacDonald & Leary, 2010). Social pain signals lowered relational evaluation (i.e., how much others find a relationship with the individual to be valuable, close, and important; Leary, 1999) and can lead to thwarted need satisfaction, worsened mood (Williams, 2007), and temptations Address correspondence to James H. Wirth, The Ohio State University at Newark, Department of Psychology, 1179 University Dr., Newark, OH 43055, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
KLAGES AND WIRTH
9
to behave aggressively (Wesslemann, Butler, Williams, & Pickett, 2010). Research conducted in school settings indicates that part of a social exclusion experience may include feeling bullied (Saylor et al., 2012). To investigate if exclusive laughter can produce ostracism’s aversive consequences, such as feeling bullied, we employed a recall paradigm in which individuals wrote about a past exclusion experience. This paradigm received ample empirical support; researchers found recalling exclusion produced consequences similar to face-to-face exclusion (Bernstein, Young, Brown, Sacco, & Claypool, 2008; Chen, Williams, Fitness, & Newton, 2008; Riva, Wirth, & Williams, 2011). We hypothesized that recalling a time in which laughter made the participant feel excluded would lead to more aversive consequences characteristic of social exclusion (e.g., social pain, thwarted needs, worsened mood) compared to recalling a time in which laughter made the participant feel included or recalling a typical day.
METHODS Participants We recruited a total of 124 participants online across three days (i.e., MTurk; see Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011). Thirteen participants were removed due to an incomplete or nonrelevant response, leaving a final sample of 111 (50.5% Women, 18–66 years old, M = 30.31).1 Procedure Following the procedures of previous social exclusion recall paradigms, we randomly assigned participants to either recall a time laughter made them feel excluded, included, or to recall a typical Wednesday (control condition; Riva et al., 2011). Participants typed out their recalled experience step-by-step, in order as it happened, and answered a separate question about how they felt during the time recalled. Participants also indicated how easy it was to recall that time on a 5-point scale, ranging from a 1 (not difficult at all) to 5 (extremely difficult). Dependent Variables Participants responded to previously utilized social exclusion measures, based on how they felt during the time they recalled. Participants reported the amount and unpleasantness of social pain they experienced on a 10-point scale, ranging from 1 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable) (Hartrick, Kovan, & Shapiro, 2003). Participants also recorded how hurt they felt by selecting one of six graphical representations of increasingly pained faces (Wong & Baker, 1988). To assess participants’ basic need satisfaction, participants responded to 20 items evaluating belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence (Wirth & Williams, 2009); higher values indicated greater need satisfaction. Additionally, participants responded to 20 items assessing their mood (i.e., feelings of anger, happiness, hurt feelings, anxiety, and sadness (Buckley, Winkel, & Leary, 2004); higher values indicated worsened mood. Lastly, participants indicated how excluded and
Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
10
THE JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
ignored they felt. These items were measured on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely), and were randomized. To examine the extent of exclusive laughter’s impact, participants also reported how tempted they were to engage in prosocial and antisocial behaviors, on a 9-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all tempted) to 9 (very tempted; Buckley et al., 2004). Participants also indicated their feelings of relational evaluation with those they recalled interacting with on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very; adapted from Wirth, Sacco, Hugenberg, & Williams, 2010) and the extent they felt verbally, emotionally, and physically bullied on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely; Ericson, 2001).
RESULTS No significant differences emerged between conditions for ease of recall, indicating differences between conditions cannot be attributed to difficulty of recall (p = .526; see Table 1 for all inferential and descriptive statistics). One-way ANOVAs were significant for all of the following variables (ps < .001). Using Bonferroni post-hoc tests (adjusted for each individual DV), we found, participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more ostracized (excluded and ignored) than those recalling inclusive laughter or a typical day, ps < .001, ds ≥ 1.06. Participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more social pain (NRS and pain faces) and lowered relational evaluation than those recalling inclusive laughter or a typical day, ps < .001, ds ≥ 0.87. Demonstrating exclusion’s consequences, recalling exclusive laughter thwarted need satisfaction and worsened mood (ps < .001, ds ≥ 1.08) compared to recalling inclusion or a typical day. Similarly, exclusive laughter increased antisocial and decreased prosocial behavior temptations, ps < .001, ds ≥ 0.83. Lastly, recalling exclusive laughter evoked feeling verbally and emotionally bullied compared to inclusive laughter or a typical day, ps < .001, ds ≥ 0.66. There were no significant differences for physical bullying, p = .094. Additionally, participants felt more belonging, happiness, and less anger in the inclusive laughter than the Wednesday condition, ps ≤ .02, ds ≥ 0.65. No other significant differences emerged between these latter conditions, ps ≥ .09, ds ≤ 0.52.
DISCUSSION We identified laughter as a novel form of social exclusion that can produce the aversive consequences characteristic of exclusionary experiences. Compared to inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday (control condition), exclusive laughter led to increased social pain, thwarted basic needs, worsened mood, increased aggression, and lowered relational evaluation. In contrast, recalling a time when laughter made individuals feel included did not consistently produce more favorable responses than a typical day; this is consistent with previous findings (Kerr, Seok, Poulsen, Harris, & Messe, 2008; Williams & Sommer, 1997). Our findings seem to contradict previous evidence for laughter having primarily positive effects, such as improved mood, greater feelings of life worth (Lebowitz, Suh, Diaz, & Emery, 2010), and palliating pain (Zillmann, Rockwell, Schweitzer, & Sundar, 1993). Future research could be done concerning how the outcomes of laughter vary with respect to internal (e.g.,
KLAGES AND WIRTH
11
TABLE 1 Responses to Dependent Variables Based on Assigned Recall Task Condition Inferential statistics
Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
Dependent variable Ease of recall Feeling excluded Feeling ignored Social pain NRS-Painful NRS-Unpleasant GRS Pain Faces scale Relational evaluation Basic needs Belonging Self esteem Control Meaningful existence Mood Anger Happiness Hurt feelings Anxiety Sadness Behavior temptations Prosocial temptations Antisocial temptations Feeling bullied Emotional bullying Verbal bullying Physical bullying
α
Exclusive
Inclusive
Wednesday
F(2, 108)
p
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
0.65 64.55 24.39
.526
The Journal of Social Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20
Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else a
Stephanie V. Klages & James H. Wirth a
b
University of North , Florida
b
The Ohio State University at Newark Accepted author version posted online: 20 Sep 2013.Published online: 13 Dec 2013.
To cite this article: Stephanie V. Klages & James H. Wirth (2014) Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else, The Journal of Social Psychology, 154:1, 8-13, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2013.843502 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2013.843502
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
The Journal of Social Psychology, 154: 8–13, 2014 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0022-4545 print / 1940-1183 online DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2013.843502
Excluded by Laughter: Laughing Until it Hurts Someone Else Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
STEPHANIE V. KLAGES University of North Florida
JAMES H. WIRTH The Ohio State University at Newark
ABSTRACT. Can laughter cause social pain? Given the host of ways exclusion is communicated, we examined if exclusive laughter could produce the aversive consequences accordant with social exclusion. Using a validated recall paradigm, participants recounted a time of exclusive or inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday (control condition). Participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more ostracized, increased social pain, thwarted basic needs, worsened mood, reduced relational evaluation, and increased temptations to aggress compared to inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday; there were generally no significant differences between the inclusive laughter and a typical Wednesday. Participants recalling exclusive laughter also felt more verbally and emotionally bullied, demonstrating empirically, for one of the first times, a link between social exclusion and bullying. Keywords: bullying, exclusive laughter, laughter, social exclusion, social pain
LAUGHTER IS KNOWN TO PALLIATE PAIN (Zillmann, Rockwell, Schweitzer, & Sundar, 1993), but can laughter alternatively cause pain? We aimed to establish the consequences of exclusive laughter, specifically exclusive laughter leading to feelings of social exclusion and feeling bullied. Laughter can communicate the integration or distancing (excluding) of members within a group (Keyton & Beck, 2010). For instance, Eibl-Eibesfeldt (1970) specified that, “in its original form laughing seems to unite against a third party,” (p. 132, italics original), suggesting that laughter could communicate social exclusion. This notion is plausible, given that exclusion is communicated in diverse manners, such as the silent treatment (Williams, Shore, & Grahe, 1998). Many forms of social exclusion cause individuals to experience social pain in response to the threat or actual loss of social connections (e.g., Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003; MacDonald & Leary, 2010). Social pain signals lowered relational evaluation (i.e., how much others find a relationship with the individual to be valuable, close, and important; Leary, 1999) and can lead to thwarted need satisfaction, worsened mood (Williams, 2007), and temptations Address correspondence to James H. Wirth, The Ohio State University at Newark, Department of Psychology, 1179 University Dr., Newark, OH 43055, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
KLAGES AND WIRTH
9
to behave aggressively (Wesslemann, Butler, Williams, & Pickett, 2010). Research conducted in school settings indicates that part of a social exclusion experience may include feeling bullied (Saylor et al., 2012). To investigate if exclusive laughter can produce ostracism’s aversive consequences, such as feeling bullied, we employed a recall paradigm in which individuals wrote about a past exclusion experience. This paradigm received ample empirical support; researchers found recalling exclusion produced consequences similar to face-to-face exclusion (Bernstein, Young, Brown, Sacco, & Claypool, 2008; Chen, Williams, Fitness, & Newton, 2008; Riva, Wirth, & Williams, 2011). We hypothesized that recalling a time in which laughter made the participant feel excluded would lead to more aversive consequences characteristic of social exclusion (e.g., social pain, thwarted needs, worsened mood) compared to recalling a time in which laughter made the participant feel included or recalling a typical day.
METHODS Participants We recruited a total of 124 participants online across three days (i.e., MTurk; see Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011). Thirteen participants were removed due to an incomplete or nonrelevant response, leaving a final sample of 111 (50.5% Women, 18–66 years old, M = 30.31).1 Procedure Following the procedures of previous social exclusion recall paradigms, we randomly assigned participants to either recall a time laughter made them feel excluded, included, or to recall a typical Wednesday (control condition; Riva et al., 2011). Participants typed out their recalled experience step-by-step, in order as it happened, and answered a separate question about how they felt during the time recalled. Participants also indicated how easy it was to recall that time on a 5-point scale, ranging from a 1 (not difficult at all) to 5 (extremely difficult). Dependent Variables Participants responded to previously utilized social exclusion measures, based on how they felt during the time they recalled. Participants reported the amount and unpleasantness of social pain they experienced on a 10-point scale, ranging from 1 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable) (Hartrick, Kovan, & Shapiro, 2003). Participants also recorded how hurt they felt by selecting one of six graphical representations of increasingly pained faces (Wong & Baker, 1988). To assess participants’ basic need satisfaction, participants responded to 20 items evaluating belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence (Wirth & Williams, 2009); higher values indicated greater need satisfaction. Additionally, participants responded to 20 items assessing their mood (i.e., feelings of anger, happiness, hurt feelings, anxiety, and sadness (Buckley, Winkel, & Leary, 2004); higher values indicated worsened mood. Lastly, participants indicated how excluded and
Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
10
THE JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
ignored they felt. These items were measured on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely), and were randomized. To examine the extent of exclusive laughter’s impact, participants also reported how tempted they were to engage in prosocial and antisocial behaviors, on a 9-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all tempted) to 9 (very tempted; Buckley et al., 2004). Participants also indicated their feelings of relational evaluation with those they recalled interacting with on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very; adapted from Wirth, Sacco, Hugenberg, & Williams, 2010) and the extent they felt verbally, emotionally, and physically bullied on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely; Ericson, 2001).
RESULTS No significant differences emerged between conditions for ease of recall, indicating differences between conditions cannot be attributed to difficulty of recall (p = .526; see Table 1 for all inferential and descriptive statistics). One-way ANOVAs were significant for all of the following variables (ps < .001). Using Bonferroni post-hoc tests (adjusted for each individual DV), we found, participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more ostracized (excluded and ignored) than those recalling inclusive laughter or a typical day, ps < .001, ds ≥ 1.06. Participants recalling exclusive laughter felt more social pain (NRS and pain faces) and lowered relational evaluation than those recalling inclusive laughter or a typical day, ps < .001, ds ≥ 0.87. Demonstrating exclusion’s consequences, recalling exclusive laughter thwarted need satisfaction and worsened mood (ps < .001, ds ≥ 1.08) compared to recalling inclusion or a typical day. Similarly, exclusive laughter increased antisocial and decreased prosocial behavior temptations, ps < .001, ds ≥ 0.83. Lastly, recalling exclusive laughter evoked feeling verbally and emotionally bullied compared to inclusive laughter or a typical day, ps < .001, ds ≥ 0.66. There were no significant differences for physical bullying, p = .094. Additionally, participants felt more belonging, happiness, and less anger in the inclusive laughter than the Wednesday condition, ps ≤ .02, ds ≥ 0.65. No other significant differences emerged between these latter conditions, ps ≥ .09, ds ≤ 0.52.
DISCUSSION We identified laughter as a novel form of social exclusion that can produce the aversive consequences characteristic of exclusionary experiences. Compared to inclusive laughter or a typical Wednesday (control condition), exclusive laughter led to increased social pain, thwarted basic needs, worsened mood, increased aggression, and lowered relational evaluation. In contrast, recalling a time when laughter made individuals feel included did not consistently produce more favorable responses than a typical day; this is consistent with previous findings (Kerr, Seok, Poulsen, Harris, & Messe, 2008; Williams & Sommer, 1997). Our findings seem to contradict previous evidence for laughter having primarily positive effects, such as improved mood, greater feelings of life worth (Lebowitz, Suh, Diaz, & Emery, 2010), and palliating pain (Zillmann, Rockwell, Schweitzer, & Sundar, 1993). Future research could be done concerning how the outcomes of laughter vary with respect to internal (e.g.,
KLAGES AND WIRTH
11
TABLE 1 Responses to Dependent Variables Based on Assigned Recall Task Condition Inferential statistics
Downloaded by [Case Western Reserve University] at 05:33 03 December 2014
Dependent variable Ease of recall Feeling excluded Feeling ignored Social pain NRS-Painful NRS-Unpleasant GRS Pain Faces scale Relational evaluation Basic needs Belonging Self esteem Control Meaningful existence Mood Anger Happiness Hurt feelings Anxiety Sadness Behavior temptations Prosocial temptations Antisocial temptations Feeling bullied Emotional bullying Verbal bullying Physical bullying
α
Exclusive
Inclusive
Wednesday
F(2, 108)
p
M
SD
M
SD
M
SD
0.65 64.55 24.39
.526
