Abstract:

Social exclusion is a very painful experience that threatens people’s physical and mental health, potentially increasing their risk of developing emotional problems. However, the psychological mechanism by which social exclusion affects emotional problems remains unclear. Studies have found that an impaired adaptability to emotional conflict plays an important role in emotional problems. Therefore, the first objective of the present study is to explore whether and how social exclusion affects adaptation to emotional conflict. After a person experiences social exclusion, social inclusion can promote positive emotions and lessen negative emotions. Therefore, the second objective of the present study is to explore whether and how social inclusion has the potential to regulate the effect of social exclusion on adaptation to emotional conflict.

The present study used the Cyberball game and face−word Stroop paradigm to explore the effect of social exclusion on adaptation to emotional conflict (Experiment 1), and whether social inclusion had the potential to regulate the effect of social exclusion on adaptation to emotional conflict (Experiment 2). Experiment 1 used a mixed experimental design with 2 (social situation: exclusion, inclusion) × 2 (previous trial consistency: consistent, inconsistent) × 2 (current trial consistency: consistent, inconsistent) format. The consistency of the previous trial and the consistency of the current trial were the within-subject factors, while the social situation was the between-subject factor. In Experiment 1, participants were randomly assigned to either the inclusion group or the exclusion group. Experiment 2 used a mixed experimental design with 2 (Game 1: exclusion vs. inclusion) × 2 (Game 2: exclusion vs. inclusion) × 2 (previous trial consistency: consistent, inconsistent) × 2 (current trial consistency: consistent, inconsistent) format. The consistency of both the previous trial and the current trial were the within-subject factors, while Game 1 and Game 2 were the between-subject factors. In Experiment 2, participants were randomly assigned to the inclusion−exclusion, exclusion−exclusion, exclusion−inclusion, or inclusion−inclusion groups.

In Experiment 1, the emotional conflict adaptation effects (CAEs) in reaction times of exclusion group (M= 4.39, SD= 45.55) was lower than that of the inclusion group (M = 19.16, SD= 38.83), [t (89) = 1.67, p= 0.099, d= 0.35]. In Experiment 2, the inclusion−exclusion group showed a greater emotional conflict adaptation effects (CAEs) in its reaction times than the exclusion−exclusion group [F (1,122) = 4.60, p= 0.034, η2 p = 0.04]. There was no significant difference in the emotional conflict adaptation effects (CAEs) in reaction times between the exclusion−inclusion group and the inclusion−inclusion group [F (1,122) = 0.80, p= 0.373] (Figure 1).

In conclusion, social exclusion has the potential to reduce the individual’s adaptation to emotional conflict, while social inclusion has the potential to regulate the excluded individual’s adaptation to emotional conflict. These findings contribute to understanding the relationship between social exclusion and emotional problems and provide a feasible program to mitigate the risk of emotional problems caused by social exclusion.

Key words: social exclusion, social inclusion, adaptation to emotional conflict, emotion problems