CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 352Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionBullying, Victimization, and AggressionSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Motivations for prevention or promotion following social exclusion: being rejected versus being ignored

Molden, Daniel C., Lucas, Gale M., Gardner, Wendi L., Dean, Kristy, Knowles, Megan L.·2009·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0012958
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Social exclusion evokes powerful motivations and emotions. The present studies examined how these motivations and emotions might differ following exclusion that is explicit, active, and direct (i.e., when one is rejected) versus implicit, passive, and indirect (i.e., when one is ignored). It was hypothesized that being rejected should produce a sense of social loss and lead to more prevention-focused responses, including withdrawal from social contact, thoughts about actions one should not have taken, and increased feelings of agitation. In contrast, being ignored should produce a sense of failure to achieve social gain and lead to more promotion-focused responses, including reengagement in social contact, thoughts about actions one should have taken, and increased feelings of dejection. These hypotheses were supported across 4 studies in which people recalled or underwent experiences of being rejected or ignored. Past research on active versus passive exclusion is reexamined and found to be consistent with these hypotheses as well.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0012958

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 74 references

2 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 352

Related

Metadata

Authors
Molden, D. C., Lucas, G. M., Gardner, W. L., Dean, K., & Knowles, M. L.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Georgia (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2009-02
Volume
96
Issue
2
Pages
415-431
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/a0012958
OpenAlex
W2158079757
Cited by
352
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 10
FWCI
16.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
social exclusion, rejection, prevention motivation, social loss, social benefits, social withdrawal, agitation, dejection
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Anxiety, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rejection, Psychology, Social Alienation, Social Perception, Thinking, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review