Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2025

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
Published on: April 18, 2017
Goal adjustment processes as coping responses to a blocked goal: the sample case of ostracism
Farina Rühs1,2, Werner Greve1, Cathleen Kappes1
1Institute of Psychology, University of Hildesheim, Hildesheim, Germany.
Introduction:
Recently, Rühs et al. (2022) used an adapted ostracism-paradigm to study goal adjustment processes, and goal disengagement processes (GD) in particular, as regulatory responses to goal-blocking situations such as ostracism. The present study conceptually replicates this study and extends it by inclusion of sub-personal indicators of GD in the paradigm.
Methods:
The goal to belong to a newly formed group was induced in 188 participants (Induction Phase). Afterwards, blockage of this goal was experimentally manipulated via ostracism: Participants were either included or excluded from their group in a virtual ball game (Cyberball, Blockage Phase). Finally, participants worked alone on a cognitive task to give regulatory responses some time to unfold. After each phase, dependent measures were recorded (e.g., indicators of GD and well-being).
Results:
Exclusion (vs. inclusion) in Cyberball lead to a decrease in subjective attainability of the belonging goal (goal blockage) and to affective-cognitive and behavioral GD (e.g., explicit devaluation of the belonging goal and the own group, behavioral deprioritization of ostracizing compared to new group members in a following game). However, ostracism had no effect on implicit group evaluation (repeated IATs showed a constant own group bias) and although excluded participants recovered from ostracism-induced impairments in emotions and needs, associations between recovery and GD indicators were mixed.
Discussion:
Most of the results of Rühs et al. (2022) could be replicated. Beyond that, the present study showed divergence of personal and sub-personal indicators of cognitive-affective GD (i.e., change in explicit and implicit group evaluations). This illustrates the importance of combining personal and sub-personal perspectives in GD research. Taken together, the study contributes to a conceptual and functional clarification of GD processes and, at the same time, offers a fruitful new perspective on coping with ostracism.
More Related Videos
09:40Measuring Neural and Behavioral Activity During Ongoing Computerized Social Interactions: An Examination of Event-Related Brain Potentials
Published on: November 15, 2014
08:24The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
Published on: August 25, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Coping Strategies: Emotion Focused
Coping Strategies: Problem Focused
For example, consider a student who struggles to understand their...
Cognitive Dissonance
Self-Discrepancy Theory
Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping
In- and Out-Groups