Hartgerink Chris H J, van Beest Ilja, Wicherts Jelte M, Williams Kipling D
Department of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.
Department of Social Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2015 May 29;10(5):e0127002. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127002. eCollection 2015.
We examined 120 Cyberball studies (N = 11,869) to determine the effect size of ostracism and conditions under which the effect may be reversed, eliminated, or small. Our analyses showed that (1) the average ostracism effect is large (d > |1.4|) and (2) generalizes across structural aspects (number of players, ostracism duration, number of tosses, type of needs scale), sampling aspects (gender, age, country), and types of dependent measure (interpersonal, intrapersonal, fundamental needs). Further, we test Williams's (2009) proposition that the immediate impact of ostracism is resistant to moderation, but that moderation is more likely to be observed in delayed measures. Our findings suggest that (3) both first and last measures are susceptible to moderation and (4) time passed since being ostracized does not predict effect sizes of the last measure. Thus, support for this proposition is tenuous and we suggest modifications to the temporal need-threat model of ostracism.
我们研究了120项网络投球研究(N = 11,869),以确定排斥的效应大小以及效应可能被逆转、消除或变小的条件。我们的分析表明:(1)排斥的平均效应很大(d > |1.4|);(2)该效应在结构方面(玩家数量、排斥持续时间、投掷次数、需求量表类型)、抽样方面(性别、年龄、国家)以及因变量测量类型(人际、个人内、基本需求)上具有普遍性。此外,我们检验了威廉姆斯(2009)的命题,即排斥的即时影响难以被调节,但在延迟测量中更有可能观察到调节作用。我们的研究结果表明:(3)首次和末次测量都容易受到调节作用的影响;(4)被排斥后经过的时间并不能预测末次测量的效应大小。因此,对该命题的支持并不充分,我们建议对排斥的时间需求 - 威胁模型进行修正。