When “We” or “They” exclude others: attributing and evaluating ostracism observed in in-groups and out-groups

Ostracism is a common social occurrence with severe psychological and behavioral consequences. Whereas many studies have focused on the perspective of ostracized individuals, our research explores observers’ perceptions of another’s ostracism, when the reason for ostracism is unclear. We investigated whether group membership affects observers’ causal attributions and evaluations of observed ostracism. Based on previous research and theory (Black Sheep Effect Ultimate Attribution Error), we hypothesized that when ostracism is observed in an out-group, the sources (i.e. the ostracizing group members) will be evaluated more negatively than the target (i.e. the ostracized individual), as the exclusion will be perceived as a violation of social norms. However, when ostracism is observed in the in-group, we hypothesized that observers would evaluate targets more negatively than the sources of ostracism. We further assumed that an intergroup bias in evaluation would be mediated by in-group-serving causal attributions. Results of an online experiment (N = 398) revealed that group membership influenced neither the attribution of responsibility nor the general evaluation of the ostracism sources and targets. Regardless of group membership, participants attributed responsibility for ostracism more to the sources than to the targets and rated targets as more likable. Though questions regarding the influence of group membership on observed ostracism remain open, the current study provided further insight into the impact of attributions on evaluation of ostracism sources and targets.