Recent study findings suggest that cynicism might explain why some people respond to social exclusion with prosocial behavior, while others do not. After being excluded during a ball-tossing game, participants who were low in cynicism reacted with greater empathy and prosocial behavior compared to those who were high in cynicism. The study was published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences.
Humans are social creatures with a fundamental need for belonging, and being excluded by others elicits profound psychological distress. Findings suggest that the pain of rejection can lead people to react in different ways. While some people may become “emotionally numb” and refrain from engaging in prosocial behavior, others might attempt to restore their sense of connectedness by increasing their prosociality.
Study author Bryan K. C. Choy and his research team at Singapore Management University wondered whether a personality factor might explain these contrasting responses to social exclusion. Specifically, they focused on cynicism — a worldview that maintains that others are self-interested and insincere.
People who are cynical tend to have less empathy for others, which may lead them to believe that attempts to reconnect after rejection are futile. Choy and his colleagues theorized that, when being excluded, people who are highly cynical will be less likely to respond with empathy compared to those who are less cynical. Through this reduced empathy, highly cynical individuals will be less likely to engage in prosocial behavior.
“Social exclusion is a fairly universal experience,” explained Choy. “However, how people react to social exclusion—and the pain it causes—often varies: some react positively, others negatively, and still there are those who do not behave any differently. What are the psychological variables accounting for this variation? Our discussions led us to consider the role of cynicism.”
“The study of cynicism and how it manifests across different social situations is an important one given that the world today seems to be facing a crisis of cynicism, with news reports, articles, polls and opinion pieces highlighting people’s lack of faith in established institutions and even in one another. The rise in cynicism is also interesting given that it is often associated with various negative outcomes (e.g., poorer health and social relations). Given the inclination that cynical people have towards believing in the worst of others, we were interested to examine how they might react in response to social exclusion.”
For their study, the researchers had 232 university students participate in a virtual ball-tossing game with two other players. The participants were told that all players could choose who they wanted to throw the ball to throughout the game. In actuality, the two other players were computer-controlled, and their tosses were dictated by an algorithm.
The experiment included two conditions. In the exclusion condition, the student received about 7% of the ball tosses. In the inclusion condition, the student received about 33% of the tosses. After the game, participants filled out a survey that assessed their feelings and their empathy toward the next participant who would be playing the game. Prosocial behavior was also assessed by asking participants how many raffle tickets they were willing to share with another participant. Before the game, participants had completed a measure of cynicism.
As expected, participants who were excluded during the ball toss experienced threats to the four fundamental needs (control, self-esteem, belonging, and meaningful existence). The extent that they felt threatened was not impacted by their level of cynicism, although cynicism did affect the way they reacted to the exclusion.
When participants were included in the game, there was no difference between the levels of empathy of those high versus low in cynicism. However, when participants were excluded, only those who were less cynical reported greater empathy, and in turn, more prosocial behavior. These contrasting reactions might have to do with people’s beliefs about whether efforts toward connection are likely to succeed or not.
“How people react in response to social exclusion depends on how cynical they are,” Choy told PsyPost. “Whereas non-cynics respond positively by experiencing more empathy for others and consequently behaving more altruistically towards others — potentially to engender reciprocity from others and re-establish broken ties — cynics show no such change.”
“We also found no such differences in empathy and altruism when comparing people’s scores on other ‘negative’ personality traits like psychopathy, Machiavellianism, or social dominance orientation, thus indicating that the role of cynicism is unique. Potentially, cynics (unlike non-cynics) view the chances of reciprocity to be so low — given their belief that others are likely to exploit their kindness — that they do not experience empathy and do not bother behaving pro-socially.”
But the study, like all research, has some limitations. “Our study was conducted on undergraduates in Singapore, so whether the results generalize to other samples that differ on important cultural or demographic characteristics is an open question,” Choy explained. “Our research article also only describes one study, so extensions and replications (both direct and conceptual) are needed.”
“There are benefits and drawbacks to all behaviors and behavioral tendencies, and cynicism is likely no exception,” the researcher added. “Stay tuned!”
The study, “Too cynical to reconnect: Cynicism moderates the effect of social exclusion on prosociality through empathy”, was authored by Bryan K. C. Choy, Kimin Eom, and Norman P. Li.
