Regulatory focus and social reconnection following social exclusion

Promotion- and prevention-focused people are differentially sensitive to situational gains and losses, thus we reasoned that people's state regulatory focus following social exclusion should influence whether a social reconnection opportunity is perceived as safe (i.e., will exclusion persist or abate). To create an exclusion condition, all participants believed that other ostensible participants read their personal essay and chose not to work with them (i.e., all participants were excluded). Following the exclusion, participants rated how much they wanted to work with a new partner whose personality was depicted as a safe or unsafe reconnection opportunity. We expected and found that participants who held a prevention focus were willing to work with the partner, but only when the opportunity was perceived as safe. By comparison, participants who held a promotion focus were willing to work with the partner regardless of the opportunity's safety. The relationship between social reconnection safety and regulatory focus and its effect on social reconnection efforts is discussed.

Automated summary

This study found that following social exclusion, people with different state regulatory focus have varied reactions to the safety of social reconnection opportunities. Those with a prevention focus were only willing to reconnect when the opportunity was perceived as safe, while those with a promotion focus were willing to reconnect regardless of the safety of the opportunity.